EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[najaB]

The vigilance of all our security services go a long way to achieving this, but as was proved in Nice, one ISIL sympathiser with a large goods vehicle can wreak utter carnage.

Which ignores the point that an elevated threat level doesn't necessarily mean that death is imminent, which seemed to be the point you were making in post #5096.

Perhaps their more criminal associated elements have satisfied themselves with the grooming and sexual abuse of young teenage white British girls....

I honestly expect better of your discourse than the level of racial stereotyping that this comment displays.

 

[backontrack]

I honestly expect better of your discourse than the level of racial stereotyping that this comment displays.

I didn't.

 

[Trog]

I assume you mean Edward II And yes, you are correct that there is considerable uncertainty about what happened to him, quite a few historians think the traditional accounts of his gruesome death were just propaganda, and at least one researcher has even questioned whether he was murdered at all.

Yes my bad.

 

[3141]

One factor is that you need to consider is that in all likelihood they would move down the risk categories as they age.

Plus the time between sentence and execution can be as much as a decade, so that's a half-million pounds right there.

It didn't take anything like as long as that when the death penalty existed here. My recollection is that the system in some American states that allows appeals to go on for so long was considered cruel and our quicker resolution was far better. There's no reason to assume that if the death penalty was reintroduced the procedures wound expand to ten years or more.

Well yes, if that society killed people.

It was however a long time ago.

No, it was when I was 26.

Interestingly, what happened before you were born seems ancient compared with what's happened since. I remember when I was thirteen (in 1952) my grandmother gave me a London General Omnibus Company bus map she'd found tucked inside a book. It was dated 1929 and seemed incredibly old to me. Yet twenty years later, when I was 33, a document that was 23 years old and had been created during my lifetime seemed more or less contemporary.

 

[najaB]

It didn't take anything like as long as that when the death penalty existed here.

Society - specifically its attitude towards the legal system - has changed a lot since the 1960's.

 

[me123]

It didn't take anything like as long as that when the death penalty existed here. My recollection is that the system in some American states that allows appeals to go on for so long was considered cruel and our quicker resolution was far better. There's no reason to assume that if the death penalty was reintroduced the procedures wound expand to ten years or more.

The death penalty is a final, irreversible punishment. It is imperative, therefore, that the appeals process is exhausted prior to the sentence being carried out. The notion that they'll go straight from the courtroom to the gallows is utterly foolish. I do not doubt for a minute that, if we did reinstate CP, we would have an extensive appeals system in place that would take in the order of years. It is essential to minimise the risk of miscarriages of justice (although undoubtedly you cannot remove that risk altogether).

 

[muz379]

It didn't take anything like as long as that when the death penalty existed here. My recollection is that the system in some American states that allows appeals to go on for so long was considered cruel and our quicker resolution was far better. There's no reason to assume that if the death penalty was reintroduced the procedures wound expand to ten years or more.

But the last execution in this country was '64 , the legal system has moved on since then and there is nothing to say that we would not have developed a much more rigorous appeals process in the 50 something years since then . I mean just to cite one massive legal change since 1964 I would have assumed that incorporating the ECHR into our legal system would have led to some requirement for more rigorous appeals ?

Arguably the Americans legal situation with regards to capital punishment is still evolving even today with changes to the methods of execution and pre death processes that are carried out.


There was a case brought in Jamaica in '93 about the "death row phenomena" and the time spent on death row not knowing if you would eventually be executed did amount to cruel and unusual punishment . I remember the result of the case was to commute the sentences of all of those on death row and after that there was not an execution carried out in Jamaica for an incredibly long time . I have not revisited that area of law since studying it but I do believe that they have since then carried out some executions so it would be interesting to see how they have got around those issues .

It would also be interesting to see if there is a greater percentage of innocent people subjected to the death penalty if you get rid of the extensive stages of appeal ?

Did we kill more factually innocent people when have had a quicker process than in Jamaica or America ?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The death penalty is a final, irreversible punishment. It is imperative, therefore, that the appeals process is exhausted prior to the sentence being carried out. The notion that they'll go straight from the courtroom to the gallows is utterly foolish. I do not doubt for a minute that, if we did reinstate CP, we would have an extensive appeals system in place that would take in the order of years. It is essential to minimise the risk of miscarriages of justice (although undoubtedly you cannot remove that risk altogether).

I too do not doubt that if we had the death penalty, there would need to be a solid review/appeals procedure. But 10 years???? [*] Come on! You basically need at best a couple of teams of people to go through the evidence, talk to any witnesses etc., and figure out if there are any flaws in the evidence, and perhaps to go back to court to convince a team of judges either way. I can believe that, in a reasonable, efficient, system, that would take a few months - and that it might sometimes go on for longer if some reason turns up to doubt some of the evidence. But I cannot believe it has to take 10 years to do that. I'm going to hazard a guess that the reason it can take so long in the USA is that they have a very inefficient system, and lawyers and judges etc. go off to work on other cases for long periods in the meantime and so on.

I think that, if you really want to keep claiming that capital punishment would result in massive, long, cruel, delays like we see in America and would cost a fortune like we see in America, then you'd need to come up with some convincing argument to show that the American system probably is the best possible system for death penalty processes, and that it's close to being as efficient and quick and cost-effective as any reasonable system could ever be. Do you believe that is the case? I know I'm working on guesswork, without any detailed knowledge of the system, but I somehow doubt it is.


[*] I realize you said 'years', you yourself didn't specify '10' years, but you replied to someone who did suggest that timeframe without contradiction, so I'm assuming that's the kind of period you're implying appeals could take.

 

[najaB]

I'm going to hazard a guess that the reason it can take so long in the USA is that they have a very inefficient system, and lawyers and judges etc. go off to work on other cases for long periods in the meantime and so on.

The higher courts do not work quickly. Here or in the USA.

I must say, however, that I'm concerned by the apparent rush to kill the convicted.

 

[me123]

I too do not doubt that if we had the death penalty, there would need to be a solid review/appeals procedure. But 10 years???? [*] Come on! You basically need at best a couple of teams of people to go through the evidence, talk to any witnesses etc., and figure out if there are any flaws in the evidence, and perhaps to go back to court to convince a team of judges either way. I can believe that, in a reasonable, efficient, system, that would take a few months - and that it might sometimes go on for longer if some reason turns up to doubt some of the evidence. But I cannot believe it has to take 10 years to do that. I'm going to hazard a guess that the reason it can take so long in the USA is that they have a very inefficient system, and lawyers and judges etc. go off to work on other cases for long periods in the meantime and so on.

I think that, if you really want to keep claiming that capital punishment would result in massive, long, cruel, delays like we see in America and would cost a fortune like we see in America, then you'd need to come up with some convincing argument to show that the American system probably is the best possible system for death penalty processes, and that it's close to being as efficient and quick and cost-effective as any reasonable system could ever be. Do you believe that is the case? I know I'm working on guesswork, without any detailed knowledge of the system, but I somehow doubt it is.


[*] I realize you said 'years', you yourself didn't specify '10' years, but you replied to someone who did suggest that timeframe without contradiction, so I'm assuming that's the kind of period you're implying appeals could take.

I think the US system is the closest real life parallel to what we would introduce, although I should point out that very few civilised countries employ the death penalty on a regular basis. I'm not claiming it's the best model to follow (to be honest, I wouldn't advocate any model). But I think it's closest to what we would have; note that I'm not saying that it's something we should have.

To take another parallel, we could also look at Japan. Japan executes far fewer people than the US, but it still takes years (usually around 7 years, can be over 30) to get to the point of execution. Singapore is in the realm of 20 years. Speedy executions in civilised countries are not the norm, and I've already outlined why this is the case. The extensive appeals process is necessary, and it is necessary to allow the accused to complete the process. It takes time because these are often complex cases. Indeed, given the irreversible nature of the sentence, having a period of years is probably the best approach - it allows the appeal process to be performed diligently and also allows time for any new evidence to come to light.

I'm not going to speculate as to what the UK appeal process would be - it would certainly be a new process within our legislature. But the evidence that we see from capital punishment in civilised countries around the world is that such a process would take years rather than months.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The higher courts do not work quickly. Here or in the USA.

I must say, however, that I'm concerned by the apparent rush to kill the convicted.

I don't see it particularly as a rush to 'kill the convicted' - more a case of, disputing this idea that it must take years and years to get from conviction to execution. Having said that, I do think that there is a good argument that criminal cases should come to trial and be concluded a lot quicker than is currently the case - for the benefit of all involved (including victims and defendants) - whether capital punishment is involved or not.

I'm actually undecided about the death penalty - I think there are some good arguments on both sides. And I would also say that I think the 'miscarriage of justice' argument is the strongest argument on the anti-death-penalty side.

However, what I find somewhat concerning - and the thing that mainly prompted my previous post - is the way that some people seem to be pushing the idea that we mustn't have the death penalty because if we did it would be just like America and just as expensive as America and just as cruel as America and take just as long as America and so on. I think that's a pretty silly argument because - you know what - this isn't America. We have a very different legal system from America, and a very different cultural and political environment too. Both our and the American legal systems are imperfect, and could do with a lot of improvement (the fact that cases often take so long to come to higher courts, which you rightly cite, is a case in point). But the idea that, if we had the death penalty, it would have to be exactly like how they do it in America, really doesn't seem sensible to me. I find it a bit of a shame because there are some very powerful moral and practical arguments against the death penalty, which people arguing against it on this thread largely seem to be ignoring in favour of continually pushing questionable comparisons with America, which I would suggest is not helping their case.

 

[muz379]

I too do not doubt that if we had the death penalty, there would need to be a solid review/appeals procedure. But 10 years???? [*] Come on! You basically need at best a couple of teams of people to go through the evidence, talk to any witnesses etc., and figure out if there are any flaws in the evidence, and perhaps to go back to court to convince a team of judges either way. I can believe that, in a reasonable, efficient, system, that would take a few months - and that it might sometimes go on for longer if some reason turns up to doubt some of the evidence. But I cannot believe it has to take 10 years to do that. I'm going to hazard a guess that the reason it can take so long in the USA is that they have a very inefficient system, and lawyers and judges etc. go off to work on other cases for long periods in the meantime and so on.

I think that, if you really want to keep claiming that capital punishment would result in massive, long, cruel, delays like we see in America and would cost a fortune like we see in America, then you'd need to come up with some convincing argument to show that the American system probably is the best possible system for death penalty processes, and that it's close to being as efficient and quick and cost-effective as any reasonable system could ever be. Do you believe that is the case? I know I'm working on guesswork, without any detailed knowledge of the system, but I somehow doubt it is.


[*] I realize you said 'years', you yourself didn't specify '10' years, but you replied to someone who did suggest that timeframe without contradiction, so I'm assuming that's the kind of period you're implying appeals could take.

People have spent as long as 40 years on death row in AMerica .

Also it is worth considering that there are two reasons why the actually execution might be delayed

The first is down to the actual execution itself not being able to be carried out . At the moment a lot of states who still actually execute are not executing people because they are having problems sourcing the drugs that they used to execute people . There have been many challenges on the basis that certain methods including certain combinations of drugs are a breach of the subjects constitutional right under the eight amendment to not be subject to cruel or unusual punishment . That might seem absurd perhaps but it has to be a consideration when you see people catching fire on the electric chair on visibly struggling and suffocating in a gas chamber you do have to ask yourself if that is compliant with the constitution . That only raises the question of how we would kill people if we brought the death penalty back in here . Our Human rights doctrines also include a similar right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment .

Another reason for the delays is due to the legal challenges that a defendant is entitled to . Now admittedly over there because of the right to appeal first to the highest state courts and then through federal courts all the way upto the supreme court if you have an argument on a point of law the appeals process could be expedited over here by not having to go through 2 levels of judiciary . But another thing that is a consideration is that many death row defendants cannot afford their own legal representation . Waiting for suitably qualified public defender over there can take time ,similarly over here if we reintroduced the death penalty we would have to have an extensive level of public funding for lawyers to represent people appealing their sentence . But if you spent too much it would just become another tabloid headline about vast sums of money being used to defend rapists and murderers because it does not seem to be fashionable in the newspaper world to pay any respect to the proper legal doctrine of innocent until proven guilty .

As for needing a couple of teams to go through the evidence to establish its accuracy . But surely if these teams dealt with the matter of people facing the death penalty there is a risk that they could become hardened to it and not pay proper attention to elements of doubt . We have seen the phenomena with magistrates become more conservative and case hardened in their dealings with criminal matters when asked to adjudicate on fact . It is one of the reasons I personally would reject any notion of criminal jurors . Otherwise you would end up with a Jury full of crown prosecutors . So used to hearing about violence and disorderly conduct all day that it would become normal to them and they would assume everyone guilty .

 

[najaB]

I don't see it particularly as a rush to 'kill the convicted' - more a case of, disputing this idea that it must take years and years to get from conviction to execution. Having said that, I do think that there is a good argument that criminal cases should come to trial and be concluded a lot quicker than is currently the case - for the benefit of all involved (including victims and defendants) - whether capital punishment is involved or not.

The countries where the condemned are executed quickly (e.g. China, Saudi Arabia) don't strike me as countries whose legal systems we should seek to emulate.

 

[muddythefish]

One mans view of civilised can vary in different parts of the world and there are those in other countries who view homosexuality as uncivilised. I would like you to expand your stated word of "inhuman" as it appears that you feel this was the case in Britain of capital punishment until the mid 1960s (when I was 20 years of age). Were my formative and university years spent in an inhuman society then?

Yes,,

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I honestly expect better of your discourse than the level of racial stereotyping that this comment displays.

Look at the last three major cases that involved group sexual grooming and abuse of young teenage white girls that have occurred in Britain and see who were the accused. If any racial stereotyping appears to been a common denominator in them, the accused are the ones who have made it so.

Oxford, Dewsbury and Rochdale cover a wide area in Britain,

 

[muz379]

Look at the last three major cases that involved group sexual grooming and abuse of young teenage white girls that have occurred in Britain and see who were the accused. If any racial stereotyping appears to been a common denominator in them, the accused are the ones who have made it so.

Oxford, Dewsbury and Rochdale cover a wide area in Britain,

Is it that it was racial though . Or was it that they picked upon particularly vulnerable juveniles who had overwhelmingly come from care or broken homes ?and it just so happens that there is an abundance of a particular race of young girls coming from those backgrounds ?

As abhorrent as it is plenty of groups of white men who abuse children choose victims using exactly the same criteria . Vulnerable children from broken homes or who grew up in care .

 

[najaB]

Look at the last three major cases that involved group sexual grooming and abuse of young teenage white girls that have occurred in Britain and see who were the accused. If any racial stereotyping appears to been a common denominator in them, the accused are the ones who have made it so.

Oxford, Dewsbury and Rochdale cover a wide area in Britain,

Your comment could be summarised as: "British Muslim men aren't committing terrorism because they're busy grooming white girls."

If you can't see what's wrong with that then I really don't know what to say.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I didn't.

I know that you can be relied upon to add your support to certain other posters and had you been around at the time that I was when the Profumo affair shocked Britain with two young women of a certain notoriety being involved, you would have remembered the phrase that entered into common knowledge attributed to the younger of them, Mandy Rice-Davies......

"Well, he would say that, wouldn't he"

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Your comment could be summarised as: "British Muslim men aren't committing terrorism because they're busy grooming white girls."

I am sure that if you had made such an over-reaching generalisation comment as one acting for the prosecution, my defence council would be at once on his feet making an appeal to the judge.

If you wish to make such a puerile comment that is non-specific to those who were not any part whatsoever in those three major cases, then you are in your right to do so, but be aware that the wording of your summary above could well be taken as "tarring all with the same brush"

Do you deny what was said by the judiciary at the end of the three cases of Oxford, Rochdale and Dewsbury that I chose to highlight, details of which should still being fresh in peoples' minds?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Is it that it was racial though . Or was it that they picked upon particularly vulnerable juveniles who had overwhelmingly come from care or broken homes ?and it just so happens that there is an abundance of a particular race of young girls coming from those backgrounds ?

As abhorrent as it is plenty of groups of white men who abuse children choose victims using exactly the same criteria . Vulnerable children from broken homes or who grew up in care .

I note what you say, but in certain countries with a different view of women far removed from what we in Britain see, women are viewed as naught but chattels. Therefore, my contention is that the defendants in their own mindset were adhering to the community view that prevails in their homeland.

 

[muz379]

I note what you say, but in certain countries with a different view of women far removed from what we in Britain see, women are viewed as naught but chattels. Therefore, my contention is that the defendants in their own mindset were adhering to the community view that prevails in their homeland.

And what countries are those ?

Remind me again how many of the perpetrators had actually come from these countries and of these how many had lived over here long enough to know that what they was doing was wrong ?

And how many had been born over here and lived their whole lives here never actually seeing the situation in their homeland ?

You paint such generalised views of other countries and using quite outdated stereotypes by the sounds of it . Yet I am sure you would be the first to cry fowl if people did the same of people from this country .I mean we saw at Euro 2016 that English football hooligans are not the best in the world anymore . So I am sure you would cry that it is an unfair outdated stereotype for people to say that the English are just a nation of oafish borderline alcoholic skinhead football hooligans .

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Look at the last three major cases that involved group sexual grooming and abuse of young teenage white girls that have occurred in Britain and see who were the accused. If any racial stereotyping appears to been a common denominator in them, the accused are the ones who have made it so.

Oxford, Dewsbury and Rochdale cover a wide area in Britain,

Those were of course absolutely appalling cases. I think you may be mistaken about racial stereotyping though - from what I'd read, the victims in the cases were mainly chosen because of their vulnerability. But however the victims were chosen, that doesn't change that they were absolutely awful, life-destroying crimes (and incidentally the kinds of cases where it's hard not to wonder if the death penalty wouldn't have been a more appropriate sentence).

However, even if the perpetrators were doing racial stereotyping, that's no excuse for you, or anyone else here to do likewise. Two wrongs don't make a right, and making a remark like:

Perhaps their more criminal associated elements have satisfied themselves with the grooming and sexual abuse of young teenage white British girls....

Is rather suggestive of racial stereotyping of Asians/Muslims - I would suggest that racial stereotying is just as bad and just as dangerous, no matter who is stereotying whom. The fact that a few people who happen to be from one racial group/one religious group do something awful is not a justification for tarring large numbers of other people who happen to be from the same ethnic group/have the same religion with those kinds of actions.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I note what you say, but in certain countries with a different view of women far removed from what we in Britain see, women are viewed as naught but chattels. Therefore, my contention is that the defendants in their own mindset were adhering to the community view that prevails in their homeland.

It is very true that in certain countries, women are often very badly treated, and have few rights, and cultural attitudes amongst many men in those countries appear to be quite appalling in that regard. I think it's very possible that you are correct to the extent that the actions of the men involved in those particular sexual abuse cases may well have been influenced by that kind of culture.

But I don't think that changes the objection to your remarks - in that you appeared to be tarring a whole ethnic/religious group living in the UK with those same attitudes, which is almost certainly unfair and incorrect, and potentially quite insulting to those Muslims and Asians living in the UK (almost certainly, the vast majority) who would be just as appalled as you or I at the abuse that occurred.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

And what countries are those ?

Remind me again how many of the perpetrators had actually come from these countries and of these how many had lived over here long enough to know that what they was doing was wrong ? And how many had been born over here and lived their whole lives here never actually seeing the situation in their homeland ?

You paint such generalised views of other countries and using quite outdated stereotypes by the sounds of it . Yet I am sure you would be the first to cry fowl if people did the same of people from this country .I mean we saw at Euro 2016 that English football hooligans are not the best in the world anymore . So I am sure you would cry that it is an unfair outdated stereotype for people to say that the English are just a nation of oafish borderline alcoholic skinhead football hooligans .

The ingrained beliefs of those from the areas that you well know of but choose to ignore are not the types of beliefs that suddenly dissipate over a period of three generations of living in Britain. Have a journey around Burnley and Blackburn and you will see what I mean. I will cite "honour killings" as one such matter that is totallty foreign to British culture, but the belief in such a "matter of honour" still is as strong as ever in certain immigrant communities and I can do no better than to cite the case of the "honour killing" in Britain of the 17 year-old British Pakistani girl, Shafilea Ahmed, by her own mother and father for which both of them received 25 year prison sentences in 2012. No generalisation there. Just cold hard facts.

In answer to your later hypothesis, using your exact word of "fowl", I give you my total assurance that I never have, nor ever will, utter such a call of such avian nature, under any circumstances whatsoever. I admit to have hearing such a word as "fowl" being loudly shouted by stallholders at both the Bury and Bolton indoor meat markets, usually in the final hour of trading when it is said the local residents are there to claim reduced price bargains offered by those stallholders. I once did obtain four middle-sized fresh chickens for only £5.00 at 1645 in Bolton market.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It is very true that in certain countries, women are often very badly treated, and have few rights, and cultural attitudes amongst many men in those countries appear to be quite appalling in that regard. I think it's very possible that you are correct to the extent that the actions of the men involved in those particular sexual abuse cases may well have been influenced by that kind of culture.

But I don't think that changes the objection to your remarks - in that you appeared to be tarring a whole ethnic/religious group living in the UK with those same attitudes, which is almost certainly unfair and incorrect, and potentially quite insulting to those Muslims and Asians living in the UK (almost certainly, the vast majority) who would be just as appalled as you or I at the abuse that occurred.

One matter that seemed to ensure the continuance of the type of beliefs that were brought into this country from the Asian sub-continent from the days of immigrants who came into Britain after the Second World War to work in the textile mills was the fact that for many years, the Imams who came with the immigrants were from very conservative rural Muslim areas who would be strong in their preaching at the local mosques and that fact was recently highlighted by the more enlightened members of the Islamic communities as one that needed to have a seed change. I do so hope that events will reveal this to be a most worthwhile aspiration.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Sorry, in all the discussion about the death penalty, I missed this.

Do I understand about devastated lives? How about undiagnosed Coeliac disease for 40 years? How about panic attacks for that length of time, resolved going gluten free? How about being unable to work for that time cos of doctors happy to just keep giving you sick notes and tablets? How about living in mouldy, freezing flats owned by scum private landlords? I live a devastated life every single effing day. I would love to have had a job, a trade, paid my taxes etc. So yes I do care about others lives being devastated, especially by Mr Cameron, the Tory government and the bedroom tax!!! Stigmatising the poor as work-shy scroungers. Robbing the poor to give to his rich banker friends. So don't have a go at me about not caring!!!

That certainly sounds like you have had more than your share of problems My sympathies. And I totally agree with you about the bedroom tax, and the Government stigmatising many of the poor.

However, we had a democratic vote. One side won, we have to abide by the decision. Stop moaning trying to overturn it cos the minority lost!

But this is where I would take issue with your attitude.

I have friends who are from the EU, have lived in the UK for - in some cases - decades who, because of the Brexit vote, very justifiably terrified that in 2 year's time, they might end up forced out of their homes and jobs and - in effect - forcibly relocated to countries that are no longer their homes. Given Theresa May's current apparent attitude, I'd say their fears may well be justified. Is that your message to those people? 'Stop moaning'? How would you feel if (hypothetically) a Conservative supporter responded to your distress about the bedroom tax by saying something like 'Stop moaning. We had an election and the Conservatives won.'. Can't you see that by saying things like 'stop moaning' you're putting yourself on that same level?

Yes, we had a referendum. But that doesn't mean there shouldn't be compassion for people affected by it, and attempts to persuade the Government to change its mind where it's doing wrong (Just as - for example - for the bedroom tax. The Conservatives won an election promising to continue the bedroom tax. That's not going to stop me and others who are aware of the hurt the bedroom tax is doing from doing whatever we can to try to change the Government's mind.) Campaigning for what you believe in (including campaigning against a referendum result that [I believe] will cause huge damage and suffering, without any real benefits) isn't moaning - it's what democracy is about!

Let's all work to make Brexit work, and work well for everyone. Yes, it's going to be a very bumpy road. All the Remainer's who said everything would be bad if we left, well look, the country hasn't ground to a halt yet, in fact we're doing much better than predicted.

Actually, you can't get me on that one I was arguing on railforums well before the referendum that the claims of economic woe were probably exaggerated and unrealistic (but that this was still less serious than the outright lies being perpetuated by the Leave side, and there were still very good reasons for remaining in the EU).

 

[najaB]

Paul. I want you to think very carefully about the statement you are trying to defend. Again, it can be distilled down to "British Muslims aren't committing acts of terrorism because they're abusing white girls instead."

 

[EM2]

Mods, can the discussions regarding the death penalty and paedophilia be split off into separate threads please?

 

[muz379]

The ingrained beliefs of those from the areas that you well know of but choose to ignore are not the types of beliefs that suddenly dissipate over a period of three generations of living in Britain. Have a journey around Burnley and Blackburn and you will see what I mean. I will cite "honour killings" as one such matter that is totallty foreign to British culture, but the belief in such a "matter of honour" still is as strong as ever in certain immigrant communities and I can do no better than to cite the case of the "honour killing" in Britain of the 17 year-old British Pakistani girl, Shafilea Ahmed, by her own mother and father for which both of them received 25 year prison sentences in 2012. No generalisation there. Just cold hard facts.

But all your "cold hard facts" demonstrate are that there are some within those communities who do have backwards moral codes that do not comply with those widely accepted in Britain .This should come as no surprise there are morally abhorrent criminals in all racial groups present in the uk .

However you provide no evidence of the extent of this in the Asian community ?

 

[Domh245]

In a desperate attempt to drag this back onto the topic of EU Referendum: The result and aftermath what did everyone else make of Theresa May's decision to sit in the Lords for the start of their debate on the bill?

It'd be quite nice to see some parliamentary action and see some proper debate and amendments made to the bill given the rather lacklustre attempt at it in the House of Commons.