State of the world Today

[crispibits]

Anyway shifty_ben, was H.I.M worth the trip?

[Hello]

Its a shame that something like this happens. Everyone has the ability to be nice and I just dont understand why people cant see it I try to be as polite as possble to everyone

[jjmac]

Howdy All,

Hellow wrote:
>>
Its a shame that something like this happens. Everyone has the ability to be nice
>>

Some people are quite disturbed, for various reasons. It is a common thing, for people to approach, or see, other people in terms of themselves. Most of the rejections/acceptances that are person experiences will tend to be rooted in that psychology. People really are very different amongst themselves. Aside from surface similarities. But, in terms of being "bailed up" (sic ?) ... one certainly does not have the right. There is always a degree of choice. One can sit in a doorway and get smelly, crash a window in a big dept store, or assault some one to steal there soap .... the first is were i'd tend to lean, but the second would be considered too. But ... the good police, bless em, will be less inclined to hassle the fragrant than the smelly.

hmmmm, certainly an interesting thread. I was going to drop in a few of my own offerings on some of the issues, but having now read over it, it seems its already been covered, and probably better than what i could do

But do you think i can resist it (grin) ...

My freedom is all that i actually own, and i will defend it passionately for as long as iv'e got. And i also don't need the threat of any overriding God or other authority, to let me know the difference between right and wrong. And i don't need the fears of the 'good people' directed in my direction just so that they will feel safe from their imaginary beasts.

Incidently, it has been estimated, in Australia at least, that around 30% of the people who are addicted to some form of opiate based substance actually work within the medical profession and are sufficiently economically viable, and also intelligent enough to stay right away from crime and thus the courts. And also, the majority of people who use hemp, either occasionally or other wise, belong to the so called "baby boomer set" and also tend to be more or less economically viable. And also stay right away from crime and the courts. But who does the media focus on ... youth of course. And the good old favourite ... "the poor". It is so nice to know that the media are out there digging up the real facts, keeping every one so clued up on the real state of things (mega_sarcasm.png)


pins wrote:
>>
and points out that in the fifties in britain there was a register for junkies, who went to their gp to get the prescription. because it was never mixed with anything and the amount was always seet, there was very little problem with addictions getting worse. The level of addicts in the country remained about stable - new cases were mainly due to people who had had morphine as a pain killer. Then they scrapped that and classified it, and people had to start to buy it illicitly, and things got out of hand.
>>

Yes, dear Mr Burroughs, such a gem. And where would we be if it were not for Art. would we have a Linux or an FSF working away in the back ground.

It makes me think of the 30's and people such as the Hurst family. The poor thing, wanted to be a multi millionaire but had a slight problem. All the potentially available, cheap Mexican work force, didn't need to work in his plantation, oh dear. They were largely self sufficient. Spinning their own cloth and making their own oil. And poor old Mr Du Pont, he had a similar problem with a competing fibre that was preventing a perfectly good nylon monopolisation plot from getting off the ground. And old Mr Anslinger aka "brand new FBI agent, needs an Agenda, preferably something benign to build a career on". Now, damn it, how is a budding FBI agent going to make a career with out something to focus on ... hmmmm.

iirc, during the 90's, the other "war" that the U.S has been very much engaged in ... costed at around ...over 8 thousand billion dollars, as a conservative estimate. By goolly, geee, WOW !. I find myself daydreaming a little, on just what could have been achieved with that. hmmmm, probably just a pipe dream though


In any case ...

shifty_ben wrote:
>>
We have security shutters so it adds another 2 minutes on. Slowly pulling things together, Ive been putting word round so anyone who gets any issues is going to report the buggers
>>

Yes, two minutes is a big help

I may have missed it but i'm wondering if it's ok for you to describe what actually happened. I don't want to compromise any legal action or strategy you may have in that respects of course. But i though some information about the actual circumstances may be insightful.


edited: mon 01/05/2006
just minor clarifications.

edited: wen 03/05/2006:
spell and incorrect attrib


jm
Humpty Dumpty Was Pushed !

[jjmac]

crisbits wrote:

>>
It's only called a riff when broken up with things like intros, bridges and choruses...
>>

lol, just noticed, ... yes, i prefer all those bits as well really


jm
Humpty Dumpty Was Pushed !
Marley Lives !

[Diagmato]

If only discepline wasnt being made "illegal" - look at the olden days, when the cane was in school, and parents were awful strict. Kids grew up to be respectable, law-abiding people. Look at it nowadays. No discepline, parents afraid to discepline because their kids threaten to report them (honestly, it has happened). Kids think they can get away with anything, and the law is actually allowing them to.

The reasoning behind it is just awful. "Who's to say who's a criminal? That guy who stole your car stereo - did he do it out of spite or was he despirate? You keeping it from him was criminal". Those were the actual words of a criminal physcologist. It seems, they want people to leave their cars unlocked, and that people have the right to steal from each other. Its just sick. I worked, and got paid. I treated myself with a car stereo. Some selfish fool smashed in, and took it. And im the criminal?

"Human rights" is now "criminal rights". The rights of the victim are thrown away because its "unfair on the criminal as there must be a reason he/she did what he/she did.".

[pins]

Not sure I'd quite agree with that, diagmato: my father went to a boys school where they used the cane (except on him - he refused to bend over and be beaten!) and he saw some of the boys he was at school with knife a milkman to death for a laugh. It's no good telling people to be nice -OR ELSE! which is what discipline of that sort is. that just creates authoritarians and facists. I was never disciplined in that way, and I'm close to the most curteous polite, self effacing chap you could hope to meet. being nice needs to come from inside, not be something people are forced to, cos then they'll just look for ways to work around the 'rules'. For it to come from inside, people have to geniunley respect and love others. For people to do that, they have to have been loved and respected themselves. Which is probably not what you'll find in the homes of the scoundrels who terrorised Shifty Ben.

[shifty_ben]

I agree to an extent, but parents should have the right to choose how to discipline their children - I'm not saying go back to the days when Fathers could whip their kids - but a good firm smack always worked for me. I had one parent (my mum) who went down the smacking route, and my dad who just lectured me. Between them they turned out a nice kid (if I do say so myself ) I went to a very rough school, and lived in an equally rough area and whilst I did things that the law frowns upon, I certainly wasn't out nicking cars, and threatening people with knives.
Its a hard balance to get, the thing that bothers me is the 'criminal rights' to my mind the law should be more like insurance companies - If you crash your car whilst drink driving (or doing some other illegal act) most insurance companies will refuse to pay out, you were outside the rules and so gave up your protection. The same should be true of the law, a criminal steps outside the law so why the hell should he be protected by it?
What these kids need is a good thorough beating, so at least they learn that there are consequences, problem is if I had done that, i would either have ended up stabbed or arrested.

There will always be someone who tries to work around the rules, its just important to make people understand that there are consequences. Problem is these are the kind of kids who won't care until they are actually banged up, then maybe it will sink in.

[nordle]

But who does the media focus on ... youth of course. And the good old favourite ... "the poor". It is so nice to know that the media are out there digging up the real facts, keeping every one so clued up on the real state of things

As usual, interesting points throughout, including some history!
I guess on that one about media to be fair they are a business not a public service. So is it the youth and the poor which is their target market, probably not, does fear sell papers, unfortunately yes.

If only discepline wasnt being made "illegal" - look at the olden days, when the cane was in school, and parents were awful strict. Kids grew up to be respectable, law-abiding people. Look at it nowadays. No discepline, parents afraid to discepline because their kids threaten to report them (honestly, it has happened). Kids think they can get away with anything, and the law is actually allowing them to.

mmm, I wouldn't agree totally with that on the basis that many of my parents generation have dreadful relationships with their kids and this is directly down to the fact that they can't deal with their own emotions. They spoke only when spoken to and a beating was the norm, and now they are emotional feckwits and they have raised a generation at arms length, they have very poor relationships and hardly communicate, they certainly appear to have not instilled and sort of life training into their siblings because they can't.

Of course these are sweeping statements, but based on probably 30-40 groups of parents which we still see.

Also, media and news travels a lot faster now compared to 60 years ago, as my parents said a lot of the people lived and never moved from a very small location, you can see the big cultural differences within 100 miles. So to say kids grew up to be law abiding was based on a very localised view which may not have spread nationally.

Thats not to deny that in a lot of areas discipline is not an issue, but we shouldn't lurch from one extreme to the other, certainly a lot of the people I know born circa 1940's I wouldn't describe as well adjusted balanced individuals.

[shifty_ben]

Anyway shifty_ben, was H.I.M worth the trip?

sorry didn't see your post, it was more than worth it. The Atmosphere was incredible, we were about 4 people from the front The support band was amazing H.I.M were amazing, a pint was 3.40 but on a night out who cares?

[crispibits]

Ah, excellent, so all's well that ends well eh? Shall we all go to bed? Oh, nordle, you've got very pointy elbows, and shifty_ben, your hair keeps getting in the way. And jjmac, STOP snoring... I knwo you're the other side of the world, but all the same. Night night!

[shifty_ben]

and shifty_ben, your hair keeps getting in the way.

heh, that pictures over a year old, much bigger now

[jjmac]

Howdy All


Diagmato Wrote:
>>
If only discepline wasnt being made "illegal" - look at the olden days, when the cane was in school, and parents were awful strict. Kids grew up to be respectable, law-abiding people. Look at it nowadays. No discepline, parents afraid to discepline because their kids threaten to report them (honestly, it has happened). Kids think they can get away with anything, and the law is actually allowing them to.
>>

A couple of things to keep in mind though, if you look at the most violent prone societies in the world ... they also tend to be the punitive !.

Note how capital punishment hasn't reduced lethal crimes in the US. What does seem to happen though, a person, once cornered, knowing what the likely punishment is going to be, go to great lengths to escape that result. Such as extremely forceful responses, no witnesses etc.

I can remember from when i was a high school, our placements were based on a geographical distribution an was quite stupid too. But i was lucky enough to go to this place that was basically a dumping ground. Anyone that was uncontrollable at another school was transfered to us. So it became a somewhat "mixed" population.

All the "heavies" as such, saw punishment as a kind of badge of status. Weird i know, but then they were a weird bunch. Mostly seriously disturbed of course. I can remember talking to an old mate of mine recently on all that, and they mentioned something interesting.

He reckoned that what lay behind it was that they had been seriously humiliated infont of their own peers and others ... such as teachers etc, as a means of control. But as they were at a developmental stage, they didn't really understand the purpose. But they did react in an detrimentally emotive way, due to the perception of having been humiliated. That is, at a stage were all the hormons were starting to kickin, they felt their maleness was being taken away from them ... result , extreme defensive aggression, (talking an all male environment) ... and it was that experience of humiliation that caused them to go , in a very real way, into a kind of disturbed insanity that found an expression through violence. And an almost manic need to prove to other people that they could "take anything" so to speak.

Considering that they were kids at the time (14 - 18 years), and were in a developmental stage, as mentioned ... i don't think the same rules of responsibility could be applied in the same fashion as it would be expected of an older person... and expected to work.

Mind you, all the rules and threats etc, worked on me and a whole lot of other people. But then we were just ordinary bods who were there due to a stupid geographical demarcation.

But ... what is the alternative ... just because the answer is a difficult one, doesn't mean the former should be some form of default. At least societies that experience low incidences along these lines ... maybe they would be worthy of learning from. Such as tribal communities and the like. What is it about Hawian families that is different

>>
The reasoning behind it is just awful. "Who's to say who's a criminal? That guy who stole your car stereo - did he do it out of spite or was he despirate? You keeping it from him was criminal". Those were the actual words of a criminal physcologist.
>>

hmmmm, i think the physiologist may have been trying to express the principle of the greater social responsibility. Such as, if a society implements certain structures, or institutionalised "norms", ones that are known to have a certain percentile of destructive impact ... known through observation over long periods of time, then doesn't the "intent" rest with that society, if there allowed to continue, and so rests the ultimate fault. It's not a new idea, but one that the corporate world really doesn't want to hear about. Not having seen/heard the particular quote you mention, i can't be really sure there, but i would suspect thats what they may have been trying to say. Though, probably just not very efficiently .

>>
"Human rights" is now "criminal rights". The rights of the victim are thrown away because its "unfair on the criminal as there must be a reason he/she did what he/she did.".
>>

In Aus, and i would expect the same applied in the UK, ... if you wake in the night and find a burglar in your house ... and you attack them ... you can be charged with assault. And if you were to grab a weapon, a person had better think of a good story quick.

Sounds a bit ridiculous , does it not. Untill you consider that a person could be quite easily "set up" to take a fall by the manipulation of a scenario like that. As a species, we really are that devious.

pins wrote:
>>
It's no good telling people to be nice -OR ELSE! which is what discipline of that sort is.
>>

hmmmmm, well, That is hitting the nail on the head...

Can it be imagined, say, ... the formation of the "Anti-Hate Squad" , who's moto is "We Hate Hate" --- and if you lot don't start being nice ... were gunna come round to your houses, and pull all ya $#oody arms off Thats a quote from the Aunty Jack Show, used to be on TV over here a long time back ... twas a very funny show.
(grin)


edited: tue 02/05/2006: just a couple of clarification edits.


jm
Humpty Dumpty Was Pushed !

[shifty_ben]

What is it about Hawian families that is different

Must be the Malibu

In Aus, and i would expect the same applied in the UK, ... if you wake in the night and find a burglar in your house ... and you attack them ... you can be charged with assault. And if were to grab a weapon, a person had better think of a good story quick.

Yup same here, although I think the best story from that genre is an American one - A family goes away on holiday (as you do), some guy sees the house is empty and climbs onto the garage roof in order to gain access to an upstairs window. Guy falls through the garage roof and finds he cannot get out, lives off dog food for 2 weeks and then tries to sue the family for negligence. Can't remember whether he won or not though.

[nordle]

All the "heavies" as such, saw punishment as a kind of badge of status

In the UK we have these things called ASBOS which kids get given for being little criminals and causing people grief. Back on the day people were ashamed of a criminal record, but these kids use them as status symbols.
I get the impression that they do have a positive impact on a few kids, but not sure if its the best way.

hmmmm, i think the physiologist may have been trying to express the principle of the greater social responsibiliie. Such as, if a society implements certain structures, or institutionalised "norms", ones that are known to have a certain percentile of destructive impact ... then doesn't the "intent" rest with that society, and so ultimate fault. It's not a new idea, but one that the corporate world really doesn't want to here. Not having seen/heard the particular quote you mention, i can't be really sure there, but i would suspect thats what they may have been trying to say. Though, probably just not very inefficiently Smile

Sometimes I wish I had a few more brain cells, I tried reading some books from Bertrand Russell but found my brain lacking. Your point above sounds in a similar style.
The principles of mathematics
The problems of philosophy
Why Im not a christian
Religion and science
Mysticism and logic

In Aus, and i would expect the same applied in the UK, ... if you wake in the night and find a burglar in your house ... and you attack them ... you can be charged with assault. And if were to grab a weapon, a person had better think of a good story quick.

Sounds a bit ridiculous , does it not. Untill you consider that a person could be quite easily "set up" to take a fall by the manipulation of a scenario like that. As a species, we really are that devious.

One famous case in this country was the Tony Martin case. On the face of it two burglers broke into a farm of a pensioner who used a shotgun to defend his life and killed one of the intruders.
Initially I felt some sort of sympathy for Mr Martin, you might have done a similar thing.

However nothing is as clear cut as it may seem, and forensics proved that he did not shoot a succession of shots in blind panic from a game shooting two shot shotgun. But that he had stalked the intruders and shot and advanced using an anti-personnel pump action shotgun ie pro-actively gone after them as they fled his property.

During police interview when question about how he obtained the unlicensed firearm not usually associated with pheasent hunting.
Mr Martin claimed he "found it in the boot of his car".

And at a neighbourhood watch meeting the previous year he stated that if any burglers came onto his property he would shoot them. A retired firearms officer was at the meeting and reported the claim to the police as he was concerned about the mental state of Mr Martin.

So it goes beyond self defence and becomes pre-meditated. He later had his sentence reduced. "The appeal judges accepted new psychiatric evidence that Martin was suffering from a paranoid personality disorder and acting under diminished responsibility when he shot Barras."

As you say, the law allows for "reasonable force" for a very good reason.

[shifty_ben]

You forget to mention that he had had his Firearms license revoked a year before for something or other. So had it been a two shot shotgun then he would still have been in the wrong in terms of the weapon used. I still feel a little sympathy for him in as much as living on your own in the country with the risk of violent crime can not be nice. Still there are better ways to go about it