Is 10 years enough for this prick?

[Zedder]

The basis of our system, is spot on. Innocent untill proven guilty. It's the execution of that foundation where we are falling short.

Interesting word that "execution".

[SMOKEU]

Instead of the "bullet method", the chainsaw execution seems good. Look at this:

NOT SAFE FOR WORK!

http://www.bestgore.com/beheading/ch...itated-mexico/

[Scuba_Steve]

The basis of our system, is spot on. Innocent untill proven guilty. It's the execution of that foundation where we are falling short.

and if you ignore foundation laws the rest are worthless. It's like building a house but ignoring the foundation, sooner or later the house will collapse. This is what we have in NZ they are constantly building a bigger house of laws while at the same time slowly removing the foundation they rest on.

[Drew]

Then explain to me why someone who gets accused of sustained loss of traction gets their vehicle impounded on the spot for 28 days. That's guilty until proven innocent.

The police have been given authority, by our justice system, to remove an obvious threat to public safety when they witness the act of a burnout being staged.

You have the right to argue your case in court, but the only time the cops will use that power, is if they witnessed you doing it. In which case, I can't see why you have a problem with it.

Or someone who gets accused by a copyright holder for downloading pirated material. Same deal. Guilty until proven innocent.

If a copyright holder accusses you for downloading their content unlawfully, they first have to make a case to a judge for your prosecution I understand. System being followed their.

Or someone who exceeds a permanent speed limit by more than 40kmh or a temporary one by more than 50kmh. Instant loss of license for 28 days.

Same as the burnout thing, you know the rule, you broke it on purpose, a cop saw ya do it, try and get out of it in court.

The "innocent until proven guilty" thing is only there to protect criminals. The "guilty until proven innocent" is there to screw over ordinary people. The government is run by criminals, for criminals.

Try for a moment to understand the implication of this sentance. Innocent untill proven guilty.

Simply put, you are not CONVICTED of a crime, untill such time as the evidence proves beyond reasonable doubt that you are in fact, the guilty party.

You might be inconvenienced, but you are not guilty.

[Tigadee]

The basis of our system, is spot on. Innocent untill proven guilty. It's the execution of that foundation where we are falling short.

That's great if the guilty - when found guilty in the end - are held accountable. Are they? A little girl's life and body has been damaged - possibly for the rest of her life - and the perp gets 10 years (probably less)?

Why? Because he was damaged in the first place? And will those who damaged him be held responsible? No. So is the system really working then?

We have 'evolved' from stoning and hanging crims with some collateral damage where a few wrongly-accused innocents are hurt, to holiday camps for most crims where all innocents (that's society at large) are hurt... Innocent despite being Guilty.

[HenryDorsetCase]

If a copyright holder accusses you for downloading their content unlawfully, they first have to make a case to a judge for your prosecution I understand. System being followed their.

Not so. there are two points I object to about the skynet law: the first is that it criminalises a civil wrong, for no good reason I can see, and the second is that all that is required is a copyright holders ASSERTION that their rights are being breached, but no actual "proof in a court of lor to a standard of even balance of probabilitites". Thats your fascist state right there.

What it has done is, instead of focussing the minds of copyright holders on how to deal with new technologies, how to monetise it, how to benefit both their creators and their consumers, it has given legislative penalty, under threat of criminal conviction, to a dinosaur business model. Not only wrong, but stupid too.

[Bikemad]

how bout we have a whip round...........raise some money and offer it as a reward to any crim inside that can get to this prick and ..........you can fill in the rest

[Zedder]

how bout we have a whip round...........raise some money and offer it as a reward to any crim inside that can get to this prick and ..........you can fill in the rest

And "take him fishing"?

As tempting as it sounds, I don't think it's the right way.

[oneofsix]

Not so. there are two points I object to about the skynet law: the first is that it criminalises a civil wrong, for no good reason I can see, and the second is that all that is required is a copyright holders ASSERTION that their rights are being breached, but no actual "proof in a court of lor to a standard of even balance of probabilitites". Thats your fascist state right there.

What it has done is, instead of focussing the minds of copyright holders on how to deal with new technologies, how to monetise it, how to benefit both their creators and their consumers, it has given legislative penalty, under threat of criminal conviction, to a dinosaur business model. Not only wrong, but stupid too.

but... they don't even have to prove they are the copyright holder. A lot of their cases fail when they had to take them to court as it transpired they did really hold the copyright. It is a bit like say I'm a shoplifting victim because someone shoplifted at the supermarket I go to.

Now back to the real criminals

[Scuba_Steve]

Now back to the real criminals

Na we're talking about child abusing rapist, not "speeders"

[Zedder]

but... they don't even have to prove they are the copyright holder. A lot of their cases fail when they had to take them to court as it transpired they did really hold the copyright. It is a bit like say I'm a shoplifting victim because someone shoplifted at the supermarket I go to.

Now back to the real criminals

It's interesting that you wrote "now back to the real criminals" OO6 because I thought you'd be up in arms about the fact that Government can change a civil wrong to a criminal act arbitrarily and seemingly without thought for the innocent who will be caught up in this Skynet debacle.

[Drew]

"It is better that ten guilty men go free, than one innocent man go to jail".

I concur. Because if I was the one innocent man in a different system, I'd come out of prison a real fuckin psycopath. I doubt I'd ever get over the time lost with my kids and other loved ones. An Christ as my witness, scociety would pay through the nose.

[Tigadee]

Right now, it's ten guilty men go free and a hundred innocents go through hell, because a crime does not only affect the immediate victim...

[HenryDorsetCase]

how bout we have a whip round...........raise some money and offer it as a reward to any crim inside that can get to this prick and ..........you can fill in the rest

give him counselling?

[HenryDorsetCase]

"It is better that ten guilty men go free, than one innocent man go to jail".

I concur. Because if I was the one innocent man in a different system, I'd come out of prison a real fuckin psycopath. I doubt I'd ever get over the time lost with my kids and other loved ones. An Christ as my witness, scociety would pay through the nose.

wasn't Jebus all about the brotherly love and turning the other cheek?