Truck Drives Through Crowd in Nice, France

[Thracian]

He wasn't known to security services - just known for smaller unrelated crimes.

Agg - Assault, DV and Robbery I understand are not small crimes - just not on the same scale as this, obviously.

 

 

Most anything would be a smaller crime than the carnage in Nice but it sounds as if he's metaphorically held a season ticket for police visits and for much more than just minor matters.

Again, I'd have to question his mental balance and the seeming unwillingness to take dangerous people off the streets due to human rights considerations.

The legislation should be thrown away and re-written with a lot more common sense and regard to potential victims and national security. But I said this a lot of unnessary deaths ago. 

[Nick]

Yeah but in reality Tony, you can't lock somebody away forever because they broke the law at a point.

[Guest MattP]

Hve to say, all this praying for various places over the last 18 months actually seems to be making things worse. Maybe it's time for a change of tack, you know, instead of just 'praying', maybe trying to confront the problem?

 

How we do that I don't know, but that's why we pay all these World leaders, diplomats and envoys huge salaries.

[Trav Le Bleu]

Sky News reporting 52 in critical condition, with 25 of those in 'very' critical.

Bad and sad all round.

I thought, after security success at The Euros, the country would somewhat recover further. But many are probably fearing when they hear a loud banging noise and possibly some even afraid of going out in busy public places.

Isis can't hit anything remotely well guarded. As I said earlier, they're not organised cells of equipped terrorist who have staked out their target and bought inside info, so that they can hit the weakest points; they rely on inspiring people who are already disaffected and mentally unstable to act on their inner desires. That's all they have to do and it works.

[Thracian]

Yeah but in reality Tony, you can't lock somebody away forever because they broke the law at a point.

 

When you come up with an even moderately workable solution I'll be all ears but meanwhile kind-hearted liberalism and the fear of human rights legislation is combining to increase and encourage the problems. Uncomfortable/regrettable or not the first responsibility is to the population and their safety. And if leaders are unwilling to act firmly to this end then we need new leaders.     

 

I don't know chapter and verse on the Nice killer or any knowledge of his mental state, but from what I've read so far he was a regular and quite serious offender.

 

As such, he'd have been out of circulation a long time ago, in any regime of mine, though not necessarily in prison. How many lives might that have saved at a stroke. Not just the 84 dead so far. But all the ongoing despair of their families.

 

Those "Black Lives Count" banners struck a chord it me for their simple truth. It's high time that Victims Lives Counted too .

 

     

.

[Nick]

When you come up with an even moderately workable solution I'll be all ears but meanwhile kind-hearted liberalism and the fear of human rights legislation is combining to increase and encourage the problems. Uncomfortable/regrettable or not the first responsibility is to the population and their safety. And if leaders are unwilling to act firmly to this end then we need new leaders.     

 

I don't know chapter and verse on the Nice killer or any knowledge of his mental state, but from what I've read so far he was a regular and quite serious offender.

 

As such, he'd have been out of circulation a long time ago, in any regime of mine, though not necessarily in prison. How many lives might that have saved at a stroke. Not just the 84 dead so far. But all the ongoing despair of their families.

 

Those "Black Lives Count" banners struck a chord it me for their simple truth. It's high time that Victims Lives Counted too .

 

     

.

So what would you do with people who drink alcohol and drive over the limit Tony? A similar justice considering the risk they pose?

[Dr The Singh]

So what would you do with people who drink alcohol and drive over the limit Tony? A similar justice considering the risk they pose?

, how did I know that was gonna come out??

[Thracian]

So what would you do with people who drink alcohol and drive over the limit Tony? A similar justice considering the risk they pose?

 

 

No "solution" I notice! 

 

And you're actually belittling the type of crime being talked about while over 80 bodies lie in a morgue.not to mention the Paris bodies before that and so many more who probably need never have died if the authorities had acted on the known "previous" (and their real, as opposed to theoretical, victims).

[Jimothy]

No "solution" I notice!

And you're actually belittling the type of crime being talked about while over 80 bodies lie in a morgue.not to mention the Paris bodies before that and so many more who probably need never have died if the authorities had acted on the known "previous" (and their real, as opposed to theoretical, victims).

It appears he has a conviction for assault and has had his wrist slapped a couple of times for petty things, he wasn't known to the security services. Yet your solution seems to be to have him locked up as a precaution. Tell me, without hindsight, how that's a workable solution? So everyone with even the smallest criminal past should be locked away just in case? I think you'll need to come up with better than that It's a complex issue with a difficult solution that's not as simple as locking up for life, anyone who's ever spoken to a policeman.

[Thracian]

It appears he has a conviction for assault and has had his wrist slapped a couple of times for petty things, he wasn't known to the security services. Yet your solution seems to be to have him locked up as a precaution. Tell me, without hindsight, how that's a workable solution? So everyone with even the smallest criminal past should be locked away just in case? I think you'll need to come up with better than that It's a complex issue with a difficult solution that's not as simple as locking up for life, anyone who's ever spoken to a policeman.

 

 

a) That's not what I read about his background. And you make no comment about his past mental stability which I feel certain would have reflected the dangers he posed.    

 

b) Nor did I say or imply this: "So everyone with even the smallest criminal past should be locked away just in case." which is just the umpteenth example of people taking things I write and manipulating them for the convenience of their own argument to mean something entirely different. .

 

But you just carry on supporting the kind of philosophically flawed liberalism, similarly counter-productive legislation and irresponsible, risk-riddled fast-track multiculturalism (immigration should be considered, beneficial, properly checked and gently-paced so as not to be counter-productive)  that has cost so many lives already and left whole countries having to spend countless billions desperately trying to keep people safe with armed police now the norm, security cameras everywhere and lots more besides.

 

In football terms we've scored one of the daftest own goals ever. And the costs have been incredible.

 

For example we'd mounted an estimated 5.9 million security cameras even in 2013 covering 200 aspects of our economy - and how many more since? That's an obscene outlay considering they were a rarity when I was a kid.

 

http://www.securitynewsdesk.com/bsia-attempts-to-clarify-question-of-how-many-cctv-cameras-in-the-uk/

 

Add to that the costs of policing, of the ridiculously high-level security now needed at every major event, at every airport and seaport, rising costs to guard against cyber crime which already costs billions and you really do wonder where it will end other than in total financial and social disaster.

 

And yet the dangers seem to be increasing - particularly on the continent - where France has even called for volunteers to boost their national reserve!

 

Yet people like you seem too blinkered to admit the folly of creating such a stupid, wasteful and entirely unnecessary mess, the consequences of  which will be felt and paid for in cash, carnage and misery, way beyond the end of my life.     

 

 

 

[Nick]

a) That's not what I read about his background. And you make no comment about his past mental stability which I feel certain would have reflected the dangers he posed.    

 

b) Nor did I say or imply this: "So everyone with even the smallest criminal past should be locked away just in case." which is just the umpteenth example of people taking things I write and manipulating them for the convenience of their own argument to mean something entirely different. .

 

But you just carry on supporting the kind of philosophically flawed liberalism, similarly counter-productive legislation and irresponsible, risk-riddled fast-track multiculturalism (immigration should be considered, beneficial, properly checked and gently-paced so as not to be counter-productive)  that has cost so many lives already and left whole countries having to spend countless billions desperately trying to keep people safe with armed police now the norm, security cameras everywhere and lots more besides.

 

In football terms we've scored one of the daftest own goals ever. And the costs have been incredible.

 

For example we'd mounted an estimated 5.9 million security cameras even in 2013 covering 200 aspects of our economy - and how many more since? That's an obscene outlay considering they were a rarity when I was a kid.

 

http://www.securitynewsdesk.com/bsia-attempts-to-clarify-question-of-how-many-cctv-cameras-in-the-uk/

 

Add to that the costs of policing, of the ridiculously high-level security now needed at every major event, at every airport and seaport, rising costs to guard against cyber crime which already costs billions and you really do wonder where it will end other than in total financial and social disaster.

 

And yet the dangers seem to be increasing - particularly on the continent - where France has even called for volunteers to boost their national reserve!

 

Yet people like you seem too blinkered to admit the folly of creating such a stupid, wasteful and entirely unnecessary mess, the consequences of  which will be felt and paid for in cash, carnage and misery, way beyond the end of my life.     

 

 

 

This rhetoric us utter tripe - instead of going off having a go at others why don't you explain to us what your regime would look like.

And while your at it, let's count the victims of drunk drivers and apply the same rules. Because let's be honest, well over eighty are killed each year by over the limit fools, who think their risk/crime doesn't apply to them. You still that fool, Tony?

And prison certainly isn't working as it costs more to lock so one away than it does to send a kit to Eton and over 70% re-offend within a couple years of release. I have no idea why you are employing the panoptic argument either in your example.

We also have the least qualified staff working with the highest and most risky individuals - the only way to rehabilitate is to empower and educate. That costs money and until we start spending it in the right way we'll be nowhere on this.

Just say once and for all what your non-liberal regime would look like, put your cards on the table and say exactly what you would do if you were in charge. If you dare.

[pleatout]

This is hugely complex and I dont mean to over simplfiy but as others have said we are reaping what has been sown.

 

If you treat a group of people appallingly, disenfranchise them and discriminate against them, then there will come a point when leaders emerge who look to destroy, kill and maim.

 

The army was sent to N Ireland to protect the nationalist/republican/Catholic minority.  Something (several) thing(s) happened that alienated young men and allowed them to be steered towards terrorism.

 

The same has happened in this case.  They see muslim countries invaded by "christians", they see the treatment of Palestinians by Israel with no little or no comment by the west and the attitude of the Saudi government with the tacit approval of the west.

 

It becomes very easy to radicalise poorly educated, poorly informed indivduals that have a leaning toward psychopathy.  Cast your net wide enough with outrageous claims and eventually you will get a perfect target.  Fill them with enough one sided bile and let them go.

[Webbo]

This is hugely complex and I dont mean to over simplfiy but as others have said we are reaping what has been sown.

 

If you treat a group of people appallingly, disenfranchise them and discriminate against them, then there will come a point when leaders emerge who look to destroy, kill and maim.

 

The army was sent to N Ireland to protect the nationalist/republican/Catholic minority.  Something (several) thing(s) happened that alienated young men and allowed them to be steered towards terrorism.

 

The same has happened in this case.  They see muslim countries invaded by "christians", they see the treatment of Palestinians by Israel with no little or no comment by the west and the attitude of the Saudi government with the tacit approval of the west.

 

It becomes very easy to radicalise poorly educated, poorly informed indivduals that have a leaning toward psychopathy.  Cast your net wide enough with outrageous claims and eventually you will get a perfect target.  Fill them with enough one sided bile and let them go.

Who has been treated appallingly?

[leicsmac]

Who has been treated appallingly?

 

I think that's reasonably well covered in the post.

[Webbo]

I think that's reasonably well covered in the post.

So the person who drove the lorry into all those people . Whose family were allowed to settle in France, with all the advantages that entails over Tunisia has been treated appallingly?

[leicsmac]

So the person who drove the lorry into all those people . Whose family were allowed to settle in France, with all the advantages that entails over Tunisia has been treated appallingly?

 

People who share his beliefs have been treated appallingly. And as pleatout said, that has led to other people who share those beliefs - greedy, sociopathic warmongerers - being able to highlight this appalling treatment, apply gross generalisations to it and then encourage others to kill for their death-worshipping fascistic cause. And that's your motivated killer behind the wheel of that truck.

[Webbo]

People who share his beliefs have been treated appallingly. And as pleatout said, that has led to other people who share those beliefs - greedy, sociopathic warmongerers - being able to highlight this appalling treatment, apply gross generalisations to it and then encourage others to kill for their death-worshipping fascistic cause. And that's your motivated killer behind the wheel of that truck.

What beliefs? He was a petty crook not a devout muslim. Treated appallingly by who?

 

A year ago there were 20 odd western tourists murdered in Tunisia, does that count as appalling treatment? Can we run over Tunisians and then say it's their own fault?

[leicsmac]

What beliefs? He was a petty crook not a devout muslim. Treated appallingly by who?

 

A year ago there were 20 odd western tourists murdered in Tunisia, does that count as appalling treatment? Can we run over Tunisians and then say it's their own fault?

 

The Iraqis by various parties, the Palestinans by the Israelis, the Saudis by their own Western-backed government, again as mentioned in the post above.

 

Yes, you could make the argument that that all is in the name of self-defence or reprisal for previous events, and you might well be right - but what you or I believe about is sadly irrelevant - it's being used to justify the kind of shitshow we saw in Nice anyway, and as you said the disenfranchised ones who aren't even that devout but psychopathic and looking for a cause to kill for are getting drawn in too.

 

I'm honestly not sure what the solution is - or even if there is one - but really, does interventionism in the name of national security work in this case?

[Webbo]

The Iraqis by various parties, the Palestinans by the Israelis, the Saudis by their own Western-backed government, again as mentioned in the post above.

 

Yes, you could make the argument that that all is in the name of self-defence or reprisal for previous events, and you might well be right - but what you or I believe about is sadly irrelevant - it's being used to justify the kind of shitshow we saw in Nice anyway, and as you said the disenfranchised ones who aren't even that devout but psychopathic and looking for a cause to kill for are getting drawn in too.

 

I'm honestly not sure what the solution is - or even if there is one - but really, does interventionism in the name of national security work in this case?

I don't make any argument about self defence, I just don't like the "we're reaping what we sow, it's our fault argument". The only people to blame for this are the murdering bastards who carry out these atrocities.

[leicsmac]

I don't make any argument about self defence, I just don't like the "we're reaping what we sow, it's our fault argument". The only people to blame for this are the murdering bastards who carry out these atrocities.

 

I think that the "reaping what they sow" argument is overly reductive and doesn't nearly tell the whole picture, I agree. That being said, unless everyone who calls for such atrocities and the ones that carry them out are straightforwardly psychopathic in their motivation, revenge is - rightly or wrongly - a motivating factor here. Simply saying it isn't so - while quite possibly true - isn't going to carry water.

 

The only way to stop such a cycle of violence is for people to stop using history and revenge as a motivator, whether such a cause is true or not.

[Thracian]

19 hours ago, Swan Lesta said:

This rhetoric us utter tripe - instead of going off having a go at others why don't you explain to us what your regime would look like.

And while your at it, let's count the victims of drunk drivers and apply the same rules. Because let's be honest, well over eighty are killed each year by over the limit fools, who think their risk/crime doesn't apply to them. You still that fool, Tony?

And prison certainly isn't working as it costs more to lock so one away than it does to send a kit to Eton and over 70% re-offend within a couple years of release. I have no idea why you are employing the panoptic argument either in your example.

We also have the least qualified staff working with the highest and most risky individuals - the only way to rehabilitate is to empower and educate. That costs money and until we start spending it in the right way we'll be nowhere on this.

Just say once and for all what your non-liberal regime would look like, put your cards on the table and say exactly what you would do if you were in charge. If you dare.

 

I've probably been as frank as anyone in explaining what my approach would be to all sorts of things but have no intentions of writing a book to answer all the questions your comment raises, especially for a person who has no apparent wish to turn from the sort of liberal thinking that has doubtless, in some small way, helped create the demonstrably igneous society now evolving right across the UK and Europe.

 

We've never agreed on much at all over the years  (despite your flattering use of the Swan Lesta handle which I conceived )  and I find it disheartening to reflect on the problems doubtless well-meaning liberal thinking has created and to realise that the champions of that approach still fly their increasingly discredited and bedraggled flag for concepts that are constantly taken advantage of.

 

Do you ever look at the consequences of that thinking (examples of which abound and are ongoing each day) and ask yourself "is this what we really wanted to come about and couldn't we have done so much better?" 

 

The most annoying thing to me, on reflection, is that I'd never have encouraged the seeds of such predictably counter-productive philosophy to be planted in the first place. 

 

Laws would be so much simpler in my system and governed by the over-riding concept of "what is fair" not just to the people themselves but to others affected. 

 

"Prison?" I don't think I've mentioned prison. And I wouldn't perceive the kind of prisons we have today in any case.

 

Because the failings of that system are clear for a even blind man to see. I've never agreed with our current prison system or anything like it. I'm not sure what you mean by "empowering" but am entirely with you on "education".

 

But any education assumes the subject is willing to learn and to positively benefit from learning. Sadly,  that's alarmingly questionable in my experience of recent years.

 

Debating my "regime" is pointless.  I don't have one and no amount of theorising will change that.

 

I've done my time as a leader in various situations and, to counter your "if you dare" mocking, all were broadly successful.  

 

I didn't shout at people, nor did I make many rules. I just got people to believe in themselves and offered help/encouragement/incentive for them to get the most from their abilities. My kind of "education" I suppose.  

 

It didn't seem complicated but I'm not sure I'd want to test my approach in today's society - which says so much for its failings and challenges really.

 

 

 

  

.   

 

 

 

 

     

[Thracian]

21 hours ago, leicsmac said:

 

People who share his beliefs have been treated appallingly. And as pleatout said, that has led to other people who share those beliefs - greedy, sociopathic warmongerers - being able to highlight this appalling treatment, apply gross generalisations to it and then encourage others to kill for their death-worshipping fascistic cause. And that's your motivated killer behind the wheel of that truck.

 

 Ask yourself. If it was your son who so indiscriminately murdered those entirely innocent people would you really excuse it on the basis of anything you've said?       

[Manwell Pablo]

13 minutes ago, Thracian said:

 

In terms of excusing someone that really tops the lot. Ask yourself. If it was your son who so indiscriminately murdered those entirely innocent people would you really excuse it? Because, if so, I'd suggest you see a psychiatrist.      

 

He's not excusing anything Tony is he, he's illustrating a simple fact. 

[Thracian]

Comment rephrased. You had a point. 

.       

[leicsmac]

28 minutes ago, Thracian said:

 

 Ask yourself. If it was your son who so indiscriminately murdered those entirely innocent people would you really excuse it on the basis of anything you've said?       

 

 

Pablos point above and that I think it much more a justification in the twisted mind of such a person than an excuse aside, this sounds a lot like the "what if the victim was your family member/friend/loved one etc" argument that a lot of people use to justify the nastiness of the actions of another and the righteousness of a response.

 

And my response would be the same as when given that argument. If I knew such a killer personally, my viewpoint on them would be the exact same as if they were a stranger.

 

Because personal is not the same as important.