I reckon some of these blokes and they're all blokes, ringing up LBC to defend Mark Field would slap their wives around the ear holes if they burnt the toast.
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Should Mark Field be charged with assault?
Collapse
X
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by BlasterBates View PostI reckon some of these blokes and they're all blokes, ringing up LBC to defend Mark Field would slap their wives around the ear holes if they burnt the toast.Comment
-
Originally posted by BlasterBates View PostI reckon some of these blokes and they're all blokes, ringing up LBC to defend Mark Field would slap their wives around the ear holes if they burnt the toast.Comment
-
Originally posted by meridian View PostAgreed, there is an element of “she put herself in that position”. Doesn’t make Field’s reaction any less palatable. There’s probably a whole range of situations for a psychological exercise around this:
- walk into an area that’s a bit dodgy and get beaten up. Did you put yourself in that position?
- attempt to burgle a house and get shot. Did they put themselves in that position?
- wear something a bit flirty and get raped. Did she put herself in that position?
It’s not the action that’s on trial, it’s the reaction and whether it is justified / justifiable.
Of the three examples you supply the only one where the person is committing an offence is burglary and the rules are that the response should be proportional. so yes if you believed the burglars were armed with a knife then you could use a knife or bat to defend yourself. If the burglar dies in a fair fight then the homeowner is free to go.
Guns are slightly different in the UK.
In this case She committed trespass, public order offences and possibly offences related to national security. He pushed her out of the room to limit the danger it was in my opinion reasonable and proportionate. If the infiltrator had been a man he would have been congratulated.
she is nearly 20 years younger than him, roughly the same height. Females are known to commit violent crime you know.Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much.Comment
-
Originally posted by BlasterBates View Postaha I see so it would be fine if he grabbed her by the neck.
I'm glad we cleared that up.
ah your usual lack of 'comprehension'. You made an assertion that as usual was wrong because you thought that by lying you would win the argument.
If he did it to prevent a crime and there was no intention to hurt then yes it would be fine.Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much.Comment
-
Should a person be charged with assault for assaulting a non-aggressive person in public?
If the answer is "but they could have been dangerous" then that justifies assault on anyone. All you have to claim is that the person cold have been dangerous and you can do what you want, get rid of the police.
But it's a slippery slope, they want to make a speech today, tomorrow they'll be turning up with machine guns. Best lock up any dissenters and traitors.
Is that the answer?…Maybe we ain’t that young anymoreComment
-
Originally posted by WTFH View PostShould a person be charged with assault for assaulting a non-aggressive person in public?
If the answer is "but they could have been dangerous" then that justifies assault on anyone. All you have to claim is that the person cold have been dangerous and you can do what you want, get rid of the police.
But it's a slippery slope, they want to make a speech today, tomorrow they'll be turning up with machine guns. Best lock up any dissenters and traitors.
Is that the answer?I'm alright JackComment
-
Originally posted by BlasterBates View PostIndeed on the video she clearly doesn't look dangerous. He was angry because she was a lefty Liberal and so he decided to teach her a lesson.
oh and you have proof of that then?
thought not!Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much.Comment
-
Originally posted by vetran View Postoh and you have proof of that then?
thought not!
There was about 100 people in the room, and a "dangerous" thug walks past and they do nothing, why ?
If he really thought she was dangerous he would have dived under the table.I'm alright JackComment
-
Different people react differently in different situations.'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Which IT contractor skills will be top five in 2025? Jan 2 09:08
- Secondary NI threshold sinking to £5,000: a limited company director’s explainer Dec 24 09:51
- Reeves sets Spring Statement 2025 for March 26th Dec 23 09:18
- Spot the hidden contractor Dec 20 10:43
- Accounting for Contractors Dec 19 15:30
- Chartered Accountants with MarchMutual Dec 19 15:05
- Chartered Accountants with March Mutual Dec 19 15:05
- Chartered Accountants Dec 19 15:05
- Unfairly barred from contracting? Petrofac just paid the price Dec 19 09:43
- An IR35 case law look back: contractor must-knows for 2025-26 Dec 18 09:30
Comment