Disgust!

[RogerS]

Nature vs nurture? Some current research does suggest that some people are born with the mental framework for pure evil.

Re immediate execution...guess the guy who was released recently after being in prison for, what was it?, 20 or so years proclaiming his innocence and was finally found to have been telling the truth....well, he might have a different perspective.

Don't get me wrong...I'm all for this guy suffering and don't hold with the 'we should be civilised' homily which smacks to me of smug cant and a holier than thou attitude.

 

[head clansman]

hi digit

no the cost to the public keeping a prisoner for the rest of his natural would be enormous per person how many are their in jail :?: l i wonder .hc

 

[Digit]

It would, unfortunately, but better that than keep releasing them to re offend.

Roy.

 

[Jake]

smacks to me of smug cant and a holier than thou attitude.

I'm very unlikely to be holier than you Roger.

As for cant, well I actually believe it, whether you agree or not.

As for smug, well it is difficult not to be a little smug when people like you are always proving my moral superiority to me.

 

[head clansman]

Hi digit

trouble is if we keep them in side would it mean inside till death or would some do go-oder come along in say twenty yrs and try to release them like the Hindle woman ( i know she died in side thank the good lord) but imagine if she been released, or jack the ripper (mind boggling) .hc

 

[BradNaylor]

Hi digit

trouble is if we keep them in side would it mean inside till death or would some do go-oder come along in say twenty yrs and try to release them like the Hindle woman ( i know she died in side thank the good lord) but imagine if she been released, or jack the ripper (mind boggling) .hc

Err...

they never actually caught him though, did they?

 

[Digit]

Inevitable I think. The news this evening had a case in point where a schizophrenic being 'treated in the community' murdered a pregnant woman. Again!

Roy.

 

[Doctor]

Err...

they never actually caught him though, did they?

or did they, member of the royal family was one conspiracy theory.

 

[Jenx]

Several members, Brad.
Several :wink:

 

[RogerS]

smacks to me of smug cant and a holier than thou attitude.

I'm very unlikely to be holier than you Roger.

As for cant, well I actually believe it, whether you agree or not.

As for smug, well it is difficult not to be a little smug when people like you are always proving my moral superiority to me.

That's being a bit presumptious, isn't it, Jake?

 

[Jenx]

Several members, Brad.
Several :wink:

Queen Victoria's son, Edward Vll had a son, also called Edward ( Eddy ).
To find out more.. if you wanted to, look him up, + a man called Walter Sickert, and a gentleman called William Gull, who was the Queen's physician / surgeon.
Gull was purported to be the perpetrator, aided and abetted by Sickert and Eddy, with Queen Vic's knowledge.


Or so the story goes :wink:

 

[head clansman]

Hi all

Err...

they never actually caught him though, did they?

Sorry i mislead you there a bit with jack the ripper what i should have said was the Yorkshire ripper .hc

 

[Jake]

smacks to me of smug cant and a holier than thou attitude.

I'm very unlikely to be holier than you Roger.

As for cant, well I actually believe it, whether you agree or not.

As for smug, well it is difficult not to be a little smug when people like you are always proving my moral superiority to me.

That's being a bit presumptious, isn't it, Jake?

Then only bit that could be presumptious is the last line, and that was a joke, turning your personal jibes about me back on you. If you weren't so pompously self-right(wing)eous in your pride in your barbarism, you might have noticed.

 

[RogerS]

smacks to me of smug cant and a holier than thou attitude.

I'm very unlikely to be holier than you Roger.

As for cant, well I actually believe it, whether you agree or not.

As for smug, well it is difficult not to be a little smug when people like you are always proving my moral superiority to me.

That's being a bit presumptious, isn't it, Jake?

Then only bit that could be presumptious is the last line, and that was a joke, turning your personal jibes about me back on you. If you weren't so pompously self-right(wing)eous in your pride in your barbarism, you might have noticed.

Please explain where the personal jibes came from? Nowhere have I mentioned your name and yet to responded with a direct personal attack as if this were the case.

 

[Jake]

It was remarkable coincidence then.