Filed under Crime & Punishment

I sort of disapprove of this

…and sort of am impressed by it:

A court in Iran has ruled that a man who blinded a woman with acid after she spurned his marriage proposals will also be blinded with acid.

I endorse the arrest of Damian Green

Absolute hilarity; the more MPs arrested the better, especially if they’re Tories. I mean, if every Tory cunt were cheese-grated to death, that’d be better; but arrest is a good starting point.

Blah blah blah whistleblowing blah blah blah. Like I give a shit; he’s a fucking Tory MP. I’m willing to stand up for BNPists, terrorists and paedophiles, but I draw the line at Tory MPs. Mr Neimoller, this is where your poem ends.

On ‘being a bad person’

I found myself sober at a houseshare where a friend was supposed to be cooking me dinner, but where two drunken gentlemen who’d failed to leave from the night before were still in attendance having consumed a bottle of vodka for brunch and another for tea.

Naturally, I hit the wine hard; after a rapid couple of glasses, the conversation steered onto the horrible but unavoidable topic of Baby P. Luckily, before political prejudices could be aired, one of the drunken non-current-affairs following gentlemen said “who the fuck is Baby P?”.

Not entirely to my credit, the answer I gave was “a very small rapper, who was beaten to death by some white people”. Not entirely to their credit, the people about acquiesced in this answer. The n-c-a-f chap asked some more questions, which we answered honestly but not, perhaps, giving the full flavour of the case.

If Mr N-C-A-F gets lynched, then I’ll feel quite bad about the whole situation…

Casual racism confession hour

OK. was anyone else surprised to see the face-blurred photo of Baby P and discover that he was white and blond?

Of course, there’s no reason why white, blond parents can’t be just as vicious and evil as any others; although given that there can’t be more than about four white parents in Harringey it goes slightly against the grain…

(I heard someone comment as an aside that the mother had been to public school. Not sure if this has been confirmed in any non-censored sources; if it’s true, then it’ll have been another factor making life difficult for the social workers involved. If you spend your days dealing with lackwit charvers who’re incapable of, know wha’ I mean, like, stringing, a fucking sentence fucking, like, together, then I suspect a bit of expensively-purchased articulacy and charm is likely to switch off some of your alarm bells…)

Chav stab chav. Yay.

Katie Perry, #1 pop star, isn’t especially gay. She claims to have kissed a girl, which may or may not be true, but is primarily into gentlemen. Her song suggesting otherwise was written by British songstress Cathy Dennis, as a generic piece of Tin Pan Alley For Sale-ness.

However, this picture of her is hot:
I held a knife, and I liked it

As one might expect, the moronic press are grumpy. They say ‘oooh, but what of the knife crimeing? Oooh, the terrible toll. Ooooh, the end of the fucking world’. Etc.

This is bollocks.

#1: it’s a fucking picture, get over it. If not…

#2: knife crime is done by boys. If girls carried knives, the main impact would be to slightly diminish levels of date rape and domestic violence. Given that all other violent crime, in terms of incidence, pales into utter insignificance compared to domestic violence, err, bothered.

#3: otherwise, knife crime is irrelevant. Except mugging, which involves innocents and is bad and should be treated seriously. Nearly all actual stabbing involves despicable bastards who deserves to die stabbing other despicable bastards who deserve to die – exactly like gun crime. We should support this as a positive development in society, rather than worrying about it. If some intimidatory thick gangland cunt (and no, this isn’t a colour thing – I accept that in Peckham most of said cunts are black, whereas in Manchester they’re mostly white) stabs another one dead, that’s a tick in the ‘they’re not fucking shit up for the rest of us, plus if they kill each other enough then chav girls might breed with people who’re less awful thereby improving thing for the next generation’ box.

This leads into a more generic crime point: if you don’t thoroughly deserve crime, it won’t happen to you. If you’re not a pikey thug, then even mugging is extremely unlikely to happen if you don’t get blind drunk or chat on the phone while you’re walking down the street. You might get your wallet nicked whilst in deceptively safe surroundings (me, leaving East London and going to a bar in Notting Hill the other week), but serious crime happens to serious scum – and again, the only exception is rape, which is done by men of all classes in all places on all occasions.

If you’re a guy who isn’t a scumbag and is afraid of crime, you’re an idiot. And if you’re a woman who thinks that black chavs are more likely to crime you up than rugby-playing Old Etonians, then you’re an idiot too…

(via)

Possessing or possessed?

A thought’s just struck me about the proposed (technically, passed but not implemented) legislation on possession of extreme/violent pornography.

At the moment, people are often convicted of possession of child pornography [*] after the police and their experts find deleted images on their hard disks (because pressing ‘delete’ and ‘empty recycle bin’ leaves the file on your hard disk until it gets overwritten by new stuff).

Legally speaking, is that possession in itself, or is it near-irrefutable evidence of prior possession? It doesn’t make any real difference to child pornography, because it’s been illegal for longer than computers capable of showing it have existed, so I’m not sure that the point has ever been debated in court (it could have theoretical relevance for pseudophotographs and images of 16- and 17-year-olds, both of which were criminalised only in 2004ish, but as far as I can tell only one person‘s been convicted of possession solely of pseudophotographs, and he didn’t use this as his defence [**]).

But for extreme/violent pornography, it’s pretty vital: if you have a currently-legal library of horrible porn, and the government decides to bring the laws into effect, then in the latter case you can delete it and be safe. In the former case, you pretty much have to burn your computer to be sure of not falling foul of the legislation (overwriting the disk with zeros still isn’t necessarily enough, as it might be possible to read information that’s been overwritten on a hard disk by taking it apart and doing clever things with magnets). Which seems pretty fucking unreasonable…

Coincidentally, today’s ‘crazy censoring bastards who should be crucified news’ also includes this and this.

[*] indecent images of children if you’re the law; child abuse images if you’re dementedly PC.

[**] as outlined in this comment here, his defence was more along the lines of ‘what the fuck are you talking about, you mentalists, it’s a fucking cartoon! What, you’re going to convict me, risk banging me up and put me on the sex offenders’ register over a fucking cartoon? What the *fuck*?’. Whilst entirely reasonable in logic (and whilst anyone who thinks that owning pervy cartoons, even 3D ones, should be a criminal offence is a despicable bastard who deserves flaying alive), that doesn’t go down so well with courts of law…

The British Union of Slack-Jawed, Violent Trolls

I’m disappointed my sole BNPite reader left, after I offended him by suggesting that some idiot fuckwits were idiot fuckwits.

Nonetheless, encountering these dim bigoted sods on t’Internet has done a great deal to diffuse my personal version of the horrible, vaguely Current Labour-y stereotype that the Decent Working Classes have all kinds of Serious Reasonable Grievances exacerbated by Illegal Immigrants working to Destroy Our Culture for Unfair Wages, rather than being (e.g.) useless thick cunts, compared to whom even Alf Garnet would sooner employ a Paki or a nigger.

Weirdly, successful, clever, well-adjusted people having a good time with nice lives very seldom fill that bill. Doubtless that’s a Bilderberg conspiracy…

Anyway, the Flying Rodent has a good response to this kind of criticism:

What if support for the far right by ordinary people all over Europe owes less to tyrannical multiculturalism than it does to their cretinous desire to blame all of their personal problems on blacks, PC do-gooders, gays, Poles, criminal-loving lawyers, gypsies and Muslims, to name but a few?

I mean, let’s be honest – when we’re talking about far right politicians, we’re talking about people too stupid to drive cars without smashing them into walls and pulverising themselves into mean-spirited goo.

Quite. Rest in pieces, Mr Haider.

Ignorant victims miss point

Amanda and Philip Peak, of Partington, near Manchester, are despicable stupid cunts and I’m glad their children are dead.

Harsh? Well, yes. Fair? Well, yes. Why?

1) they exemplify the modern ‘person to whom a bad but unusual thing has happened’ tendency to assume that Terrible Terrible Badness, and not Miserable Luck is at fault – despite the fact that if anything bad happens to you, up to and including murder, bad luck will almost inevitably have far more impact than anyone’s malicious intentions (with ‘your own stupidity’ and ‘other people’s stupidity’ also counting way above ‘badness, malice etc’ in the list).

2) they also exemplify the current government’s utterly insane tendency to deal with harmful things that are already illegal by proposing to make things that aren’t harmful illegal. In this case, because someone who was at more than twice the drink-drive limit crashed into their car, they want to cut the drink-drive limit to zero.

Now, on 1 I’m absolutely fucking right: it’s very easy to do stupid things that could kill someone; we all do stupid things that could kill someone on a regular basis; anyone who says they don’t is a liar and a hypocrite; and therefore when someone kills someone by doing a stupid thing, we should view it primarily as a terrible shame rather than an opportunity to satisfy Um Primitive Tribal Rage God by sacrificing the other person on an altar of pointless cruelty.

However, I accept that most people in society are barbaric fuckwits who barely deserve the title ‘human’, and therefore will concede this point to the primitive ‘oooh, punish, punish, punish’ morons until I’m dictator, at which point I’ll contrive bizarre and elaborate schemes to ensure that every single potentially dangerous action one of these people takes brings horrible pain and suffering to a loved one, then ask them how they feel about punishing people for bad luck a year later.

(yes, drinking and driving bad mkay; no, I’ve never drink-driven. If I was in a hotel at 6AM drunk-but-feeling-sober after two hours sleep and I got a text that my relationship with the person I loved was fucked up, would I definitely be able to stop myself from going and sort things out? Anyone who says they definitely wouldn’t is a liar, and I despise them for their utter cant and wish nothing but suffering on them. Because they’re malicious, whereas Luke McCormick wasn’t. That makes them worse than if he’d killed a fucking *million* children).

(also, on what planet is a minimum 3.5 years in jail, plus entirely losing your only shot at a decent career, not an incredibly severe punishment? Again, I’d love to see how the Peaks and their defenders would cope with the same – *extremely fucking harsh* situation).

Anyway. Enough; I’ll concede that point to you barbarians and morons.

Point two alone is enough to want the Peaks strung up. In exchange for *absolutely fucking nothing*, for a measure that would have done *literally fuck all* to save their kids’ lives, they want to make it effectively impossible to enjoy the excellent pleasure of going to a country pub and having a couple of beers with lunch. That isn’t worth it. It fucking isn’t. Even if there were evidence that a lower limit would save lives, which there isn’t, it still wouldn’t be enough: given that the value of a life is set at approximately £1m in benefit-cost analysis, if countryside drinking killed 10 people a year but provided £11m worth of amusement, then banning it would be moronic. But there isn’t, so the point is even stupider.

In short, fuck them; if there’s any inheritability at all to intelligence, I’m glad their kids won’t grow up to vote.

What about poisoning?

If you think that sending someone to jail for killing a fucking seagull is a proportionate and sensible decision, then you’re a stupid cunt.

This blog salutes seagull kickers Paul Cheetham and Jamie Griffiths; should either of you happen to find this post, I’ll happily buy you a pint when you get out – just leave a comment. Hell, I’ll even make it two pints, as long as your first act is to replicate the kicking-to-death action on chairman of the bench and despicable bastard Ken Allitt.

(for the avoidance of doubt, this blog’s position on animal cruelty is roughly the same as its position on table cruelty: i.e. only somebody certifiably insane could believe that such a thing existed. Actually, that’s not quite fair – the reason gullible idiots think animal cruelty is a real thing is because animals look a bit like people, so out of fairness I’ll compare it to mannequin cruelty…)

Sometimes bad shit happens

If you think the admittedly unusual event of five people being stabbed to death in a particular 24-hour period means anything at all in terms of Society, Oh My God, Society, We’re All Going To Die, It’s So Broken, Yoof Of Today bullshit, then you’re a fucking idiot who doesn’t understand statistics.

Five stabbings doesn’t matter *in the slightest* in a country of sixty million people – it’s roughly equivalent to a third of the number of people who died of alcoholic liver disease on Friday. Even in terms of rate-of-change, the fact that it happened in one day is a statistical anomaly, combined with the general propensity of murders to take place at the end of the week and during the summer; the rate over the year is the important figure, and there’s little evidence that it’s rising significantly.

If you knew any of the men who died, that’s sad and you have the right to be upset. If you didn’t, you don’t have the right to give a shit, and you certainly don’t have the right to use the random happenings of their death to go off on some ridiculous rant about bringing back hanging / reducing social inequality / whatever the fuck half-arsed measure you think will stop a few young men from (as they always have everywhere) killing each other in stupid fights.

The fact is, shit happens; people die; if you’re not an idiot who starts knife fights then your chances of being injured or killed in one are near-zero; and if you are then why the hell should anyone care whethey you life or die…?