Spare wheel stolen

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 17 Jan 2006, 17:04

I don't believe that is a relevant enough analogy or comparison. We are talking about behaviour modification and quick justice, not belief compromise.

Your vegetarian analogy confuses a punch in the pus with lentils and humous.

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 17 Jan 2006, 17:08

Porty wrote:I don't believe that is a relevant enough analogy or comparison. We are talking about behaviour modification and quick justice, not belief compromise.

Your vegetarian analogy confuses a punch in the pus with lentils and humous.

Yes, you are talking quick justice and I'm not even sure if that was what Franck was after. Revenge for personal reasons is very different.

I've not provided any solutions to the kind of behaviour talked about on this thread, but just as people here are furiously opposed to vandalism, so am I if they condone worse acts of revenge/quick justice as a reaction.

Imagine if guns were legal and readily available here.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 17 Jan 2006, 17:57

Dadaist wrote:Imagine if guns were legal and readily available here.

In terms of assualt, guns are a bit more frightening than knives, which Franck could easily carry. I don't think Franck would even contemplate taking a knive to the vandal but I guess some vigilantes may. (not that Franck is a vigilante)

foxy · Post by **foxy** » 17 Jan 2006, 23:35

Dadaist wrote:just as people here are furiously opposed to vandalism,

What's your views on vandalism Dada?

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 18 Jan 2006, 00:25

foxy wrote:
Dadaist wrote:just as people here are furiously opposed to vandalism,
What's your views on vandalism Dada?

Same as Francks I guess, just subtract the vigilante bit for all of the reasons I've stated.

Chilli Pepper · Post by **Chilli Pepper** » 18 Jan 2006, 11:47

What are peoples opinion on the sentance imposed on the 2 Thai fishermen for the murder of the British tourist. I expect Dadaist would give them a good ticking off with a pointy finger and sent them on their way.

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 18 Jan 2006, 12:36

Chilli Pepper wrote:What are peoples opinion on the sentance imposed on the 2 Thai fishermen for the murder of the British tourist. I expect Dadaist would give them a good ticking off with a pointy finger and sent them on their way.

Expect what you like. Welcome to the forum - what kind of capsicum are you?

It's interesting that the mother of the victim has said she is against the death penalty :

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_east/4614904.stm

I think you also mean "send" them on their way - "sent" means I already did it.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 18 Jan 2006, 13:48

What an enjoyable thread.

Dada with his usual, and some would say admirable, non-violent stance, has put forward his point of view and only just dipped into rancour. Frank, a person of equal conviction, has defended his position admirably and the debate has been of an excellent standard.

For me the various arguments have only served to illustrate what a wonderfully diverse place Portobello is.

If the vandal had attempted to escape via Mentone Avenue area and been captured by Bellybabe. He could have expected an intense counselling session, offered a path to rehabilitation and to top it off, a little belly dance as a a fond farewell.

If the vandal had attempted to escape up the East side of Bath Street he may have encountered a pink-shirted perambulator who administered a swift punch in the pus

If the escape had been terminated by Franck on the West side of the street. Then the perpetrator could expect a serious of hammer like blows, organ penetrating lacerations and a final kick in the head before Franck made his way home to tell the whole tale to his Elf, who just sat there mute.

If the vandal had succesfully eluded capture, making his way up Brighton Place to the Durhams before being apprehended by Dadaist. Then he could expect a friendly welcome that included a meal of home-grown jalapenos and a selection of chemical laden instant snacks. After an approximate 45 minute socialst diatribe the vandal would make his way back down to the High Street into the police station and beg to be locked away in a correctional facility.

With so many possible outcomes, no wonder petty criminals are entranced by the adventure that is Portobello.

CatzVP · Post by **CatzVP** » 18 Jan 2006, 15:13

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 18 Jan 2006, 15:44

Porty wrote: Frank, a person of equal conviction

Yup, conviction is the word.

Franck · Post by **Franck** » 18 Jan 2006, 17:50

Porty wrote: If the escape had been terminated by Franck on the West side of the street. Then the perpetrator could expect a serious of hammer like blows, organ penetrating lacerations and a final kick in the head before Franck made his way home to tell the whole tale to his Elf, who just sat there mute.

Brilliant Porty, brightened up a tedious day in the world of me.

Btw, I would never,ever consider carrying- or using- any kind of weapon. I worked in a couple of bars in the city centre whilst at university and was challenged by a drunk with a knife...its not a pleasant thing to happen to anyone.

dadaist wrote:Yup, conviction is the word.

I'm beginning to get the feeling you dont like me, do you know me outside cyberland, and have I done something to offend you?

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 18 Jan 2006, 19:54

It's nothing personal! I guess I just think that regard for the law in terms of private property put next to complete disregard for the law in terms of assault is a double standard - in that you must think that the person who damaged your car deserves prison for the offence of vandalism, but you seem to think that the law should allow you to commit assault.

In my limited understanding, assault is a worse crime than vandalism, therefore you deserve prison more than the person who damaged your car - and in effect if you think that car damage justifies assault, I would understand if someone thought that assault justifies car damage in your instance.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 20 Jan 2006, 20:31

I read somewhere recently (and please forgive me if I've already posted this

) that if you put up a Beware of the Dog sign and somebody burgles your house and the dog bites the burglar - the burglar can rightly sue you because you knew your dog was dangerous

. Better just to surprise them then!

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 21 Jan 2006, 11:09

I heard of a similar situation recently where a burgular fell through the skylight of a house he intended to rob, injuring himself in the process. The owners returned to find him sprawled over their floor. He later successfully sued them.

How would I feel in the unlikely event that I spotted someone vandalising my car? I would feel very angry indeed. I would probably use a lot of language that we do not allow on this forum. If I felt capable of detaining the person responsible then I would attempt to do so until the police arrived. I would restrain them using any means at my disposal and with the minimum of force required. However, I would be very conscious that in so doing I would be leaving myself open to an allegation of assault.

If I was thinking clearly I would also factor in the risk (high) that the vandal was carrying a knife or other weapon, and the possible consequences of this.

What Franck described was an emotional response that most of us can relate to. We are angry and frustrated because these mindless acts of vandalism cost us money and the persons responsible are very rarely brought to justice. To make matters worse, many people do not bother to notify the Police of these crimes so they don't have a true picture of the problem and they are unable to justify the resources required to deal with it.

So my answer is the same as always. If you are concerned about crime in your area, get together with your neighbours and form a NW group, co-ordinate your efforts, liaise with your local councillor, the Police and with other NW groups, record all instances of crime in your area etc. Take positive steps to help yourself and your neighbours.

Punching the wee/big person in the face, however much they deserve it, is a course of action that will ensure a court appearance, but with you in the dock.

Dadaist makes the point that 'natural justice' and revenge attacks create an escalation of violence and lead to the breakdown of social order. I agree entirely with this, as I'm sure most people do.

I do not share Porty's view that this has been an enjoyable thread. I do not like the way it has been conducted and neither do others who have complained about it.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 21 Jan 2006, 11:31

Bob Jefferson wrote: I do not share Porty's view that this has been an enjoyable thread. I do not like the way it has been conducted and neither do others who have complained about it.

You are entitled to your opinion and it causes me no problems that we disagree. These "others who have complained" that you speak of, are they prepared to identify themselves publicly? Are they forum members? Their views are not currency otherwise.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 21 Jan 2006, 12:00

The fact that they have read the thread means that they are users of the forum. Registered or not, they are entitled to their opinion.

All forum users are encouraged to contact the moderators or website management team if they feel that posting guidelines have been breached. They may do so publicly or privately as they wish. All complaints are investigated.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 21 Jan 2006, 12:27

Bob Jefferson wrote:The fact that they have read the thread means that they are users of the forum. Registered or not, they are entitled to their opinion.

And you and are we quite entitled to ignore it. The entitlement to an opinion is a given. However, unless the opinion haver's go public, their opinions are not currency among forum users. It is a private matter between yourself and the rest of the mods.

I an only sumise that you also think the complaints lack vailidity.I notice that there has been no moderation on this thread other than the puerile profanity filter

foxy · Post by **foxy** » 21 Jan 2006, 13:11

Bob Jefferson wrote: I do not like the way it has been conducted and neither do others who have complained about it.

Bob you say you do not like the way the thread has been conducted and that others have complained. Do the complaints concern the tone of the thread or the content/views expressed?

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 21 Jan 2006, 14:32

foxy wrote:
Bob Jefferson wrote: I do not like the way it has been conducted and neither do others who have complained about it.
Bob you say you do not like the way the thread has been conducted and that others have complained. Do the complaints concern the tone of the thread or the content/views expressed?

Foxy we all know your stand on tone versus views - that is, it doesn't matter how odious the content is as long as the tone is polite!

The POL "Daily Express" Posse need a website and a publication. You could call it "The Portobello Inquisitor"!

foxy · Post by **foxy** » 21 Jan 2006, 15:27

Dadaist wrote:
foxy wrote:
Bob Jefferson wrote: I do not like the way it has been conducted and neither do others who have complained about it.
Bob you say you do not like the way the thread has been conducted and that others have complained. Do the complaints concern the tone of the thread or the content/views expressed?
Foxy we all know your stand on tone versus views - that is, it doesn't matter how odious the content is as long as the tone is polite!

The POL "Daily Express" Posse need a website and a publication. You could call it "The Portobello Inquisitor"!

Dadaist please don't claim to know my stand when you clearly don't... particularly in this case.

I do not have a problem with either the tone or the views expressed, including yours. If I had wanted to express my opinion, I would have done so publicly on the thread

I asked Bob a reasonable (IMO) question for clarification about others who had complained, so that I could try to understand the issues

And what's wrong with polite?

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 21 Jan 2006, 18:23

Dadaist wrote:Foxy we all know your stand on tone versus views -

I, for one, don't know Foxy's stand on tone versus views. What I do know is that there is an element of what Bob calls "users" who attempt to influence this forum anonymously (at least to most of us) and from the sidelines. I take issue when Bob waves their complaints at us like they are the righteous. Personally, i couldn't give a toss what they think until such time they come on here and tell us themselves.

"Oh Bob, I was looking on POL today and there is a thread promoting violence against vandals, oh bob, oh bob I would love to contribute to the forum but I won't do so until its cleaned up and serious. Please note this as an offical complaint."

It is truly pathetic. Who the hell do they think they are?

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 21 Jan 2006, 19:07

I have to confess that I agree with Porty on this one (

). I'm getting fed up of people constantly complaining about things that are discussed on this forum. Do we all have to start policing our opinions, sense of humour, discussions etc, etc, etc before we write anything so that we've got everybody covered in case they're offended, don't think it's funny, upset, shocked, dismayed, or any other emotion you can possibly think of? If they don't want to argue/debate/discuss the topic of the thread then forget about it and go and read something else. The strain of trying to be somebody I'm not is getting too much for me

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 21 Jan 2006, 19:16

All that any member is required to do is to abide by the posting guidelines. If they have done so then there are no grounds for complaint. People have complained about aspects of this thread and I am one of those persons.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 21 Jan 2006, 19:19

Franck wrote:I do not sit and wait for the next vandal, unlike you seem to wait on the next post.

I like it

.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 21 Jan 2006, 19:27

Bob Jefferson wrote:All that any member is required to do is to abide by the posting guidelines. If they have done so then there are no grounds for complaint. People have complained about aspects of this thread and I am one of those persons.

What exactly are you complaining about? Franck doesn't seem unduly worried about Dadaist (and vice versa as usual).

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 22 Jan 2006, 15:06

Bob Jefferson wrote:All that any member is required to do is to abide by the posting guidelines. If they have done so then there are no grounds for complaint. People have complained about aspects of this thread and I am one of those persons.

So, seen as how there has been no intervention by mods, I hope you told "them" that there complaints were groundless and gave yourself a ticking off for making groundless complaints.

Who are the other people? Did they complain to you or the rest of the mods? Were the complaints about the tone or the views?

(I dont really expect you to reveal the ID of the people but it would be good to know the answer to the last 2 questions)

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 22 Jan 2006, 15:20

Dadaist wrote:
foxy wrote:
Bob Jefferson wrote: I do not like the way it has been conducted and neither do others who have complained about it.
Bob you say you do not like the way the thread has been conducted and that others have complained. Do the complaints concern the tone of the thread or the content/views expressed?
Foxy we all know your stand on tone versus views - that is, it doesn't matter how odious the content is as long as the tone is polite!

The POL "Daily Express" Posse need a website and a publication. You could call it "The Portobello Inquisitor"!

Would you accept that mental abuse can be more harmful than physical abuse?

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 22 Jan 2006, 15:47

Bring on the ASBO then, torture boy!!!

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 22 Jan 2006, 19:33

I am confused

What are the complaints? I cannot seem to find them.

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 22 Jan 2006, 20:18

Pal of Porty wrote:I am confused

What are the complaints? I cannot seem to find them.

I think that's what Porty's point is - the people who complain are lurkers who take no part in the debates but see fit to criticize their tone/content - and when they do, they go straight to Bob.

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 22 Jan 2006, 23:39

Dadaist wrote:
Pal of Porty wrote:I am confused

What are the complaints? I cannot seem to find them.
I think that's what Porty's point is - the people who complain are lurkers who take no part in the debates but see fit to criticize their tone/content - and when they do, they go straight to Bob.

But Bob said he was unhappy with this thread too (a form of complaint) but I have still not seen any reasons why. I was just curious.

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 23 Jan 2006, 10:33

The Gadgee wrote:Great stuff!

I'm normally a voyeur on this board rather than a participant. I find what I call "the middle-aged Neighbourhood Watch for the digital age" a bit scary. Just wanted to warn locals of my theft and gauge whether to even bother telling the police. From this we have a full blown diatribe on human morality. This kind of stuff keeps me coming back for more. Oh, that and the "what are you listening to at the moment?..."

I find them scary too.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 23 Jan 2006, 10:48

Dadaist wrote:Bring on the ASBO then, torture boy!!!

An ASBO won't protect you form yourself. I felt you were casting Foxy's disenchantment with one of the totrure threads from 2005 up to her. It obviously needles you and you need to get over it. IMHO.