Do soldiers have a 'right to life'?

[d000hg]

Is it against the law to depict a certain prophet in a specific light? or burn religious books?

Well spotted. Some things are against the law, other things are not.

[cailin maith]

I think, when you join the forces, accepting that your life may be at risk is part of the deal.

But you're still entitled to expect that every safety precaution will be taken - so if shortage of proper equipment, or crap decision making, or lack of care contribute to that death, IMO your family should be entitled to some redress.

+1

[Gibbon]

The poppy burner should just be ignored, his purpose is to cause offence and thanks to the Tabloids has succeeded. The most offensive thing in my opinion is the way we are letting him and his ilk turn the poppy into a political symbol, by being overprotective of it we are giving them more ways to try and irritate us.

We should show more of the stiff upper lip to these contemptible cretins and keep the poppy out of the political arena.

[d000hg]

WGS. If someone was sending emails with this picture to individuals who had lost family members I'd say it then becomes worthy of police attention.

[AtW]

Soldiers trade their right to life in exchange for a lot of guns and right to kill.

HTH

[Incognito]

Have you heard of rule of law? Is it against the law to burn poppies?

No, but it's not the act of burning the poppy, it's the message it's conveyed.

1 Offence of sending letters etc. with intent to cause distress or anxiety.

(1)Any person who sends to another person—
(a)a letter, electronic communication or article of any description which conveys—
(i)a message which is indecent or grossly offensive;
...
(b)any article or electronic communication which is, in whole or part, of an indecent or grossly offensive nature,is guilty of an offence if his purpose, or one of his purposes, in sending it is that it should, so far as falling within paragraph (a) or (b) above, cause distress or anxiety to the recipient or to any other person to whom he intends that it or its contents or nature should be communicated.

The guy most probably hasn't helped himself by writing "How about that you squadey (sic) c**t"

What the law allows is any form of protest that isn't done with the intention of causing offence. I'm not religious, but I have no right to stand outside a mosque and burn the Koran. That's not protesting, that's trying to get a reaction. As was his actions in burning the poppy.

[Cliphead]

Soldiers trade their right to life in exchange for a lot of guns and right to kill.

HTH

If it wasn't for the participation of some members of my family in WWII you'd either never have been born or be speaking German.

Cretin.

[AtW]

If it wasn't for the participation of some members of my family in WWII you'd either never have been born or be speaking German.

I don't think you can find a family in Russia whose family members did not die in WW2. British contribution was not insignificant but it wasn't determining factor in that war. Google up German military losses on Ostfront.

As I said - soldiers are there to risk their life, if they were not supplied well or bad decisions were made that resulted in their death then people responsible should get court martial - like say those poor chaps in Iraq who got killed by mob and they did not have ammo FFS.

[Incognito]

I don't think you can find a family in Russia whose family members did not die in WW2.

As I said - soldiers are there to risk their life, if they were not supplied well or bad decisions were made that resulted in their death then people responsible should get court martial - like say those poor chaps in Iraq who got killed by mob and they did not have ammo FFS.

If you're going to troll know your subject. They had ammunition, they chose not to fire.

[Cliphead]

I don't think you can find a family in Russia whose family members did not die in WW2. British contribution was not insignificant but it wasn't determining factor in that war. Google up German military losses on Ostfront.

As I said - soldiers are there to risk their life, if they were not supplied well or bad decisions were made that resulted in their death then people responsible should get court martial - like say those poor chaps in Iraq who got killed by mob and they did not have ammo FFS.

Not arguing with the numbers or possible outcome. Just about every family in this country made some sacrifice regardless of the kit, decisions made or any possible agenda.

They were there when they were needed pure and simple.

Fck this you carry a gun so tough sht argument.