Joushag Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Some of the kids on the streets in the main UK cities are completely feral. They are unsupervised, unloved, unwanted in the community and broke. They steal, mug, stab, and fight at any opportunity. If you dont believe this is true, pop over to London and stroll out of Brixton tube station one evening chatting on your mobile phone and see how long you last. I would guess at 15 seconds or less. [/color] I think this debate is a little pointless when it comes to decided whether they are feral or not. It doesn't matter. The most important thing here is why the politician uses such words and what we understanding we come to have from it. The word feral has associations with what is condersider the animal. But these are people, not animals. It makes the problem and the people harder to understand when you use words that try to classify them as something they are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Some of the kids on the streets in the main UK cities are completely feral. They are unsupervised, unloved, unwanted in the community and broke. They steal, mug, stab, and fight at any opportunity. If you dont believe this is true, pop over to London and stroll out of Brixton tube station one evening chatting on your mobile phone and see how long you last. I would guess at 15 seconds or less. [/color] I think this debate is a little pointless when it comes to decided whether they are feral or not. It doesn't matter. The most important thing here is why the politician uses such words and what we understanding we come to have from it. The word feral has associations with what is condersider the animal. But these are people, not animals. It makes the problem and the people harder to understand when you use words that try to classify them as something they are not. True, its a bit unfair comparing themselves to animals. Animals don't intentionally destroy their own environment of financial gain or entertainment. Scum is a more appropriate term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joushag Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Animals don't intentionally destroy their own environment of financial gain or entertainment.As an aside, the human race as a whole destroys the environment for financial gain and entertainment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pauld Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 Some of the kids on the streets in the main UK cities are completely feral. They are unsupervised, unloved, unwanted in the community and broke. They steal, mug, stab, and fight at any opportunity. If you dont believe this is true, pop over to London and stroll out of Brixton tube station one evening chatting on your mobile phone and see how long you last. I would guess at 15 seconds or less. [/color] I think this debate is a little pointless when it comes to decided whether they are feral or not. It doesn't matter. The most important thing here is why the politician uses such words and what we understanding we come to have from it. The word feral has associations with what is condersider the animal. But these are people, not animals. It makes the problem and the people harder to understand when you use words that try to classify them as something they are not. True, its a bit unfair comparing themselves to animals. Animals don't intentionally destroy their own environment of financial gain or entertainment. Scum is a more appropriate term. Just so as we are clear mdo and joushag are wrong. mdo using the descriptor "scum" is wrong scum floats at to the top, human scum are BANKERS. Joushag opposite view to both mine and merkins is just plain wrong. These kids are feral by definition, merkin gave good examples of definitions, he left of the list, that these kids are psychotic in the main, they have zero empathy for their fellow man, other people exist to them only to be violently exploited. Feral implies animal, these fuckers as iv already said hunt in packs like mange ridden, rabid fucking animals, who should be forcibly sterilised along with the fuckers that spawned them. I am sure most will appreciate this deep insightful over-view of the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joushag Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 Maybe they are by definition feral, but it is not helpful to use the term. That's all I am saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 I would expect the sentences to be reduced on Appeal. However until they are then it's squeaky bottom time! Good. Wrong again it would seem: Facebook rioters who incited disorder have appeals rejected Two men who used Facebook to try to incite disorder during the riots in August have lost their appeals against their four-year prison sentences. http://www.independe...ed-2372578.html And the general opinion of Joe Public? "Good!" It's like the Dale Farm nonsense. Just add to the "Good!" the words "And about bloody time as well..." Tolerance can be pushed only so far and then all bets are off i.e. it's about time the piss-takers were dealt with - firmly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweek Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 Tolerance can be pushed only so far and then all bets are off i.e. it's about time the piss-takers were dealt with - firmly. If we're betting, I bet you have lots of dreams involving uniforms and shiny boots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 There wasn't even a shred of tolerance in relation to the Dale Farm issue. I don't what you think was tolerated. As for the piss-takers, the problem hasn't been dealt with though. You may feel the satisfaction of having particular individuals put in prison (with excessively harsh sentences considering the resultant crimes), but nobody has even bothered to try to sort out the underlying cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 Tolerance can be pushed only so far and then all bets are off i.e. it's about time the piss-takers were dealt with - firmly. If we're betting, I bet you have lots of dreams involving uniforms and shiny boots. I have them all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 If we're betting, I bet you have lots of dreams involving uniforms and shiny boots. To match the photos? Afraid not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted December 30, 2011 Share Posted December 30, 2011 Tolerance can be pushed only so far and then all bets are off i.e. it's about time the piss-takers were dealt with - firmly. Guardian analysis of some of the UK govt documents released after 30 years and which relate to discussion around the 1981 riots. National Archives reveals historic parallels between 2011 and 1981 riots Once the prospects for economic regeneration and the behaviour of the police were taken off the table, the post-riots debate in 1981 degenerated into a debate over more military equipment for the police and the influence of television in spreading "copycat" riots. The historical parallels with the aftermath of the 2011 summer riots seem easy to draw. A quick and inconclusive debate about the social roots of the unrest. A new government initiative to tackle gang culture and troubled families is launched, as was Heseltine's inner-city drive, as a singular crusade without any significant new Whitehall funds to back it up. The rioters are dismissed as an "unruly mob" who were "thieving pure and simple". Instead the law and order response has become the only reaction that commands serious ministerial time and resources. The police are now going through exactly the same debate about the use of water cannon, baton rounds and the possible new powers to create "no-go" areas for rioters that echo a modernised form of the 1714 Riot Act that chief constables concerned about the new "hit and run" tactics being used demanded in 1981. Thatcher government toyed with evacuating Liverpool after 1981 riots Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.