James Bulger murderer Jon Venables returned to prison

Biggins

hooradiation wrote: »

It's my own fault, i shouldn't have expected you to pick up on the difference between someone who would be described as a reader of a particular publication and someone who's citing it to make a point.

I've posted back-up links so I guess its not the first time I've been called a moron or similar by subtle methods.

walshb wrote: »

So, now you are claiming that if someone uses a tabloid to make, or cite a point, THAT makes them the moron?:rolleyes: No, me thinks other stuff makes people morons, if you follow.....

I agree.
I might be such a moran possibly referred to then anyway according to others skewed opinions ...and I cite all papers that back-up stuff.
At least I, yourself and others are not biased (hopefully) intentionally from the outset. An info/data link is a link to back-up something said. Nothing more.
Hooradiation, don't like the links, don't read them or respond to them. Your only annoying yourself.

Latchy wrote: »

Exactly
This snobbishness with reference to Tabloids and like the Tabloid reporting itself is nauseating at times

Yep. Its like saying one whole category of society is ALL bad, no exception and others are all always better - and because of that we should not give the supposed "bad lot" a voice and/or should not be heard from.
Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater!

Ugh-Ugh!
Excuse me while I go drag my knuckles alone the pavement as I ape by the "right" guys who are on their way to their shining pulpit with just their Times and high brow papers alone.

Even this moran knows we getting of topic thought!

Guys and Girls, there is no black and white any more.
This applies from newspapers (who's good/bad) to justice and the fairness of it handed out.
On topic, these guys were let out - emotionally, we would ALL I suspect like to see them back behind bars.
Morally, people say thru the law that everyone deserves another opportunity for past mistakes make.
Fair enough, thats the other side of the double-edged sword of justice swinging back at us.
We have to accept the whole thing coming at us or not accept it at all. The law/constitution sword is made by the public to swing.

The man now returned to jail clearly was AGAIN of not good character. Am I glad to see him back in?
Damn right I am - especially if he lived in my country or neighbourhood. As it is, he don't but that don't make me feel any lesser or less concerned for innocent people everywhere else and their safety.

Someone mention that the other guy was still behaving. Maybe so and IF so, I hope he stays that way.
BUT he might be clocking up new offending points as we speak as the returned guy did before he reached the straw that broke the camels back - its just something to keep in mind - nothing more.
The other guy is out now and so if he is moving on and learned a lesson, living a quiet life, I won't wish him all the best but I do hope he keeps his head down - if only for the public's sake.

As for the scumbag (clearly now what he is more so if more evidence was even needed) that is back in - no sympathy whatsoever for him. He again showed where his colours and character lie.
I hope his 21 day opportunity for appeal fails and he stays locked up.

Biggins

Biggins wrote: »

As for the scumbag (clearly now what he is more so if more evidence was even needed) that is back in - no sympathy whatsoever for him. He again showed where his colours and character lie.
I hope his 21 day opportunity for appeal fails and he stays locked up.

Well with respect you don't really know the whole story of why he was recalled. your basing your assumption on what you know about Venables already and hearsay.
to be honest im not sure 2 kids that gave a toddler such a gruesome death will ever be fit for for society in terms of integration with normal people after such a thing happening but i honestly don't believe one of the most high profile murderers ever known would go looking for trouble.

Biggins

Deleted User wrote: »

Well with respect you don't really know the whole story of why he was recalled. your basing your assumption on what you know about Venables already and hearsay.

With equal respect, I'm going with 4 separate sources have stated yesterday as to why he was recalled.
Have you browsed thru the previous later news info and links in this thread?
Here is yet another link, the British Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/7364719/James-Bulger-killer-returned-to-jail-due-to-drug-use-and-violence.html
Hearsay? Tell that to his new victims.

Deleted User wrote: »

I honestly don't believe one of the most high profile murderers ever known would go looking for trouble.

At it turns out the nature of the beast by his own actions since leaving confinement, didn't change it seems.
He broke his release condition in many ways, he knew what he was doing, he attacked, took drugs, etc.
He might not have gone looking for trouble (actually he did, when he unprovoked according to witnesses and the victim, attacked a co-worker) but he did go looking for said drugs, didn't take a peaceful route in dealing with people, abused and attacked at oppertunity. When trouble got the opportunity to turn up, he invited it in, he didn't turn it away or say "No!"

Apparently Jack Straw and co agreed - thus where he is right now again!

Biggins

Biggins wrote: »

With equal respect, I'm going with 4 separate sources have stated yesterday as to why he was recalled.
Have you browsed thru the previous later news info and links in this thread?


At it turns out the nature of the beast by his own actions since leaving confinement, didn't change it seems.
He broke his release condition in many ways, he knew what he was doing, he attacked, took drugs, etc.
He might not have gone looking for trouble but he did go looking for said drugs, didn't take a peaceful route in dealing with people, abused and attacked. When trouble got the opportunity to turn up, he invited it in!

Apparently Jack Straw and co agreed - thus where he is right now again!

yeah loads of speculation still nothing officially confirmed. Addiction to drugs could be an addiction to prescribed medication.

Biggins

Deleted User wrote: »

yeah loads of speculation still nothing officially confirmed. Addiction to drugs could be an addiction to prescribed medication.

1. If its good enough for ITN, AP, the highbrow British Telegraph as well as others to state on record and put their serious reporting reputation on line - I and others tend to have more faith in what they state.
Can you prove otherwise? Please do...
O' and two more papers tomorrow report the same details - front page!

2. An addiction that for a start was part of his release conditions.... Buying of ILLEGAL drugs - part of his conditions...

brendansmith

flowersagogo wrote: »

this is 'shoot the messenger'. all of it. i've seen a seven year old take a swipe at a hooker(his word) from a stolen car.

HAHA Brilliant!

a-k-47

minidazzler wrote: »

What he did was horrible, but he was a fcuking child when he did it.

Noone here knows if he is a scumbag now. He might have done feck all to get recalled. Irish prisoners who get Temproary release are supposed to stay sober, maybe it's the same for him and he happened to have a few drinks?

Unless it's released why he was recalled to prison, then people really shouldn't call for his death, or take delight in it.

I am FAR from a liberal person with regard to criminals, but he was a child when he did it. He probably is reformed.

fcuk everyone that thanked that post. Some people are born pure evil and will never leave them. Worth a ban imo.

epgc3fyqirnbsx

a-k-47 wrote: »

fcuk everyone that thanked that post. Some people are born pure evil and will never leave them. Worth a ban imo.

Not arguing with you, but how do you know that some people are born 'pure evil'?

Have you met many such people?

Have you met these lads?

brendansmith

a-k-47 wrote: »

fcuk everyone that thanked that post. Some people are born pure evil and will never leave them. Worth a ban imo.

HAHA You are so brave for standing up for what you believe in!

Millicent

a-k-47 wrote: »

fcuk everyone that thanked that post. Some people are born pure evil and will never leave them. Worth a ban imo.

Well, that's a convincing and persuasive argument. I take back everything I said before. I don't know what I was thinking. I have seen the error of my ways...

epgc3fyqirnbsx

Millicent wrote: »

Well, that's a convincing and persuasive argument. I take back everything I said before. I don't know what I was thinking. I have seen the error of my ways...

You see, a well thought out, and informed, argument can change anyones mind

a-k-47

Landon Old Pigeon wrote: »

Not arguing with you, but how do you know that some people are born 'pure evil'?

Have you met many such people?

Have you met these lads?

do you have to ask me twice? ask me twice?

yeah me!... ted bundy, jeffery dalmer, dont think one day they decided to be evil cnuts and kill dozens of people for the lolz...


to add, i dont care if he was successfully rehabilitated or not a 'scumbag anymore' or whatever drivel your trying to protray. Dont think the Bulge family would either.

To be honest, while it is a heinous despicable crime to say the least i can never understand this lynch mob, eye for an eye attitude people develop toward criminals. No one knows what lies ahead of them from one day to the next. whilst the majority know better then to commit such a truly awful crime similar to the James Bulger murder, there is alot of other situations that people find themselves in that can get out of hand pretty quickly.

1. Drink driving is wrong but people do it.
2. Assaulting a person is wrong but people do it.
3. Lying is wrong but people do it.
4. Adultery is wrong but people do it.
5. Stealing is wrong but people do it.
6. Bullying is wrong but people do it.

We as humans drink too much, swear too much and eat the wrong foods, we know its wrong but we we still do it. Whilst none are a patch on the murder of a toddler, are we qualified to judge what 'justice' should be served up for another human being?

It is my opinion that 3 kids died that day. One got a brutal death and the other 2 practically gave up their right to a normal life for reasons we'll never know. No good would come out of them lads being murdered in retribution. The cancerous epidemic would just spread.

brendansmith

Landon Old Pigeon wrote: »

Not arguing with you, but how do you know that some people are born 'pure evil'?

Have you met many such people?

Have you met these lads?

George Thorogood & the Destroyers - Bad to the Bone Lyrics

On the day I was born, the nurses all gathered 'round
And they gazed in wide wonder, at the joy they had found
The head nurse spoke up, and she said leave this one alone
She could tell right away, that I was bad to the bone

epgc3fyqirnbsx

Deleted User wrote: »

To be honest, while it is a heinous despicable crime to say the least i can never understand this lynch mob, eye for an eye attitude people develop toward criminals. No one knows what lies ahead of them from one day to the next. whilst the majority know better then to commit such a truly awful crime similar to the James Bulger murder, there is alot of other situations that people find themselves in that can get out of hand pretty quickly.

1. Drink driving is wrong but people do it.
2. Assaulting a person is wrong but people do it.
3. Lying is wrong but people do it.
4. Adultery is wrong but people do it.
5. Stealing is wrong but people do it.
6. Bullying is wrong but people do it.

We as humans drink too much, swear too much and eat the wrong foods, we know its wrong but we we still do it. Whilst none are a patch on the murder of a toddler, are we qualified to judge what 'justice' should be served up for another human being?

It is my opinion that 3 kids died that day. One got a brutal death and the other 2 practically gave up their right to a normal life for reasons we'll never know. No good would come out of them lads being murdered in retribution. The cancerous epidemic would just spread.

Yep, and the hypocracy of these 'justice' seekers is the craziest thing about it.

Those bastards killed someone, so now we'll do it to show that we're better!

Millicent

Landon Old Pigeon wrote: »

You see, a well thought out, and informed, argument can change anyones mind

It can indeed, Slasher. It can indeed.:D

Millicent

a-k-47 wrote: »

do you have to ask me twice? ask me twice?

yeah me!... ted bundy, jeffery dalmer, dont think one day they decided to be evil cnuts and kill dozens of people for the lolz...


to add, i dont care if he was successfully rehabilitated or not a 'scumbag anymore' or whatever drivel your trying to protray. Dont think the Bulge family would either.

To be fair, he wasn't asking you twice. They were two different questions.

So Venables and Thompson are serial killers now? Link? Or is that not the point you're trying to portray?

partyatmygaff

a-k-47 wrote: »

do you have to ask me twice? ask me twice?

yeah me!... ted bundy, jeffery dalmer, dont think one day they decided to be evil cnuts and kill dozens of people for the lolz...


to add, i dont care if he was successfully rehabilitated or not a 'scumbag anymore' or whatever drivel your trying to protray. Dont think the Bulge family would either.

How the hell can you tell if someone is "born evil"? Your upbringing decides that, not your genes.

a-k-47

a-k-47 wrote: »

fcuk everyone that thanked that post. Some people are born pure evil and will never leave them. Worth a ban imo.

well like i said earlier, there is good and evil in everyone. its keeping the evil under lock and key is the challenge we face

smurgen

to be fair i wouldn''t want either of these as my neighbours,they are both still very dangerous people in my opinion and should be behind bars for good.
i really dont think some people can be rehabilitated but thats just me speaking from a lay man point of view.for example there's a guy that grew up in our area,tormented me and my pals as kids,robbed us,stabbed his own dad,beat up a 60 year old on the bus and slit some dudes artery with a slash hook,and broke a naggin bottle off his girlfriends face.he's practically running cork prison now im told.so in my opinion this guy is either gona kill someone or be killed.0 chance of rehabillitation,so if i was tomorrow told i was terminally ill and close to death id try my upmost to put a bullet in him in a bid to do the world some good on my way out.

Some people throw away their rights to human rights imo and this guy here is one of them.

smurgen

[QUOTE=Millicent\;I just don't know what can be achieved by punishing them indefinitely."

ensuring the safety of the public

nacho libre

partyatmygaff wrote: »

How the hell can you tell if someone is "born evil"? Your upbringing decides that, not your genes.

well what about those serial killers who have a good upbringing and yet they can still commit murder without a scintilla of remorse?




it has been proven from brain scans of psychopaths that they have deficiencies in the frontal lobe area...which other people do not have. a prominent neurobiologist concluded these difference could only be from birth not as a consequence of environment

Run_to_da_hills

£250,000 for second new identity for James Bulger murderer

According to this Jon Venables will have to get a third identity fearing that his second ID will be disclosed after this breach on his parole conditions.

epgc3fyqirnbsx

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

£250,000 for second new identity for James Bulger murderer

According to this Jon Venables will have to get a third identity fearing that his second ID will be disclosed after this breach on his parole conditions.

The very media that are complaining about the money that is being spent covering up their identities will probably cost the taxpayer a lot more money by forcing the authorities to be more zealous than usual

They are citizens and so are entitled to state protection. It's what ebery democracy is grounded on. State must protect at all costs and these ****in tabloids are driving costs higher.

And lets not say they dont deserve state protection, maybe not, but do you want national referendums to decide such which have wide ranging implications, to give a wild example; you get done for manslaughter against someone who assaulted your sister, get released and his family comes after you but the state cabt protect you. Think about these things ffs, have a bit of perspective, think about what is FACT and what is NOT and most of all think about how will such actions actually benefit society in the long run.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

transylman wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlmJ6xbb0x4

Just wow... Poor kid

scudzilla

2 ten year old kids being naughty, in my eyes, is smashing a couple of windows, stealing some sweets, not doing what they did.

I hope they both burn in hell and die an agonizingly painful death, should have nailed the little bastards to a wall when they got them, but no, way too many do-gooders in society today

walshb

partyatmygaff wrote: »

How the hell can you tell if someone is "born evil"? Your upbringing decides that, not your genes.

You serious? So, everyone is born good, and it's all down to parenting and environment?

No, no...Many many people who have had normal and decent upbringings have committed heinous acts of violence, and were simply bad from day 1.

You cannot state as fact that folks aren't born bad or evil.

recylingbin

I haven't, nor won't be reading this thread. But, I'm going to take a wild guess and bet any amount of money that this thread has a high volume of daily fail links.

Biggins

recylingbin wrote: »

I haven't, nor won't be reading this thread. But, I'm going to take a wild guess and bet any amount of money that this thread has a high volume of daily fail links.

While only partly correct, pity you won't be reading it, you would have seen all the other links posted by good others besides myself - but as the saying goes "ignorance is bliss" and I suppose very convenient too sometimes.

LordDorington

lugha wrote: »

It often strikes me as odd that you almost never get people taking the law into their own hands (except for out and out gangsters) after stuff like this, even though many people say they would.

True... I suppose nobody can REALLY know what they would do until they are actually in that situation themselves. I like to think that if the justice system failed one of my loved ones I WOULD take the law into my own hands but until that day (and please God it wont happen) I just dont know.

LordDorington

It is my opinion that 3 kids died that day. One got a brutal death and the other 2 practically gave up their right to a normal life for reasons we'll never know. No good would come out of them lads being murdered in retribution. The cancerous epidemic would just spread.[/QUOTE]

It might stop them from re-offending...wouldnt that be good??

LordDorington

nacho libre wrote: »

well what about those serial killers who have a good upbringing and yet they can still commit murder without a scintilla of remorse?




it has been proven from brain scans of psychopaths that they have deficiencies in the frontal lobe area...which other people do not have. a prominent neurobiologist concluded these difference could only be from birth not as a consequence of environment[/QUOTE

Indeed...and what about the people who ahve had worse upbringings and HAVENT basdhed a two year old baby to death?? The argument is flawed to say the least. Personally I think it is a nature AND nurture thing.

Co45

LordDorington wrote: »

Indeed...and what about the people who ahve had worse upbringings and HAVENT basdhed a two year old baby to death?? The argument is flawed to say the least. Personally I think it is a nature AND nurture thing.

Watch the Ice Man interviews on youtube theres one where Kulklinski talks to a psychiatrist and he sums up his state of mind pretty well. Basically he had a gene that caused him to be emotionless that was heriditery however the psychiatrist went onto say that his daughters won't neccesarily become violent with this gene as they were brought up in an enviroment of love and nurture unlike Kulklinski who was regularly beaten unconcious by his dad from the age of 2 up.
It is nature AND nurture. Nature plays the main part but it wouldn't manifest without a certain type of violent upbringing.

hooradiation

Biggins wrote: »

I've posted back-up links so I guess its not the first time I've been called a moron or similar by subtle methods.

Not really, even your first set of "back up links" were news outlets reporting that the mail had claimed something.
That's not back-up, that's he-said, she-said hearsay.

The Mail has a long history of simply making shit up, bunging the word allegedly in front of it (or that other gem "sources say") so frankly you getting all butthurt that people as skeptical of a paper with a long history of lies is just so damn precious.

Biggins wrote: »

I agree.
I might be such a moran possibly referred to then anyway according to others skewed opinions ...and I cite all papers that back-up stuff.
At least I, yourself and others are not biased (hopefully) intentionally from the outset. An info/data link is a link to back-up something said. Nothing more.
Hooradiation, don't like the links, don't read them or respond to them. Your only annoying yourself.

Yep. Its like saying one whole category of society is ALL bad, no exception and others are all always better - and because of that we should not give the supposed "bad lot" a voice and/or should not be heard from.
Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater!

Ugh-Ugh!
Excuse me while I go drag my knuckles alone the pavement as I ape by the "right" guys who are on their way to their shining pulpit with just their Times and high brow papers alone.

Even this moran knows we getting of topic thought!

You misspelled moron, twice.

And i don't really give two fucks about your inverse classism spiel.
Go peddle that shit to someone more gullible, y'know someone who'll believe your "I'm just a regular guy tellin' it like it is" bollox.

Biggins

hooradiation wrote: »

Not really, even your first set of "back up links" were news outlets reporting that the mail had claimed something.
That's not back-up, that's he-said, she-said hearsay.

The Mail has a long history of simply making shit up, bunging the word allegedly in front of it (or that other gem "sources say") so frankly you getting all butthurt that people as skeptical of a paper with a long history of lies is just so damn precious.

You misspelled moron, twice.

And i don't really give two fucks about your inverse classism spiel.
Go peddle that shit to someone more gullible, y'know someone who'll believe your "I'm just a regular guy tellin' it like it is" bollox.

Dear Sir,

I am formally responding to you here and now - then no more.
I will not be further addressing these issues with you - you are rude, arrogant and a disgusting example of why the internet is a showcase of people who consist of "net bad behaviour" and show only a consistent lack of good vocabulary.

Words that are used are sometimes a useful window to a persons true character.

Good day.

genericguy

Kaizer Sosa wrote: »

Sorry, but I don't really buy the DNA thing. I read that article you posted earlier and Robert Thompson was subjected to systematic violent abuse from his older siblings and was suspected of having been sexually abused by one in particular. If ever there was a recipe for messing a child up, that boy had every single ingredient. Despite that cocktail of dysfunction in his background, he personally never had a history of violence before that incident.

the DNA thing doesn't do it for me in these cases. DNA is what I do for a living, and I don't read the mail, so by that rationale i should be fairly well placed to comment.

we all have the same genes. there are different forms of these genes, different flavours if you like, which we inherit from our parents in different combinations. there is no gene, to my knowledge, which causes a human to smash a child's face in with bricks and iron bars put his dead body onto a train track.

essentially what we have here, is a child that was a cnut, who has grown into an adult cnut. there doesn't have to be an explanation for everything, bad upbringing or not, some people are simply cnuts. this man is a cnut, and even though i am not a man of faith, i shall pray every day that he gets raped and beaten to death in prison.

walshb

genericguy wrote: »

the DNA thing doesn't do it for me in these cases. DNA is what I do for a living, and I don't read the mail, so by that rationale i should be fairly well placed to comment.

we all have the same genes. there are different forms of these genes, different flavours if you like, which we inherit from our parents in different combinations. there is no gene, to my knowledge, which causes a human to smash a child's face in with bricks and iron bars put his dead body onto a train track.

essentially what we have here, is a child that was a cnut, who has grown into an adult cnut. there doesn't have to be an explanation for everything, bad upbringing or not, some people are simply cnuts. this man is a cnut, and even though i am not a man of faith, i shall pray every day that he gets raped and beaten to death in prison.

So, folks can be born bad, or badder than others? I am no DNA expert, but I do believe that some folks are created, or born with more of an appetite for mayhem, destruction, cruelty, violence, depravity etc etc. The same way that some folks are born with more compassion, gentleness, peacefulness, empathy etc.

Now, parenting and environment can and do at times play a part, but also, it can simply be down to nature.

genericguy

walshb wrote: »

So, folks can be born bad, or badder than others? I am no DNA expert, but I do believe that some folks are created, or born with more of an appetite for mayhem, destruction, cruelty, violence, depravity etc etc. The same way that some folks are born with more compassion, gentleness, peacefulness, empathy etc.

Now, parenting and environment can and do at times play a part, but also, it can simply be down to nature.

on the face of it, it would seem plausible that you could be "bad or badder", but it just doesn't work like that the way i see it. there have been studies where identical twins were raised seperately and shown to have developed behaviours that were poles apart (no ref handy). this shows to me that the crucial element in determining whether or not you become a good person is your environment. there are definitely genes that have been shown to correlate with impulsive behaviour, which might lead to some people doing things impulsively, like an assault etc. but what these boys did was not impulsive, it was premeditated.

in any sample of a population there are statistical outliers - some people who are super tall, super fat, super athletes, and these kids are just super pricks. that's be my view. they were raised by bastards, and they became bastards. they would be absolutely no loss to society, and they should just be used to save seven lives, will smith-style.

TheZohanS

TheZohan wrote: »

Guys the discussion is not about the stardard of red-tops, lets stay on-topic and try and be nice to each other.....who know's maybe one of you guys can win the Heart of Gold Award this year.

hooradiation wrote: »

Not really, even your first set of "back up links" were news outlets reporting that the mail had claimed something.
That's not back-up, that's he-said, she-said hearsay.

The Mail has a long history of simply making shit up, bunging the word allegedly in front of it (or that other gem "sources say") so frankly you getting all butthurt that people as skeptical of a paper with a long history of lies is just so damn precious.

I will not warn you again.

dan719

hooradiation wrote: »

And i don't really give two fucks about your inverse classism spiel.
Go peddle that shit to someone more gullible, y'know someone who'll believe your "I'm just a regular guy tellin' it like it is" bollox.

If I could thank this a million times, I would.

Biggins

What we have in the Bulger case is a highly emotive subject.

Myself and others incorporate links to information and/or news quotes to relevant subject material in a topic thread.

If we are going to start excluding some sources just because some feel they come from just a complete trash source, we again are throwing out "the baby with the bath water" and I feel unjustly its wrong (a) not allowing a source to judged on its actual material (b) not allowing media workers writing such information to regain any form of credibility possibly lost despite what other fellow co-workers have done in the same building.
* This alone means that we are tarring all in any one media outlet, with the same brush. Is there anyone here that really thinks any one daily national newspaper organisation is entirely 100% bad - and even if so, are we right to exclude them and on what basis? And EVEN if we were to accept that any one media outlet was bad/trash/"insert insult here" - are we not shooting ourselves in the foot by excluding their information and reading/using only other data made available, thus giving us a less broad perspective of possibilities like a horse wearing blinkers.

We might not agree with what is written, we can speak out against it, but we cannot do neither if we are precluded from incorporating such data from the outset because of the feelings of a percentage that feel some sources shouldn't be quoted at all and should be held back from the eyes and minds of the public!
Is that not censorship? Think of China, Burma, North Korea, Iraq, Germany pre 1945 to name a few examples!

If we allow all forms of media communication to flow - those that fall within adopted state laws in regards to not advocating violence, not advocating race hatred, etc - we allow everyone to judge both sides of an argument, to see both sides of "a coin" and further ferment our own opinions as to how we feel about something.

Long story short. I feel its wrong to not post what some feel is links just from "trash" source they personally see it as. We are all hopefully intelligent people here. Allow all of us to at least read all the available material out there and let us decide for ourselves whats good and whats bad.
If we are not allowed that opportunity, our opinions, motivations and subsequent actions can be used, abused and circumvented for the will of one possibly questionable totalitarian system like the many we already have on this planet.

Knock a newspaper article/link for what it contains, not just because of the building it came from!

walshb

I tell you, go onto the Mail website and you will see it is ****ing littered with news, sports, arts, business, entertainment, science, technology, health etc etc. Hundreds upon hundreds of articles. Now, picking out one or two every so often that doesn't do it for you and then using this to label the paper/site trash is plain ridiculous.

Worse still, knocking and dismissing it because OTHERS are is not just ridiculous, but sad.

I suppose it all boils down to the, Give a Dog a Bad Name, mentality

BaZmO*

Tabloid sources, tabloid responses.

walshb

BaZmO* wrote: »

Tabloid sources, tabloid responses.

Have you other sources that are more informative, or worthy?

dan719

Deleted User wrote: »

Whilst none are a patch on the murder of a toddler, are we qualified to judge what 'justice' should be served up for another human being?

It is my opinion that 3 kids died that day. One got a brutal death and the other 2 practically gave up their right to a normal life for reasons we'll never know. No good would come out of them lads being murdered in retribution. The cancerous epidemic would just spread.

I'd say James Bulger's parents would be pretty well qualified, wouldn't you? Three kids died? What a load of absolute rubbish. Only one child died that day, and the two bastards that did are alive today. I have absolutely no problem with them both being murdered, and just hope it is the father that gets to do it.

And to the person who talked about the lack of vigilante justice. Well, it's pretty obvious why, when the government spends so much money and legal effort on protecting these people.

scudzilla

scudzilla wrote: »

2 ten year old kids being naughty, in my eyes, is smashing a couple of windows, stealing some sweets, not doing what they did.

I hope they both burn in hell and die an agonizingly painful death, should have nailed the little bastards to a wall when they got them, but no, way too many do-gooders in society today

what good will that do? sadly whats done is done. would be better if everyone just carried on with their lives. there's also too many have a go heroes in society who do stupid unnecessary things. makes no difference, wont bring anyone back and only lowering themselves to the standards of the original murderers.

dan719v2.0 wrote:

I'd say James Bulger's parents would be pretty well qualified, wouldn't you?

don't get me wrong, i wouldn't wish what they went through on anyone but if they caught up with these 2 lads say hypothetically and got vengeance, would they feel better do you think?? what gives them the right to play god in any circumstances. don't forget also, the day the little fellow went missing he was left outside a butchers shop on his own in a busy shopping centre. could his mum not have brought him in? im sorry for her loss and as i said i wouldn't wish it on anyone. no parent deserves that but leaving your kid outside a shop in a busy shopping mall in today's society or even back in 1993 standards is extremely risky.

i do agree maybe that they were realised far too quickly and that the British had far too much faith in their so called rehabilitation system. it was almost arrogance on their part

aDeener

Deleted User wrote: »

what good will that do? sadly whats done is done. would be better if everyone just carried on with their lives. there's also too many have a go heroes in society who do stupid unnecessary things. makes no difference, wont bring anyone back and only lowering themselves to the standards of the original murderers.



don't get me wrong, i wouldn't wish what they went through on anyone but if they caught up with these 2 lads say hypothetically and got vengeance, would they feel better do you think?? what gives them the right to play god in any circumstances. don't forget also, the day the little fellow went missing he was left outside a butchers shop on his own in a busy shopping centre. could his mum not have brought him in? im sorry for her loss and as i said i wouldn't wish it on anyone. no parent deserves that but leaving your kid outside a shop in a busy shopping mall in today's society or even back in 1993 standards is extremely risky.

i do agree maybe that they were realised far too quickly and that the British had far too much faith in their so called rehabilitation system. it was almost arrogance on their part

That wouldnt be like them at all

aDeener

aDeener wrote: »

That wouldnt be like them at all

god no. very out of character

nacho libre

walshb wrote: »

You serious? So, everyone is born good, and it's all down to parenting and environment?

No, no...Many many people who have had normal and decent upbringings have committed heinous acts of violence, and were simply bad from day 1.

You cannot state as fact that folks aren't born bad or evil.

well, if you are deeply religious it's preferable to have the above view point. i imagine most religious people view paedophilia as an acquired mental disorder rather than a sexual orientation somone is born with for the same reason they don't want to concede that some people are born with a greater inclination to be violent than others.

nacho libre

Co45 wrote: »

Nature plays the main part but it wouldn't manifest without a certain type of violent upbringing.

in many cases i'd say that true. however there are many bad eggs who had loving parents. just as there are more people who have had a ****ty childhood who wouldn't dream of comitting henious crimes than those who do.

i suspect no matter what kind of upbringing Ted Bundy had, he'd still have been violent towards women.