TRC is primarily funded by ad revenue. If you like the content you find here, don't block the ads check them out instead. Thank you.
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 47

Thread: Interesting law...?

  1. #31
    Should Get Out More slowsider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    RoI
    Posts
    9,600
    Like
    368
    Liked 2,489 in 1,622 posts

    Default Re: Interesting law...?


    TRC is primarily funded by ad revenue. If you like
    the content you find here, don't block the ads check
    them out instead. Thank you.
    Quote Originally Posted by Yambo View Post
    No it's not.
    Terrorism is using violence for political ends. The other one is threatening violence for financial gain. The difference is clear.
    If you are implying that terrorists fund-raise with armed robbery the distinction is still there; they may be both, but armed robbery is not some kind of gateway drug.

  2. #32
    Should Get Out More Gedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Southern Hampshire
    Posts
    18,505
    Like
    830
    Liked 1,383 in 673 posts

    Default Re: Interesting law...?

    For many, terrorism is just a feeble justification for them to commit robbery, extortion, assault , drug trafficking etc etc ..

  3. #33
    Expecting rain saga_lout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Essex, innit
    Posts
    28,025
    Like
    4,233
    Liked 5,033 in 3,364 posts

    Default Re: Interesting law...?

    Quote Originally Posted by slowsider View Post
    Terrorism is using violence for political ends. The other one is threatening violence for financial gain. The difference is clear.
    If you are implying that terrorists fund-raise with armed robbery the distinction is still there; they may be both, but armed robbery is not some kind of gateway drug.
    Terrorism is using violence for political ends. Armed robbery is using violence for personal ends. The difference is not so clear when put like that.

  4. #34
    Should Get Out More wheelnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hanging by a thread
    Posts
    5,345
    Like
    933
    Liked 890 in 512 posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Interesting law...?

    Quote Originally Posted by slowsider View Post
    Terrorism is using violence for political ends. The other one is threatening violence for financial gain. The difference is clear.
    If you are implying that terrorists fund-raise with armed robbery the distinction is still there; they may be both, but armed robbery is not some kind of gateway drug.
    The person on the wrong end of the violence probably struggles to appreciate the distinction.

  5. #35
    Should Get Out More slowsider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    RoI
    Posts
    9,600
    Like
    368
    Liked 2,489 in 1,622 posts

    Default Re: Interesting law...?

    Quote Originally Posted by saga_lout View Post
    Terrorism is using violence for political ends. Armed robbery is using violence for personal ends. The difference is not so clear when put like that.
    I'd be terrified if I was held-up at gunpoint, but I wouldn't describe the perp as a terrorist.

  6. #36
    Expecting rain saga_lout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Essex, innit
    Posts
    28,025
    Like
    4,233
    Liked 5,033 in 3,364 posts

    Default Re: Interesting law...?

    Quote Originally Posted by slowsider View Post
    I'd be terrified if I was held-up at gunpoint, but I wouldn't describe the perp as a terrorist.
    I keep forgetting you're an IRA apologist. There is not much difference between using violence to get your own way* and using violence to get your own way**.

    * Politically
    ** Financially

  7. #37
    Should Get Out More slowsider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    RoI
    Posts
    9,600
    Like
    368
    Liked 2,489 in 1,622 posts

    Default Re: Interesting law...?

    Quote Originally Posted by saga_lout View Post
    I keep forgetting you're an IRA apologist. There is not much difference between using violence to get your own way* and using violence to get your own way**.

    * Politically
    ** Financially
    Wow. Looking forward to your evidence for the former.

    As for the latter, why not apply the PTA to knife crime?

  8. #38
    Expecting rain saga_lout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Essex, innit
    Posts
    28,025
    Like
    4,233
    Liked 5,033 in 3,364 posts

    Default Re: Interesting law...?

    Quote Originally Posted by slowsider View Post
    Wow. Looking forward to your evidence for the former.
    Do you think I kept a record or do you think I'll go trawling through 11 years of Revcounter threads?

    Quote Originally Posted by slowsider View Post
    As for the latter, why not apply the PTA to knife crime?
    Because there is a difference, just not as big a difference as you seem to think.

  9. #39
    Should Get Out More slowsider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    RoI
    Posts
    9,600
    Like
    368
    Liked 2,489 in 1,622 posts

    Default Re: Interesting law...?

    Quote Originally Posted by saga_lout View Post
    Do you think I kept a record or do you think I'll go trawling through 11 years of Revcounter threads?
    .
    Put up, or shut up.

  10. #40
    Should Get Out More Yambo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Looking at the Med . . .
    Posts
    16,845
    Like
    1,227
    Liked 4,053 in 1,998 posts
    Blog Entries
    23

    Default Re: Interesting law...?

    Quote Originally Posted by slowsider View Post
    Terrorism is using violence for political ends.

    Terrorism is possible using just the threat of violence. It does not need to be political.

    As I said before, you don't need guns and bombs to be a terrorist, you just need a telephone and for people to think you have guns and bombs and will maybe use them.

  11. #41
    Should Get Out More
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    7,013
    Like
    35
    Liked 1,465 in 928 posts

    Default Re: Interesting law...?

    Quote Originally Posted by nidge View Post
    Isn’t his the same as transferred malice, which is recognised in English law
    No, in simple terms, transferred malice is when A intends to harm B but misses and harms C. There must be evidence that A was aware of the potential danger to C. The transfer is from victim A to victim C, not between A and an accomplice.

  12. #42
    Should Get Out More
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    7,013
    Like
    35
    Liked 1,465 in 928 posts

    Default Re: Interesting law...?

    Quote Originally Posted by wheelnut View Post
    There was a case a few years back, west Yorks I think, where a bunch group of riders were RLC, one of them was killed in a fault collision and the police/CPS made a case for them all to be charged with death by dangerous under joint enterprise. I think it went to court but they were found not guilty.
    That would be the one near Tadcaster, North Yorkshire. The judge decided that the rider who crashed was held to be solely at fault because he was in charge of his own actions. There was a thread about it on TRC at the time.

  13. #43
    Should Get Out More Bobzilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wigan :(
    Posts
    11,626
    Like
    2,476
    Liked 1,229 in 822 posts
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default Re: Interesting law...?

    Constructive manslaughter over here. I'm disappointed that it's not charged more frequently, especially in road traffic cases.

    Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

  14. #44
    Should Get Out More NyseriA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    11,496
    Like
    5,991
    Liked 2,431 in 1,340 posts

    Default Re: Interesting law...?

    Quote Originally Posted by saga_lout View Post
    I keep forgetting you're an IRA apologist. There is not much difference between using violence to get your own way* and using violence to get your own way**.

    * Politically
    ** Financially
    There is though; holding up a bank or an individual or a shop puts the people in those premises in fear of violence. Terrorism is designed to put EVERYONE in fear of violence and the intent is to coerce a government, not a shop owner etc.

  15. #45
    Expecting rain saga_lout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Essex, innit
    Posts
    28,025
    Like
    4,233
    Liked 5,033 in 3,364 posts

    Default Re: Interesting law...?

    Quote Originally Posted by NyseriA View Post
    There is though; holding up a bank or an individual or a shop puts the people in those premises in fear of violence. Terrorism is designed to put EVERYONE in fear of violence and the intent is to coerce a government, not a shop owner etc.
    There is a difference, but not a lot of difference.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Go Back to Forum My Forum

TRC Affiliates - Help TRC make a small amount of commission