Mark Easton wrote in his blog about how disproportionism in the media leads to hysterical fear of crime.
What’s the correct response? Hysterical fear of crime, naturally.
Responsibilities – I wish!!!
Person A is a responsible person who can be trusted with a knife (or a gun, or a child, or whatever).
Person B is an irresponsible person who cannot be trusted with a knife (or a gun, or a child, or whatever).
We are not allowed to discriminate between A and B as this would be an infringement of B’s “rights”.
Therefore, we must treat A in the same way as B and impose any amount of petty restrictions on both of them.
And B, being irresponsible, will evade the restrictions imposed to control him/her.
While A, being responsible, will try to abide by the restrictions which are not necessary for him/her.
A, being responsible, is far easier to police and prosecute than B. A will therefore be more disadvantaged by these restrictions than B.
Until we are once again allowed to DISCRIMINATE between A and B, things will go from bad to worse.
And no, it’s not really that difficult to tell the majority of the As and Bs apart . . .
AZLewes
Yes, the Bs all have little squinty eyes that are too close together while the As are all 6′ tall and blond, with proud chests that swell with the joy of living.
But that’s not it for poor long-suffering A and scumbag B…
[AZLewes] is spot on, however I would go one further as the situation is now in reality much more skewed in favour of the irresponsable person B.
The responsible person A is going about his legal business in the street and is unarmed.
A is approached by the irresponsable person B who is armed and intent on relieving A of his wallet containing his hard-earned cash. This is required to feed B’s drug habit. Person B pulls a knife.
Unfortunately for person B, A takes exception to B’s criminal behaviour and is morally obliged to decline the invitation to hand over his wallet. Being a fairly well built chap A defends himself using reasonable force and person B suffers hurt feelings and a cracked nail as he is forceably separated from the contents of his cuttlery draw.
PC Plod (person pC) arives on scene and decides for some reason that ‘a dispute’ (you can b***dy say tha again) has occured between person A and person B, whose ‘rights’ are now for some inexplicable reason equal even though person B is clearlt a knife wielding thug well known to the Police, and person A is just trying to get home from work.
A is fingerprinted, DNA tested, and charged with assault. Whilst A is held overnight in the cells, B is released without charge because “it is soceity wot dun it to ‘im innit?” and is therefore free to knock over A’s house during the small hours to rearm himself from the cuttlery draw and steal A’s property to fund his drug habit.
The law abiding person A now has a criminal record and looses his job, his house and his wife.
Well done pC, UK law and British common sense.
——–Whilst this situation is mercifully rare, it has occurred in the past and although laughable when expressed like this, it is unfortunately now a genuine concern for the law abiding.
The fact that it is rare is because most people in this situation would actually just hand over their wallet, loose £10 in cash, cancel their cards and not bother to report it (because no-one will be caught anyway and it is not worth the effort having the conversation with the administrator on the front desk of the police station, even if you can find one that is actually open) rather than risk taking a stand, or indeed help anyone else finding themselves in this position.
It is this fear of the state by the law abiding which is causing antisocial behaviour in all its forms to spiral because quite simply, the law abiding do not feel able to take action or intervene in any way lest they end up in the cells. Untill this dire situation (or the perception of this situation) is clearly reversed, crime and general disorder will only get worse.
Repealling the fatuous Human Rights Act, a European construct with no place in UK law, would be a fantastic start.
UKIntel
Check your newspeak dictionaries, citizens: “Mercifully rare” should replace the oldspeak term “Completely made up.”
64 Responses to “Pity poor law-abiding A”
Operator, my internets are broken.
Good McGrief. I never cease to wonder at the capacity of these people to get outraged at situations they have made up.
I think I can bring to mind one such case where a burglar fell off a building he was…um, burgling, after an “exchange of words” with the homeowner. So let’s be fair to the poor lad – if he pushes a burglar out of a fourth story window THERE MAY BE AN INVESTIGATION. Quelle horreur!
Wait, isn’t prison a good place to go now, wot with pc gorn mad an’ all?
And why did person A lose his wife?
Because the loony leftie judge decided that the only way to properly make amends to poor honest B was to dissolve A’s marriage and hand her to B as a chattel for whatever disgusting, squinty-eyed perversions he desired to use her for. Also he loses his house because B is actually a brick thief and after he successfully got A’s wallet and keys by giving pC a backhander, he had free reign to dismantle A’s house while he was in prison. HE ACTUALLY MADE A’S EX-WIFE CARRY SOME OF HER OWN HOUSE AWAY TO BE SOLD TO GYPSIES. FACT.
Can someone give me a short precis please? I almost took my life trying to read that.
@ Informer
Two cunts blithering on about knifecrime and human rights.
Nuff said?
“The problem with laws is that they apply to me instead of just everyone else.”
Any money says that Person B is better company in the pub than Person A.
Today’s gibbering hyperbole has been bought to you by the letters A and B…
I’m going to guess that AZLewes has never been a victim of knifecrime(c) or knows anyone who has.
That story sounds like it was pieced together from ‘facts’ he read in the Daily Mail, or The Sun.
Anyway, I love how he is proposing to solve an unfair judicial system by smiting it with an unfair judicial system (one that presumably requires citizens to wear either “Person A” or “Person B” armbands to indicate to which class of person the state decides they belong to).
@ Col John Matrix
Actually armbands could be useful – that way, when your being attacked at knifepoint, you could tell whether the antagonist is sensible enough to use it properly or just going to slash away randomly.
Also how many other people reckon that, several hours after posting, UKIntel was still snorting into his afternoon cup of tea at the thought of how clever he was to introduce person pC into the equation, the moronic monkey minge.
Ooh, armbands to differentiate us upstanding volk from the less acceptable sections of society. What a good idea. Could we do badges as well?
Why has no one though of this before?
“Also he loses his house because B is actually a brick thief…”
You misspelled “looses”.
“The problem with laws is that they apply to me instead of just everyone else.”
Kelvin, this is bloody brilliant! Could you come up with some succinct versions of all the other HYS complaints? I guess there are around six in total. That way we can just stamp them on the foreheads of HYS’ers and save them the trouble of all the typing.
“…is therefore free to knock over A’s house during the small hours”.
Knock over a whole house? Christ, these Bs truly are a different breed. I’m going to arm myself immediately.
That the same human rights act written by the british and backed by everyones favourite pissed up lunatic, churchill, is it ?
“…we must treat A in the same way as B and impose any amount of petty restrictions on them.”
Yeah! Bloody petty restrictions preventing HYS-ers and Daily Mail readers owning guns or beating their wives in the privacy of their own homes.
‘although laughable when expressed like this’.
You said it, fucknut.
Yes, Kelvin. That precis was spot on.
I heard that Person A is a pedo, just sayin’.
I have to defer to Nelson on that one.
My imaginary friend was attacked by knifecriming space-miners last night – AGAIN.
Gordon ClOW(n), when will you listen to THE ORD(i)Nary people and sort out these AMrxist smace-miners???!!? You couldnt make it up, unless you’re me, and you just have.
Wow, Kafka’s first attempts were really, really shit.
I wonder how much other crap he came out with before he got round to K?
I think the ‘A’ in ‘Person A’ probably stands for ‘AZ Lewes’.
But what could the ‘B’ stand for? ‘Bloody yobs’, as in “how dare these bloody yobs loiter in my presence”?
‘Bastard’, as in “stick two fingers up at me will you, well I’ll show you you little bastard”
‘BJ Lewes’, his father to whom he has Oedipal knifecrime urges?
‘Dr. Branflake’, the interfering busybody psychiatrist who keeps insisting that, really, the problem is with AZ Lewes himself and not his father?
‘Justice Barnes’, the politically correct judge who mandated that AZ Lewes see the aforementioned Dr. Branflake?
Or possibly ‘Bloody pulp’, to which AZ Lewis used an aluminium baseball bat to beat one of the bloody yobs?
Could person C, or pC, also be Police Constable (since promoted to Chief Inspector) Christopher Plod, who apprehended AZ Lewes during the act?
Tel lme!!!!?!
Don’t forget his excellent contribution to this post.
Category A:
People I like, people who are rich and famous, people who appear in the media a lot who I’m supposed to like until the media moves them into category B.
Category B:
Former A-types resettled to B by the media. Immigrints. The unemployed. The great unwashed. People who use public transport. Drugs dealers. Foriegners. The Terrorists. Everybody accused of commiting crimes (except white-collar, corporate, and war crimes which are acceptable when the victims are B-people). The PC Brigade.
I suspect in AZLewes world the armbands would be unnecessary. A is for Arian, B is for Black. AZL is for Arsewitted Zebra’s Labia.
(I agree, it needs work)
“B” for black by any chance?
This is bloody slander, this is… I never done nothing…
“relax, I’m A type”
Where were peoples D-Z in all of this? Bloody typical of the selfish society that they wouldn’t come to person A’s help.
Badges? We don’t need no steenking badges.
Badgers on the other hand.. You’d soon be able to work out who was going to knifecrime you in the street if they were forced to pin a badger to their chest.
and on the plus side. all the ‘B’s would die of tuberculosis. it’s a win-win situation.
I thought that we called them Alphas and Epsilons.
So, if I’ve got this right, according to AZLewes A > B where:
A = Aryans
B = Blacks
AZLewesAZL = an AZzhoLe
wesjust own up now, because i know at least half of you couldn’t be arsed to read all that crap about A’s and B’s.
I got to the second paragraph of the second post and suddenly jamming my head into the staff room microwave and turning it to power 10, time 5.00 minutes semed like a fucking great idea.
Bring back Hitler, he knew the benefits of discrimination. Crime was down massively in his time. Ok so was gay love, gingers, free speech, democracy, freedom and jews, but who needs any of that?
I just want to say that UKIntel is an amoeba’s gunk receptor.
Why, in UKIntel’s scenario, does Person A have a wallet when he carries his tenner as loose cash? What’s the point of the wallet? TELL ME!
Furthermore, while UKIntel is clearly capable of spelling ‘responsible’ correctly, why is he utterly unable to spell the slightly elongated opposite ‘irresponsible’? Is it because he’s a honey badger’s furry cup of kitten tears, perchance?
PC Plod’s gone mad! Or should I say, “una Plod ded PC”.
Take that, knifecrimers, ha!
I’m going to give this classification of everything a go:
Knives
Guns
Children
Whatever
To be honest, if I met AZLewes I’d probably knife him in his whatevers so that he couldn’t produce any gun-toting children.
Well whaddya know – the classification system works. You couldn’t make it UP!!!!!
Sorry about the length of this post, by the way, but I thought you wouldn’t get the full pomposity of UKIntel’s wrongbrained bullshit if I cut it down.
Loving “gunk receptor”, but -10 points for amoeba, since they reproduce asexually and therefore have neither gunk-receptors, jizz-holes, cream-catchers or semen-sinks.
Man, I’m going to go against the grain a bit here, but for the first time (ever?) someone on HYS has got it right. UKIntel – I salute you.
I’m glad that someone’s sticking up for my rights for a change. These do-gooder lefty liberal loonies are so concerned about Person B all the time. So what if he’s in a persistent vegitative state, he was black. What else would he be doing in my neighbourhood if he wasn’t going to knife me up or abduct blonde kids to sell them to Belgian peedorapers? All of a sudden I’m the criminal.
You couldn’t make it up.
6000 – No UKIntel is just another HYS twat with the small nuget of an idea of somthing that may be in some way right, but in genral is still an Elephents warty spunt bucket.
I mean, “Repealling the fatuous Human Rights Act, a European construct with no place in UK law, would be a fantastic start.”
And the idea that we should change laws based on peoples fears and prejdice. FFS
6000, I’m not sure which bit you think is right – possibly all of it – but if so, may I just point out that the Person As of this world were restricted to using reasonable force in self-defence long before the advent of the Human Rights Act.
Oh, and that Jimmy Savile thinks he’s a person A.
I don’t think we should even be discussing ‘Person A’ and ‘Person B’, they’re not people, they’re scum and should have been hanged back when they were children.
6000. UKintel is just making stuff up then presenting it as fact, saying Person A has now lost his job, wife, got a criminal record etc. when Person A only exists in his head.
One of the few people ever tried for ‘defending’ himself was Tony Martin the farmer who shot and killed an unarmed man. Find me evidence of self-defence cases not involving firearms going to court and getting a conviction I’ll possibly concede that UKintel isn’t the total scrofulous skunk’s scrotum he appears to be.
God knows what was with my spelling in that post. Lord knows what a prejdice is.
Both of those cunts make me want to knifecrime myself repeatedly.
Lets not forget that Lewes is a place where they annually parade burning crosses down the street and burn effigies of “hate” figures each year, including a gypsy caravan in 2003.
I love that bit most of all. I never realised that allowing oneself to be knifecrimed was in itself a moral failing. If only I’d had National Service to instil some British Backbone.
Why is it that in these hypothetical consequences for Person A, his wife is always assumed to only be in it for the money?
Tom, of course I was only with Person A for the money. He’s two-dimensional idiot who turned out to be a loser. The sex was lousy and he was always moaning about how many brown people he saw loose on the streets.
Person B, however, has bowled me over with his cheeky chappy criminal ways, and he always buys me nice things. No contest really.
Person A is clearly a thinly-veiled AZLewes. Would you marry AZLewes for anything but money?
Would you marry him for any amount of money? Money’s not that nice.
I genuinely don’t understand how the human rights act could be seen as a bad thing.
it’s all person B rown’s fault (both Gordon and immigruntz)
HY-lariou-S
The people who wrote these HYS posts obviously think that they are the last words in logical deductive reasoning, and would walk into any university Philosophy Professor job – if only such jobs were handed out by merit (instead of through EU-Labour PC positive-discrimination scheme).
UKIntel and AZLewes could pioneer a new way of thinking – called Common Dense!
AZLewes is the 21st century Gilbert and/or Sullivan and i claim my GBP5…
Consider this: HYS posters are selfish to the point of solipsism. Samuel Johnson’s immortal response to such a notion was to kick a stone and declare, “I refute it thus!” Your average HYS poster’s response would be to kick the stone, then blame Gordon CLOWN for putting it there and the health and safety wonks who declared that stones were too dangerous to leave where they were and anyway it’s probably an immigrant stone.
The thing is, if you live entirely in a world of your own creation, it’s tremendously shocking to have anything not under your control. Hence they can’t grasp that Human Rights Legislation also applies to them: They’re already the most important person in the world, of course they have all the rights they could ever want, except the ones ZaNuLiarBore are busy eroding*. Meanwhile the insidious thing about Human Rights is it also applies to people they don’t like: prisoners can no longer be tortured, immigrants can’t be deported if they’ll be murdered in their country of origin, you can’t simply beat a youth to death for openly chewing gum in public. As far as they see it, giving rights to everyone does nothing but restrict their own right to be misanthropic cunts. FACT.
* This actually plays to the control-is-everything aspect of their mentality. They expect government to be shit and it is, and they prove it’s shit by whining about how shit it is, and therefore they’re in control of it.
Tut… When whinging about The Human Rights Act you should at least try to misspell it… “Ooman Rights” or “‘Uman Rights”… something like that… There’s some sort of rule about it… I think it’s something about Person Bs can;t pronounce the letter “H” but I’m just rambling on now…
This all made me laugh, until I thought back to an incident about 15 years ago, when I intervened and stopped a young thug (young male, about 6ft and 15years old)assualting someone. Myself and another passer by held onto the thug whilst the police were called. When they arrived they took the young scamp back to his house and warned us that we could be charged with false imprisonment, although we weren’t arrested. The person who was assualted had gone to hospital by that time. One of the thugs friends had run off and found the thugs dad in a pub, who then came to the scene (he was also well known to the police). In his drunken state he then loudly threatened myself and the other person with violence at some point in the not to distant future. When I turned to the constable who was barely 1 foot away, he claimed not to have heard the threat. The truth was he was petrified of the man. Funnily enough shortly afterwards, the WPC who had taken the lad home was arrested herself for soliciting and living off immoral earnings (she was pimping herself and other girls). She was exposed by a punter who recognised her from her day job. The last bit was front page national news.
The young thug eventually found his way to jail after a viscious assualt a few years later.