The cycle of vindictive bastardry

Obsolete makes sense:

[This is] why Sophie Lancaster’s mother hasn’t received the overwhelming sympathy or coverage that Helen Newlove did; she happened to [be] a youth worker who believed in compassion, letting live and and forgiving, and despite initial and understandable soul-searching about whether she could continue in such a job, she’s decided she will. Contrast that to Newlove: the woman out not for justice, but for apparent vengeance, who gives the kind of quotes the tabloids adore, such as saying how she’d give her husband’s killers the lethal injection herself, while demanding that new, deeply authoritarian and illiberal laws be brought in to stop such youths killing in the future.

When met with individuals who don’t want to pursue a vendetta, or even, God forbid, forgive their tormentors, as Anthony Walker’s mother famously did, they don’t understand it or consider it worthy of further coverage, except to ask how they possibly could do such a thing. The embittered and angry always make for better copy than the reflective ones who want to move on.

I’d agree wholeheartedly, and add Liz Longhurst to the list of the vindictive, vendetta tabloid-tacular side. And of course, this fuels the cycle of hatred, has contributed to everyone being more afraid of crime than they should be, and generally makes the world a worse place for all concerned. While I’m not a Christian, getting rid of “eye-for-eye” and substituting “turn the other cheek” is quality inspirational genius, and is pretty much the foundation of everything that’s good, decent and worth keeping about western civilisation.

On a more personal basis, the people I love know my views about This Sort Of Thing, and are sane liberals rather than deranged medievalists; it’s disappointing to think that in the extremely unlikely event that I were to become the victim of a vile murder, they’d be more or less completely ignored in favour of people who wanted to eviscerate children [*] live on TV…

[*] it’s weird – if anyone other than Helen Newlove were to go public about their desire to kill children, they’d find themselves at best a social pariah and probably in a loony bin within a few days…

4 thoughts on “The cycle of vindictive bastardry

  1. septicisle says:

    In all the coverage given to her, I don’t think Longhurst has once been asked how criminalising individuals’ personal predilections which they can do nothing about will help stop a man killing another woman out of what she seemed sheer lust rather than anything to do with “violent pornography”. It’s how the cycle works: ask only the questions for which they have easily quotable answers for. Everything else is verboten.

  2. GhostCat says:

    Criminalising individual’s personal predilections? Like stalking? So, if I should ever catch up with the person who abused me when I was seven I shouldn’t seek legal redress? I eagerly anticipate your words of utterly profound wisdom.

  3. PDF says:

    Err, what?

    1) it’s awful that someone abused you when you were seven;

    2) they’re a despicable bastard who should go to jail for a long time;

    3) neither 1 nor 2 has no bearing on whether or not I should go to jail for looking at photographs of consenting adults having sex whilst pretending to be dead.

  4. Liam Virgil says:

    “if anyone other than Helen Newlove were to go public about their desire to kill children, they’d find themselves at best a social pariah and probably in a loony bin within a few days…” – exemption also applies to one of the Bulger uncles, who threatened, live on This Morning, to kill Venables and thingy, and got clean away with it. Like that cunt who punched that bloke for taking flowers from the Diana grief heaps.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>