"If you can't do the time..."
Wicked Uncle Nigel
Let him go, or keep him where he is?
FWIW, I think he's a nasty thug with a slight talent for self-publicity.
The big mistake was letting him come back to the UK for medical
treatment instead of leaving him to rot in the bed he'd made for
himself.
The BHaLC will be along directly to explain why I'm wrong.
--
Wicked Uncle Nigel - "He's hopeless, but he's honest"
I have already made the greatest contribution to the fight against climate
change that I can make: I have decided not to breed. Now quit bugging me and
go and talk to the Catholics.
Speedgazebo MOTP #1
wrote:
> So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>
> Let him go, or keep him where he is?
>
> FWIW, I think he's a nasty thug with a slight talent for self-publicity.
> The big mistake was letting him come back to the UK for medical
> treatment instead of leaving him to rot in the bed he'd made for
> himself.
>
> The BHaLC will be along directly to explain why I'm wrong.
>
When they do, perhaps they will identify themselves, 'cos I for one
can't work out who they are.
--
Speedgazebo
zymurgy
I believe it's in their .sig's, you muppet.
Hint: One is a COFF, the other is a silver haired lothario, with more
than a liking for a small island in the Irish sea.
HTH.
Paul.
Hankjam
<w...@wicked-uncle-nigel.me.uk> wrote:
>So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>
>Let him go, or keep him where he is?
>
>FWIW, I think he's a nasty thug with a slight talent for self-publicity.
>The big mistake was letting him come back to the UK for medical
>treatment instead of leaving him to rot in the bed he'd made for
>himself.
>
<snipped>
Can't disagree with your position at all.
Rot in the place.
Hj
petrolcan
uncle-nigel.me.uk says...
>
> So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>
> Let him go, or keep him where he is?
Let him go, he'll be dead soon.
> FWIW, I think he's a nasty thug with a slight talent for self-publicity.
> The big mistake was letting him come back to the UK for medical
> treatment instead of leaving him to rot in the bed he'd made for
> himself.
As Straw has stated today, if he had served his time he'd have been a
free man years ago.
> The BHaLC will be along directly to explain why I'm wrong.
Never!
ogden
> So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>
> Let him go, or keep him where he is?
>
> FWIW, I think he's a nasty thug with a slight talent for self-publicity.
> The big mistake was letting him come back to the UK for medical
> treatment instead of leaving him to rot in the bed he'd made for
> himself.
>
> The BHaLC will be along directly to explain why I'm wrong.
As an unofficial member of the BHaLC, I say fuck him.
If he'd done his time, rather than break out and go on the run, he'd
have been out decades ago. But he decided to do a runner and only came
back when his health was failing and he wanted to milk public services
towards which he's contributed pretty much nothing.
As you say, he made his bed. Several times over. I have no sympathy.
--
ogden
ogden
> Wicked Uncle Nigel wrote:
>
> > So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
> >
> > Let him go, or keep him where he is?
> >
> > FWIW, I think he's a nasty thug with a slight talent for
> > self-publicity. The big mistake was letting him come back to the UK
> > for medical treatment instead of leaving him to rot in the bed he'd
> > made for himself.
> >
> > The BHaLC will be along directly to explain why I'm wrong.
>
He screwed my pelvis to a cake stand.
--
ogden
Wicked Uncle Nigel
<og...@pre.org> typed
How very *dare* you try to 306b my thread before I've flushed out the
BHaLC?
Eddie
> Cab wrote:
>> Yeahbut he was a proper crim. Not like the toe-rags we get today.
>
> He screwed my pelvis to a cake stand.
That was Dinsdale, not Ronnie.
--
Eddie ed...@deguello.org
His: SL Mille, Elefant 900
Hers: Monster S4R (deceased) http://www.last.fm/group/ukrm
vulgarandmischevious
>The BHaLC will be along directly to explain why I'm wrong.
I consider myself a founder member of the BHaLC, and I'm okay with him
staying in the clink until he dies.
Catman
FFS! we seem to have consensus on UKRM
<fx: unsubscribes>
What's the *point* any more.
--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 145 2.0 Cloverleaf 156 V6 2.5 S2
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk
Phil Launchbury
> So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>
> Let him go, or keep him where he is?
Keep him where he is.
>
> FWIW, I think he's a nasty thug with a slight talent for self-publicity.
Agreed. And proud of being a violent law-breaker.
> The BHaLC will be along directly to explain why I'm wrong.
Don't assume that we think alike on all issues..
Phil
--
Phil Launchbury
'I speak to machines with the voice of humanity'
'Speak to the wise with the voice of insanity'
Phil Launchbury
>
> I believe it's in their .sig's, you muppet.
I don't do .sig numbers.
>
> Hint: One is a COFF, the other is a silver haired lothario, with more
COFF?
Phil Launchbury
>
> As an unofficial member of the BHaLC, I say fuck him.
>
> If he'd done his time, rather than break out and go on the run, he'd
> have been out decades ago. But he decided to do a runner and only came
> back when his health was failing and he wanted to milk public services
> towards which he's contributed pretty much nothing.
>
> As you say, he made his bed. Several times over. I have no sympathy.
I am peturbed to realise that Ogden and I are as one on this. Must
reformat brain immediately.
Champ
<w...@wicked-uncle-nigel.me.uk> wrote:
>So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>
>Let him go, or keep him where he is?
>
>FWIW, I think he's a nasty thug with a slight talent for self-publicity.
>The big mistake was letting him come back to the UK for medical
>treatment instead of leaving him to rot in the bed he'd made for
>himself.
>
>The BHaLC will be along directly to explain why I'm wrong.
<The founder speaks>
I've gained pretty much all my information on this case from reading
this thread, but from that I don't see any good reason to let him out.
--
Champ
What doesn't kill you only makes you stronger
ZX10R | Hayabusa | GPz750turbo
neal at champ dot org dot uk
Cab
>>> > The BHaLC will be along directly to explain why I'm wrong.
>>>
>>> Yeahbut he was a proper crim. Not like the toe-rags we get today.
>>
>>He screwed my pelvis to a cake stand.
I'm surprised I didn't get any more bites than that. I'm not on form...
> How very *dare* you try to 306b my thread before I've flushed out the
> BHaLC?
Heh.
--
Cab :^) - I'm from lots of different places
Z1000ABS : http://www.rosbif.org/ukrm (just for WUN)
The ALL NEW ukrm website : http://www.ukrm.info
email addy : ukrm_dot_cab_at_rosbif_dot_org
Eddie
> In article <a053fe20-94a5-407f...@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, zymurgy wrote:
>> I believe it's in their .sig's, you muppet.
>
> I don't do .sig numbers.
>
>> Hint: One is a COFF, the other is a silver haired lothario, with more
>
> COFF?
Culivator(?) of Facial Fur. I thought you had one.
Adrian
saying:
> <The founder speaks>
>
> I've gained pretty much all my information on this case from reading
> this thread, but from that I don't see any good reason to let him out.
How about...
http://thelawwestofealingbroadway.blogspot.com/2009/07/personal-view.html
platypus
Phil Launchbury
> Phil Launchbury wrote:
>>
>>> Hint: One is a COFF, the other is a silver haired lothario, with more
>>
>> COFF?
>
> Culivator(?) of Facial Fur. I thought you had one.
I do. Kept trimmed short in this weather but still face-fungus.
Eddie
> In article <r88uh6...@deguello.org>, Eddie wrote:
>> Phil Launchbury wrote:
>>> COFF?
>> Culivator(?) of Facial Fur. I thought you had one.
>
> I do. Kept trimmed short in this weather but still face-fungus.
Well, yes, but I meant that I thought you had a COFF#.
Phil Launchbury
> Phil Launchbury wrote:
>> In article <r88uh6...@deguello.org>, Eddie wrote:
>>> Phil Launchbury wrote:
>>>> COFF?
>>> Culivator(?) of Facial Fur. I thought you had one.
>>
>> I do. Kept trimmed short in this weather but still face-fungus.
>
> Well, yes, but I meant that I thought you had a COFF#.
Quite possibly. As I said elsewhere - I can't be bothered to keep track
of .sig numbers.
Hog
> In article <MPG.24b5f661d...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> ogden wrote:
>>
>> As an unofficial member of the BHaLC, I say fuck him.
>>
>> If he'd done his time, rather than break out and go on the run, he'd
>> have been out decades ago. But he decided to do a runner and only
>> came back when his health was failing and he wanted to milk public
>> services towards which he's contributed pretty much nothing.
>>
>> As you say, he made his bed. Several times over. I have no sympathy.
>
> I am peturbed to realise that Ogden and I are as one on this. Must
> reformat brain immediately.
But how much time has he actually served? Seems to me more than enough
for a train job and a coshed employee. And he is no risk to the public.
Seems to bear no relation to the really dangerous cunts who do a bit of
time then walk, and nobody is telling me the Raghead fraternity or the
26 offences to date lot are repentant. And many of the latter are
released in the full knowledge they will reoffend.
Compare the Bulger killers for 2. Bit of time then a life at her Maj's
expense.
--
Hog
'06 ST4-S
'96 Bastard12 '89 R100RS '81 XS650 '78 RD400
'81 R65 Outfit
Hog
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 23:11:20 +0100, Wicked Uncle Nigel
> <w...@wicked-uncle-nigel.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>>
>> Let him go, or keep him where he is?
>>
>> FWIW, I think he's a nasty thug with a slight talent for
>> self-publicity. The big mistake was letting him come back to the UK
>> for medical treatment instead of leaving him to rot in the bed he'd
>> made for himself.
>>
>> The BHaLC will be along directly to explain why I'm wrong.
>
> <The founder speaks>
>
> I've gained pretty much all my information on this case from reading
> this thread, but from that I don't see any good reason to let him out.
So you agree with me now that habitual offenders in general should be
locked up and never released. Cool.
I just need to get you over to the Capital Punishment way of thinking
now.
Adrian
they were saying:
> But how much time has he actually served?
2 years before escaping, 8 years since returning.
So that's 10 years of the original 30 year sentence.
> Seems to me more than enough for a train job and a coshed employee.
Don't forget the prison escape and subsequent 30 years on the run.
ogden
> But how much time has he actually served? Seems to me more than enough
> for a train job and a coshed employee. And he is no risk to the public.
>
> Seems to bear no relation to the really dangerous cunts who do a bit of
> time then walk, and nobody is telling me the Raghead fraternity or the
> 26 offences to date lot are repentant. And many of the latter are
> released in the full knowledge they will reoffend.
>
> Compare the Bulger killers for 2. Bit of time then a life at her Maj's
> expense.
Your trolls are getting worse.
--
ogden
Hog
huh?
Andy Bonwick
>On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 23:11:20 +0100, Wicked Uncle Nigel
><w...@wicked-uncle-nigel.me.uk> wrote:
>
>>So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>>
>>Let him go, or keep him where he is?
>>
>>FWIW, I think he's a nasty thug with a slight talent for self-publicity.
>>The big mistake was letting him come back to the UK for medical
>>treatment instead of leaving him to rot in the bed he'd made for
>>himself.
>>
>>The BHaLC will be along directly to explain why I'm wrong.
>
><The founder speaks>
>
>I've gained pretty much all my information on this case from reading
>this thread, but from that I don't see any good reason to let him out.
Whereas I can see no good reason to waste tax payers money keeping him
banged up.
He wouldn't have received the same sentence today if he'd committed
the same offence, he's not exactly a major risk to society and he's
costing us money to keep him there.
YTC#1
> So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>
> Let him go, or keep him where he is?
Can't be arsed readuing the thread.
He was sentenced, he escaped, he lauded it until he needed the NHS.
Let him rot
>
> FWIW, I think he's a nasty thug with a slight talent for self-publicity.
> The big mistake was letting him come back to the UK for medical
> treatment instead of leaving him to rot in the bed he'd made for
> himself.
>
> The BHaLC will be along directly to explain why I'm wrong.
>
--
Pull eyes to email
Catman
> On Thu, 02 Jul 2009 07:26:35 +0100, Catman
> <cat...@rustcuore-sportivo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> vulgarandmischevious wrote:
>>> Wicked Uncle Nigel <w...@wicked-uncle-nigel.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The BHaLC will be along directly to explain why I'm wrong.
>>> I consider myself a founder member of the BHaLC, and I'm okay with him
>>> staying in the clink until he dies.
>> FFS! we seem to have consensus on UKRM
>> <fx: unsubscribes>
>>
>> What's the *point* any more.
>
I agree with both sides.
platypus
Questions of right and wrong shouldn't be settled on the basis of how much
it costs. If you want to lower the cost to the taxpayer of administering
justice, start looking at idiocies like single mums banged up for
shoplifting or no TV licence.
Anyway, if he was released, he'd be taking up an NHS bed and costing even
more to look after.
Andy Bonwick
So what would he have got if he'd done the same today?
>Anyway, if he was released, he'd be taking up an NHS bed and costing even
>more to look after.
The cost to the NHS would be the same but we wouldn't be paying a
gorilla to look after him.
With a bit of luck he'd die in a piss soaked bed at no cost to me and
right now he's costing me money.
Rudy Lacchin
news:69bq459ectsnmnidp...@4ax.com...
>
>>>>> So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>>>>> Let him go, or keep him where he is?
>
>>more to look after.
No, because he's Brazilian now. We just send him back there.
--
R.
zymurgy
> In article <a053fe20-94a5-407f-9f83-713793cc5...@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,zymurgywrote:
>
> > I believe it's in their .sig's, you muppet.
>
> I don't do .sig numbers.
But the OP was specifically referring to something that's generally a
sig reference. i.e there's a number for BHaL'ism
> > Hint: One is a COFF, the other is a silver haired lothario, with more
>
> COFF?
newbie
P.
platypus
He's not, you know.
Wicked Uncle Nigel
<mono...@blueyonder.co.uk> typed
Oh.
<Puts safety catch back on>
--
Wicked Uncle Nigel - "He's hopeless, but he's honest"
I have already made the greatest contribution to the fight against climate
change that I can make: I have decided not to breed. Now quit bugging me and
go and talk to the Catholics.
Phil Launchbury
Well - if you count 1998 as newbie[1] then yes - guilty as charged..
Phil
[1] Not so much 11 years experience as 1 year repeated 11 times.
Champ
<w...@wicked-uncle-nigel.me.uk> wrote:
><Puts safety catch back on>
Talking of which - we had a 'company event' yesterday evening, with
lots of outdoor games, one of which was 'laser clay pigeon shooting'.
it uses 'real' shotguns that have been comverted to fire light, and
measure the reflection back from a modified clay.
A quick google reveals this:
http://www.laserclayshooting.com/
Anyway, we all had 10 clays, and I hit every one with my first shot
(of two possible).
Just call me Dead-Eye Champion
--
Champ
What doesn't kill you only makes you stronger
ZX10R | Hayabusa | GPz750turbo
neal at champ dot org dot uk
Wicked Uncle Nigel
<Si...@127.0.0.1> typed
>On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 09:33:07 +0100, Wicked Uncle Nigel wrote:
>
>> Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, platypus
>> <mono...@blueyonder.co.uk> typed
>>>Rudy Lacchin wrote:
>>>> "Andy Bonwick" <nos...@bonwick.me.uk> wrote in message
>>>> news:69bq459ectsnmnidp...@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then? Let him go, or
>>>>>>>>> keep him where he is?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyway, if he was released, he'd be taking up an NHS bed and costing
>>>>>> even more to look after.
>>>> No, because he's Brazilian now. We just send him back there.
>>>
>>>He's not, you know.
>>
>> Oh.
>>
>> <Puts safety catch back on>
>
>man, dying, who is not able to harm anyone. Surely the idea of prison
>is to punish, rehabilitate and protect the public. He's not likely to
>harm the public, there is no point in rehabilitation at this point, and
>punishment of someone in his condition just seems petty.
>
>It would also be a lot cheaper to keep him in a palliative care home than
>a prison for the short time he's likely to have left.
You don't think he'd do an Ernest Saunders and be propping up the bar at
his local regaling the impressionable with stories of "back in the day",
then?
Hog
> You don't think he'd do an Ernest Saunders and be propping up the bar
> at his local regaling the impressionable with stories of "back in the
> day", then?
I'm really REALLY missing the point. Why on earth do you all want to
keep him in jail. He didn't do anything terribly bad and he has served
a fair whack of jail time.
FFS we allow people who have done much worse to become politicians.
Champ
<w...@wicked-uncle-nigel.me.uk> wrote:
>So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>
>Let him go, or keep him where he is?
OK, so my liberal slip is showing again, prompted by Simes (imagine!).
Prison is meant to do three things:
- deterrence - a threat to stop the individual and the general
population
- punishment - to inflict some retribution
- reform - to stop the offender doing it again.
I don't think Biggs needs detering, nor do I think keeping him inside
will deter any other potential criminals. There's certainly no point
in reforming him at his age (what crime could he commit even he wanted
to?).
So retribution is what it's about. Which might be fair enough, but
lets not pretend it's anything else.
steve robinson
> Wicked Uncle Nigel wrote:
>
> > You don't think he'd do an Ernest Saunders and be propping up the bar
> > at his local regaling the impressionable with stories of "back in the
> > day", then?
>
> I'm really REALLY missing the point. Why on earth do you all want to keep him in
> jail. He didn't do anything terribly bad and he has served a fair whack of jail
> time.
>
> FFS we allow people who have done much worse to become politicians.
He is only being kept in jail because of the embarrasement he caused the british
government whilst living it up in Brazil and the fact that our man of straw is
trying to look tough on criminals
Pete Fisher
<ne...@champ.org.uk> cast forth these pearls of wisdom
>On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 23:11:20 +0100, Wicked Uncle Nigel
><w...@wicked-uncle-nigel.me.uk> wrote:
>
>>So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>>
>>Let him go, or keep him where he is?
>
>OK, so my liberal slip is showing again, prompted by Simes (imagine!).
>
>Prison is meant to do three things:
>- deterrence - a threat to stop the individual and the general
>population
>- punishment - to inflict some retribution
>- reform - to stop the offender doing it again.
>
>I don't think Biggs needs detering, nor do I think keeping him inside
>will deter any other potential criminals. There's certainly no point
>in reforming him at his age (what crime could he commit even he wanted
>to?).
>
>So retribution is what it's about. Which might be fair enough, but
>lets not pretend it's anything else.
Just about sums it up. When I first heard the news my immediate reaction
was to let him rot, but given that he is hardly in the same league as
Rudolph Hess what purpose would it serve other than vengeance ?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/this-sick-old-man-should-be-freed-1729623.html
--
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Pete Fisher at Home: Pe...@ps-fisher.demon.co.uk |
| Voxan Roadster Gilera Nordwest * 2 Yamaha WR250Z |
| Gilera GFR * 2 Moto Morini 2C/375 Morini 350 "Forgotten Error" |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
steve robinson
> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 11:25:45 +0100 in uk.rec.motorcycles, Hog says:
>
> > Wicked Uncle Nigel wrote:
> >
> >> You don't think he'd do an Ernest Saunders and be propping up the bar
> >> at his local regaling the impressionable with stories of "back in the
> >> day", then?
> >
> > I'm really REALLY missing the point. Why on earth do you all want to
> > keep him in jail. He didn't do anything terribly bad and he has served
> > a fair whack of jail time.
> >
> > FFS we allow people who have done much worse to become politicians.
>
> How many politicians have beaten people up with a pickaxe handle?
There is no evidence that Biggs actually attacked anyone , his police profile was
that of a small time petty criminal not a violent armed robber
Hog
> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 11:25:45 +0100 in uk.rec.motorcycles, Hog says:
>
>>
>>> You don't think he'd do an Ernest Saunders and be propping up the
>>> bar at his local regaling the impressionable with stories of "back
>>> in the day", then?
>>
>> I'm really REALLY missing the point. Why on earth do you all want to
>> keep him in jail. He didn't do anything terribly bad and he has
>> served a fair whack of jail time.
>>
>> FFS we allow people who have done much worse to become politicians.
>
Martin McGuiness
Gerry Adams
et all
Hog
Even if he did, such an attack gets 2 or 3 years inside.
Hog
> In communiqu� <qrmr45laqqrbd31tf...@4ax.com>, Champ
> <ne...@champ.org.uk> cast forth these pearls of wisdom
>> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 23:11:20 +0100, Wicked Uncle Nigel
>> <w...@wicked-uncle-nigel.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>>>
>>> Let him go, or keep him where he is?
>>
>> OK, so my liberal slip is showing again, prompted by Simes
>> (imagine!). Prison is meant to do three things:
>> - deterrence - a threat to stop the individual and the general
>> population
>> - punishment - to inflict some retribution
>> - reform - to stop the offender doing it again.
>>
>> I don't think Biggs needs detering, nor do I think keeping him inside
>> will deter any other potential criminals. There's certainly no point
>> in reforming him at his age (what crime could he commit even he
>> wanted to?).
>>
>> So retribution is what it's about. Which might be fair enough, but
>> lets not pretend it's anything else.
>
> Just about sums it up. When I first heard the news my immediate
> reaction was to let him rot, but given that he is hardly in the same
> league as Rudolph Hess what purpose would it serve other than
> vengeance ?
Well good grief for all the time he has served vengence has truly been
served. Let the old boy out FFS.
Hog
> On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:59:32 +0100, boots wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 11:25:45 +0100 in uk.rec.motorcycles, Hog says:
>>
>>>
>>>> You don't think he'd do an Ernest Saunders and be propping up the
>>>> bar at his local regaling the impressionable with stories of "back
>>>> in the day", then?
>>>
>>> I'm really REALLY missing the point. Why on earth do you all want
>>> to keep him in jail. He didn't do anything terribly bad and he has
>>> served a fair whack of jail time.
>>>
>>> FFS we allow people who have done much worse to become politicians.
>>
>
> I never liked the way Norman Tebbit's eyes glinted whenever he saw a
> truncheon...
....and a jar of Vaseline
Andy Bonwick
Yeah, keep him banged up because he partied with a few RN blokes and
released a record with a punk band. They're terrible crimes.
Cab
> How many politicians have beaten people up with a pickaxe handle?
time.
--
Cab :^) - I'm from lots of different places
Z1000ABS : http://www.rosbif.org/ukrm (just for WUN)
The ALL NEW ukrm website : http://www.ukrm.info
email addy : ukrm_dot_cab_at_rosbif_dot_org
Pip
says...
>
> On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 12:29:38 +0100, Hog wrote:
> >> How many politicians have beaten people up with a pickaxe handle?
> >
> > Martin McGuiness
> > Gerry Adams
> > et all
>
> *Ding*
*THUD*, actually.
--
Pip, the "Mechanical Nightmare" (tm Bonwick Major)
Pip
says...
>
> On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:59:32 +0100, boots wrote:
> > How many politicians have beaten people up with a pickaxe handle?
>
> I suspect that there are some that have done things similar or worse. I
> never liked the way Norman Tebbit's eyes glinted whenever he saw a
> truncheon...
That's because he was recalling the action with Maggie, slipping him a
truncheon without lube while he was lashed, spreadeagled, to a hotel
balcony.
prawn
> So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>
> Let him go, or keep him where he is?
I have given it a small amount of thought and my wishy-washy liberal self
can see merit in both cases. Meh.
--
Leviticus 11:10
M J Carley
>boots wrote:
>> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 11:25:45 +0100 in uk.rec.motorcycles, Hog says:
>>
>>> Wicked Uncle Nigel wrote:
>>>
>>>> You don't think he'd do an Ernest Saunders and be propping up the
>>>> bar at his local regaling the impressionable with stories of "back
>>>> in the day", then?
>>>
>>> I'm really REALLY missing the point. Why on earth do you all want to
>>> keep him in jail. He didn't do anything terribly bad and he has
>>> served a fair whack of jail time.
>>>
>>> FFS we allow people who have done much worse to become politicians.
>>
>> How many politicians have beaten people up with a pickaxe handle?
>
>Martin McGuiness
>Gerry Adams
>et all
David Davis would have liked to and the DUP were happy to have the
threat of it behind them.
--
Si deve tornare alle basi: Marx ed i Clash.
Michael Carley: http://people.bath.ac.uk/ensmjc/
M J Carley
I thought he should be kept in until I was reminded that Straw let
Pinochet go.
Timo Geusch
> On 2 Jul 2009 12:53:09 GMT, Adrian <tooma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"Hog" <hog...@freenetCHIPS.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like
>>they were saying:
>>
>>> But how much time has he actually served?
>>
>>2 years before escaping, 8 years since returning.
>>So that's 10 years of the original 30 year sentence.
>
> you only serve a third now so (excluding the extra time for a break
> out) he's done enough.
Yebbut, you do seem to get extra time for sticking your finger to plod,
which is what he essentially did.
Cynical me is beginning to think that waiting for the biological
solution to the problem allows the government to show how tough they are
on crime and crims.
--
Morini Corsaro 125 | XL250 Motosport | R1150RT
Laverda SF2 | Harley FXD BOTAFOF #33 TWA#10
The UKRM FAQ: http://www.ukrm.net/faq/index.html
"Je profite du paysage" - Joe Bar
Colin Irvine
following:
>So, what do we think about Ronnie Biggs, then?
>
>Let him go, or keep him where he is?
>
>FWIW, I think he's a nasty thug with a slight talent for self-publicity.
>The big mistake was letting him come back to the UK for medical
>treatment instead of leaving him to rot in the bed he'd made for
>himself.
>
>The BHaLC will be along directly to explain why I'm wrong.
Not this one.
--
Colin Irvine
ZZR1400 BOF#33 BONY#34 COFF#06 BHaLC#5
http://www.colinandpat.co.uk
Charlie
"Cab" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:af92i6-...@news.rosbif.org...
> On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:59:32 +0100, boots wibbled:
>> How many politicians have beaten people up with a pickaxe handle?
>
> I don't believe that Biggs was responsible according to reports of the
> time.
It was a iron bar. Biggs wasn't on the train. He didn't whack the driver.
The driver died several years later (thus no legal culpability, under the
year-and-a-day rule), of (IIRC) leukaemia. The family traded for years on
the "he was never the same afterwards" line, as a way of loading guilt onto
the robbers and justifying the 30-year sentences.
Charlie
"boots" <bo...@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:a11c9e56f73e8816...@blakeley.plus.com...
> On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 11:35:52 +0100 in uk.rec.motorcycles, Charlie says:
>
>>
>>"Cab" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
>>news:af92i6-...@news.rosbif.org...
>>> On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:59:32 +0100, boots wibbled:
>>>> How many politicians have beaten people up with a pickaxe handle?
>>>
>>> I don't believe that Biggs was responsible according to reports of the
>>> time.
>>
>>It was a iron bar. Biggs wasn't on the train. He didn't whack the
>>driver.
>
> less cost to the taxpayer. The train robbery was in law AIUI a joint
> enterprise so all the participants are equally culpable.
He was, indeed, equally culpable, but the facts deserve an airing. He was a
peripheral and junior figure. He was not on the footplate, but sitting in a
getaway car, so could have had no influence on whether the driver was hit.
That was the only point of national 'outrage', as the money was only going
to be incinerated. AIUI, Biggs went on the run precisely because he had
been given a sentence which he felt was disproportionately severe. Again, I
don't excuse it. I merely thought that the level of his involvement should
be clarified.
Andy Bonwick
Even though I think Biggs should be set free I don't think you've got
your facts right on this one. My understanding (from a source I trust
implicitly) is that he received a heavy blow to the head which caused
him to be off work for a long time and several medical examinations
said that he was effectively permanently disabled by the attack.
The cunts should have been banged up for a long time (which they were)
because they neither knew nor cared what the consequences were when
they belted him with said blunt object but there's no point in keeping
a vegetable like Biggs in jail to prove a point.
Let's not forget that the biggest crime was that cunt Phil Collins
trying to portray one of the gang as some kind of working class hero
in the film Buster.
muddy cat
Andy Bonwick <nos...@bonwick.me.uk> wrote:
> Let's not forget that the biggest crime was that cunt Phil Collins
> trying to portray one of the gang as some kind of working class hero
> in the film Buster.
So this is why he's despised.
--
Mike UKRMMA: 23
V-Strom (The warthog)
The spirit of the living beings was in the wheels
skype: muddycat
Catman
> In article <n8f455tu0m63362h3...@4ax.com>,
> Andy Bonwick <nos...@bonwick.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> Let's not forget that the biggest crime was that cunt Phil Collins
>> trying to portray one of the gang as some kind of working class hero
>> in the film Buster.
>
> So this is why he's despised.
>
Well , it's *one* of them. Sussudio is another.
--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 145 2.0 Cloverleaf 156 V6 2.5 S2
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk
muddy cat
Catman <cat...@rustcuore-sportivo.co.uk> wrote:
> muddy cat wrote:
> > In article <n8f455tu0m63362h3...@4ax.com>,
> > Andy Bonwick <nos...@bonwick.me.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> Let's not forget that the biggest crime was that cunt Phil Collins
> >> trying to portray one of the gang as some kind of working class hero
> >> in the film Buster.
> >
> > So this is why he's despised.
> >
>
> Well , it's *one* of them. Sussudio is another.
Ah.
Andy Bonwick
<my_email_addre...@privacy.net> wrote:
>Andy Bonwick wrote:
>
>> Let's not forget that the biggest crime was that cunt Phil Collins
>> trying to portray one of the gang as some kind of working class hero
>> in the film Buster.
>
>I remember speaking with Buster Edwards [1] about this shortly after
>the film came out. Although he didn't say it outright, I think he was
>pretty bitter that he got shafted by Collins and the cast/crew of the
>film.
>
I thought the whole film was a sham and Collins can't possibly have
ever spoken to Buster Edwards about how he should portray him.
Charlie
"Andy Bonwick" <nos...@bonwick.me.uk> wrote in message
news:n8f455tu0m63362h3...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 11:35:52 +0100, "Charlie" <nos...@all.ta> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Cab" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
>>news:af92i6-...@news.rosbif.org...
>>> On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:59:32 +0100, boots wibbled:
>>>> How many politicians have beaten people up with a pickaxe handle?
>>>
>>> I don't believe that Biggs was responsible according to reports of the
>>> time.
>>
>>It was a iron bar. Biggs wasn't on the train. He didn't whack the
>>driver.
>>The driver died several years later (thus no legal culpability, under the
>>year-and-a-day rule), of (IIRC) leukaemia. The family traded for years on
>>the "he was never the same afterwards" line, as a way of loading guilt
>>onto
>>the robbers and justifying the 30-year sentences.
>>
> Even though I think Biggs should be set free I don't think you've got
> your facts right on this one. My understanding (from a source I trust
> implicitly) is that he received a heavy blow to the head which caused
> him to be off work for a long time and several medical examinations
> said that he was effectively permanently disabled by the attack.
Biggs was a bit-player, a bit of a wally by most accounts, certainly not a
hard man and not part of either of the 2 London gangs who planned the
robbery. He became a romantic figure by going over the wall and on the run;
which he did because he didn't think his sentence (the same as the _actual_
robbers) was fair. Yes, this is specious and swivel-eyed "villains' logic",
I happily concede, but that was his motivation. Jack Mills died many years
after the robbery. He was certainly disabled by the blow, but he died of
leukaemia.
They got 30 years, which was a very savage sentence even then, in the days
before automatic parole, by comparison with the tariff for murder.
It's one of history's "if only" conundrums; if they hadn't whacked the
driver, most of the country would have been quietly amused and delighted by
the audacity of the operation. With the money on its way to be burned, it
would have been an almost victimless crime. My folks were very moralistic,
hang 'em & flog 'em types but even they regretted that one bit of
unnecessary violence transformed a comedy into something serious. Even
they, to my amazement, thought that 30 years was harsh.
Andy Bonwick
The problem is that if you go out to commit a crime you're as guilty
as the rest and he must have known that some of the other members were
violent cunts.
BTW, your first post saying that the family traded for years on the
incident seems a bit lame when you now concede that he was actually
disabled by the attack and I know with 100% certainty that if my
father had been disabled by a cunt with an iron bar I'd be happy to
see them do 30 years and I'd be even happier if I could be left to
beat the perps head in with a similar iron bar to see how much he
enjoyed it.
Obviously we live in a civilised society where justice isn't handed
out by simply letting a different thug beat someone to a pulp as a
form of means of dealing with a criminal act but the fact remains that
they decided that potentially killing someone to escape justice was
ok.
>They got 30 years, which was a very savage sentence even then, in the days
>before automatic parole, by comparison with the tariff for murder.
>
The sentence was dished out as a deterrent and that was wrong. The
sentence should fit the crime and nothing else should influence the
decision on what to hand out but we're talking about something that
happened a long time ago when society wasn't quite as willing to
accept that sort of thing.
>It's one of history's "if only" conundrums; if they hadn't whacked the
>driver, most of the country would have been quietly amused and delighted by
>the audacity of the operation. With the money on its way to be burned, it
>would have been an almost victimless crime. My folks were very moralistic,
>hang 'em & flog 'em types but even they regretted that one bit of
>unnecessary violence transformed a comedy into something serious. Even
>they, to my amazement, thought that 30 years was harsh.
>
Absolutely. Spending money that was due to be torched has got to be
one of the biggest laughs going but one of the gang decided to take it
to the next level and they all got hammered for it. Maybe they should
have put a contract out on him for dropping them so far into a pool of
shit?
Charlie
<snip>
And I see that, just for you-hoo, "Buster" will be showing on TV (again)
tonight!
BTW, I agree with most of what you wrote but (I expect you'll concur that) a
bunch of psychopathic and/or fantasist criminals don't deserve very much
(that is to say, any) more of our debating time.
Andy Bonwick
>
>"Andy Bonwick" <nos...@bonwick.me.uk> wrote in message
>news:hv3755dvkpvjhaigm...@4ax.com...
>
><snip>
>
>And I see that, just for you-hoo, "Buster" will be showing on TV (again)
>tonight!
>
I'm so excited at the prospect that I'm tempted to forget about
drinking Stella and eating the chefs 'special' and watching tv in my
hotel room.
Actually I'll not bother.
>BTW, I agree with most of what you wrote but (I expect you'll concur that) a
>bunch of psychopathic and/or fantasist criminals don't deserve very much
>(that is to say, any) more of our debating time.
>
I think most people agree that they were thugs and most agree that the
sentences were way out of proportion to the crime (by todays
standards) but it's history now and the govt. won't bend on this one
so he'll die in jail.