Jump to content

My eye! Sweet Jesus, Ouch!


Sledge

Recommended Posts

what about the people with severe allergies? My wife has a severe nut allergy, and has to carry around an epi-pen (adrenaline shot, very L4D2!) in case she eats one/gets rubbed with one/touches one or somethign by accident. I've done first aid training and *know* that if she didnt have one, and accidentally ate something with nuts in it, she would die. as it stands, the epi pen has only just enough adrenaline to keep the heart going until the ambulance arrives, where they've got MORE adrenaline, and so can get her to a hospital (which has even MORE) and (hopefully) save her life.

 

AFAIK, thoe epi-pens cost about £120 each, and you need two (one as a spare in case you lose it) and expire every two years or so.

 

Should we/she have to pay £250 every couple of years for something she's not chosen to have?

 

I vaguely agree with you, though. i think you should get something like a three strike system. 1st problem thats caused by obesity/smoking/drug addiction is treated, with a stern warning. Second is treated with a very clear message that next time you'll have to pay for it. third time and you pay or you dont get it. at elast that way people are made patently aware of whats happening, and WHY its happening.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 24.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

*edit*

 

Who?

 

No, I am what I would call a radical liberal.

 

I think people should be able to do anything they want until they hurt someone.

At that point we throw the book at them

 

*/edit*

 

 

Yeah but you could have some fat, alcoholic smoker on a liver and a pair of lungs by then.

 

Tink, your mrs' nut allergy is not a choice and it is not a byproduct of a choice so it is covered in Stunt's Britain.

 

Did I mention politicians?

 

They get an 8 by 10 room in a block of flats in Peckam where they have to stay unless they are at home doing a surgery.

 

They get institutional canteen food, 24K and no allowances except free rail travel.

 

All prisoners with terms over 1 year are shipped to China, Turkey or India (any where with a ###### human rights record) where they are handed over to the Chinese (or such) for incarceration.

I am sure we could get a good deal, 10 quid a week each or something.

Their last year (should they survive) will be spent in the UK on an intensive course of retraining and counselling and then sent to an area where they have no relatives or friends and sorted out in a job, they will be under covert observation by SRR, MI5, MI6 and police recruits during the surveillance section of their training.

 

One slip up and it's back to China.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think shipping people off to countries with atrocious human rights records and then spying on them after thier sentences are served is in any way liberal at all, in fact it seems to be the polar opposite. I've said my piece and I know how these things turn out so I'll exit here. Feel free to refute, slag off, etc ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do people seem to think that privatising things will improve anything? It will, in fact, do the exact opposite.

 

Look at the trains, buses, bin collections, roads, water boards, gas, electric companies, phones, etc, etc, etc...

 

All that happens is that the costs associated with running the service stay the same, but now the company has to make a *profit* instead of just coving its own costs, so prices go up and/or service levels go down. "Unprofitable" routes to outlying villages get dropped, stranding people in their hamlets with no way to get to the nearest town but their own cars. This is just one example...

 

Things that provide a SERVICE should not be run for a profit, they should be run to provide the best SERVICE to the public. The only people who can do this without needing to make a profit are the government - whether local or national...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea is that privatisation creates competition, but that's not really true, it just means that companies will compete to do the least they can get away with for the lowest possible price.

 

 

All that happens is that the costs associated with running the service stay the same, but now the company has to make a *profit* instead of just coving its own costs, so prices go up and/or service levels go down. "Unprofitable" routes to outlying villages get dropped, stranding people in their hamlets with no way to get to the nearest town but their own cars. This is just one example...

 

+1

 

5 or so years ago, a return bus ticket from my village to the nearest town was 80p, now it's £5. Nothing's changed, the service is no more regular than it was, and what's more we often have drivers who haven't actually been taught the route, last week a lady had to direct the driver to every single stop. £5 wouldn't be too bad if I was going a long way, but it's about 5 miles, and it's the same ticket you buy if you want to go 30 miles. I suppose it's more efficient to just have one ticket for adults and one for children rather than one based on how far you want to travel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Managed competition, thats what is needed :)

 

Anyway, new rant: BT

 

So I'm paying £38.78pm for BT Evening & Weekends plus 8M broadband.

 

I look for a better deal. Hmm, O2 are £15.50 for 20M including line rental (my actual line supports 12M).

 

I call up BT for a MAC code. Suddenly they can offer me line rental and up to 20M broadband for £25.28. <_<

Link to post
Share on other sites

French and Australian hospitals run on a system not too far from my plans and they are awesome.

What doesn't seem to work is privatisation in Britain, I'll have to put Sir Alan Sugar in charge.

 

On the human fights/liberal thing, here is a thought experiment.

 

Language follows thought. Have you ever heard of a crime described as inhuman? rape is inhuman, why should a person who commits an inhuman crime be allowed human rights?

 

Do what you like until you hurt someone (who doesn't consent to be hurt) then watch out because it's Chinese nipple electrodes time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, the desires to impregnate females, eat and murder are about the only instincts man has that ARE human. Everything else is trained in.

 

Crime is simply a failure to suppress our natural instincts.

 

Plus, do you not see the hypocrisy there? Surely if you torture someone, they havent consented, does this not make you a criminal? Put someone on that job for a short while and they will start to enjoy it...

 

---

Another little rant (without too much detail):

 

Accepting 20pm payment on a £1600 debt is not happening.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, the legal system isn't perfect, you're bound to get the wrong guy occasionally.

 

Like it or not, everyone in the world is human, humans aren't always nice but they all have rights. Prisons do an adequate job of taking away the main ones we take for granted in this country, freedom to move around and do what you want being the main one.

 

 

On an unrelated note, I have given myself arc eye, with a torch :( I don't like it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, the desires to impregnate females, eat and murder are about the only instincts man has that ARE human. Everything else is trained in.

 

Apart from the whole set of social instincts we also have. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one has rights. There are no such thing as civil rights, human rights or anything else. The very idea is ludicrous. What people have are priviledges granted them by their governments. That and what they're able to enforce themselves.

 

Sound harsh? Well, yes, it is, but it's true. The government can take away what you think are your "rights" any time they choose to do so. Can you stop them? How? By protesting? By voting? By taking up arms and rebelling? Oh wait, they banned guns, outlaws protesting and suspended elections. ######. Now what? :unsure:

 

At the end of the day, your "rights" extend only so far as your ability to assert and enforce them on anyone who tries to deny them to you. Everything else is given to you at the whim of a person or group stronger than you. And as such, can be taken away just as easily.

 

 

 

On another matter, I'm greatly in favour of removing "rights" from criminals. They violated the "rights" of their victims, why should they be protected? They broke the law, why should the law protect them?

 

Bring back the concept of the Outlaw. If you're outside the law's rules, then you're outside them all the way, you don't get protected by them anymore. Anyone can do anything they like to you, you're not part of society. You're essentially not a person any more.

 

In the Western world, we seem to have somehow become so concerned with the "rights" and protection of criminals that we have forgotten that laws, rights and protection are there to protect people *FROM* criminals.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Amateurstuntman - That's why you replace the human rights act with a civil rights act. Certain human rights, as covered the UNDHR should be enshrined, but for the rest of the "human rights" that people seem to think they have are actually civil rights.

So civil rights like, being able to live without the fear of violence and crime for example should apply to people who are able to stay within the bounds of civil society.

Anyone who takes deliberate steps outside the bounds of civil society should no longer be covered by these rights.

 

For example, you can't "accidentally" burgle someones house. You select your victim, you check to see if the property is secured, you deliberately enter the property and you deliberately select property to take for your own gain. So by doing such, your civil rights not to have the snot beaten out of you by an enraged home-owner, (who's civil right to security and living without the fear of crime you've just broken), is waived as you have deliberately stepped out of the bounds, and protection of, civil society.

 

This also follows the Libertarian principal of do what you want so long as you do no injury to others. Common sense really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While completely ignoring the underlying causes of most crime such as poverty, child abuse etc.

 

Bunch of right wing ****s spouting sewage, this is.

 

I'll give you poverty for a minority, stealing to feed your family because you've fallen through the cracks*, but at the end of the day, for the majority, it's an excuse, "oh I had a broken childhood", "things are tough" etc etc. The vast majority of people in the same situation of poverty manage to live their lives without resorting to criminal activity.

Far too much huggy left wing sewage spouting rubbish that doesn't accept personal responsibility for your own actions, it has to be someone elses fault*.

 

*The only exception for this I'm aware of at the moment is above, in that for one reason or another, our social care system has some pretty big cracks meaning that too often, the people that need the help aren't getting it, and that needs sorting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Causes of crime do not interest me.

 

The UK has a welfare system. Poverty is not an excuse.

 

Abuse is not an excuse. I don't care what happened to you, that's no justification for harming others. If you were a victim of crimes, abuse or whatever, then you need help - I'm not saying otherwise - but not a license to become a criminal yourself.

 

There's too much of this "Oh, it's not their fault" BS attitude. It *IS* their fault, they made a CHOICE to turn to crime in a society where help is available without such desperate measures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Amateurstuntman - That's why you replace the human rights act with a civil rights act. Certain human rights, as covered the UNDHR should be enshrined, but for the rest of the "human rights" that people seem to think they have are actually civil rights.

So civil rights like, being able to live without the fear of violence and crime for example should apply to people who are able to stay within the bounds of civil society.

Anyone who takes deliberate steps outside the bounds of civil society should no longer be covered by these rights.

 

For example, you can't "accidentally" burgle someones house. You select your victim, you check to see if the property is secured, you deliberately enter the property and you deliberately select property to take for your own gain. So by doing such, your civil rights not to have the snot beaten out of you by an enraged home-owner, (who's civil right to security and living without the fear of crime you've just broken), is waived as you have deliberately stepped out of the bounds, and protection of, civil society.

 

This also follows the Libertarian principal of do what you want so long as you do no injury to others. Common sense really.

Stop stealing my thoughts. :blink:

 

I have to agree completely, criminals who would happily steal your possesions, threaten or harm your family, even try to kill you, have no right to hide behind the human rights act themseves when they so willingly violate other peoples right to live in peace & free from fear/ harm etc etc. The number of times you see smug scum bags laughing as they know their solicitor can use some obscure technicality to get them a reduced sentence or escape charges altogether makes me sick; just as bad a a criminal being able to sue you after they hurt themselves breaking into your house- maddening yet true.

 

I dont believe we should have a free-for-all and be allowed to beat the scum to death for just stealing a tv or xbox ( 3 strikes system perhaps?... ), but they shouldnt be allowed the luxury of xboxes and sky tv in their prison cells; prison used to be a means of punishing wrong-doers and discouraging them from breaking the law in future. Seems these days prison is cushier than ever, and lags get let out early due to overcrowding, only to go on and reoffend & get another slap on the wrist. Someone build some more bloody prisons and take away the entertainment centres, and try some proper rehabilitation techniques..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the use of session cookies.