Tory MP Stabbed

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
They didn’t voluntarily ask for or sponsor the white eye to come over for the sake of diversity. They just couldn’t cope with a different tribe who was more relentless and meaner then they were.

Actually, for much of your history, the truth of the Indian/settler relationship was much more benign and only became truly rapacious in the mid-nineteenth century when the Indian decline was manifest and the relationship with a land-hungry US became completely overbalanced in favour of the Palefaces.

 
Me...


You...


The graph...
1634397758870-png.610177

Let's break things out for simplicity.



The graph is rising from 1953 It is going from a low point of around 4.8 up to a peak of around 16.00. If that is not a rise, what is it?

Follow these simple steps...

  1. Take a ruler, put one end at 1953's data point, and the other end on 2002's data point and draw a line.
  2. Take the ruler away. This is an important step - do not miss it out otherwise you will not be able to the next step. You will need the ruler see...
  3. Now draw line straight up from the year 1965's and where it crosses the line you draw in step 1, draw a line straight across to the left hand edge.
  4. Read out the number for murders per million from the left hand edge. It is around 6
  5. And this is the most important step, go back to whatever God-forsaken fools paradise of a school you allegedly went to and get them to explain why 6 is bigger than 4, and why that is called "rising".

Rise means going up. From low to high.

It did rise. The nice picture you gave us shows it.

You are a moron. Everyone is aware of that anyway from other posts, but this merely underlines the fact.



Fine, so it was low in 1938 before going up (two peaks in 1942 and 1945). It went up despite the death penalty being in use. It did not act as a deterrent and a rise ensued. Just think that through. It went from a small number to a big number (a rise) whilst people could be given the death penalty.

It was not a deterrent.

You are a moron. Everyone is aware of that anyway from other posts, but this merely underlines the fact.



Except for the fact that the death penalty was abolished in 1965 (it wasn't, Parliament didn't finally confirm it until 1969 after sunset provisions expired but that matters not, we will use your 1965 numbers - either work because you are a moron).

In 1965 your graph shows the murder rate being around 6. In 1938 as you said above it was almost as low as in 1953, at around 4.

When I went to school 4 was less than 6. The rate in 1938 and 1953 was around 4, in 1965 it was around 6.

The rate was lower in 1953 than when it was abolished, by 2. Put it another way, in 1965 the rate was 2 more than in 1953. That means the murder rate started going up before the death penalty was abolished.

You are a moron. Everyone is aware of that anyway from other posts, but this merely underlines the fact.

You can make this stop anytime you like by not posting. Otherwise you will continually be underlining the fact you a moron.

Sweet baby Jeebus, if you'd raped another person in as vicious and prolonged manner as you just raped Google Search, we'd have the death penalty legalised by Thursday.
 
Sweet baby Jeebus, if you'd raped another person in as vicious and prolonged manner as you just raped Google Search, we'd have the death penalty legalised by Thursday.
What Google search? The moron in question posted the links. All I did was look at them. I bet he wasn't expecting anyone to do that.

Just follow his links and draw your own conclusions. Me, I am sticking to the fact that 6 is greater than 4 and thus there is a rise.

Or perhaps you are the kind of person who does need google to tell you something like that.
 

BuggerAll

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
I don't think we disagree, at all. A medal, while symbolic, was intended to honour a person and his/her actions, deeds, achievements, selflessness and devotion. It is struck and awarded for such a purpose and it is probably the most appropriate way of honouring an individual. It is specific to the task.

Awarding city status to a rather dingy seaside town in the Thames Estuary is, I think, a rather inappropriate way of doing so.

To me, it is more like Boris shooting from the hip, without giving the matter any proper consideration, in order to curry favour. It is a very Boris thing to do.
Jubillee medals, GCs for the NHS etc all symbolic. Honorary degrees etc. All symbolic. This is intended to honour Sir David.
 
I don't think we disagree, at all. A medal, while symbolic, was intended to honour a person and his/her actions, deeds, achievements, selflessness and devotion. It is struck and awarded for such a purpose and it is probably the most appropriate way of honouring an individual. It is specific to the task.

Awarding city status to a rather dingy seaside town in the Thames Estuary is, I think, a rather inappropriate way of doing so.

To me, it is more like Boris shooting from the hip, without giving the matter any proper consideration, in order to curry favour. It is a very Boris thing to do.
Is it a battle worth fighting over though....? ....in terms of decisions that PMs make it's an irrelevance, but if he refused the requests gathering pace on MSM it starts to become a distraction taking up time from important matters.... ..appease the DM readers calling for it by approving the request then move on

At least it's one less shouted question from Laura Kuensburg he has to answer.
 
I'm glad to see that peerless Southend is to be a city (peerless, not pier-less).

I recall happy days of youth swimming in the stool-ridden waters that lapped gently at the 4' bore main sewage outfall. Happy days and God knows how we came through unscathed.

Memories aside, Southend is ok. It represents something of the spirit of coastal, Thames-ish Essex. I don't mind it being made a city and if that gives some pleasure to his family, the city/county then good show.
 
Does this now give Southend a bishop, with accompanying seat in the House of Lords?
I knew this was coming after watching and listening to various News outlets over the weekend. “It’s what he would have wanted”, I have heard constantly today. Well actually I think we all know he (and his family) would much prefer that he was still living and breathing today and for many more years to come!
I totally get the sentiment behind it, but don’t personally agree today was the appropriate time to announce it. Far better if it was announced next year after a period of reflection and due diligence.
It smacks of MSM and Social Media influence and Politicians wanting to garner popularity.
That said; a great deal of dignity and respect being shown on both sides of the floor this afternoon for a clearly decent man and rightly so
I’ve switched it off now, as I don’t think my ticker would stand listening to ‘Our Angela’ singing his praises.
RIP.
 
Is it a battle worth fighting over though....? ....in terms of decisions that PMs make it's an irrelevance, but if he refused the requests gathering pace on MSM it starts to become a distraction taking up time from important matters.... ..appease the DM readers calling for it by approving the request then move on

At least it's one less shouted question from Laura Kuensburg he has to answer.
Has she asked Boris if he will resign, yet?
 
At least it's one less shouted question from Laura Kuensburg he has to answer.

Would it really be something that would be likely to weaponised and used against him... by anyone? It is not something that requires instant action.

A decent period of calm reflection, culminating in a dignified, considered and appropriate response is a whole different matter from the glacially slow response to urgent matters of state of which he is usually (justifiably) accused.
 
I think you're right. Why wasn't Southend given city status before his his tragic demise? What's actually changed?

A need to virtue signal and distract everyone from talking about what caused the stabbing
 

TamH70

MIA
A need to virtue signal and distract everyone from talking about what caused the stabbing

Indeed. Panem et circenses for the modern era. Keep them focused away from the fact that the barbarians are no longer at the gate, but in among us.
 

Latest Threads

Top