Ferkin stupid disrespectful little ****s
- Thread starter ChrisR
- Start date
JamesM
Senior Retro Guru
JamesM":388chykn said:
ChrisR":388chykn said:
I know, I was being sarcastic. I remember seeing one of those police camera programs once where a lad was kicking mirrors off cars and had been caught on CCTV. When asked why he did it that was his defence "it's not hurting anyone because they are insured".
JamesM":3aopa5yw said:
it seems we are also dealing with massively ill-informed teenage scumbags! who would have thunk it!
i see it more and more these days (i'm 2
where the young'uns have less respect for anyone else - regardless of age (and not much less than they probably have for themselves).having a son myself, i can see that some of it stems from a lack of discipline from parents - and in the parents, i can see that stems from a lack of motivation/willingness to make sacrifices in their own lives in order to bring up their children with a sense of responsibility, compassion, ability to see right from wrong, foresee consequences etc, the list goes on....
if mum and dad go out drinking on a Friday night, why shouldn't I? type attitude.
basically, there seem to be a lot of people having children who just can't be bothered with it all.
videojetman
Retrobike Rider
- Feedback
- View
as long as the law is soft on unlawful people there is no preventing people vandalising peoples property.
it seems as though the criminal element are more protected than the victim.
i can understand why people snap and take matters into their own hands.
it seems as though the criminal element are more protected than the victim.
i can understand why people snap and take matters into their own hands.
Those tenants who shot the burgalars on that farm are providing quite the example of your statement jetman.
although an extreme example, it still shows that under almost any circumstance the law will protect those who know how to manipulate it - and they are often the people that break it on a regular basis!
although an extreme example, it still shows that under almost any circumstance the law will protect those who know how to manipulate it - and they are often the people that break it on a regular basis!
yagamuffin
Senior Retro Guru
- Feedback
- View
twain":1wuc4p9s said:
To be fair, the couple shot an intruder and confessed it to the Police. It is the Polices job to arrest them. It's up to the CPS to decide if there is any evidence to charge them with a criminal offence.
If we start letting the police decide what crimes they are going to arrest people for we'll get in to a helluva mess.
yagamuffin":3r9d3vks said:
i guess this is the part where most people who dont usually encounter the law would slip up. if they had perhaps confessed slightly differently (or not at all), their situation may come out more favourable. but i don't know what was said.
its about knowing what to say to the police as soon as they are on the scene - anything you do say may be used as evidence and all that.
people who regularly encounter the law (on the wrong side of it) find out quickly how to handle themselves (and the police).
if you can't/won't be honest, be vague or say nothing at all, usually works to buy some time until you get some professional representation!
Similar threads
