As a profound atheist , I thought Vlad hit the nail on the head , when he said , "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone"
I think i have also said that several times on here , but ,,,alas ,to continue the biblical references , it really is like casting pearls before swine ,
Chevalier I think you are a lovely human being ,bereft of course of intellect and writing ability but I love you none the less !
The theme that has driven all of you Syvretshites mad , is a wild , ludicrous attachment to a persona out of kilter with reality.
I know it would be fabulous if anything he said was true or even remotely exciting , but it remains the same tittle tattle , gossip, "I will prove to you all" conjecture and nonsense, whilst sitting in a London Hotel and applying for political asylum in New Zealand ....for gods sake !
Vlad , who appears to be an entirely sane person, although , having read his letter in last nights evening post , may himself , be slightly economical with the truth , having converted his support for paedophiles (Sorry not support, a questioning of judicial reference) to support for lesser crimes such as drug dealing, and I can see his point ! Abolish all crime , all laws and before you know it we will be crime free!! I look forward to Vlad (Not the Impaler , but perhaps of the russian author status ) If he he has the time and can get over his "I am so fantastic that if I was chocolate I would lick myself to death" to pass on his wisdom
Some people might be upset with Spartacus for revealing the true identity of a forum member but I suspect that I wouldn't get away with writing to the JEP without somebody picking up on the coincidence.
As for the quality of my "wisdom", although I am touched, I am merely passing on the findings of the Crime Prosecution Service, Death Penalty Information Centre, and the UK Sentencing Advisory Panel amongst others. You may find it convenient that the data I present is in line with the suggestions I make. This is a risk you will take if you lend yourself to subjective opinions as opposed to educating yourself through assimilation of data.
I feel I owe you an apology as I have engaged in a rather blatant skulduggery. First by researching a particular topic, then through presenting my findings based upon data gathered by official government sources. No doubt I caught you unprepared for such a furious assault on your cherished notions that all of society's problems can be resolved at the end of a noose.
It was also particularly cruel to ask you about aspects of your posts which you had previously ignored such as "How can we catch them in the first place?"
As such I believe it is I, not Spartacus who should be censured for the following heinous infractions:
a) differing from the norm through being a secular, rationalist, liberal.
b) allowing data to inform my opinions rather than jump to conclusions.
c) researching and referencing my posts.
d) presenting those findings without accusing anyone of being a "ballsack".
The above acts have undoubtedly been to the detriment of years of entrenched bigotry and has cast a sickly pall over the festering spirit of Thatcherism in the island. I may go so far as to say that some of what I have written may have caused fascists across all twelve parishes to have trouble digesting their Champagne brunches in abject horror of the idea of liberal reform. Some may even have skipped brunch altogether and gone straight to Elevenses.
Having upset the social order to this degree, I am only surprised that other posters have not done as Spartacus has and suggested that I mount the very gallows I so oppose. I humbly throw myself on the mercy of the moderators here and sincerely apologise for using this forum for its intended purpose.
V.
p.s From re-reading Spartacus' post it would seem I am obliged to make another heartfelt apology for not specifying in my letter to the JEP that the original debate started on PJ was regarding how to deal with child abusers, not drug dealers. Despite the fact that the principles of prevention of crime through better policing and presumably better deterrence through execution would still seem to apply, the error is regretted.
It does speak volumes however that he does not feel that such barbaric punishments are warranted for other types of crime. If I were at all suspicious I might feel this proved my fears that people were letting their anger about child abuse blind them to the matter at hand. It's very interesting how when the element of paedophilia is replaced by a more common crime that we all seem to regain some perspective...
