mudcat.org: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafeawe

Post to this Thread - Sort Descending - Printer Friendly - Home


BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE

s6k 23 Sep 04 - 01:17 PM
GUEST 23 Sep 04 - 01:28 PM
Nerd 23 Sep 04 - 02:36 PM
The Fooles Troupe 23 Sep 04 - 09:44 PM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 23 Sep 04 - 10:25 PM
Uncle_DaveO 24 Sep 04 - 03:45 PM
GUEST 24 Sep 04 - 03:55 PM
GUEST 24 Sep 04 - 03:56 PM
s6k 24 Sep 04 - 04:33 PM
Bill D 24 Sep 04 - 05:30 PM
GUEST,Jon 24 Sep 04 - 06:00 PM
GUEST,Peter from Essex 24 Sep 04 - 06:03 PM
s6k 24 Sep 04 - 06:45 PM
Chris Green 25 Sep 04 - 06:56 AM
s6k 25 Sep 04 - 08:43 AM
GUEST 25 Sep 04 - 01:13 PM
The Shambles 25 Sep 04 - 03:10 PM
Edain 25 Sep 04 - 03:32 PM
McGrath of Harlow 25 Sep 04 - 05:43 PM
s6k 25 Sep 04 - 07:07 PM
Chris Green 25 Sep 04 - 07:24 PM
GUEST,The Beast of Farlington 26 Sep 04 - 01:13 PM
s6k 26 Sep 04 - 02:14 PM
Dave the Gnome 27 Sep 04 - 10:36 AM
GUEST,Hugh Jampton 27 Sep 04 - 11:54 AM
GUEST,Hugh Jampton 27 Sep 04 - 11:57 AM
GUEST,Hugh Jampton 27 Sep 04 - 11:59 AM
GUEST,Hugh Jampton 27 Sep 04 - 12:06 PM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:




Subject: BS: BRITISH LAW IS SHITE, AND SAVE CAT STEVENS!
From: s6k
Date: 23 Sep 04 - 01:17 PM

Yes, we are yet again been proved that the british law is shite, if any more proof were needed.

following the case a month ago of a man who stole ONE BANANA, and then cost taxpayers £20,000 to keep him in a cell for the night, we have more lunacy.

A man stole £6 worth of carpet fittings, and was kept overnight for £15,000

a man admitted damaging a box of eggs in an egg fight, and was charged £1000 fine.

A man stole five sandwiches and the court case cost £20,000

and so, british law is utterly stupid, and i hope people who agree to pay £20,000 of YOUR money have a slow and painful death.

Also, whats this about conkers? the government have cut down a load of conker trees, in case kids climbing up them injure themselves.... WHAT THE FUCK! i bet there was a time that kids can enjoy climbing trees and collecting conkers, and if they got a few scratches and bruises, then never mind, but NOWADAYS... ohhhh no we cant have that cos were a bunch of retards so lets cut a load of conker trees down.

-----

now onto Cat Stevens, that legend of music. WHAT THE HELL DO AMERICA THINK THEY ARE DOING?

they refused to let him into the country as a matter of "national security"

in other words, youre a muslim, youre not getting in.

this is fucking stupid, cat stevens is more famous nowadays for being an ambassador of peace than of a musician, and for SEPTEMBER 11 ATTACKS, he released a box set, and donated the money to the families of the victims, and also re recorded Peace Train.

and america think he is a threat..... well you can piss off too america.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Sep 04 - 01:28 PM

Study hard. Go to law school and help shape it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: Nerd
Date: 23 Sep 04 - 02:36 PM

The real question is "what about locking up a guy in jail for one night costs 20 grand?" That sounds like a fishy statistic to me.

If you divide how much it costs to have a prison by the number of inmate-nights served in it, you MAY get a figure like 20,000 quid per inmate-night (but I doubt it).

Even if it DOES come to this figure, though, it's not true that locking up the banana guy cost that much. His absence would not have allowed them to close the prison, so the taxpayers would have paid just as much; it would have been divided among fewer prisoners that night, is all.

AND a dangerous banana-wielding scofflaw would have been on the streets. Just think, he could have killed several silent-movie actors with the peel alone!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 23 Sep 04 - 09:44 PM

Part of the problem is that some of the charities are alleged to be funnelling money to non-charitable causes, also called 'Terrorists'. The same thing was happening with the IRA getting money from the USA many years ago, probably before some people here were even born. The USA was very reticent and allegedly unable to stop that then.

"What goes around, comes around"

Robin


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 23 Sep 04 - 10:25 PM

hello,
terrorisum is bad, dont be a terrorist.john


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 24 Sep 04 - 03:45 PM

As a matter of interest, what are "conker trees"??

Dave Oesterreich


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Sep 04 - 03:55 PM

Horse chesnuts to you!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Sep 04 - 03:56 PM

or even horse chesTnuts..sorry dropped my t.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: s6k
Date: 24 Sep 04 - 04:33 PM

TODAY A LORRY DRIVER TRAVELLING AT HIGH SPEEDS KILLED 3 PEOPLE

HIS PUNISHMENT:

6 MONTH DRIVING BAN


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Sep 04 - 05:30 PM

capital letters don't make the point any more true...or not true, but they ARE hard on the eyes.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 24 Sep 04 - 06:00 PM

OT but

Dave, did you never play conkers as a kid? Perhaps there is an American word for the game. The game is to tie conkers (as indicated above, the nuts from the horse chestnut tree) on pieces of string and take it in turns bashing one on the other until one broke. One thing that saddened me was maybe a couple of years back... I passed a wonderful "conker tree" just by the village primary school and "conkers" were laying on the ground and no evidence any kid had picked any up. At the risk of being a 44 year old, old git, in my day, I'd have been seeking out the best looking ones...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: GUEST,Peter from Essex
Date: 24 Sep 04 - 06:03 PM

Also, whats this about conkers? the government have cut down a load of conker trees, in case kids climbing up them injure themselves.... WHAT THE FUCK! i bet there was a time that kids can enjoy climbing trees and collecting conkers, and if they got a few scratches and bruises, then never mind, but NOWADAYS... ohhhh no we cant have that cos were a bunch of retards so lets cut a load of conker trees down.


Not because of the risk to the kids but because of the danger of death to motorists when kids start chucking bricks into trees on busy roads.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: s6k
Date: 24 Sep 04 - 06:45 PM

load of bollocks, no need to cut a load of trees down.

also, why do people come onto threads and complain about capital letters? why dont people come to threads and actually talk about the topic in hand instead of whinging at every little thing, like that Amos


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: Chris Green
Date: 25 Sep 04 - 06:56 AM

Is s6k the chemical formula for vitriol by any chance?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: s6k
Date: 25 Sep 04 - 08:43 AM

dunno ask steven hawking :p


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Sep 04 - 01:13 PM

Trees are not to blame for kids choosing to climb them and throw bricks at motorists.
To use this as a reason to chop them down is stupidity, unfortunately, local councils around the globe seem very proficient at this kind of reasoning.
Some kids here were also throwing bricks at cars, from a bridge.....now I think it would be a bit silly to remove the bridge, it performs a functio... a tree does also, shade and oxygen...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Sep 04 - 03:10 PM

Local councils plant and maintain roadside trees. The reason I suspect that this action is taken - is advice about the council's liability.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: Edain
Date: 25 Sep 04 - 03:32 PM

Just to make you feel a little better Jon, I'm 20 and conkers was still going strong while I was at school with several large conker trees growing in the wood just across the road :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Sep 04 - 05:43 PM

More than enough conkers round our way.

I remember as a kid getting angry at other kids throwing things at the trees to bring the conkers down before they were ripe and ready to fall. Always seemed such a waste.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: s6k
Date: 25 Sep 04 - 07:07 PM

GUEST is truly enlightened, i couldnt have said it any better


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: Chris Green
Date: 25 Sep 04 - 07:24 PM

May I suggest this link here It'll save you posting!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: GUEST,The Beast of Farlington
Date: 26 Sep 04 - 01:13 PM

"and so, british law is utterly stupid, and i hope people who agree to pay £20,000 of YOUR money have a slow and painful death"

Apart from this being a disproportionate punishment for the crime (which is partly what your post is about), the cost of the slow and painful death to the National Health Service is likely to be a lot more than £20k.

Hung by your own petard, S6K.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: s6k
Date: 26 Sep 04 - 02:14 PM

well, send them to me then, and i will cause a slow and painful death to them, free of charge!!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Sep 04 - 10:36 AM

I don't doubt that you read the statistics correctly S6K but I do have very serious doubts on the validity of the quoted stats. I strongly suspect that they came from a newspaper, Am I right? If so remember that the byline '£20k to keep a man inside for a night' sells copy. Never mind that it is complete nonsense. I would like to see of what that £20 comprises!

Now then, onto Conkers. Did you see that Trevor McDonald program a week or two back about the compensation society? If you did you would not be surprised at all that they are considering this move. Claims for compensation are costing local authorities billions every year and we are the ones who foot the bill in the end. The only thing that authorities seem to have open to them is to try and eliminate the cause of these claims. I would not be at all surprised to see moves making people sign a waiver before walking down the pavement!

Don't get me wrong - I agree with the principle and we should not have to be subjected to these ridiculaous nanny laws. remember though that it is the people who make the claims that should shoulder a huge portion of the blame though. And the lawyers that make the most money out of them.

One article I saw in a local paper made me shake my head the other day. A mother complaining her child had broken his leg while playing on a construction site. She was taking everyone possible to court for negligence as it could not possibly the fault of her little darling for breaking into the site and trespassing on private property could it?

Remember the days when if you broke into a building site you got a thick ear from the nightwatchman? Looks like you get your parents a luxury holiday instead now...

Bring back child labour, ricketts and hanging, that's what I say;-)

Cheers

DtG


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: GUEST,Hugh Jampton
Date: 27 Sep 04 - 11:54 AM

There is nothing wrong with our laws that are derived from statute and precedent, it is just astounding the way that some members of the judiciary and magistrature interpret and implement them. If you wish to see "shite" laws and regulations then look to Brussels ( a load of self seeking scoundrels). Which reminds me, have you seen the package Neil KiNNOCKo


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: GUEST,Hugh Jampton
Date: 27 Sep 04 - 11:57 AM

Incidentally, I too have a family of weasals nesting in my beard.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: GUEST,Hugh Jampton
Date: 27 Sep 04 - 11:59 AM

(continued)Neil Kinnock has been rewarded with for life for his contribution to cleaning up the EEC pig-pen? Was not he the one who would do nothing or perhaps even ratted on a creditable "whistle blower"?.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: YET AGAIN THE BRITISH LAW IS SHITE
From: GUEST,Hugh Jampton
Date: 27 Sep 04 - 12:06 PM

Impersonation Alert???
Only a guest posting under my name would spell weasles as "weasals"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 15 April 9:13 AM EDT

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.