| Colston Statue vandals innocent 18:40 - Jan 5 with 18437 views | Flashberryjack |
Colston vandals are CLEARED: Gleeful BLM activists thank Banksy for his support after they are acquitted of criminal damage over toppling of Edward Colston statue - sparking outrage that jury has given a 'greenlight to political vandalism. |  |
| |  |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:28 - Jan 7 with 867 views | Professor |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 09:23 - Jan 7 by Dr_Parnassus |
All roads should be smashed to bits if found to have Roman foundations.
The beautiful City of Bath needs to be demolished and burned to the ground.
The Pyramids needs to de destroyed with immediate effect.
The name Swansea needs to be changed immediately as it was named after Sweyn the Viking who was responsible for the death of countless people as he ravaged new lands.
Anyone backing the verdict here yet not lobbying for the above is a hypocrite. |
I think that is a naive post.
Do you know who Mengistu Haile Mariam is?
Probably not, but modern African history is not anyone's strong point.
He was the leader of the DERG, the pseudo-marxist military junta who deposed Haile Selassie and inflicted terror on any dissidents and tried to starve Tigrayan rebels into surrender. He is in exile in Zimbabwe after protection. from that other slime Mugabe.
The DERG executed about a million and starved millions more.
It surprised me that none of the DERG's Soviet style monuments were destroyed. Mariam's uniform and portrait remain on display with those of other Emperors and presidents in the national museum.
This is all living memory 70s-90s and very raw for many. Ethiopians are wise in many ways as befits one of the oldest civilisations. Do they celebrate the DERG-of course not. But they retain the monuments and so on to remind them of the 'Red Terror'. In Meskel Square, where the largest DERG structures were built is the museum about the DERG and what they did. It's harrowing. A column of skulls of the unidentified remains with you for a long time. Sadly the civil war is repeating some of the mistakes, but the principle remains. The monuments should stay as that lesson from history. Bristol needs to followed Liverpool in contextualising Colston and the slave trade in the city's history. I think removing statues like Robert Lee's in New Orleans is also wrong, you can't change the past, learn from it.
But equally was this prosecution in the public interest? I don't think so. Is the verdict correct? Yes, twelve jurors came to that conclusion. Perhaps we should ask why this went ahead and the role of societies like the Merchant Venturers in retaining the statue without proper context. The main lesson of history should be to learn from the past's mistakes. Erasing it does not help, neither does ridiculous outrage. And GB News are very lucky they avoided a contempt charge. |  | | |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:39 - Jan 7 with 846 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:28 - Jan 7 by Professor |
I think that is a naive post.
Do you know who Mengistu Haile Mariam is?
Probably not, but modern African history is not anyone's strong point.
He was the leader of the DERG, the pseudo-marxist military junta who deposed Haile Selassie and inflicted terror on any dissidents and tried to starve Tigrayan rebels into surrender. He is in exile in Zimbabwe after protection. from that other slime Mugabe.
The DERG executed about a million and starved millions more.
It surprised me that none of the DERG's Soviet style monuments were destroyed. Mariam's uniform and portrait remain on display with those of other Emperors and presidents in the national museum.
This is all living memory 70s-90s and very raw for many. Ethiopians are wise in many ways as befits one of the oldest civilisations. Do they celebrate the DERG-of course not. But they retain the monuments and so on to remind them of the 'Red Terror'. In Meskel Square, where the largest DERG structures were built is the museum about the DERG and what they did. It's harrowing. A column of skulls of the unidentified remains with you for a long time. Sadly the civil war is repeating some of the mistakes, but the principle remains. The monuments should stay as that lesson from history. Bristol needs to followed Liverpool in contextualising Colston and the slave trade in the city's history. I think removing statues like Robert Lee's in New Orleans is also wrong, you can't change the past, learn from it.
But equally was this prosecution in the public interest? I don't think so. Is the verdict correct? Yes, twelve jurors came to that conclusion. Perhaps we should ask why this went ahead and the role of societies like the Merchant Venturers in retaining the statue without proper context. The main lesson of history should be to learn from the past's mistakes. Erasing it does not help, neither does ridiculous outrage. And GB News are very lucky they avoided a contempt charge. |
Not sure I understand the point you are trying to make. Also unsure what you find naive about mine, mine is very straight forward.
If the verdict this week suggests anyone can tear down or destroy a monument that they don’t like due to connections it had in the distant past, then anyone can claim the same thing with the Pyramids, the Roman relics of today and of course old Norse terminology and statues.
It’s the same thing.
You can’t back the decision to pull down one monument due to its links to slavery and then not back someone to be prosecuted if they go and blow up the Pyramids tomorrow. North of Africa is of course steeped in slavery.
Also important to note that a jury verdict does not mean it was the correct verdict. Was the OJ Simpson verdict correct? Sadly it appears criminality is being excused for political reasons, a political movement that is poisoning society and sweeping the world.
If there was clear evidence they vandalised it then they should be guilty as charged. If they were found not guilty because of the notion “they clearly didn’t like the statue”, then that is something that needs to be looked at going forward as crimes can not be excused on the basis that the perpetrator didn’t like the victim/property of victim and what they felt it represented. [Post edited 7 Jan 2022 10:44]
|  |
| |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:39 - Jan 7 with 847 views | Superjan |
It was right that they were prosecuted , because the Crown Prosecution Service followed the process and on the basis of the test they applied they determined that they should . Its worth noting that there appears to have been an acceptance by the defence and plainly the Judge that there was a case for the defendants to answer and as a result the decision was left to the jury. | | | |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:45 - Jan 7 with 833 views | Sirjohnalot |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:19 - Jan 7 by Superjan |
As already has been said the decision of the jury was based on the evidence and argument that they heard in Court . We don’t know who was on the jury , their backgrounds , their occupations , their ethnicity . They were twelve people picked at random from a larger pool of potential jurors . Ultimately whether an individual not involved in the process doesn’t like their decision then unfortunately for them they have to accept it . The jury performed the role that they were picked to do . It is clear that the facts of the case are unusual to say the least and the defendants were entitled to be tried by their peers . Which is again exactly what happened. A precedent hasn’t been set , a jury in a different part of the country dealing with a similar incident may convict , a different twelve in Bristol may have convicted . |
Spot on |  | | |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:47 - Jan 7 with 822 views | Superjan |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:39 - Jan 7 by Dr_Parnassus |
Not sure I understand the point you are trying to make. Also unsure what you find naive about mine, mine is very straight forward.
If the verdict this week suggests anyone can tear down or destroy a monument that they don’t like due to connections it had in the distant past, then anyone can claim the same thing with the Pyramids, the Roman relics of today and of course old Norse terminology and statues.
It’s the same thing.
You can’t back the decision to pull down one monument due to its links to slavery and then not back someone to be prosecuted if they go and blow up the Pyramids tomorrow. North of Africa is of course steeped in slavery.
Also important to note that a jury verdict does not mean it was the correct verdict. Was the OJ Simpson verdict correct? Sadly it appears criminality is being excused for political reasons, a political movement that is poisoning society and sweeping the world.
If there was clear evidence they vandalised it then they should be guilty as charged. If they were found not guilty because of the notion “they clearly didn’t like the statue”, then that is something that needs to be looked at going forward as crimes can not be excused on the basis that the perpetrator didn’t like the victim/property of victim and what they felt it represented. [Post edited 7 Jan 2022 10:44]
|
The verdict this week does not suggest that anyone can tear down or destroy a monument that they do not like due to connections that it had in the distant past. it simply means that those particular twelve people in that particular Court on that day felt that the four were not guilty based on the evidence and argument they had heard . A different jury could have reached a different decision. | | | |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:48 - Jan 7 with 819 views | Glossolalia |
Dr P is extrapolating logically. Nothing naive or wayward in his thinking. If people insist on being so morally horrified with history, the safe bet is to tear it all down and start again. But they won't, and they'll be using their smartphones made from a near-slave in the far East to further espouse their selective outrage and all-encompassing virtue. |  | | |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:50 - Jan 7 with 815 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:47 - Jan 7 by Superjan |
The verdict this week does not suggest that anyone can tear down or destroy a monument that they do not like due to connections that it had in the distant past. it simply means that those particular twelve people in that particular Court on that day felt that the four were not guilty based on the evidence and argument they had heard . A different jury could have reached a different decision. |
But it does.
The fact 12 people can be picked at random and decide to find people not guilty of vandalism when there is clear evidence they did is a major concern.
That suggests this may not be an isolated phenomenon and similar random picks may well allow this criminality to happen if the same arguments for it are made.
It could very well be a societal shift, as we can see from this thread with others being pleased with such a result. | |
| |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:52 - Jan 7 with 814 views | Professor |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:39 - Jan 7 by Dr_Parnassus |
Not sure I understand the point you are trying to make. Also unsure what you find naive about mine, mine is very straight forward.
If the verdict this week suggests anyone can tear down or destroy a monument that they don’t like due to connections it had in the distant past, then anyone can claim the same thing with the Pyramids, the Roman relics of today and of course old Norse terminology and statues.
It’s the same thing.
You can’t back the decision to pull down one monument due to its links to slavery and then not back someone to be prosecuted if they go and blow up the Pyramids tomorrow. North of Africa is of course steeped in slavery.
Also important to note that a jury verdict does not mean it was the correct verdict. Was the OJ Simpson verdict correct? Sadly it appears criminality is being excused for political reasons, a political movement that is poisoning society and sweeping the world.
If there was clear evidence they vandalised it then they should be guilty as charged. If they were found not guilty because of the notion “they clearly didn’t like the statue”, then that is something that needs to be looked at going forward as crimes can not be excused on the basis that the perpetrator didn’t like the victim/property of victim and what they felt it represented. [Post edited 7 Jan 2022 10:44]
|
The Colston issue could easily have been dealt with if, the self-appointed, Merchant Venturers had not blocked it, despite the general feeling of the City it was problematic. Perhaps this is was seen an issue for a jury in the city.
The verdict suggests nothing, it's not a precedent (which you have failed to grasp previously on UK law). The question was this criminal damage? The jury decided no. On what basis, we don't know and will never do so.
The disgusted of Tunbridge Wells approach helps nothing or no one either.We can agree to disagree I think
Anyway have a good evening-work to do. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:52 - Jan 7 with 813 views | Glossolalia |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:47 - Jan 7 by Superjan |
The verdict this week does not suggest that anyone can tear down or destroy a monument that they do not like due to connections that it had in the distant past. it simply means that those particular twelve people in that particular Court on that day felt that the four were not guilty based on the evidence and argument they had heard . A different jury could have reached a different decision. |
You really believe, given the mass online ignorance and herd mentality, that this outcome suggests nothing about the potential for further criminal damage? It doesn't matter if juries don't set precedents. The fact is, you and the usual bunch are giving people far too much credit: the mob is ignorant to your law-based knowledge. You're ensconced in it, comforted by it. These online fanatics are blind to it and will likely see one thing: a green light.
We don't live in a world of legal absolutes. You're on here spouting legal this and protocol that: it doesn't matter. Pull your heads out of your books and look around. People are, in general, utter morons. [Post edited 7 Jan 2022 10:57]
| | | |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 11:01 - Jan 7 with 794 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:52 - Jan 7 by Professor |
The Colston issue could easily have been dealt with if, the self-appointed, Merchant Venturers had not blocked it, despite the general feeling of the City it was problematic. Perhaps this is was seen an issue for a jury in the city.
The verdict suggests nothing, it's not a precedent (which you have failed to grasp previously on UK law). The question was this criminal damage? The jury decided no. On what basis, we don't know and will never do so.
The disgusted of Tunbridge Wells approach helps nothing or no one either.We can agree to disagree I think
Anyway have a good evening-work to do. |
It is absolutely a precedent.
Not only is it a precedent but it is a green light for others to mimic such criminality, I know you also know this so not sure why you are pretending otherwise.
Every single case of criminal damage to something someone doesn’t like will now have the same defence, and if the jury was picked at random then there is every chance such ridiculous arguments seem to be trumping the law of the land - that’s anarchy.
Unlike other crimes, “we will never know” does not apply, it was on video - we all saw it. It was criminal damage. We should all now be concerned that our property could be vandalised in the same way if the mob decide to find links to something they don’t agree with.
Unfortunately some of the excellent posts you make often get drowned out by your senseless ones when you get all leftist on us. You can be damned sure if some Republicans had done similar things to a statue for their own reasons and were found innocent, you would not hold the same views… where as I would.
Everyone needs to be treated the same under the law of the land, motive should not be a mitigating circumstance to mindless violence or criminal damage. | |
| |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 11:03 - Jan 7 with 791 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:52 - Jan 7 by Glossolalia |
You really believe, given the mass online ignorance and herd mentality, that this outcome suggests nothing about the potential for further criminal damage? It doesn't matter if juries don't set precedents. The fact is, you and the usual bunch are giving people far too much credit: the mob is ignorant to your law-based knowledge. You're ensconced in it, comforted by it. These online fanatics are blind to it and will likely see one thing: a green light.
We don't live in a world of legal absolutes. You're on here spouting legal this and protocol that: it doesn't matter. Pull your heads out of your books and look around. People are, in general, utter morons. [Post edited 7 Jan 2022 10:57]
|
Indeed, it’s not a lawful precedent but a social one.
Jurors are members of the public, if members of the public are led to believe these acts can be excused because the perpetrators didn’t like the thing they enacted the crime onto - that’s all the precedent that is needed.
The fact we have people more than happy with such a verdict suggests that precedent of thought is not limited to those random 12 jurors.
That’s a scary prospect. [Post edited 7 Jan 2022 11:06]
| |
| |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 11:14 - Jan 7 with 778 views | Boundy |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:39 - Jan 7 by Dr_Parnassus |
Not sure I understand the point you are trying to make. Also unsure what you find naive about mine, mine is very straight forward.
If the verdict this week suggests anyone can tear down or destroy a monument that they don’t like due to connections it had in the distant past, then anyone can claim the same thing with the Pyramids, the Roman relics of today and of course old Norse terminology and statues.
It’s the same thing.
You can’t back the decision to pull down one monument due to its links to slavery and then not back someone to be prosecuted if they go and blow up the Pyramids tomorrow. North of Africa is of course steeped in slavery.
Also important to note that a jury verdict does not mean it was the correct verdict. Was the OJ Simpson verdict correct? Sadly it appears criminality is being excused for political reasons, a political movement that is poisoning society and sweeping the world.
If there was clear evidence they vandalised it then they should be guilty as charged. If they were found not guilty because of the notion “they clearly didn’t like the statue”, then that is something that needs to be looked at going forward as crimes can not be excused on the basis that the perpetrator didn’t like the victim/property of victim and what they felt it represented. [Post edited 7 Jan 2022 10:44]
|
Simple question is? who decides the differential , between what's acceptable to deface or destroy and not . | |
| "In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master." |
| |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 11:15 - Jan 7 with 775 views | Superjan |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:50 - Jan 7 by Dr_Parnassus |
But it does.
The fact 12 people can be picked at random and decide to find people not guilty of vandalism when there is clear evidence they did is a major concern.
That suggests this may not be an isolated phenomenon and similar random picks may well allow this criminality to happen if the same arguments for it are made.
It could very well be a societal shift, as we can see from this thread with others being pleased with such a result. |
That is how the jury system works , without wishing to become repetitive another twelve people could have reached a different decision , another jury in another part of the country could have reached a different decision .We do not know . Again, whether or not the decision of those particular twelve suggests a societal shift who knows ? | | | |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 11:24 - Jan 7 with 764 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 11:15 - Jan 7 by Superjan |
That is how the jury system works , without wishing to become repetitive another twelve people could have reached a different decision , another jury in another part of the country could have reached a different decision .We do not know . Again, whether or not the decision of those particular twelve suggests a societal shift who knows ? |
Indeed, but the jury usually is instructed to deal with the facts of the case, did they do it or didn’t they.
That means you have a fairly solid idea of whether you will be found guilty or not if there is evidence showing you committing a crime.
In this case the response seemed to be “it doesn’t matter if they did or not, we think it’s okay for them to”.
That’s terrifying.
What if people decide it’s okay to beat up people with political views they don’t like? What if the jury then also decides that guilt doesn’t matter?
I think it’s fairly obvious there has been a societal shift in certain sections and the pushback against such a movement is down to such things as this. The law of the land is useless if people don’t care if it was broken or not, and allow them to do so of it also aligns with their view.
It shouldn’t come into it. Did they do it, yes or no.
The jury is not there to decide what laws are ok to break and which ones aren’t. Which seems to have been the case here. | |
| |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 11:28 - Jan 7 with 759 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 11:14 - Jan 7 by Boundy |
Simple question is? who decides the differential , between what's acceptable to deface or destroy and not . |
And that becomes the problem.
The law of the land should decide, and that suggests nothing can be criminally damaged. Something we should all agree upon. If there is clear evidence you did it then you should be found guilty of that crime.
As soon as the law of the land is overtaken by sections of society, that’s when problems start coming. That’s anarchy.
If this is a sign of things to come with this violent and intolerant movement sweeping all nations then you can absolutely see why there is an appetite for Republican law and order types in the States and I’m sure a similar sort of thing in the U.K. should this continue. | |
| |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 11:39 - Jan 7 with 739 views | Glossolalia |
With Prof, sirjon etc, we have educated individuals in their fields who sometimes fail to apply their knowledge at a human, societal level. The world doesn't work like that - it's capricious, reactionary and impossible to predict. They ensconce themselves in their world of data and spreadsheets, thinking that this can be neatly applied to the real world.
We know that juries don't set 'precedents', but we also know this ruling sets a dangerous precedent. Understand? It's quite funny how the 'experts' on here are at pains to point out the legal small print, and then imagine that this is enough to ensure no mob, or fanatic gets the wrong end of the stick. | | | |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 11:52 - Jan 7 with 722 views | Superjan |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 11:24 - Jan 7 by Dr_Parnassus |
Indeed, but the jury usually is instructed to deal with the facts of the case, did they do it or didn’t they.
That means you have a fairly solid idea of whether you will be found guilty or not if there is evidence showing you committing a crime.
In this case the response seemed to be “it doesn’t matter if they did or not, we think it’s okay for them to”.
That’s terrifying.
What if people decide it’s okay to beat up people with political views they don’t like? What if the jury then also decides that guilt doesn’t matter?
I think it’s fairly obvious there has been a societal shift in certain sections and the pushback against such a movement is down to such things as this. The law of the land is useless if people don’t care if it was broken or not, and allow them to do so of it also aligns with their view.
It shouldn’t come into it. Did they do it, yes or no.
The jury is not there to decide what laws are ok to break and which ones aren’t. Which seems to have been the case here. |
What would you suggest as an alternative to the present system ? | | | |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 11:57 - Jan 7 with 711 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 11:52 - Jan 7 by Superjan |
What would you suggest as an alternative to the present system ? |
Don’t know how widespread of a problem it’s going to be yet. But the signs aren’t good.
If this sort of thing gets repeated and criminals are walking free due to political sentiment then it’s clearly not fit for purpose anymore.
What that would look like I'm not quite sure. | |
| |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 11:59 - Jan 7 with 708 views | Flynnidine_Zidownes |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:12 - Jan 7 by Boundy |
I did mention that a precedent was being set, maybe not in a legal sense but certainly one which a few will try to claim when Pictons monument for example is targeted . |
Indeed but the good people of Carmarthen had a grown up adult debate and a vote on that and decided it should stay.
That’s the way to go about it. You don’t just allow rent a mob to smash it up and dump it in the river. How people are blinded to this simple notion is beyond me. | | | |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 12:03 - Jan 7 with 698 views | onehunglow |
When we have demolished all these statues who s next .
John Lennon was a nasty bugger so his should be demolished at the Pier Head . | |
| |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 12:38 - Jan 7 with 674 views | Glossolalia |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 12:03 - Jan 7 by onehunglow |
When we have demolished all these statues who s next .
John Lennon was a nasty bugger so his should be demolished at the Pier Head . |
Indeed, he used to be cruel to his woman. He beat her and kept her apart from the things that she loved. | | | |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 12:57 - Jan 7 with 647 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 12:03 - Jan 7 by onehunglow |
When we have demolished all these statues who s next .
John Lennon was a nasty bugger so his should be demolished at the Pier Head . |
Churches surely? The crusades of 850 years ago should be just as confronting for people having to live by a church as Colston’s statue was to them for his part in things 400 years ago.
It’s an easy defence to make now.
The Tower of London and Tower Hill? The acts committed there were abhorrent by today’s standards.
The Colosseum? Send the demolition team in pronto. Or is 2000 years ago enough for people to look past the acts committed by Rome in there? I mean it’s not fresh in the memory like the 1600’s….
Destroy it all surely? | |
| |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 13:24 - Jan 7 with 622 views | ItchySphincter |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 10:28 - Jan 7 by Professor |
I think that is a naive post.
Do you know who Mengistu Haile Mariam is?
Probably not, but modern African history is not anyone's strong point.
He was the leader of the DERG, the pseudo-marxist military junta who deposed Haile Selassie and inflicted terror on any dissidents and tried to starve Tigrayan rebels into surrender. He is in exile in Zimbabwe after protection. from that other slime Mugabe.
The DERG executed about a million and starved millions more.
It surprised me that none of the DERG's Soviet style monuments were destroyed. Mariam's uniform and portrait remain on display with those of other Emperors and presidents in the national museum.
This is all living memory 70s-90s and very raw for many. Ethiopians are wise in many ways as befits one of the oldest civilisations. Do they celebrate the DERG-of course not. But they retain the monuments and so on to remind them of the 'Red Terror'. In Meskel Square, where the largest DERG structures were built is the museum about the DERG and what they did. It's harrowing. A column of skulls of the unidentified remains with you for a long time. Sadly the civil war is repeating some of the mistakes, but the principle remains. The monuments should stay as that lesson from history. Bristol needs to followed Liverpool in contextualising Colston and the slave trade in the city's history. I think removing statues like Robert Lee's in New Orleans is also wrong, you can't change the past, learn from it.
But equally was this prosecution in the public interest? I don't think so. Is the verdict correct? Yes, twelve jurors came to that conclusion. Perhaps we should ask why this went ahead and the role of societies like the Merchant Venturers in retaining the statue without proper context. The main lesson of history should be to learn from the past's mistakes. Erasing it does not help, neither does ridiculous outrage. And GB News are very lucky they avoided a contempt charge. |
What a great post. Context has a huge part to play, unfortunately some people want it to be black and white. |  |
| |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 13:33 - Jan 7 with 612 views | Gwyn737 |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 13:24 - Jan 7 by ItchySphincter |
What a great post. Context has a huge part to play, unfortunately some people want it to be black and white. |
Exactly. And this is where this idea of extrapolation doesn't work.
Support refugees? Why don't you move some into your house then?
Donate to Save the Children? What's wrong with Barnardos?
Concerned about climate change? You still drive a car don't you?
One jury trial goes a different way to how you think it should? Anarchy!
Using this premise of extrapolation, it would suggest that after OJ was acquitted, murder became fair game. | | | |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 14:20 - Jan 7 with 580 views | Boundy |
| Colston Statue vandals innocent on 13:33 - Jan 7 by Gwyn737 |
Exactly. And this is where this idea of extrapolation doesn't work.
Support refugees? Why don't you move some into your house then?
Donate to Save the Children? What's wrong with Barnardos?
Concerned about climate change? You still drive a car don't you?
One jury trial goes a different way to how you think it should? Anarchy!
Using this premise of extrapolation, it would suggest that after OJ was acquitted, murder became fair game. |
"Using this premise of extrapolation, it would suggest that after OJ was acquitted, murder became fair game."
One minor flaw in your example , the offence Simpson was alleged to have committed is that it wasn't carried out in full view of crowds , filmed by the media or in front of the police . Other than that you may have a point | |
| "In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master." |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
