/ Oscar Pistorios shot his girlfriend

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
mark s - on 14 Feb 2013
He thought she was a burglar and killed her.
In reply to mark s: Terrible story.
Trangia - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s:

That's awfull and sadly not an uncommon event in a country which has 15,000 murders a year and many people live in gated compounds with high security due to their fear of intruders.
Enty - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Trangia:

I did a cycling tour for some guys from Johannesburg. They all lived like that - gated compounds, razor wire, armed to the teeth. On guy had been home-jacked twice before he took all the major security measures.

E
Rampikino - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s:

I hope I'm not the only one who thinks that a tragic event such as this is not worthy of mockery.

I still don't understand why some items are deemed to be "ok" to take the mickey out of while others are untouchable. I don't see anything funny in this at all.
the power - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s: no subject is untouchable
Rampikino - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to the power:

Is that truly correct?

So when the avalanche killed a number of people recently, would we find it acceptable to make jokes on this site and say "no subject is untouchable" ?
Enty - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino:
> (In reply to mark s)
>
> I hope I'm not the only one who thinks that a tragic event such as this is not worthy of mockery.
>
> I still don't understand why some items are deemed to be "ok" to take the mickey out of while others are untouchable. I don't see anything funny in this at all.

Correct - way too soon.

E
jkarran - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino:

> Is that truly correct?
> So when the avalanche killed a number of people recently, would we find it acceptable to make jokes on this site and say "no subject is untouchable" ?

He's foreign, different and a celebrity.

Not saying it's acceptable, just pointing out why the thread has gone down the mockery rather than shock/revulsion/sympathy track.

jk
Trangia - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Enty:

Whilst I was staying with my son in a Johannesburg suburb, where they had a house surrounded by a high wall and electric fence with an electric gate, a similar tragedy occured when one of their neighbours in the same street shot his own 19 year old son dead.

The police came to the conclusion that the lad who had been out clubbing with friends had been trying to get back into the house quietly so as not to wake his parents. The father heard the slight noises and seeing a figure creeping stealthly across the unlit lounge shot at it.

Householders in these areas are really jumpy because the burglars are often armed and often kill the occupants of a house.

Many people including my son and his family kept one or more large dogs in the house to alert them to attempted break ins.

Trangia - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Enty:
> (In reply to Rampikino)
> [...]
>
> Correct - way too soon.
>
> E

+2

DNS on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Trangia:

Regardless of the many other redeeming features of southern Africa, if that's how I had to live my life - I'd move.
SCC - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino:
> (In reply to mark s)
>
> I hope I'm not the only one who thinks that a tragic event such as this is not worthy of mockery.
>
> I still don't understand why some items are deemed to be "ok" to take the mickey out of while others are untouchable. I don't see anything funny in this at all.

No humour at all in this.

Si
Skyfall - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Slugain Howff and rocky57:

I'd be feeling pretty ashamed right now if those were my posts; well done.
rocky57 - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s:

Okay, already. I retract my original post.

Iíll wager though that none of you complainers are irreproachable in using humour that you might have later realised was not appropriate; "at the time", I might add. Feel free to judge, but feel free to inwardly reflect.

Moley on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s:
If this happened in the USA everyone would be calling for a ban on guns. S.Africa sounds like a sound case for not having guns in the home.
Steve Perry - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s: To shoot someone 4 times in the head and arm, would require a clear sight of the victim in my opinion. He is being held by police at present. If it is a genuine mistake my condolences.
Blue Straggler - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Steve Perry:

He would be held by police regardless of whether they had any suspicions, surely. It only happened about 7 hours ago.
Wiley Coyote - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Enty:
> (In reply to Rampikino)
> [...]
>
way too soon.
>
Genuine question. If this is too soon what is the approriate time gap? And why might it vary(eg size of death toll? Distance from UK)? How long was it before it was OK to use the line: "Apart from that Mrs Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?"

I like climbing - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s:
Tragic and we will know more soon......
ads.ukclimbing.com
Blue Straggler - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Wiley Coyote:

Genuine answer - it tends to be more taboo to make jokes when the perpetrator is famous and the victim is not, than when the roles are reversed.
Thus, Lenny Bruce is hailed as an edgy maverick for making jokes about JFK's assassination, on stage to a paying audience, iirc the next day. But people held back from making jokes (if they ever did) about Nicole Brown or Lana Clarkson
The New NickB - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s:

Reeva Steenkamp

The name of the person who died, not difficult to find out and as seen as the tragedy of this story is that she has died, perhaps worth mentioning.
Steve Perry - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s: Charged with murder
mark s - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Steve Perry:
> (In reply to mark s) To shoot someone 4 times in the head and arm, would require a clear sight of the victim in my opinion. He is being held by police at present. If it is a genuine mistake my condolences.

yeah a 9mm pistol is not renowned as accurate,so being close is necessary

all will come out soon
Steve Perry - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s: It has they've just charged him with murder.
mark s - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Steve Perry:
> (In reply to mark s) Charged with murder

yeah ive just seen,so guess he knew who she was
Mikkel - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Steve Perry:
> (In reply to mark s) It has they've just charged him with murder.

Does this mean Jokes are back on?
mark s - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Mikkel:
> (In reply to Steve Perry)
> [...]
>
> Does this mean Jokes are back on?
guess so

is there a death penalty in s africa?
The New NickB - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s:
> (In reply to Steve Perry)
> [...]
>
> yeah ive just seen,so guess he knew who she was

I guess those sort of questions are what a jury are for, you know with actual evidence and stuff.
andy - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Trangia:
> (In reply to Enty)
> [...]
>
> +2

Not even a sardonic chuckle?
Trangia - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s:
> (In reply to Mikkel)
> [...]
> guess so
>
> is there a death penalty in s africa?

I think it was recently abolished
Trangia - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Trangia:

Actually not even "recently" it was abolished in 1995.
DynamoCL - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s:

Also, according to her twitter account, she was hoping to surprise him for valentines day. So she sneaked in to his house, and he reacted like this. Poor girl.

Although some other sickos tweeted her about taking "shots in the dark" to guess what the surprise was going to be.

https://twitter.com/reevasteenkamp
Enty - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to andy:
> (In reply to Trangia)
> [...]
>
> Not even a sardonic chuckle?

Empathy man , empathy!

E
mark s - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s: i guess either way he is in trouble.surely even in south africa,shooting at an unknown human target is criminal.
not good for everyone involved
Enty - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to andy:
> (In reply to Trangia)
> [...]
>
> Not even a sardonic chuckle?

Oh go on then:

Roses are red
Violets are glorious
Don't ever startle
Oscar Pistorius.

E

Pinged - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Enty:

You still not over that thread? Sheeeesh. :)

Steve Perry - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s: The reports of him mistaking her for a burglar are unfounded, SA Police have no knowledge of this and don't know who started that rumour. They have said there has been domestic disturbances at the address in the past.
mike123 - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to rocky57:
" Feel free to judge, but feel free to inwardly reflect."
i dont think i ve ever come across it but like this sentence alot .

+1


Tom V - on 14 Feb 2013
> (In reply to mark s)
> [...]
>
> I think it was recently abolished


What, chuckling?
ads.ukclimbing.com
goldmember - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Mikkel: he doesn't have a leg to stand on
Blade gunner
balmybaldwin - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s:

Seems he has been charged with murder: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-21459240
tolly_60 - on 14 Feb 2013
Everytime he heard a gun in the summer it was him getting murdered.
Trangia - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Trangia:

Actually not even "recently" it was abolished in 1995.

But that may turn out to be a pity from a murderer's point of view. SA jails are shit holes and rife with intimidation, buggerry and gang raping. Ross Kemp did a series on world wide lifers and jails last year and SA jails make US jails look like paradise. Even worse for a white Afrikaner
Lukeva - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Trangia: Shudder
Ridge - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Moley:
> (In reply to mark s)
> If this happened in the USA everyone would be calling for a ban on guns. S.Africa sounds like a sound case for not having guns in the home.

Looking at the crime stats for SA, not having a home arsenal is probably far more dangerous. After Somalia, and maybe Zim, it's probably 3rd in my African "No way am I going there" list. Unless automatic weapons come as part of the holiday package.
Lukeva - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Ridge:
> (In reply to Moley)
> [...]
>
> Looking at the crime stats for SA, not having a home arsenal is probably far more dangerous. After Somalia, and maybe Zim, it's probably 3rd in my African "No way am I going there" list. Unless automatic weapons come as part of the holiday package.

I've been to Mogadishu in Somalia, it was scary enough. I'd say SA is a long way from Somalia; Congo, Sudan are scary too, and also countries sadly ravaged by war. SA is a holiday destination!
graeme jackson - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Trangia:
> (In reply to Trangia)
>
> Actually not even "recently" it was abolished in 1995.
>
> But that may turn out to be a pity from a murderer's point of view. SA jails are shit holes and rife with intimidation, buggerry and gang raping.

it's a pity our jails aren't like this. Might cut down crime a little.
Rampikino - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to graeme jackson:

I couldn't agree with you less. Just because someone is in jail it does not mean they should expect a threat of gang rape and nor should that ever be used a deterrent by the state.
Mike Stretford - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to graeme jackson:
> (In reply to Trangia)
> [...]
>
> it's a pity our jails aren't like this. Might cut down crime a little.

Or, more likely, lead to very embittered individuals leaving jail with nothing left to loose and a serious problem with society.
graeme jackson - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino:
> (In reply to graeme jackson)
> Just because someone is in jail it does not mean they should expect a threat of gang rape

Maybe not but it would be nice if criminals could expect some sort of hardship when they're convicted.
Mike Stretford - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to graeme jackson:
> (In reply to Rampikino)
> [...]
>
> Maybe not but it would be nice if criminals could expect some sort of hardship when they're convicted.

Under you preference, the stronger criminals with violent bullying tendencies would be enjoying themselves.
Lukeva - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to graeme jackson:
> (In reply to Rampikino)
> [...]
>
> Maybe not but it would be nice if criminals could expect some sort of hardship when they're convicted.

IMO criminals should be sent to prison as a punishment, not to be punish... Um, that does make sense. I.e. the incarceration and loss of liberties is punishment enough. That would be very hard for me anyway
ThunderCat - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to graeme jackson:
> (In reply to Trangia)
> [...]
>
> it's a pity our jails aren't like this. Might cut down crime a little.

Like it does in SA you mean? Oh, wait...


Rampikino - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to graeme jackson:

Do you feel that somehow convicted criminals currently have a ball?
graeme jackson - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Papillon:
> (In reply to graeme jackson)
> [...]
>
> Under you preference, the stronger criminals with violent bullying tendencies would be enjoying themselves.

on the contrary - my preference would be for the punishment to fit the crime so that those with the most violent tendencies are kept locked up for most of the day with no priviledges while the rest of the prison population do something useful for the human race like sewing mailbags or whatever. They certainly wouldn't have their own Tvs or telephones or whatever.
Mike Stretford - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to graeme jackson: Right.... so be careful what you reply to. You said something very different 10mins ago.
graeme jackson - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino:
> (In reply to graeme jackson)
>
> Do you feel that somehow convicted criminals currently have a ball?

presumably you have read reports about current prisons and the priviledges that the inmates enjoy such as their own tvs etc. maybe if the feckers hadn't wrecked my house and caused my wife to become almost a recluse for several years I wouldn't feel so strongly but when all they can expect for ruining someone elses life is a rap on the knuckles then yes, I think they should be made to suffer a bit more than they do..
jkarran - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to graeme jackson:

> it's a pity our jails aren't like this. Might cut down crime a little.

No it's not an no it wouldn't.

Think for a second about what you're saying!
jk
Dave Williams - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Lukeva:
> (In reply to Ridge)
> [...]
>
> I've been to Mogadishu in Somalia, it was scary enough. I'd say SA is a long way from Somalia; Congo, Sudan are scary too, and also countries sadly ravaged by war. SA is a holiday destination!

Hmm, you obviously haven't travelled widely in SA or you wouldn't say this. It's much less safe than it used to be. I agree that the popular tourist areas are relatively safe but off the beaten track I found many areas of SA to be very scary indeed, downtown Jo'berg being one!

We once spent a little time with a family in Pretoria and they were all well armed. Actually reminded me a lot of visiting my relations in the States - "The more guns you have, the better!"

Dave
ads.ukclimbing.com
Rampikino - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to graeme jackson:

I don't need to read reports. I have a relative who is currently in jail. I can assure you that he is not having a ball. Far from it.
Bobling - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s:

What a thread!
Sir Chasm - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino: Has he got a tv?
graeme jackson - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino:
> (In reply to graeme jackson)
>
> I don't need to read reports. I have a relative who is currently in jail. I can assure you that he is not having a ball. Far from it.

So how do you feel about that? Do you think he is suffering unduly or is his punishment apt for whatever crime he committed? Genuine question BTW as my only experience is as a victim so naturally my opinions are biased.

In reply to Lukeva:

> I've been to Mogadishu in Somalia,

Really?! Wow. What on earth for? According to your profile you're too young to have been there in the "good ole days", so you must be a balsy journalist or a balsy aid worker at a guess!
Lukeva - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Dave Williams:
> (In reply to Lukeva)
> [...]
>
> Hmm, you obviously haven't travelled widely in SA or you wouldn't say this. It's much less safe than it used to be. I agree that the popular tourist areas are relatively safe but off the beaten track I found many areas of SA to be very scary indeed, downtown Jo'berg being one!
>
> We once spent a little time with a family in Pretoria and they were all well armed. Actually reminded me a lot of visiting my relations in the States - "The more guns you have, the better!"
>
> Dave

You take my comment out of context. I am well aware of the disparities with SA, notwithstanding this people do visit SA on holiday, not many people visit Mogadishu, certainly none on holiday. I consider my self very lucky to have been to the areas of Africa that I have done.

Anywhere with a lot of guns scares me, especially the biker and cowboy bars in the USA with guns clearly visible. Exciting though
Slugain Howff - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Bobling:
> (In reply to mark s)
>
> What a thread!

Indeed - it went rapidly downhill after the first reply.

Mike Highbury - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Slugain Howff:
> (In reply to Bobling)
> [...]
>
> Indeed - it went rapidly downhill after the first reply.

Yes, star f*cking is rarely attractive
Rampikino - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to TobyA:

He has lost his liberty (as is the requirement) and as a result has many restrictions that TV/Books cannot make up for - he can't see his loved ones when he wants, he can't get out and about when he wants and everything is prescribed for him. He can't meet up with friends, go down the pub or just go and visit somewhere he fancies. His business was put on hold while he is inside and other people have to take care of that for him. He has gone into suspended animation.

Contact with the outside world is very limited indeed and requires a number of hoops to be jumped through - including changing jails at the drop of the hat to somewhere further away from home and his relatives.

So I guess the system is doing what it is supposed to do - his liberties are artificial and he has pretty much no say over them.

But he is not having parties, spending all day on the play station, laughing it up at our expense. He is also treated like sh*t by the Prison Staff, as are his visiting relatives who somehow are guilty by association. He certainly is NOT having a ball.

I'm not saying that anything should be any different, but to suggest that it is somehow an easy life is false.
Sir Chasm - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino: On the plus side, he's getting free board and lodging.
Rampikino - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Sir Chasm:

...and still has to pay the lease on his business and mortgage on his house while not being able to earn.

(again, I'm not claiming any right or wrong here, just how it is)
Sir Chasm - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino: Well, the wrong was whatever got him locked up. Whether people should be treated worse (statutory gang rape or no tv in their cell) is a different question.
Skyfall - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino:

What did he do to get a prison sentence (even if allegedly)?

My father was a prison governor, long retired, unusually worked his way up from the bottom so knew the score. A very decent humane person and yet all in favour of harsh sentences for those deserving. Yet had a lot of pity for some young idiots who got caught up in their lives and the system (when kids were being arrested at football matches for carrying anything resemblingor could be construed as a weapon). Prisons aren't perfect but it's hard to see what other option there is sometimes. For less serious crimes and those at the end of their sentences, there are open prisons too, which many people won't be aware of (except those living near them).
Rampikino - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Sir Chasm and Skyfall

Yes (Sir Chasm) you are correct. Whatever the rights or wrongs of a person's actions, to suggest that harsher jails (where gang rape is a genuine threat) are some kind of positivie deterrent is crass.

Sorry Skyfall, I'm not going to discuss these details.
Skyfall - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino:

Fair enough and I agree about abuse in prisons incidentally although, if I were a direct or indirect victim of a serious crime, I'm not sure if I would feel the same.
Pinged - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino:

I'd disregard Sir Chasm's comments if I were you. They are all just mindless attempts to be controversial and are clearly written from a position of advanced ignorance
Rampikino - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Pinged:

It's fine, I'm not offended.

I think until you have any kind of experience of having a relative in jail then it's too easy to fall into the "prisoners have it easy" trap.
Sir Chasm - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino: Putting aside rape for the moment, do you think not having a tv in your cell is unreasonable?
Rampikino - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Sir Chasm:
> (In reply to Rampikino) Putting aside rape for the moment, do you think not having a tv in your cell is unreasonable?

Would you care to rephrase your question?

Frankly I don't see where rape belongs in it.
Sir Chasm - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino: Do you think it unreasonable for prisoners to not have a tv in their cell?
ads.ukclimbing.com
Alyson - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino: Can you not see? It belongs in the same sentence as television. "Things we should do to make life worse for prisoners: statutory rape and take their tvs off them." This is the kind of advanced level thinking we get treated to by Sir Chasm.
Pinged - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Alyson:

Does it actually constitue 'thinking'? Or merely penis waggling?

Sir Chasm - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Alyson: I am sticking my tongue out at your inability to quote accurately.
Alyson - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Sir Chasm: It's called paraphrasing. The content was entirely accurate.
Sir Chasm - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Alyson:
> (In reply to Sir Chasm) It's called paraphrasing. The content was entirely accurate.

Of course it wasn't accurate, I used "or" not "and".
In reply to Rampikino: I don't have an informed view about whether or not prison is or isn't "hard". However, I think it should be (putting aside the ridiculous assertion that being raped is part of the process).

I think the over-riding consideration should be the victims, both those that already exist and those that may exist in the future. Therefore, prison should be a punishment and it should also seek to rehabilitate. If that doesn't work for a particular prisoner then they shouldn't re-enter society.
Alyson - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Sir Chasm:
> (In reply to Alyson)
> [...]
>
> Of course it wasn't accurate, I used "or" not "and".

Riiiiight. So statutory gang rape and removal of tv are interchangeable concepts for you?
Sir Chasm - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Alyson: Yes, I wasn't suggesting they were rather different points on a scale at all, they're exactly the same.
Alyson - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Sir Chasm: And I am saying that no rational human being would consider discussing statutory gang rape as a state-sanctioned punishment. It makes it impossible to take you seriously.
Pinged - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Alyson:

Walk away Alyson!! Transcend Sir Gism and all that spews from within him. He's got flies in his eyes
Sir Chasm - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Alyson: Well, read the thread, the post at 13:12.
Do you think it unreasonable for prisoners to not have a tv in their cell?
Rampikino - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to all:

I'm out.
Jimbo W on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Alyson:
> (In reply to Sir Chasm) And I am saying that no rational human being would consider discussing statutory gang rape as a state-sanctioned punishment. It makes it impossible to take you seriously.

Seriously, he's not worth discussing with. Don't give his fetid mind the satisfaction of interaction.
jkarran - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Sir Chasm:

Why have you got such a bee in your bonnet about televisions?

jk
Sir Chasm - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to jkarran: It's a simple question, I don't know why it's getting such a poor reception.
Mike Stretford - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Sir Chasm: I believe TV in cells or not is used as incentive/punishment. It strikes me as a cheap and effective way to influence behaviour. Do you have an opinion on this?
Hat Dude on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Sir Chasm:
> (In reply to jkarran) It's a simple question, I don't know why it's getting such a poor reception.

You could try a new aerial or maybe one of those booster things you plug in
dek - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Sir Chasm:
> (In reply to jkarran) It's a simple question, I don't know why it's getting such a poor reception.

Is it Free view?
Alyson - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Sir Chasm:
> Do you think it unreasonable for prisoners to not have a tv in their cell?

Well leaving aside the terrible double negative in your so-called question... not unreasonable but senseless.

The people who complain loudly about tvs in prison cells are the people without an ounce of intelligence, for whom staring at Coronation Street represents the cultural highlight of their lives. Only someone deeply dull-witted would place such a high value on it over the loss of freedom, the loss of contact with family and friends, the loss of any kind of choice.

Possible benefits to having tvs in prison cells:

1) it keeps the prisoners placid
2) it keeps long term prisoners more aware of changes in the outside world, making re-integration easier when they're released
3) it can be used as an incentive for good behaviour

What are your reasons for opposing it, aside from the 'I'm a taxpayer and I have to pay for it' whine? You forfeited the ability to use that when you expressed an interest in employing gangs of rapists with your hard earned tax payments.
jkarran - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Sir Chasm:

> It's a simple question, I don't know why it's getting such a poor reception.

That's not an answer to my question.
jk
ads.ukclimbing.com
Sir Chasm - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Papillon: If prison staff find that makes a better ordered jail it would be difficult to argue. But, some people are of the opinion that prison should be "harsher", is depriving all prisoners of a tv in their cell unreasonable?
In reply to Alyson:
> (In reply to Sir Chasm)
> [...]
>
> Riiiiight. So statutory gang rape and removal of tv are interchangeable concepts for you?

What's "statutory" gang rape?
In reply to mark s: Oscar who?
Alyson - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Submit to Gravity: A concept first posited by Sir Chasm at 14.35 today on this very thread.
mkean - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Submit to Gravity:
What's "statutory" gang rape?

I think it is all part of the new sweeping policy shift the government are calling "F*@~ the proles". Either that of it is a candidate for the turner prize, I've not been keeping up.

In reply to Alyson:
> (In reply to Submit to Gravity) A concept first posited by Sir Chasm at 14.35 today on this very thread.

Bullshit then?
Alyson - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Submit to Gravity:
> (In reply to Alyson)
> [...]
>
> Bullshit then?

One man's penal system wet dream. His hopes and desires for the future of our prisons summed up in a three word phrase.

Or bullshit, yes.
Indy - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s: I suppose if you have a record for domestic violence then your defence options are limited when your partner winds up dead.
Sir Chasm - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mkean: I'll see if I can explain; it was suggested that prison should be harsher, I was trying to find out what level of harshness would be acceptable, I think we've ruled out rape as a part of penal punishment and now it's just whether prisoners can have their own tv (or, for those who don't want to fixate on tvs, mobile phones, or their own clothes instead of a uniform - what could be called luxuries).
As to the rather hysterical responders, you'll have to ask them.
Jimbo W on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Alyson:

> Well leaving aside the terrible double negative in your so-called question... not unreasonable but senseless.
>
> The people who complain loudly about tvs in prison cells are the people without an ounce of intelligence, for whom staring at Coronation Street represents the cultural highlight of their lives. Only someone deeply dull-witted would place such a high value on it over the loss of freedom, the loss of contact with family and friends, the loss of any kind of choice.

That's a very polarised way of looking at it. I don't agree. I think that a communal TV should be a privilege for some of the reasons you outline, but within cells I believe there should only be reading material available, along with directed educational material. And if literacy is an issue, it should definitely be being addressed. TVs facilitate escapism, which as you rightly point out may well keep prisoners more placid and controllable, but that is only one factor that need be addressed.
Enty - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Alyson:
> (In reply to Sir Chasm)
> [...]
>
>
> The people who complain loudly about tvs in prison cells are the people without an ounce of intelligence, for whom staring at Coronation Street represents the cultural highlight of their lives.
>
>

We should put a telly in every cell in Strangeways and see if they all start watching The South Bank Show....

E
Darren Jackson - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Enty:

They prefer their TVs on the roof at Strangeways.
MJ - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Darren Jackson:

They prefer their TVs on the roof at Strangeways.

Well, it's the only 'Night on the Tiles' they're going to get for a while.
mark s - on 14 Feb 2013
makes lance armstrongs reasons for being the most hated sports star seem pretty trivial compared to this scum bag
Ridge - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to mark s:
No need to bother with a trial then?
mark s - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Ridge: im no inspector clouseaux but if was him i wouldnt go booking a holiday this summer.
if you got off that fence you would admit the same.
G1000 - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to Trangia: Yeah and not only the high violent crime rates but there is the addition of his personal situation of having no legs. I doubt he wears his blades to bed... can you imagine how vunerable you'd feel if someone came into your bedroom and you could not get away?

Personally I think there was a pretty good reason for him having weapons close by, and if he was startled then sure he might fire without thinking. I don't know about the whole accuracy of the firing but stranger things have happened. There were reports from the neighburs of argueing so time will tell when this was but if the argueing was 10pm and the shooting was in the early hours then there is a good chance they may have gone to bed and the tradegy happened later.

Not necessarily leaning either way on this but I tend to veer on the side of innocent until proven guilty and hopefully there will be enough evidence to make the right decision on what happened. If he did shoot then he'll go down for manslaughter anyway which along with the death of his girlfriend, is a very sad waste of both lives.
Lukeva - on 14 Feb 2013
In reply to TobyA:
> (In reply to Lukeva)
>
> [...]
>
> Really?! Wow. What on earth for? According to your profile you're too young to have been there in the "good ole days", so you must be a balsy journalist or a balsy aid worker at a guess!

I was involved in a relief aid operation, flying food out there in support of UN, years ago. Nothing more than a lucky opportunity that I took. Still vey fond memories, the sea was blue and as warm as bath water.
Al Evans on 15 Feb 2013
In reply to G1000: I don't know if this has already been said on here, but the neighbours are saying the shooting went on for 10 minutes, hardly 'just supressing an intruder'.
In reply to mark s: Oscar Pistorius granted bail
ads.ukclimbing.com
fxceltic on 22 Feb 2013
In reply to Al Evans:
> (In reply to G1000) I don't know if this has already been said on here, but the neighbours are saying the shooting went on for 10 minutes, hardly 'just supressing an intruder'.

I find that extremely hard to believe, 4 shots were fired across 10 minutes? Really?
balmybaldwin - on 22 Feb 2013
In reply to Al Evans:

This is the neighbours that live half a mile away... (or 100m acording to the dodgy policeman)

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.