On 23/01/2012 10:00, larkim wrote:
On Jan 22, 6:57 pm, The Grey wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 22:58:17 +0000 (UTC),

(Andrew Gabriel) wrote:
I know it's difficult to sympathise with someone cut down by their
own criminal actions, but it's not a crime for which anyone is going
to suggest a death sentence is appropriate. So in the sense that
they didn't get a chance to serve their sentence and didn't get a
chance to go on to become reformed upright citizens, I do feel
sorry for them.

Are you for real?

He's humane. How can you triumph in the death of these people? Do
you know their backstories? Do you know if they'd done this before?
Do you know if they were doing it because someone was threatening
their children / wife / family? No, you don't.

And nor do you.

It sickens me when
people gloat about the death of anyone. These men had the same human
value as you and I.

NO they didn't! They had total contempt for any form of human value.

Even if there is no sob story behind their lives,
they were just in it to make some quick money, and had no family that
cared about them there is no reason to gloat.

"No man is an Island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the
Continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a
manor of thy friends or of thine own were; any man's death diminishes
me, because I am involved in Mankind; And therefore never send to know
for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee." John Donne.

Matt


--
Moving things in still pictures

On Jan 23, 2:41*pm, ®i©ardo wrote:
people gloat about the death of anyone. *These men had the same human
value as you and I.

NO they didn't! They had total contempt for any form of human value.

Wow. A petty criminal has "total contempt for any form of human
value". I really hope I don't know you in the physical world outside
usenet.

They were nicking some metal. They weren't torturing people.

They may well have had total contempt for everybody else's personal
wealth, but no human value. You sicken me.

Matt

On 23/01/2012 14:51, larkim wrote:
On Jan 23, 2:41 pm, wrote:
people gloat about the death of anyone. These men had the same human
value as you and I.

NO they didn't! They had total contempt for any form of human value.

Wow. A petty criminal has "total contempt for any form of human
value". I really hope I don't know you in the physical world outside
usenet.

They were nicking some metal. They weren't torturing people.

They may well have had total contempt for everybody else's personal
wealth, but no human value. You sicken me.

Matt


They were putting other people's lives at risk for personal gain, with a
total contempt for anyone else's needs, requirements, safety or well-being.

I hope I never meet you in the real world.

--
Moving things in still pictures

In article ,
®i©ardo wrote:
They were putting other people's lives at risk for personal gain, with a
total contempt for anyone else's needs, requirements, safety or
well-being.

How do you know they were putting lives at risk? They certainly didn't
care about anyone other than themselves - but what thief does?
What's far more worrying is the self righteous hang them and flog them
brigade. As if they never ever broke the law.

Just remember - speeding puts other's life at risk. If you want dramatics.

--
*A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
®i©ardo wrote:
They were putting other people's lives at risk for personal gain, with a
total contempt for anyone else's needs, requirements, safety or
well-being.

How do you know they were putting lives at risk? They certainly didn't
care about anyone other than themselves - but what thief does?
What's far more worrying is the self righteous hang them and flog them
brigade. As if they never ever broke the law.

Just remember - speeding puts other's life at risk. If you want dramatics.

No power, no phone service, no signalling on roads and railways, no
train services (etc). No, I simply can't see how the disruption of any
of these services could possible put lives at risk.
--
Ian

On 23/01/2012 16:17, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
®i©ardo wrote:
They were putting other people's lives at risk for personal gain, with a
total contempt for anyone else's needs, requirements, safety or
well-being.

How do you know they were putting lives at risk? They certainly didn't
care about anyone other than themselves - but what thief does?
What's far more worrying is the self righteous hang them and flog them
brigade. As if they never ever broke the law.

Just remember - speeding puts other's life at risk. If you want
dramatics.

No power, no phone service, no signalling on roads and railways, no
train services (etc). No, I simply can't see how the disruption of any
of these services could possible put lives at risk.

You forgot about hospital equipment, ventilators in the home, etc.
The OP obviously doesn't realize that power cuts can kill people.

In article ,
Steve O wrote:
No power, no phone service, no signalling on roads and railways, no
train services (etc). No, I simply can't see how the disruption of any
of these services could possible put lives at risk.

You forgot about hospital equipment, ventilators in the home, etc.
The OP obviously doesn't realize that power cuts can kill people.

Power cuts can and do happen without cables being nicked. If that power is
essential, backup should be provided.

--
*If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 23/01/2012 16:04, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
wrote:
They were putting other people's lives at risk for personal gain, with a
total contempt for anyone else's needs, requirements, safety or
well-being.

How do you know they were putting lives at risk? They certainly didn't
care about anyone other than themselves - but what thief does?
What's far more worrying is the self righteous hang them and flog them
brigade. As if they never ever broke the law.


How do you KNOW otherwise? Suppose they had got away with it, leaving a
live wire exposed to the elements and passers by...

Just remember - speeding puts other's life at risk. If you want dramatics.


....or even red herrings.

Please show here I have suggested "hanging and flogging". Perhaps I was
merely marvelling at Darwinism in action. They would seem to have been
the architects of their own destiny and I, for one, see no reason to
shed a tear for their passing.

--
Moving things in still pictures

In article ,
®i©ardo wrote:
On 23/01/2012 16:04, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
wrote:
They were putting other people's lives at risk for personal gain,
with a total contempt for anyone else's needs, requirements, safety
or well-being.

How do you know they were putting lives at risk? They certainly didn't
care about anyone other than themselves - but what thief does?
What's far more worrying is the self righteous hang them and flog them
brigade. As if they never ever broke the law.


How do you KNOW otherwise? Suppose they had got away with it, leaving a
live wire exposed to the elements and passers by...

You're supposing - again.

Just remember - speeding puts other's life at risk. If you want
dramatics.


...or even red herrings.

Please show here I have suggested "hanging and flogging". Perhaps I was
merely marvelling at Darwinism in action. They would seem to have been
the architects of their own destiny and I, for one, see no reason to
shed a tear for their passing.

Of course not. Didn't think you were human.

Let me sum it up. You don't care if someone lives or dies because they
have done something you disapprove of.

But expect that same person to be worried about others?

--
*Sherlock Holmes never said "Elementary, my dear Watson" *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
®i©ardo wrote:
On 23/01/2012 16:04, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
wrote:
They were putting other people's lives at risk for personal gain,
with a total contempt for anyone else's needs, requirements,
safety or well-being.

How do you know they were putting lives at risk? They certainly
didn't care about anyone other than themselves - but what thief
does? What's far more worrying is the self righteous hang them
and flog them brigade. As if they never ever broke the law.


How do you KNOW otherwise? Suppose they had got away with it,
leaving a live wire exposed to the elements and passers by...

You're supposing - again.

After the supposition his family were starving, it compares as a milder
point.


Just remember - speeding puts other's life at risk. If you want
dramatics.


...or even red herrings.

Please show here I have suggested "hanging and flogging". Perhaps I
was merely marvelling at Darwinism in action. They would seem to
have been the architects of their own destiny and I, for one, see
no reason to shed a tear for their passing.

Of course not. Didn't think you were human.

Let me sum it up. You don't care if someone lives or dies because they
have done something you disapprove of.

But expect that same person to be worried about others?

He would not be the same person if he worried about others, would he?

--

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:


Let me sum it up. You don't care if someone lives or dies because they
have done something you disapprove of.


No, but if they get killed committing criminal acts where it is obvious
there is a sever danger off death, like nicking lead of church rooves,
or nicking live cables, I am not going to lose any sleep over it OK?

On 23/01/2012 17:54, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In articlebcCdnUUjJY_RD4DSnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@giganews. com,
wrote:
On 23/01/2012 16:04, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
wrote:
They were putting other people's lives at risk for personal gain,
with a total contempt for anyone else's needs, requirements, safety
or well-being.

How do you know they were putting lives at risk? They certainly didn't
care about anyone other than themselves - but what thief does?
What's far more worrying is the self righteous hang them and flog them
brigade. As if they never ever broke the law.


How do you KNOW otherwise? Suppose they had got away with it, leaving a
live wire exposed to the elements and passers by...

You're supposing - again.


But I'm not alone in doing so, unless you are claiming it as an
exclusive right and anyone else is an imposter?

Just remember - speeding puts other's life at risk. If you want
dramatics.


...or even red herrings.

Please show here I have suggested "hanging and flogging". Perhaps I was
merely marvelling at Darwinism in action. They would seem to have been
the architects of their own destiny and I, for one, see no reason to
shed a tear for their passing.

Of course not. Didn't think you were human.


Well, given your twisted outlook on life that's hardly surprising. Let
us praise and nurture the wrong-doers, because it would be unjust to to
do otherwise, even if everyone else suffers as a result of their actions.

Hang on, got it! You go around nicking metal and power cables and this
gives you a "moral" right to defend such actions. And, when it all goes
tits up, it's society's fault.

Let me sum it up. You don't care if someone lives or dies because they
have done something you disapprove of.


I really do not care if someone is too stupid to understand the
consequences of his or her own ILLEGAL actions. I care even less if
their ILLEGAL actions compromise the safety and well-being of law
abiding people.

But expect that same person to be worried about others?


Well, it should be patently obvious even to a blinkered bigot like you
that they don't give a F*CK about anyone but themselves and consequently
reap the rewards of their own actions.


--
Moving things in still pictures

"®i©ardo" wrote in message
...
NO they didn't! They had total contempt for any form of human value.

Immediately you make a judgement and have no clue why they needed to do it.

On 28/01/2012 00:44, Christina Websell wrote:
wrote in message
...
NO they didn't! They had total contempt for any form of human value.

Immediately you make a judgement and have no clue why they needed to do it.





Except that by resorting to illegal means to acquire someone else's
property, and potentially putting others at risk at the same time, they
were unlikely to have been acting for the benefit of anyone but
themselves. You may condone their actions, perhaps because you perceive
that they had some overriding "need" that "forced" them to take this
action, regardless of the needs of anyone else, but I have my reservations.

--
Moving things in still pictures