This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
This Teen Crime Commissioner is a naught little thing, but would you expect more from a 17 year old?
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/teen-crime-commissioner-offensive-tweet-row-081528...
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/teen-crime-commissioner-offensive-tweet-row-081528...
In reply to The Lemming:
Clearly, the wrong person for the job.
She needs to walk. Or someone should push her; perhaps the person that appointed her.
Clearly, the wrong person for the job.
She needs to walk. Or someone should push her; perhaps the person that appointed her.
In reply to The Lemming: I heard this story on the radio earlier; absolute farce! Is any 17 year old mature enough for such a position and £15,000 to boot?
C
C
In reply to The Lemming: Outrageous. Nobody who has ever written, said, or done anything stupid when they were 14 or 15 should be allowed to have a job ever. At least not until the Mail on Sunday says you can.
These were written between one and three years ago. Not that you would if you read the Mail's story...
These were written between one and three years ago. Not that you would if you read the Mail's story...
In reply to Chay:
I think the whole point is that she's been appointed (for a year, it's not a permanent post) to give the police commissioner some insight into her peer group.
> (In reply to The Lemming) I heard this story on the radio earlier; absolute farce! Is any 17 year old mature enough for such a position and £15,000 to boot?
>
> C
>
> C
I think the whole point is that she's been appointed (for a year, it's not a permanent post) to give the police commissioner some insight into her peer group.
In reply to andy: And this would be the first insight,
In reply to andy:
Would anybody care to give me some insight into the role of a Police Commissioner?
I never even bothered to vote for such a non-job description.
> (In reply to Chay)
> [...]
>
> I think the whole point is that she's been appointed (for a year, it's not a permanent post) to give the police commissioner some insight into her peer group.
> [...]
>
> I think the whole point is that she's been appointed (for a year, it's not a permanent post) to give the police commissioner some insight into her peer group.
Would anybody care to give me some insight into the role of a Police Commissioner?
I never even bothered to vote for such a non-job description.
In reply to Dax H:
I'm not saying she's a paragon of virtue, but there can't be many teenagers in this day and age who haven't posted something on social networking sites that they regret. I'm glad Twitter wasn't around when I was saying all those stupid things when I was a lad.
> (In reply to andy) And this would be the first insight,
I'm not saying she's a paragon of virtue, but there can't be many teenagers in this day and age who haven't posted something on social networking sites that they regret. I'm glad Twitter wasn't around when I was saying all those stupid things when I was a lad.
In reply to andy: The Police commisioner obviously has no idea about teenagers. She just needs to spend some time with my teenage daughter to find out about the "peer group".
She is easily found either in her bedroom on her laptop on twitter/ facebook/skype etc . Failing that she is in the kitchen with her face in the fridge..
What else does sthe commissioner need to know????
She is easily found either in her bedroom on her laptop on twitter/ facebook/skype etc . Failing that she is in the kitchen with her face in the fridge..
What else does sthe commissioner need to know????
In reply to The Lemming:
Maybe that's a good thing - if you couldn't be arsed to find out what the position is for then it's perhaps best you didn't vote.
But amongst other things this "non-job" holder is responsible for hiring and firing your local chief constable and setting local policy. Personally I'm quite interested in who does that stuff.
> (In reply to andy)
> [...]
>
> Would anybody care to give me some insight into the role of a Police Commissioner?
>
> I never even bothered to vote for such a non-job description.
> [...]
>
> Would anybody care to give me some insight into the role of a Police Commissioner?
>
> I never even bothered to vote for such a non-job description.
Maybe that's a good thing - if you couldn't be arsed to find out what the position is for then it's perhaps best you didn't vote.
But amongst other things this "non-job" holder is responsible for hiring and firing your local chief constable and setting local policy. Personally I'm quite interested in who does that stuff.
In reply to andy: Andy raises some very good points.
My objection is not with the girl that was appointed; as Andy says, I think everyone on the planet has said or done something stupid at that age. She should not be subjected to public ridicule.
However, I have to say the idea of such a role and indeed the idea of such a high paid role for a person of that age is at best naive. Was it ever really expected that she would behave like the model teenage angel and never put a foot wrong for the year she was charged with this job? That's unrealistic; again I quote Andy, what teenager hasn't posted something inappropriate on a networking site?
C
My objection is not with the girl that was appointed; as Andy says, I think everyone on the planet has said or done something stupid at that age. She should not be subjected to public ridicule.
However, I have to say the idea of such a role and indeed the idea of such a high paid role for a person of that age is at best naive. Was it ever really expected that she would behave like the model teenage angel and never put a foot wrong for the year she was charged with this job? That's unrealistic; again I quote Andy, what teenager hasn't posted something inappropriate on a networking site?
C
In reply to The Lemming: or perhaps she was never expected to be the model teenager and in fact this better gives an impression of a teenager/peer group?
In reply to Chay:
That's a lot of money for alco-pops and cyder then.
> (In reply to The Lemming) or perhaps she was never expected to be the model teenager and in fact this better gives an impression of a teenager/peer group?
That's a lot of money for alco-pops and cyder then.
In reply to Chay: i'm also not sure if it matters that much - unless she did mean some of what she posted.
My ex-boss wanted to fire a lad who tweeted something vaguely uncomplimentary about his job (nothing confidential, nothing rude) - til we pointed out that in "the olden days" he'd have just told his mates in the pub that he hated his job and we'd never have heard anything about it.
My ex-boss wanted to fire a lad who tweeted something vaguely uncomplimentary about his job (nothing confidential, nothing rude) - til we pointed out that in "the olden days" he'd have just told his mates in the pub that he hated his job and we'd never have heard anything about it.
In reply to andy: I'm not sure it should matter; in this day an age, as you point out with the job analogy, it does matter to some people. My main concern with this story is that it doesn't effect her life; at the age emotional states are pretty up and down- having to deal with something you've done wrong being so public must be very difficult.
C
C
In reply to The Lemming:
All written before she got given the job (and the £15,000 salary)
Just a little warning that if the Daily Mail have an agenda, then anything you may have ever posted on the internet will be held against you...
...Unless, of course, it's them that write things, because they have a record of obliterating articles that are in bad taste, and have attention drawn to them pointing out the utter hypocrisy of their business model and ethics...
All written before she got given the job (and the £15,000 salary)
Just a little warning that if the Daily Mail have an agenda, then anything you may have ever posted on the internet will be held against you...
...Unless, of course, it's them that write things, because they have a record of obliterating articles that are in bad taste, and have attention drawn to them pointing out the utter hypocrisy of their business model and ethics...
In reply to Dominion:
Yep. Look at the shitstorm they created from Rossy and Brand. At the time very few people heard the aired show and even then only a hand-full of people made a complaint. Yet weeks later, The Mail gets hold of the story and the whole situation went ballistic.
The Mail is indeed very good at creating stories and increasing sales of its rag.
> Just a little warning that if the Daily Mail have an agenda, then anything you may have ever posted on the internet will be held against you...
>
>
Yep. Look at the shitstorm they created from Rossy and Brand. At the time very few people heard the aired show and even then only a hand-full of people made a complaint. Yet weeks later, The Mail gets hold of the story and the whole situation went ballistic.
The Mail is indeed very good at creating stories and increasing sales of its rag.
In reply to The Lemming:
The Mail took a big moral stance on not using/buying Paparazzi photos when Princess Diana was killed whilst her car was being chased by Pap photographers...
Nowadays, their online site is full of questionable Paparazzi based articles, some of which are reportedly in breach of the rules - according to Private Eye, anyway - and are frequently in opposition to the Mail's stated editorial policy, and also against what their Editor (Paul Dacre) said he adhered to when he was in front of the Leveson Enquiry, trying to defend his paper's abusive intrusion into the private lives of people...
There is reportedly the case of "Hit Girl" from the move Kick Ass
The Mail wrote articles deploring what they saw as the sexualisation of a 13yr old girl when the movie was released, but when she was still only 15 they were publishing articles on their Online site where they were doing exactly that...
.. with Paparazzi photos.
The Mail took a big moral stance on not using/buying Paparazzi photos when Princess Diana was killed whilst her car was being chased by Pap photographers...
Nowadays, their online site is full of questionable Paparazzi based articles, some of which are reportedly in breach of the rules - according to Private Eye, anyway - and are frequently in opposition to the Mail's stated editorial policy, and also against what their Editor (Paul Dacre) said he adhered to when he was in front of the Leveson Enquiry, trying to defend his paper's abusive intrusion into the private lives of people...
There is reportedly the case of "Hit Girl" from the move Kick Ass
The Mail wrote articles deploring what they saw as the sexualisation of a 13yr old girl when the movie was released, but when she was still only 15 they were publishing articles on their Online site where they were doing exactly that...
.. with Paparazzi photos.
In reply to andy:
Fair enough, and I was a little tinker at times as a teenager. Most are.
The difference with me is that I didn't publicly write homophobic, racist things whilst condoning drug taking.
She has to leave IMO and was clearly not vetted properly and having seen the interview and other clips about her, she most certainly doesnt represent most teenagers I know, one being my daughter who would never think about tweeting the vile rubbish which this girl did.
> (In reply to Dax H)
> [...]
>
> I'm not saying she's a paragon of virtue, but there can't be many teenagers in this day and age who haven't posted something on social networking sites that they regret. I'm glad Twitter wasn't around when I was saying all those stupid things when I was a lad.
> [...]
>
> I'm not saying she's a paragon of virtue, but there can't be many teenagers in this day and age who haven't posted something on social networking sites that they regret. I'm glad Twitter wasn't around when I was saying all those stupid things when I was a lad.
Fair enough, and I was a little tinker at times as a teenager. Most are.
The difference with me is that I didn't publicly write homophobic, racist things whilst condoning drug taking.
She has to leave IMO and was clearly not vetted properly and having seen the interview and other clips about her, she most certainly doesnt represent most teenagers I know, one being my daughter who would never think about tweeting the vile rubbish which this girl did.
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
I think the fact that she hasn't offered to resign says a lot.
Her comments were clearly inappropriate , even a 15 year old should have known that. I have grand children of her age group and I certainly wouldn't want her "representing" them. If she had been sorry enough to offer to resign then I might think differently, but she hasn't.
I think the fact that she hasn't offered to resign says a lot.
Her comments were clearly inappropriate , even a 15 year old should have known that. I have grand children of her age group and I certainly wouldn't want her "representing" them. If she had been sorry enough to offer to resign then I might think differently, but she hasn't.
In reply to Removed User:
How can you say that when you don't even know her? If we were all judged on what we had said in private, thought we had said in private and what we had said online, we would all be outcast as moral deviants.
No wonder the youth are so disaffected when we judge so quickly. Personally, I would be concerned about someone in public office who hadn't smoked weed, experienced life to the max and made a few mistakes in their life.
> Clearly, the wrong person for the job.
How can you say that when you don't even know her? If we were all judged on what we had said in private, thought we had said in private and what we had said online, we would all be outcast as moral deviants.
No wonder the youth are so disaffected when we judge so quickly. Personally, I would be concerned about someone in public office who hadn't smoked weed, experienced life to the max and made a few mistakes in their life.
In reply to The Lemming:
My main issue is not that she made some silly immature comments when she was 14 but more that she was to thick to make the best of a bad situation but rather sat there and blubbed "I'm not a racist, honestly".
A better response would have been,something along the lines of; I was young and immature, I said some silly things that do not reflect my views now, I really shouldn't have and wouldn't have if I'd given more thought to it. This is a prime example of why young people should really think more when posting stuff on the internet as it lingers indefinitely on the web and will no doubt come back and bite you in the ass, jeopardising your future career prospects.
From this she would sound like she really has given it some thought, has learnt something from the situation and matured and hopefully others (especially her target teenagers) would get the message that saying stupid stuff on the web really isn't cool.
My main issue is not that she made some silly immature comments when she was 14 but more that she was to thick to make the best of a bad situation but rather sat there and blubbed "I'm not a racist, honestly".
A better response would have been,something along the lines of; I was young and immature, I said some silly things that do not reflect my views now, I really shouldn't have and wouldn't have if I'd given more thought to it. This is a prime example of why young people should really think more when posting stuff on the internet as it lingers indefinitely on the web and will no doubt come back and bite you in the ass, jeopardising your future career prospects.
From this she would sound like she really has given it some thought, has learnt something from the situation and matured and hopefully others (especially her target teenagers) would get the message that saying stupid stuff on the web really isn't cool.
In reply to gethin_allen:
Well not word for word, but that's pretty much the sentiment of what she said yesterday:
""I deeply apologise for any offence caused by my use of inappropriate language and for any inference of inappropriate views."
"I am not homophobic, racist or violent and am against the taking of drugs."
"If I'm guilty of anything it's showing off and wildly exaggerating on Twitter, and I am very ashamed of myself, but I can't imagine that I'm the only teenager to have done this."
> (In reply to The Lemming)
>
> A better response would have been,something along the lines of; I was young and immature, I said some silly things that do not reflect my views now, I really shouldn't have and wouldn't have if I'd given more thought to it.
>
> A better response would have been,something along the lines of; I was young and immature, I said some silly things that do not reflect my views now, I really shouldn't have and wouldn't have if I'd given more thought to it.
Well not word for word, but that's pretty much the sentiment of what she said yesterday:
""I deeply apologise for any offence caused by my use of inappropriate language and for any inference of inappropriate views."
"I am not homophobic, racist or violent and am against the taking of drugs."
"If I'm guilty of anything it's showing off and wildly exaggerating on Twitter, and I am very ashamed of myself, but I can't imagine that I'm the only teenager to have done this."
In reply to The Lemming:
People change a lot very quickly during those years. Between 14-17 she could have understandably gone from being a child to being a young adult with a different outlook on delicate topics. I don't see that she should get sacked because of things said while a child. It would be different if say she was 20 and she'd said them while 17 where the maturing still happens quickly but not in quite as huge a manner.
She does seem to have answered the issue badly though. Surely "I was a child and did not have a proper understanding of the issues I was referring to. Now I'm more educated and take more responsibility for my actions. My flaws at that age are lessons I have learned from and are partly what make me fit for the job, as I have been there done that and understand the same in my peers" would have been better and not such an unobvious way of responding?
To be honest though, the shocking thing is that organisations haven't started thinking yet to discuss social media histories with employees who are likely to be in the public eye! If they'd asked her to close her account beforehand none of this would have come up and been blown up!
People change a lot very quickly during those years. Between 14-17 she could have understandably gone from being a child to being a young adult with a different outlook on delicate topics. I don't see that she should get sacked because of things said while a child. It would be different if say she was 20 and she'd said them while 17 where the maturing still happens quickly but not in quite as huge a manner.
She does seem to have answered the issue badly though. Surely "I was a child and did not have a proper understanding of the issues I was referring to. Now I'm more educated and take more responsibility for my actions. My flaws at that age are lessons I have learned from and are partly what make me fit for the job, as I have been there done that and understand the same in my peers" would have been better and not such an unobvious way of responding?
To be honest though, the shocking thing is that organisations haven't started thinking yet to discuss social media histories with employees who are likely to be in the public eye! If they'd asked her to close her account beforehand none of this would have come up and been blown up!
In reply to The Lemming:
I don't think the money she earns has anything to do with it! I had a job when I was 17 and was probably earning around that and I was fairly mature - luckily I grew out of that
I don't think the money she earns has anything to do with it! I had a job when I was 17 and was probably earning around that and I was fairly mature - luckily I grew out of that
In reply to Scarab9: Interesting that the Mail should be outraged over her tweet complaining that the people in her local takeaway don't speak English properly...
In reply to andy:
Agreed
Unfortunately I suspect most of my UKC posts ca2006 are still around somewhere...
> (In reply to Dax H)
> [...]
>
> I'm not saying she's a paragon of virtue, but there can't be many teenagers in this day and age who haven't posted something on social networking sites that they regret. I'm glad Twitter wasn't around when I was saying all those stupid things when I was a lad.
> [...]
>
> I'm not saying she's a paragon of virtue, but there can't be many teenagers in this day and age who haven't posted something on social networking sites that they regret. I'm glad Twitter wasn't around when I was saying all those stupid things when I was a lad.
Agreed
Unfortunately I suspect most of my UKC posts ca2006 are still around somewhere...
In reply to EeeByGum:
Come on, you dont really believe that do you. Ive smoked weed in the past and a little stronger and I've been drunk on a few occasions too. I also use some foul language in appropriate company and have a very black sense of humour.
I've never been racist though, nor have I been homophobic.
This girl, and I do feel for her and she deserves a second chance in life and needs to learn from these mistakes, is there to represent a youth stuck in turmoil about itself and its future, especially young ethnic groups and homosexuals. She has patently failed in her obligations here.
Hmm, I get this but it wasnt just the weed thing.
> (In reply to rocky57)
>
> [...]
>
> How can you say that when you don't even know her? If we were all judged on what we had said in private, thought we had said in private and what we had said online, we would all be outcast as moral deviants.
>
> [...]
>
> How can you say that when you don't even know her? If we were all judged on what we had said in private, thought we had said in private and what we had said online, we would all be outcast as moral deviants.
Come on, you dont really believe that do you. Ive smoked weed in the past and a little stronger and I've been drunk on a few occasions too. I also use some foul language in appropriate company and have a very black sense of humour.
I've never been racist though, nor have I been homophobic.
This girl, and I do feel for her and she deserves a second chance in life and needs to learn from these mistakes, is there to represent a youth stuck in turmoil about itself and its future, especially young ethnic groups and homosexuals. She has patently failed in her obligations here.
>
> No wonder the youth are so disaffected when we judge so quickly. Personally, I would be concerned about someone in public office who hadn't smoked weed, experienced life to the max and made a few mistakes in their life.
> No wonder the youth are so disaffected when we judge so quickly. Personally, I would be concerned about someone in public office who hadn't smoked weed, experienced life to the max and made a few mistakes in their life.
Hmm, I get this but it wasnt just the weed thing.
In reply to andy:
The first two points I accept.
The latter would have been so much better if she would have removed the 'If' at the start which doesnt seem to show complete acceptance. The last sentence seeks to justify her actions as though if all teenager do this then all must be good.
Thinking back, would i have wanted to her to represent me or be my conduit into government as a teenager? Hell no.
> (In reply to gethin_allen)
> [...]
>
> Well not word for word, but that's pretty much the sentiment of what she said yesterday:
>
> ""I deeply apologise for any offence caused by my use of inappropriate language and for any inference of inappropriate views."
>
> "I am not homophobic, racist or violent and am against the taking of drugs."
>
> "If I'm guilty of anything it's showing off and wildly exaggerating on Twitter, and I am very ashamed of myself, but I can't imagine that I'm the only teenager to have done this."
> [...]
>
> Well not word for word, but that's pretty much the sentiment of what she said yesterday:
>
> ""I deeply apologise for any offence caused by my use of inappropriate language and for any inference of inappropriate views."
>
> "I am not homophobic, racist or violent and am against the taking of drugs."
>
> "If I'm guilty of anything it's showing off and wildly exaggerating on Twitter, and I am very ashamed of myself, but I can't imagine that I'm the only teenager to have done this."
The first two points I accept.
The latter would have been so much better if she would have removed the 'If' at the start which doesnt seem to show complete acceptance. The last sentence seeks to justify her actions as though if all teenager do this then all must be good.
Thinking back, would i have wanted to her to represent me or be my conduit into government as a teenager? Hell no.
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers: The "racism" was referring to immigrants as "illegals" and moaning about the people in her local takeaway not being very good at English. The homophobia was referring to some people on telly as as "faggots". Offensive? Yes. Would I want my kids to say that? No. Did I ever say anything as dodgy when I was 14? Probably - just they hadn't invented computers (or electricity) back then.
The hypocrisy of the faux "outrage"of the Mail is what gets me - this is the newspaper than thinks it's ok to say that Philpott torched his house because he was on benefits, and that saw fit to publish Littlejohn's demonising of someone who chose to change their gender, yet apparently it's far worse for a 14 year old to tweet something like that.
Paul Dacre is a hypocritical turd. Blimey, hope I never want a job on the Mail - they're bound to dig that one up...
The hypocrisy of the faux "outrage"of the Mail is what gets me - this is the newspaper than thinks it's ok to say that Philpott torched his house because he was on benefits, and that saw fit to publish Littlejohn's demonising of someone who chose to change their gender, yet apparently it's far worse for a 14 year old to tweet something like that.
Paul Dacre is a hypocritical turd. Blimey, hope I never want a job on the Mail - they're bound to dig that one up...
In reply to andy:
"I deeply apologise for any offence caused"
The whole thing of apologising if anyone is offended if IMO a way of saying it's not my fault if you are over-sensitive to whatever I said/did. Perhaps, I apologise for my offensive comments, or I apologise for the comments I made as now, I realise that they are truly offensive.
"I deeply apologise for any offence caused"
The whole thing of apologising if anyone is offended if IMO a way of saying it's not my fault if you are over-sensitive to whatever I said/did. Perhaps, I apologise for my offensive comments, or I apologise for the comments I made as now, I realise that they are truly offensive.
In reply to gethin_allen: Jeez - she's not going to win with you is she? She's a 17 year old, left school (presumably) at 16 to get an apprenticeship with the local council. She's probably not had that much experience at crafting press releases.
In reply to andy:
I'm sure she must have a press advisor available to her through the police force she's working for.
> (In reply to gethin_allen) Jeez - she's not going to win with you is she?
Maybe I'm being harsh, but, if you want to take on a high profile position you have to accept that people will be watching your every move and scrutinising your every word. I'm sure she must have a press advisor available to her through the police force she's working for.
In reply to gethin_allen: high profile? She should have hung out for at least £90K then.
In reply to The Lemming:
Both my teen daughters do not tweet like that, unreal.
There are plenty of capable teens out there who could do that job with maturity.
probably find her parents are connected in some way to the police commissioner.
Both my teen daughters do not tweet like that, unreal.
There are plenty of capable teens out there who could do that job with maturity.
probably find her parents are connected in some way to the police commissioner.
In reply to andy:
We are absolutely in agreement that anything printed by the Mail is utter tosh and that its one of the country's greatest crimes that we allow trees to be felled in its production.
> (In reply to TheDrunkenBakers) The "racism" was referring to immigrants as "illegals" and moaning about the people in her local takeaway not being very good at English. The homophobia was referring to some people on telly as as "faggots". Offensive? Yes. Would I want my kids to say that? No. Did I ever say anything as dodgy when I was 14? Probably - just they hadn't invented computers (or electricity) back then.
>
> The hypocrisy of the faux "outrage"of the Mail is what gets me - this is the newspaper than thinks it's ok to say that Philpott torched his house because he was on benefits, and that saw fit to publish Littlejohn's demonising of someone who chose to change their gender, yet apparently it's far worse for a 14 year old to tweet something like that.
>
> Paul Dacre is a hypocritical turd. Blimey, hope I never want a job on the Mail - they're bound to dig that one up...
>
> The hypocrisy of the faux "outrage"of the Mail is what gets me - this is the newspaper than thinks it's ok to say that Philpott torched his house because he was on benefits, and that saw fit to publish Littlejohn's demonising of someone who chose to change their gender, yet apparently it's far worse for a 14 year old to tweet something like that.
>
> Paul Dacre is a hypocritical turd. Blimey, hope I never want a job on the Mail - they're bound to dig that one up...
We are absolutely in agreement that anything printed by the Mail is utter tosh and that its one of the country's greatest crimes that we allow trees to be felled in its production.
In reply to The Lemming: Wow! There's a lot of naive oldens on this forum isn't there! Drug-taking, 'homophobic', 'racism', 'bullying' is common behaviour for a 16/17 year old in the United Kingdom in this day and age.
A lot of the remarks that you oldies believe are racist/homophobic have changed meanings over the past 10/15 years. Especially since the internet has warped our poor little minds given us a million opinions on every subject under the sun and out in to the universe for that matter.
Firstly, drug-taking is commonplace in most schools, even ones your children are at, they'll be someone dealing drugs in your son/daughter/niece/nephews year. This sounds pessimistic but I assure you it is quite the norm!
Secondly, children have been raised with music, films, magazines, glorifying sex. You would be stupid if you thought your son or daughter aren't send 'sexy' pictures/texts to their classmates! It happens!
Thirdly, bullying happens, what do you expect when everyone can easily say something about somebody completely anonymously. Not everyone likes you, or me, or anyone else. No-one is liked by everyone. Bullying isn't a new thing, but there are now ways to get away with it much more easily. See websites like ask.fm, formspring.me...
Have you ever got on a bus and thought 'Oh that person next to me smells f**king awful!'. Well now children/teenagers can post that view straight away on sites like Twitter/Facebook, again anonymously.
To believe you can pull the blinkers over your children's eyes is false hope, and more likely to backfire.
I'm sorry if this post comes across as a bit vague or incoherent but it makes my blood boil how out-of-touch a lot of the older generations in the UK are with the young.
Yours sincerely a 21 year old lad!
A lot of the remarks that you oldies believe are racist/homophobic have changed meanings over the past 10/15 years. Especially since the internet has warped our poor little minds given us a million opinions on every subject under the sun and out in to the universe for that matter.
Firstly, drug-taking is commonplace in most schools, even ones your children are at, they'll be someone dealing drugs in your son/daughter/niece/nephews year. This sounds pessimistic but I assure you it is quite the norm!
Secondly, children have been raised with music, films, magazines, glorifying sex. You would be stupid if you thought your son or daughter aren't send 'sexy' pictures/texts to their classmates! It happens!
Thirdly, bullying happens, what do you expect when everyone can easily say something about somebody completely anonymously. Not everyone likes you, or me, or anyone else. No-one is liked by everyone. Bullying isn't a new thing, but there are now ways to get away with it much more easily. See websites like ask.fm, formspring.me...
Have you ever got on a bus and thought 'Oh that person next to me smells f**king awful!'. Well now children/teenagers can post that view straight away on sites like Twitter/Facebook, again anonymously.
To believe you can pull the blinkers over your children's eyes is false hope, and more likely to backfire.
I'm sorry if this post comes across as a bit vague or incoherent but it makes my blood boil how out-of-touch a lot of the older generations in the UK are with the young.
Yours sincerely a 21 year old lad!
In reply to Jackwd: I would just like to say i'm not condoning actions, but not surprised in the slightest!
In reply to Jackwd:
Spoken like a true 21 year old lad.
People may not be as young as you any more, doesnt mean they dont know what's going on. Anyway, I'm not going to get into a you dont know this, you dont know that argument as we can leave that to the playground.
From my perspective, she bears no resemblence to anyone whom i would want representing my daughter nor myself if I was her age. Period.
> (In reply to The Lemming) Wow! There's a lot of naive oldens on this forum isn't there! Drug-taking, 'homophobic', 'racism', 'bullying' is common behaviour for a 16/17 year old in the United Kingdom in this day and age.
>
> A lot of the remarks that you oldies believe are racist/homophobic have changed meanings over the past 10/15 years. Especially since the internet has warped our poor little minds given us a million opinions on every subject under the sun and out in to the universe for that matter.
>
> Firstly, drug-taking is commonplace in most schools, even ones your children are at, they'll be someone dealing drugs in your son/daughter/niece/nephews year. This sounds pessimistic but I assure you it is quite the norm!
>
> Secondly, children have been raised with music, films, magazines, glorifying sex. You would be stupid if you thought your son or daughter aren't send 'sexy' pictures/texts to their classmates! It happens!
>
> Thirdly, bullying happens, what do you expect when everyone can easily say something about somebody completely anonymously. Not everyone likes you, or me, or anyone else. No-one is liked by everyone. Bullying isn't a new thing, but there are now ways to get away with it much more easily. See websites like ask.fm, formspring.me...
>
> Have you ever got on a bus and thought 'Oh that person next to me smells f**king awful!'. Well now children/teenagers can post that view straight away on sites like Twitter/Facebook, again anonymously.
>
> To believe you can pull the blinkers over your children's eyes is false hope, and more likely to backfire.
>
> I'm sorry if this post comes across as a bit vague or incoherent but it makes my blood boil how out-of-touch a lot of the older generations in the UK are with the young.
>
> Yours sincerely a 21 year old lad!
>
> A lot of the remarks that you oldies believe are racist/homophobic have changed meanings over the past 10/15 years. Especially since the internet has warped our poor little minds given us a million opinions on every subject under the sun and out in to the universe for that matter.
>
> Firstly, drug-taking is commonplace in most schools, even ones your children are at, they'll be someone dealing drugs in your son/daughter/niece/nephews year. This sounds pessimistic but I assure you it is quite the norm!
>
> Secondly, children have been raised with music, films, magazines, glorifying sex. You would be stupid if you thought your son or daughter aren't send 'sexy' pictures/texts to their classmates! It happens!
>
> Thirdly, bullying happens, what do you expect when everyone can easily say something about somebody completely anonymously. Not everyone likes you, or me, or anyone else. No-one is liked by everyone. Bullying isn't a new thing, but there are now ways to get away with it much more easily. See websites like ask.fm, formspring.me...
>
> Have you ever got on a bus and thought 'Oh that person next to me smells f**king awful!'. Well now children/teenagers can post that view straight away on sites like Twitter/Facebook, again anonymously.
>
> To believe you can pull the blinkers over your children's eyes is false hope, and more likely to backfire.
>
> I'm sorry if this post comes across as a bit vague or incoherent but it makes my blood boil how out-of-touch a lot of the older generations in the UK are with the young.
>
> Yours sincerely a 21 year old lad!
Spoken like a true 21 year old lad.
People may not be as young as you any more, doesnt mean they dont know what's going on. Anyway, I'm not going to get into a you dont know this, you dont know that argument as we can leave that to the playground.
From my perspective, she bears no resemblence to anyone whom i would want representing my daughter nor myself if I was her age. Period.
In reply to gethin_allen:
I thought she was working for the PCC, not the Police Force?
> I'm sure she must have a press advisor available to her through the police force she's working for.
I thought she was working for the PCC, not the Police Force?
In reply to Carolyn:
Whichever, the point stands.
Whichever, the point stands.
In reply to Jackwd:
And if it amazes you "how out-of-touch a lot of the older generations in the UK are" it baffles the older generations (whoever they may be seeing as kids are being born every minute of every day) how the 'younger generations' seem to think that they invented drugs, sex and violence.
I'm sure in an anonymous poll you'd find out some shocking things about the old gits but the difference is that they are mostly sensible enough not to post these details on the internet for fear of the repercussions that they are obviously far more aware of than some.
And if it amazes you "how out-of-touch a lot of the older generations in the UK are" it baffles the older generations (whoever they may be seeing as kids are being born every minute of every day) how the 'younger generations' seem to think that they invented drugs, sex and violence.
I'm sure in an anonymous poll you'd find out some shocking things about the old gits but the difference is that they are mostly sensible enough not to post these details on the internet for fear of the repercussions that they are obviously far more aware of than some.
In reply to Jackwd:
You're right
I know nothing about being young.
Except maybe for once being young myself, or being a Team Leader for some of the most disadvantaged young in the North West while working for The Prince's trust and re-drafting their drugs policy, or working on an ambulance and coming into contact with young vulnerable people day after day.
But you're right, the older generation has no knowledge, skills or idea how the world works around them.
I too though exactly the same as you when I was 21. What changed?
I got some life experiences under my belt.
> I'm sorry if this post comes across as a bit vague or incoherent but it makes my blood boil how out-of-touch a lot of the older generations in the UK are with the young.
>
> Yours sincerely a 21 year old lad!
>
> Yours sincerely a 21 year old lad!
You're right
I know nothing about being young.
Except maybe for once being young myself, or being a Team Leader for some of the most disadvantaged young in the North West while working for The Prince's trust and re-drafting their drugs policy, or working on an ambulance and coming into contact with young vulnerable people day after day.
But you're right, the older generation has no knowledge, skills or idea how the world works around them.
I too though exactly the same as you when I was 21. What changed?
I got some life experiences under my belt.
In reply to gethin_allen:
Dunno about your PCC, but ours certainly doesn't have in house press advisor in the same way a Police Force tends to.
> Whichever, the point stands.
Dunno about your PCC, but ours certainly doesn't have in house press advisor in the same way a Police Force tends to.
In reply to gethin_allen:
And bouldering...
> (In reply to Jackwd)
> ... how the 'younger generations' seem to think that they invented drugs, sex and violence.
> ... how the 'younger generations' seem to think that they invented drugs, sex and violence.
And bouldering...
In reply to andy:
But they did.
We were just warming up with our bits of off-cut carpet and beer towels.
Back in the day, there was no such thing as old people.
> (In reply to gethin_allen)
> [...]
>
> And bouldering...
> [...]
>
> And bouldering...
But they did.
We were just warming up with our bits of off-cut carpet and beer towels.
Back in the day, there was no such thing as old people.
In reply to The Lemming: i'm not sure psycho at caley quite counts as "warming up"...
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers: Sadly, i'd say your daughter is in the minority!
In reply to andy:
What that teenagers are rascist, sexist, obnoxious, rude, lazy, workshy, homophobic and criminally intent ?
In the words of Frank Turner : "and all the kids are barstards"
I'm faintly worried that the poor kid is being bullied, and will end up hanging her self.
> (In reply to Chay)
> [...]
>
> I think the whole point is that she's been appointed (for a year, it's not a permanent post) to give the police commissioner some insight into her peer group.
> [...]
>
> I think the whole point is that she's been appointed (for a year, it's not a permanent post) to give the police commissioner some insight into her peer group.
What that teenagers are rascist, sexist, obnoxious, rude, lazy, workshy, homophobic and criminally intent ?
In the words of Frank Turner : "and all the kids are barstards"
I'm faintly worried that the poor kid is being bullied, and will end up hanging her self.
In reply to grumpybearpantsclimbinggoat:
At least, she will have learnt a valuable lesson and is probably right now cleaning her internet persona.
That is unless she is convicted by the police after their investigations.
At least, she will have learnt a valuable lesson and is probably right now cleaning her internet persona.
That is unless she is convicted by the police after their investigations.
In reply to grumpybearpantsclimbinggoat:
The lingering drivel we leave on the internet is going to have a pretty dramatic impact on who makes it in public life in the years to come unless we quickly readjust our expectations. The ability to forget and escape the crass stupidity of youth is a valuable thing today's youth don't have. I can't help but feel rather sorry for her, she's not the first and she won't be the last of her generation to be hung out to dry over rash words that would have in days gone by been forgotten almost before they were finished.
jk
> Has resigned
The lingering drivel we leave on the internet is going to have a pretty dramatic impact on who makes it in public life in the years to come unless we quickly readjust our expectations. The ability to forget and escape the crass stupidity of youth is a valuable thing today's youth don't have. I can't help but feel rather sorry for her, she's not the first and she won't be the last of her generation to be hung out to dry over rash words that would have in days gone by been forgotten almost before they were finished.
jk
In reply to The Lemming:
They'll be busy if that sort of tweet from a then anonymous teenager sets the threshold.
> That is unless she is convicted by the police after their investigations.
They'll be busy if that sort of tweet from a then anonymous teenager sets the threshold.
In reply to The Lemming:
Sad thing, is that this is more likely to put youngsters off politics rather than engage them. A very very sad incident indeed that we are prepared to judge people for what they said when they were adolescents.
> At least, she will have learnt a valuable lesson and is probably right now cleaning her internet persona.
Sad thing, is that this is more likely to put youngsters off politics rather than engage them. A very very sad incident indeed that we are prepared to judge people for what they said when they were adolescents.
In reply to gethin_allen:
Hmm you appear to be the reason we have the politicians we have. Always covering there own backsides, not answering questions directly and often just repeating the same thing they have already said 10 times.
Hmm you appear to be the reason we have the politicians we have. Always covering there own backsides, not answering questions directly and often just repeating the same thing they have already said 10 times.
In reply to EeeByGum:
Its not her age or really what she said that mattered as i am sure her angry ramblings are much tamer than most would spout whilst pissed on 20/20 or whatever them kids get drunk on nowadays. Its the combination of public office type role and what she said that was the problem.
> (In reply to The Lemming)
>
> [...]
>
A very very sad incident indeed that we are prepared to judge people for what they said when they were adolescents.>
> [...]
>
Its not her age or really what she said that mattered as i am sure her angry ramblings are much tamer than most would spout whilst pissed on 20/20 or whatever them kids get drunk on nowadays. Its the combination of public office type role and what she said that was the problem.
In reply to The Lemming: there would be no need for these commissioners, if the prison system wasn't so liberal. Also, if schools weren't so focused on becoming exam factories and taught educational disadvantaged children more practical skills e.g plumbing aswell as the basic exams e.g maths
In reply to Oliiver:
Do explain, please...
> (In reply to The Lemming) there would be no need for these commissioners, if the prison system wasn't so liberal.
Do explain, please...
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
Right, but she is only 17 so can't we cut her some slack? She is no worst than most of our senior politicians.
> Its not her age or really what she said that mattered as i am sure her angry ramblings are much tamer than most would spout whilst pissed on 20/20 or whatever them kids get drunk on nowadays. Its the combination of public office type role and what she said that was the problem.
Right, but she is only 17 so can't we cut her some slack? She is no worst than most of our senior politicians.
In reply to EeeByGum:
She said she was sorry, but didn't show true remorse by immediately offering her resignation. Had she done so immediately, the Commissioner would have been in a position to give her some slack and reject the offer. However she tried to hang on (as indeed most erring MPs. Bankers etc try) and in doing so left no option but to be hounded out. Silly girl.
> (In reply to TheDrunkenBakers)
>
> [...]
>
> Right, but she is only 17 so can't we cut her some slack? She is no worst than most of our senior politicians.
>
> [...]
>
> Right, but she is only 17 so can't we cut her some slack? She is no worst than most of our senior politicians.
She said she was sorry, but didn't show true remorse by immediately offering her resignation. Had she done so immediately, the Commissioner would have been in a position to give her some slack and reject the offer. However she tried to hang on (as indeed most erring MPs. Bankers etc try) and in doing so left no option but to be hounded out. Silly girl.
In reply to The Lemming: That lovely statement she read out, was no way written by her
In reply to Oliiver:
Your evidence?
Or did you mean "in my opinion, that lovely statement she read out, was no way written by her"?
> (In reply to The Lemming) That lovely statement she read out, was no way written by her
Your evidence?
Or did you mean "in my opinion, that lovely statement she read out, was no way written by her"?
In reply to The Lemming: see for yourself
In reply to Trangia:
Is that how we run things nowadays? A 17 year old being "hounded out" of a temporary job by the media is, in your view, an appropriate response to some mindless ramblings when she was 14 or 15?
> (In reply to EeeByGum)
> [...]
>
> left no option but to be hounded out. Silly girl.
> [...]
>
> left no option but to be hounded out. Silly girl.
Is that how we run things nowadays? A 17 year old being "hounded out" of a temporary job by the media is, in your view, an appropriate response to some mindless ramblings when she was 14 or 15?
In reply to Oliiver: Are you some kind of performance artist? You do seem to be so perfect a reincarnation of the young William Hague, spouting ill-informed, unpleasant opinions with the certainty that only being deeply ignorant and/or arrogant can bring. And then bringing your GCSE grades into it - brilliant.
In reply to The Lemming: I'm not ignorant she made no eye contact what solver throughout her speech
In reply to Oliiver:
"what solver"? What on Earth is that supposed to mean?
> (In reply to The Lemming) I'm not ignorant she made no eye contact what solver throughout her speech
"what solver"? What on Earth is that supposed to mean?
In reply to andy:
The media run this country, not the miners, unions or government.
> (In reply to Trangia)
> [...]
>
> Is that how we run things nowadays? A 17 year old being "hounded out" of a temporary job by the media is, in your view, an appropriate response to some mindless ramblings when she was 14 or 15?
> [...]
>
> Is that how we run things nowadays? A 17 year old being "hounded out" of a temporary job by the media is, in your view, an appropriate response to some mindless ramblings when she was 14 or 15?
The media run this country, not the miners, unions or government.
In reply to andy:
It's a classic Mail hatchet job, but even by their low standards it does seem an inappropriate target. I presume they object to the opinions of young people having some influence over the police - and possibly conflicting with their own strident opinions. However it will also have a deterent effect on young people getting involved in any sort of politics or public office - put your head above the parapet and we will trawl through your past.
> Is that how we run things nowadays? A 17 year old being "hounded out" of a temporary job by the media is, in your view, an appropriate response to some mindless ramblings when she was 14 or 15?
It's a classic Mail hatchet job, but even by their low standards it does seem an inappropriate target. I presume they object to the opinions of young people having some influence over the police - and possibly conflicting with their own strident opinions. However it will also have a deterent effect on young people getting involved in any sort of politics or public office - put your head above the parapet and we will trawl through your past.
In reply to tony:
Read it again and insert 'whatsoever'. Doesn't take a lot to work out.
> (In reply to Oliiver)
> [...]
>
> "what solver"? What on Earth is that supposed to mean?
> [...]
>
> "what solver"? What on Earth is that supposed to mean?
Read it again and insert 'whatsoever'. Doesn't take a lot to work out.
In reply to Trangia:
If we make a mistake, why do we have to resign? Just exactly what does that achieve? Blimey riley - when you were 17 did you just give up after you made a mistake and bury your head in the sand?
I just find it so patronising of we adults to be so judgemental of the younger generation when our own house is so out of order. Just look at recent scandals of PC Pleb, MPs expenses and the behaviour of the press to name three! Let us not forget that we are the role models for these folks. Is this the sort of message we want to send - that if you make a mistake or say the wrong thing, there is no way back. Game over?
> She said she was sorry, but didn't show true remorse by immediately offering her resignation.
If we make a mistake, why do we have to resign? Just exactly what does that achieve? Blimey riley - when you were 17 did you just give up after you made a mistake and bury your head in the sand?
I just find it so patronising of we adults to be so judgemental of the younger generation when our own house is so out of order. Just look at recent scandals of PC Pleb, MPs expenses and the behaviour of the press to name three! Let us not forget that we are the role models for these folks. Is this the sort of message we want to send - that if you make a mistake or say the wrong thing, there is no way back. Game over?
14-18 is a massive turning point in learning and maturity. To haul a 17 year old over the coals for something done as a 14 year old is mind boggling. I am glad my pre-16 crime record was wiped off. I got up to all sorts of pre-internet nonsense that would not have reflected well on me as an adult.
In reply to Oliiver:
Line up 100 17 year-olds, get them to make a speech on national TV and count how many have exceptional public speaking technique and use eye contact. Come off it. This someone who is still technically a child! What is it with adults these days! No wonder some kids are losing the will to live when no one will cut them the slack we all enjoyed.
> (In reply to The Lemming) I'm not ignorant she made no eye contact what solver throughout her speech
Line up 100 17 year-olds, get them to make a speech on national TV and count how many have exceptional public speaking technique and use eye contact. Come off it. This someone who is still technically a child! What is it with adults these days! No wonder some kids are losing the will to live when no one will cut them the slack we all enjoyed.
In reply to The Lemming: im 16 myself and quite frankly, she just about sums up the majority of youths today in certain parts of the UK. In the GCSE coursework there's a section called speaking and listening. The aim is to create a speech or a to act out some lines of a play, so don't say she's never been given the chance or the skills to do it - she probably ignored them. If you're going to elect someone with whom peers can relate to, don't suddenly engulf them into a role like that.
In reply to The Lemming:
We were utter tw@'s when we were that age (oh yes we were.....) thing is we had no social media then, our nonsense died in the dust of time where it was meant to. Now kids are are locking that into history. Most of this girls comments were made well before she was appointed and some a geological age ago in terms of growing up. You can debate whether or not that is an excuse but but 20 years ago she could have wised up, knuckled down to the task and it might have been the making of her, but the reality is she gave the journoscum a gift.
We were utter tw@'s when we were that age (oh yes we were.....) thing is we had no social media then, our nonsense died in the dust of time where it was meant to. Now kids are are locking that into history. Most of this girls comments were made well before she was appointed and some a geological age ago in terms of growing up. You can debate whether or not that is an excuse but but 20 years ago she could have wised up, knuckled down to the task and it might have been the making of her, but the reality is she gave the journoscum a gift.
In reply to EeeByGum:
I have to say that I thought Paris Brown had exceptional public speaking skills. From what I saw of her on various news episodes and her public apology, this girl presented herself well. She had a good vocabulary and came over as a confident individual especially while up front and centre of a media crucible.
Once all this dies down, Paris will become one of life's achievers.
> (In reply to Oliiver)
> [...]
>
> Line up 100 17 year-olds, get them to make a speech on national TV and count how many have exceptional public speaking technique and use eye contact. Come off it.
> [...]
>
> Line up 100 17 year-olds, get them to make a speech on national TV and count how many have exceptional public speaking technique and use eye contact. Come off it.
I have to say that I thought Paris Brown had exceptional public speaking skills. From what I saw of her on various news episodes and her public apology, this girl presented herself well. She had a good vocabulary and came over as a confident individual especially while up front and centre of a media crucible.
Once all this dies down, Paris will become one of life's achievers.
In reply to The Lemming: It really does depend on how you measure achievement. Ones man mountain, is another mans hill.
In reply to Oliiver:
I'd positively shite myself. In fact, the first time I did any public speaking, in front of a mayor aged 18, I had a couple of pints to steady my nerves. I was pissed as a fart and did not realise it.
I'd positively shite myself. In fact, the first time I did any public speaking, in front of a mayor aged 18, I had a couple of pints to steady my nerves. I was pissed as a fart and did not realise it.
In reply to Oliiver:
This will be here for posterity Oliiver. If a few years you will realise you were a cock. It's one of those things you kids have as an advantage over us pre-internet babies.
> (In reply to The Lemming) It really does depend on how you measure achievement. Ones man mountain, is another mans hill.
This will be here for posterity Oliiver. If a few years you will realise you were a cock. It's one of those things you kids have as an advantage over us pre-internet babies.
In reply to The Lemming:
I agree. But this episode goes highlight the contempt adults have developed for our youngsters. Given that they are the folks who will be paying for our retirement, it seems rather short sighted IMO.
> Once all this dies down, Paris will become one of life's achievers.
I agree. But this episode goes highlight the contempt adults have developed for our youngsters. Given that they are the folks who will be paying for our retirement, it seems rather short sighted IMO.
In reply to Oliiver:
If you're going to berate someone of your age for not paying attention in class, either use language you can handle with confidence or learn how to use 'with whom' and 'engulf' correctly.
I'm very glad the internet wasn't around when I were a nipper, mind.
> If you're going to elect someone with whom peers can relate to, don't suddenly engulf them into a role like that.
If you're going to berate someone of your age for not paying attention in class, either use language you can handle with confidence or learn how to use 'with whom' and 'engulf' correctly.
I'm very glad the internet wasn't around when I were a nipper, mind.
In reply to Tall Clare: I'm bloody convinced the Arts Council are paying for him/her/it - nobody could be such a nob in real life if they weren't playing a character based on Harry Enfield's "Tory Boy". Or maybe it's the Spirit of Thatcher that left her earthly body and took over some spotty bellend from Altrincham. It can't be coincidence that it suddenly appeared the day she popped her clogs.
My favourite moments were showing off about GCSE English and Daddy's "six figure salary". Priceless.
My favourite moments were showing off about GCSE English and Daddy's "six figure salary". Priceless.
In reply to andy:
The Arts Council don't pay for dross like that! I think this is someone who was posting a few weeks ago in a different guise. Can't remember the last poster's name though.
The Arts Council don't pay for dross like that! I think this is someone who was posting a few weeks ago in a different guise. Can't remember the last poster's name though.
In reply to Tall Clare:
I think it's very postmodern. I'd rather have Tory Boy making me giggle than a cow in formaldehyde.
But on reflection I think I prefer the "possessed by Maggie" theory.
> (In reply to andy)
>
> The Arts Council don't pay for dross like that!
>
> The Arts Council don't pay for dross like that!
I think it's very postmodern. I'd rather have Tory Boy making me giggle than a cow in formaldehyde.
But on reflection I think I prefer the "possessed by Maggie" theory.
In reply to andy:
Isn't there some quote about how there's something wrong with young people if they're not left-leaning and something wrong with older people if they're not right-leaning? I do think it's quite interesting that UKC has seen a little influx of teenage right-wingers recently. Just goes to show the country's going to the dogs (etc)
Isn't there some quote about how there's something wrong with young people if they're not left-leaning and something wrong with older people if they're not right-leaning? I do think it's quite interesting that UKC has seen a little influx of teenage right-wingers recently. Just goes to show the country's going to the dogs (etc)
In reply to The Lemming: oh dear...... The spelling police are here. Firstly, I'm typing on an ipad and we all know how the Americans can't spell - don't blame me, blame them. Also, we live in a society were you're damned if you challenge the hypocrisy of the liberal status quo. If you want to cut crime rates among teenagers, then impose proper sentences - a limb for a limb, an eye for an eye.
In reply to andy: Musical theatre, darling.
"Oliiver, Oliiver! Never before was a boy such a bore...."
"Oliiver, Oliiver! Never before was a boy such a bore...."
In reply to Oliiver:
That's not very Thatcherite - take responsibility for yourself! If you don't sort it yourself, don't expect anyone else to sort it for you! She would be so disappointed in you.
So what about sentences for crimes which don't involve the loss of limbs or body parts?
> (In reply to The Lemming) oh dear...... The spelling police are here. Firstly, I'm typing on an ipad and we all know how the Americans can't spell - don't blame me, blame them.
That's not very Thatcherite - take responsibility for yourself! If you don't sort it yourself, don't expect anyone else to sort it for you! She would be so disappointed in you.
> Also, we live in a society were you're damned if you challenge the hypocrisy of the liberal status quo. If you want to cut crime rates among teenagers, then impose proper sentences - a limb for a limb, an eye for an eye.
So what about sentences for crimes which don't involve the loss of limbs or body parts?
In reply to The Lemming: I was talking metaphorically, if you commit fraud you pay it back, if you assault some one you get a harsh punishment - 15 years+. If you get life you serve it and so on so forth. Can you imagine Nick Clegg in the outbreak of a riot or whatever, " don't be to harsh, it's not their fault - it's Thatchers legacy".
In reply to Oliiver:
You can alter settings on an iPad to use UK spelling, but it wasn't your spelling that I was querying.
You can alter settings on an iPad to use UK spelling, but it wasn't your spelling that I was querying.
In reply to Tall Clare: that's blatant sexism, girls thieve as well.
In reply to Tall Clare:
I went the opposite way if anything.
> (In reply to andy)
>
> Isn't there some quote about how there's something wrong with young people if they're not left-leaning and something wrong with older people if they're not right-leaning?
>
> Isn't there some quote about how there's something wrong with young people if they're not left-leaning and something wrong with older people if they're not right-leaning?
I went the opposite way if anything.
In reply to Oliiver:
So when a girl finally steals your heart we can rip it out and put it on a stake for all to see?
Good plan - bring a bucket.
> (In reply to Tall Clare) that's blatant sexism, girls thieve as well.
So when a girl finally steals your heart we can rip it out and put it on a stake for all to see?
Good plan - bring a bucket.
In reply to Oliiver:
You're the best troll we've had on here for ages. Great work!
> (In reply to The Lemming) I was talking metaphorically, if you commit fraud you pay it back, if you assault some one you get a harsh punishment - 15 years+. If you get life you serve it and so on so forth. Can you imagine Nick Clegg in the outbreak of a riot or whatever, " don't be to harsh, it's not their fault - it's Thatchers legacy".
You're the best troll we've had on here for ages. Great work!
In reply to Submit to Gravity:
Shocking bit of misquoting by Ms TC there... here's the quote I was thinking of: "A man who is not a communist at the age of twenty is a fool. Any man who is still communist at the age of thirty is an even bigger one." – George Bernard Shaw
Shocking bit of misquoting by Ms TC there... here's the quote I was thinking of: "A man who is not a communist at the age of twenty is a fool. Any man who is still communist at the age of thirty is an even bigger one." – George Bernard Shaw
In reply to The Lemming: I'm not a troll, I'm merely representing a minority of Tories on here.
In reply to Oliiver:
How do you know you're representing them? Have you asked them all? Has there been an election?
> (In reply to The Lemming) I'm not a troll, I'm merely representing a minority of Tories on here.
How do you know you're representing them? Have you asked them all? Has there been an election?
In reply to The Lemming: I don't even think there's any Tories on here.
In reply to Oliiver:
There are lots of more right-leaning posters on here - you need to look a bit harder.
There are lots of more right-leaning posters on here - you need to look a bit harder.
In reply to tony:
There doesn't need to be. It's filled with the Spirit of Thatch, and is driven to spout bilious shite to further her legacy. It's a bit like an evangelical Christian, but with extra bigotry.
> (In reply to Oliiver)
> [...]
>
> How do you know you're representing them? Have you asked them all? Has there been an election?
> [...]
>
> How do you know you're representing them? Have you asked them all? Has there been an election?
There doesn't need to be. It's filled with the Spirit of Thatch, and is driven to spout bilious shite to further her legacy. It's a bit like an evangelical Christian, but with extra bigotry.
In reply to The Lemming: if I need to look a bit harder, than there's clearly not a lot.
In reply to Oliiver:
The problem you don't understand is that crime does actually pay... as long as you don't get caught. Criminals know that the police will only catch a small subset of criminals so if you are that way inclined, the risks are well and truly worth it. And if you do get caught, you get fed and clothes in an institution that houses all your mates. Life isn't so bad after all.
An eye for an eye is one perspective, but if a civilised society is the desired outcome, I prefer "Do unto others as you would have them do to you." If you want to live in a society that has the sort of punishments you desire, why not move to Saudi Arabia?
> If you want to cut crime rates among teenagers, then impose proper sentences - a limb for a limb, an eye for an eye.
The problem you don't understand is that crime does actually pay... as long as you don't get caught. Criminals know that the police will only catch a small subset of criminals so if you are that way inclined, the risks are well and truly worth it. And if you do get caught, you get fed and clothes in an institution that houses all your mates. Life isn't so bad after all.
An eye for an eye is one perspective, but if a civilised society is the desired outcome, I prefer "Do unto others as you would have them do to you." If you want to live in a society that has the sort of punishments you desire, why not move to Saudi Arabia?
In reply to Oliiver:
Is there any chance you could learn to use the Reply button correctly? It's very confusing to see your posts with 'In reply to The Lemming' when you're actually replying to someone else.
Is there any chance you could learn to use the Reply button correctly? It's very confusing to see your posts with 'In reply to The Lemming' when you're actually replying to someone else.
In reply to EeeByGum: I completely agree with you, I was just to lazy to type it out. I don't really mean an eye for an eye, but if you assault someone, you deserved to be heavily punished.
In reply to Oliiver:
Perhaps, but assault is quite minor compared say grievous bodily hard or even the aggravated equivalent. Surely if someone is going to assault you, they may as well do the full whack and go in for GBH leaving you disabled rather than bruised?
I have been assaulted a few times. I don't feel that my perpetrators deserve to be locked up for a quarter of their life.
> but if you assault someone, you deserved to be heavily punished.
Perhaps, but assault is quite minor compared say grievous bodily hard or even the aggravated equivalent. Surely if someone is going to assault you, they may as well do the full whack and go in for GBH leaving you disabled rather than bruised?
I have been assaulted a few times. I don't feel that my perpetrators deserve to be locked up for a quarter of their life.
In reply to Oliiver:
Is that the really stupid Tories?
> (In reply to The Lemming) I'm not a troll, I'm merely representing a minority of Tories on here.
Is that the really stupid Tories?
In reply to Oliiver:
Or you need to get your eyes checked.
> (In reply to The Lemming) if I need to look a bit harder, than there's clearly not a lot.
Or you need to get your eyes checked.
In reply to Oliiver:
and what have they done to deserve that? You sure you aint just trying to balance Gudrun?
> (In reply to The Lemming) I'm not a troll, I'm merely representing a minority of Tories on here.
and what have they done to deserve that? You sure you aint just trying to balance Gudrun?
In reply to The Lemming:
We should be beware of the likes of Oliiver- a certain William Hague springs to mind and one of Maggie's children 'par excellence' !
We should be beware of the likes of Oliiver- a certain William Hague springs to mind and one of Maggie's children 'par excellence' !
In reply to The Lemming: Liberalism is the death of any modern nation.
In reply to Oliiver:
The minority in question being the young thick ones?
> I'm not a troll, I'm merely representing a minority of Tories on here.
The minority in question being the young thick ones?
In reply to deepsoup: blatant jealousy at the youth of today. It's not my fault your old.
In reply to Oliiver:
You're playing with the grown ups now.
Why not show a little maturity?
> (In reply to deepsoup) blatant jealousy at the youth of today. It's not my fault your old.
You're playing with the grown ups now.
Why not show a little maturity?
In reply to EeeByGum:
It was more than a "mistake". Did you read what she posted? At 15 she was well old enough to understand that that's totally unacceptable.
I don't believe her original "appology" was sincere, she was still trying to cling to her £15,000 pa. Had she offered resignation then, as I have already said it would have indicated true remorse, and it's very likely that the resignation would not have been accepted and she would have been given a second chance. It was the clinging on that made her position untenable.
As for your second paragraph I acknowleged that many adults are just as bad.
As I said I wouldn't want someone who had made such posts, "representing" my grand children
It was more than a "mistake". Did you read what she posted? At 15 she was well old enough to understand that that's totally unacceptable.
I don't believe her original "appology" was sincere, she was still trying to cling to her £15,000 pa. Had she offered resignation then, as I have already said it would have indicated true remorse, and it's very likely that the resignation would not have been accepted and she would have been given a second chance. It was the clinging on that made her position untenable.
As for your second paragraph I acknowleged that many adults are just as bad.
As I said I wouldn't want someone who had made such posts, "representing" my grand children
In reply to The Lemming: that'd be rather futile. You clearly mock anyone who expresses an opinion outside of your own.
In reply to Oliiver:
Ha. Shows what you know. Being my age is flippin awesome.
Ha. Shows what you know. Being my age is flippin awesome.
In reply to Trangia:
I think you've forgotten what teenagers are like - she probably knew it was offensive, probably not quite how offensive, and is the kind of thing her and her mates say and hear all the time when they're trying to be "street, innit". The tweets were intended to be read by her, what, half a dozen "followers" when she was 14 or 15. Then the Mail go gunning for her, and cue outraged spluttering from blue rinses everywhere, many of whom genuinely hold far more bigoted and offensive views.
I think you're wrong - she apologised sincerely, articulately and I think she's got a pretty bum rap from some people who probably spend half their time moaning about "political correctness gone mad" all of a sudden being offended on behalf of people who actually don't seem terribly offended by what was in the tweets. Tatchell's usually the first one to shout if someone's vaguely homophobic - he's been pretty quiet on this - perhaps he can see this for what it is.
> (In reply to EeeByGum)
>
> It was more than a "mistake". Did you read what she posted? At 15 she was well old enough to understand that that's totally unacceptable.
>
>
> It was more than a "mistake". Did you read what she posted? At 15 she was well old enough to understand that that's totally unacceptable.
>
I think you've forgotten what teenagers are like - she probably knew it was offensive, probably not quite how offensive, and is the kind of thing her and her mates say and hear all the time when they're trying to be "street, innit". The tweets were intended to be read by her, what, half a dozen "followers" when she was 14 or 15. Then the Mail go gunning for her, and cue outraged spluttering from blue rinses everywhere, many of whom genuinely hold far more bigoted and offensive views.
I think you're wrong - she apologised sincerely, articulately and I think she's got a pretty bum rap from some people who probably spend half their time moaning about "political correctness gone mad" all of a sudden being offended on behalf of people who actually don't seem terribly offended by what was in the tweets. Tatchell's usually the first one to shout if someone's vaguely homophobic - he's been pretty quiet on this - perhaps he can see this for what it is.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...