Good Laws v Bad Laws

Nuxx Bar wrote:
|| A good law is one which, if every violation resulted in a conviction,
|| would benefit society. Examples of such laws include those against
|| murder, rape, burglary, assault, shoplifting, driving without
|| insurance...most laws in fact. Wouldn't it be great if every scumbag
|| who ever murdered or raped anyone got punished appropriately?

Why do you include the victimless and purely technical offence of driving
without insurance on that list?

--
Rob

Rob wrote:
Nuxx Bar wrote:
A good law is one which, if every violation resulted in a
conviction, would benefit society. Examples of such laws include
those against murder, rape, burglary, assault, shoplifting, driving
without insurance...most laws in fact. Wouldn't it be great if
every scumbag who ever murdered or raped anyone got punished
appropriately?

Why do you include the victimless and purely technical offence of
driving without insurance on that list?

The victim is the insurance company that doesn't make the money it would if
the individual complied with the law.

"Doug" wrote in message
...
....
Because I am obviously not welcome on UKT and am at risk there of
being bullied, abused and censored again. As it is I am still being
stalked to other newsgroups by members of the dominant clique of UKT,
aka motorists.

You mean you have moved to other newsgroups, where you find that people who
already know all your tricks have been resident for years.

Colin Bignell

On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 01:26:29 -0700 (PDT), Doug put finger to keyboard
and typed:

Because I am obviously not welcome on UKT

Bloody hell, Duhg gets a clue.

Mark
--
UK deaths from cancer in the past five years: 675,000
UK deaths from terrorism in the past five years: 52
Get a sense of perspective. Don't let fear steal your liberty.

Similarly, if cannabis users were convicted every time they used
cannabis, they would mostly be in jail for a victimless, non-violent
"crime", completely unnecessarily, and to society's cost (not to
mention their own). And if every cannabis user who passed a joint to
a friend was convicted of dealing, this effect would be magnified.



You go and live in a society of 'stoners' then.

On 5 Apr, 21:39, "Mark W" s@o wrote:
Similarly, if cannabis users were convicted every time they used
cannabis, they would mostly be in jail for a victimless, non-violent
"crime", completely unnecessarily, and to society's cost (not to
mention their own). And if every cannabis user who passed a joint to
a friend was convicted of dealing, this effect would be magnified.

You go and live in a society of 'stoners' then.

Probably better than what's on offer here.

NM wrote:

Doug wrote:

... I am obviously not welcome on UKT and am at risk there of
being bullied, abused and censored again. As it is I am still being
stalked to other newsgroups by members of the dominant clique of UKT,
aka motorists.

Ha! I knew you would be back, didn't stay away long did you, have you
gathered all your toys up yet?

AFAIC you are welcome here and I think quite a few others don't want
you to feel excluded.

I'll second that.

On 5 Apr, 12:05, NM wrote:
On 5 Apr, 09:26, Doug wrote:



On 5 Apr, 08:57, "Graculus"
wrote:

"Doug" wrote in message

...

Trouble is people can't agree on which laws are good and which laws
are bad. My concern is that laws proliferate with time so there are
more and more ways of a citizen becoming criminalised, borne out by
the ever increasing prison population. Most laws eventually slip into
the history books but can be revived at any time by some bloody minded
copper aided by the CPS. Another aspect is the misuse of laws by the
police, such as the anti-terrorism laws used to quell peaceful public
protest.

A Home Secretary (any of them) always feels better inventing a new law and
making a big noise about it, rather than using an existing law which quite
easily covers what they want to do. It makes them feel better (when they're
not busy unethically exploiting their expenses).

BTW, why are you censoring posts in not cross-posting back to all the
original newsgroups - something you've often accused others of?

Because I am obviously not welcome on UKT and am at risk there of
being bullied, abused and censored again. As it is I am still being
stalked to other newsgroups by members of the dominant clique of UKT,
aka motorists.

--
UK Radical Campaignswww.zing.icom43.net
One man's newsgroup is another man's censorship.

Ha! I knew you would be back, didn't stay away long did you, have you
gathered all your toys up yet?

Another poster spammed me back.

AFAIC you are welcome here and I think quite a few others don't want
you to feel excluded.

Nevertheless they seem to be prepared to put up with those on UKT who
want to censor others by making abuse reports to ISPs, or are too
scared to challenge them for fear of being reported themselves.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
One man's newsgroup is another man's censorship.

Doug wrote:

Nevertheless they seem to be prepared to put up with those on UKT who
want to censor others by making abuse reports to ISPs, or are too
scared to challenge them for fear of being reported themselves.

You still can't read then.

--
Paul - xxx

'96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi
Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp

On Apr 7, 7:02*am, Doug wrote:
On 5 Apr, 12:05, NM wrote:

On 5 Apr, 09:26, Doug wrote:

On 5 Apr, 08:57, "Graculus"
wrote:

"Doug" wrote in message

...

Trouble is people can't agree on which laws are good and which laws
are bad. My concern is that laws proliferate with time so there are
more and more ways of a citizen becoming criminalised, borne out by
the ever increasing prison population. Most laws eventually slip into
the history books but can be revived at any time by some bloody minded
copper aided by the CPS. Another aspect is the misuse of laws by the
police, such as the anti-terrorism laws used to quell peaceful public
protest.

A Home Secretary (any of them) always feels better inventing a new law and
making a big noise about it, rather than using an existing law which quite
easily covers what they want to do. It makes them feel better (when they're
not busy unethically exploiting their expenses).

BTW, why are you censoring posts in not cross-posting back to all the
original newsgroups - something you've often accused others of?

Because I am obviously not welcome on UKT and am at risk there of
being bullied, abused and censored again. As it is I am still being
stalked to other newsgroups by members of the dominant clique of UKT,
aka motorists.

--
UK Radical Campaignswww.zing.icom43.net
One man's newsgroup is another man's censorship.

Ha! I knew you would be back, didn't stay away long did you, have you
gathered all your toys up yet?

Another poster spammed me back.

AFAIC you are welcome here and I think quite a few others don't want
you to feel excluded.

Nevertheless they seem to be prepared to put up with those on UKT who
want to censor others by making abuse reports to ISPs

Don't worry, they do that on urc as well. Anyone who defends
motorists had better have an ISP which doesn't take frivolous
complaints seriously, my goodness.