"SB" wrote in message
...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/search/news/?q=metal%20thefts

====

Scrap metal raids: Police seize tonnes of rail cable

*************

About time too!

Kev

On Dec 28, 10:30*am, "Kev Lawrence"
wrote:

About time too!

Kev

Indeed! Now all we need is government prepared to bring the law on
scrap metal out of the days of Dickens and into the 21st century and
courts prepared to believe the offence is worth more than the
miniscule scrap value the thief gets........but don't hold your
breath.

George

On Wed, 28 Dec 2011 03:11:34 -0800 (PST)
furnessvale wrote:
Indeed! Now all we need is government prepared to bring the law on
scrap metal out of the days of Dickens and into the 21st century and
courts prepared to believe the offence is worth more than the
miniscule scrap value the thief gets........but don't hold your
breath.

Expecting any sensible decision from the deluded liberal buffoons in the
legal system is a hide to nothing these days. Justice long ago went out
the window, its now just a trough the lawyers stick their snouts in and the
judges use to play one-upmanship against the democratically elected commons.
Home secretary wants to boot out some asylum seeker who's commited murder? No
chance , because Sir Justice I'm-all-right-jack-in-my-country-retreat
****wit-Smyth will be along any minute to overturn it on appeal and pat
himself on the back at what a good little liberal he's been.

B2003

On Dec 28, 11:45*am, wrote:
On Wed, 28 Dec 2011 03:11:34 -0800 (PST)

furnessvale wrote:
Indeed! *Now all we need is government prepared to bring the law on
scrap metal out of the days of Dickens and into the 21st century and
courts prepared to believe the offence is worth more than the
miniscule scrap value the thief gets........but don't hold your
breath.

Expecting any sensible decision from the deluded liberal buffoons in the
legal system is a hide to nothing these days. Justice long ago went out
the window, its now just a trough the lawyers stick their snouts in and the
judges use to play one-upmanship against the democratically elected commons.
Home secretary wants to boot out some asylum seeker who's commited murder? No
chance , because Sir Justice I'm-all-right-jack-in-my-country-retreat
****wit-Smyth will be along any minute to overturn it on appeal and pat
himself on the back at what a good little liberal he's been.

B2003

Remembering of course that the judiciary follow sentancing guidelines,
their deliberations on which are published and are subject to appeal
(inckuding in cases of leniency)

I suspect your beef is with the guidelines

Patrick

On Wed, 28 Dec 2011 06:30:47 -0800 (PST)
D1039 wrote:
Home secretary wants to boot out some asylum seeker who's commited murder=
? No
chance , because Sir Justice I'm-all-right-jack-in-my-country-retreat
****wit-Smyth will be along any minute to overturn it on appeal and pat
himself on the back at what a good little liberal he's been.

B2003

Remembering of course that the judiciary follow sentancing guidelines,
their deliberations on which are published and are subject to appeal
(inckuding in cases of leniency)

I suspect your beef is with the guidelines

There are no guidelines for that sort of thing and besides which there's a
world of difference between guidelines and rules. The judges just love to
take the human rights act to the extreme just to stick it to the politicians.
If these worthy fossils want the power of elected office they should stand
for it though I suspect they realise that no one would vote for them in a
million years so they try and aquire power through the back door.

B2003

There are no guidelines for that sort of thing and besides which there's a
world of difference between guidelines and rules. The judges just love to
take the human rights act to the extreme just to stick it to the politicians.
If these worthy fossils want the power of elected office they should stand
for it though I suspect they realise that no one would vote for them in a
million years so they try and aquire power through the back door.

B2003

You write complete rubbish but if you think your views are
representative I think you should find a bigger audience and try
getting into elective politics.
But please do not pollute the atmosphere around here with your inane
opinions.

On 29/12/2011 11:08, JJ wrote:


There are no guidelines for that sort of thing and besides which there's a
world of difference between guidelines and rules. The judges just love to
take the human rights act to the extreme just to stick it to the politicians.
If these worthy fossils want the power of elected office they should stand
for it though I suspect they realise that no one would vote for them in a
million years so they try and aquire power through the back door.

B2003

You write complete rubbish but if you think your views are
representative I think you should find a bigger audience and try
getting into elective politics.
But please do not pollute the atmosphere around here with your inane
opinions.

Said the judge...

--
Moving things in still pictures

On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 03:08:18 -0800 (PST)
JJ wrote:
You write complete rubbish but if you think your views are
representative I think you should find a bigger audience and try
getting into elective politics.
But please do not pollute the atmosphere around here with your inane
opinions.

Oh dear, are only opinions you agree with tolerated here? What a good little
"liberal" you are. Award yourself a cub scouts right-on badge.

Don't like mine? Don't read them. Or better yet, shove your objections
up your arse and go **** yourself with them.

B2003

On Dec 28, 2:30*pm, D1039 wrote:

Remembering of course that the judiciary follow sentancing guidelines,
their deliberations on which are published and are subject to appeal
(inckuding in cases of leniency)

Indeed, every time a survey is done in which people are asked what
they think is a suitable sentence for a particular crime and what they
think is the typical sentence for a particular crime, _both_ estimates
turn out to be less than the average sentence. People massively
underestimate both the rate of imprisonment and the length of prison
sentences. See for example http://goo.gl/VU7I2

ian

On Wed, 28 Dec 2011 03:11:34 -0800, furnessvale wrote:

Indeed! Now all we need is government prepared to bring the law on
scrap metal out of the days of Dickens and into the 21st century and
courts prepared to believe the offence is worth more than the miniscule
scrap value the thief gets........but don't hold your breath.

Maybe it's about time BT and Network Rail started taking civil actions
against the thieves and the scrapyards for the consequential costs caused
by their actions.

A civil judgement for the compensation costs incurred by NR for a 6 hour
shutdown on the ECML would probably be enough to close the scrapyard that
paid for the signalling cable involved.

Rgds

Denis McMahon