Reply to: A nutter apparently

[SueEllen]

** Of Daily Express readers?

Probably.

I remember all the studies I've read quote between 5 and some percentage in the mid-teens. Though the first studies I read where genetics research papers.

[d000hg]

If you are male there is a 15%* chance they aren't yours, if you are female you know they 100% bloody are.

*Daily Express survey figures.

** Of Daily Express readers?

[SueEllen]

Sorry guys - already have!

If you are male there is a 15%* chance they aren't yours, if you are female you know they 100% bloody are.

*Daily Express survey figures.

[original PM]

Fortunately original PM is unlikely to breed.

Sorry guys - already have!

[sasguru]

Fortunately original PM is unlikely to breed.

Ah one of those permanent s?

[northernladyuk]

I've put you in a box labelled "thick twat".
I now "understand" why you are compelled to post absolute bilge.
I still find it scary that you have bred thus weakening the culture whose success was originally based on intelligence.
Because we do not use Eugenics we're not in control of the lower IQ breeders.

Fortunately original PM is unlikely to breed.

[original PM]

I've put you in a box labelled "thick twat".
I now "understand" why you are compelled to post absolute bilge.
I still find it scary that you have bred thus weakening the culture whose success was originally based on intelligence.
Because we do not use Eugenics we're not in control of the lower IQ breeders.

Ooooh is it a nice box with a bow on it?

[sasguru]

It is a label

We have put him in a box labelled schizophrenia and then we have said that now he is in that box we can apply the label diminished responsibility.

I am not saying any of what you say is wrong I am saying that because you have given him some labels you can now 'understand' why he did it.

The reason you do this is that to not label him is 'scary' as it implies you are not in control.

What is even scarier is that you are not in control but you wish to maintain the illusion of control.

I've put you in a box labelled "thick twat".
I now "understand" why you are compelled to post absolute bilge.
I still find it scary that you have bred thus weakening the culture whose success was originally based on intelligence.
Because we do not use Eugenics we're not in control of the lower IQ breeders.

[vetran]

Isn't this just semantics; just as rape implies penetration murder implies the mental faculties to deliberately kill someone and to know you're doing it?

If the perpetrator is dealt with accordingly does it matter what word we use to define their action?

poor analogy. Rape only requires absence of consent from the penetrated party. No Means No. Also its quite divisive.

I would suggest you would be better using GBH as an example. Did you intend to hit him = Yes I was so angry he hit my friend & hurt him badly I thought he was going to hit me, Did you intend for him to fall over & break his jaw=no.

[d000hg]

Isn't this just semantics; just as rape implies penetration murder implies the mental faculties to deliberately kill someone and to know you're doing it?

If the perpetrator is dealt with accordingly does it matter what word we use to define their action?

[SueEllen]

It is a label

We have put him in a box labelled schizophrenia and then we have said that now he is in that box we can apply the label diminished responsibility.

I am not saying any of what you say is wrong I am saying that because you have given him some labels you can now 'understand' why he did it.

The reason you do this is that to not label him is 'scary' as it implies you are not in control.

Diminished responsibility equals not in control.

And to some people schizophrenic equals scary.

What is even scarier is that you are not in control but you wish to maintain the illusion of control.

WTF?

[original PM]

You haven't really thought this diminished responsibility thing through have you?

It is a label

We have put him in a box labelled schizophrenia and then we have said that now he is in that box we can apply the label diminished responsibility.

I am not saying any of what you say is wrong I am saying that because you have given him some labels you can now 'understand' why he did it.

The reason you do this is that to not label him is 'scary' as it implies you are not in control.

What is even scarier is that you are not in control but you wish to maintain the illusion of control.

[northernladyuk]

I believe it is convenient to label people so you can put them in boxes and apply rules to them and completely dehumanise them so you can treat them how you want.

And that is a technique which has been used for centuries to justify treating people differently from your own people.

You haven't really thought this diminished responsibility thing through have you?

[original PM]

Do you think that schizophrenia can never result in diminished responsibility or do you think the mitigation is overused?

I believe it is convenient to label people so you can put them in boxes and apply rules to them and completely dehumanise them so you can treat them how you want.

And that is a technique which has been used for centuries to justify treating people differently from your own people.

[northernladyuk]

He's likely to be sentenced to a secure mental hospital until he's no longer a danger to the public. Many mentally ill patients are actually just left in secure hospitals to rot for decades regardless of the length of their original sentence.

Murderers can get 25 years and can be out in much less due to good behaviour.

So yeah it's "fookin bollocks leftie cock wombles" to keep a mentally ill murderer locked up for far longer than a sane murderer.

The court is saying he is not a murderer. Do not mind original pm. He isn't entirely responsible for what he posts.