Jump to content
Leicester_Loyal

The Politics Thread 2020

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Dames said:

And I made the point that if young millionaire footballers with all the freedom they are allowed can be kept covid secure so can prisoners who aren’t actually allowed out. 
 

There will always be some outside contact but with the correct protocols transmission in environments like that should be extremely low... 

They aren't though are they? They are tested week in week out at high cost and some have caught it, even those who haven't broken rules.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dames said:

He’s already in prison and that cost isn’t going to change, letting him out his cell on a rota is not going to cost any more is it?

Well I imagine such drastic plans will need risk assessment and method statements. Presumably the tests for the virus will continue on a daily basis to what cost? There may be more staff needed in to implement and is it just paedos we aren’t vaccinating or all prisoners? Who decides which inmate is worthy and which is not? Will this potential human rights case need to go through the commons or the Lords?

It’s not as simple as just going, Glitter, **** him!! is it?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

They aren't though are they? They are tested week in week out at high cost and some have caught it, even those who haven't broken rules.

I don’t think there’s been a case at Leicester since March last year, not thats been reported anyway. Even at the clubs where its been caught the isolation has gone into effect and transmission minimised. Which would actually be easier to do in a prison where you are not allowed out...
 

Even so, in an environment like a prison these testing regimes should have been brought in, protocols and quarantines put in place etc. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

Entirely correct to say that the usual suspects on here and in the press would be going apeshit if Corbyn said nonces shouldn't lose their place in the queue though.

Well yeah we all make tits of ourselves from time to time on here.

Speaking of this, has the Premier league table levelled out yet or have we got a few more weeks to go?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dames said:

I don’t think there’s been a case at Leicester since March last year, not thats been reported anyway. Even at the clubs where its been caught the isolation has gone into effect and transmission minimised. Which would actually be easier to do in a prison where you are not allowed out...
 

Even so, in an environment like a prison these testing regimes should have been brought in, protocols and quarantines put in place etc. 

The other way to think about is once it's in a prison it'll pass round like mad because of them being in close contact. And you're happy to keep spending money on extra testing, protocols etc in prisons rather then just jab them and forget about them?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Well I imagine such drastic plans will need risk assessment and method statements. Presumably the tests for the virus will continue on a daily basis to what cost? There may be more staff needed in to implement and is it just paedos we aren’t vaccinating or all prisoners? Who decides which inmate is worthy and which is not? Will this potential human rights case need to go through the commons or the Lords?

It’s not as simple as just going, Glitter, **** him!! is it?

The reality is a lot of what you just said should be happening anyway. If the taxpayer can afford to spunk 22b on test and trace it can afford this as well, the cost argument doesnt wash with a government thats been spraying cash all over its cronies for the past 12 months. 
 

The reality is, if done correctly the prison system should generally be a covid secure bubble and there wouldnt be a need for nonces and murderers to be getting vaccinated ahead of the general public because they are in a secure bubble. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dames said:

The reality is a lot of what you just said should be happening anyway. If the taxpayer can afford to spunk 22b on test and trace it can afford this as well, the cost argument doesnt wash with a government thats been spraying cash all over its cronies for the past 12 months. 
 

The reality is, if done correctly the prison system should generally be a covid secure bubble and there wouldnt be a need for nonces and murderers to be getting vaccinated ahead of the general public because they are in a secure bubble. 

But it’s an ongoing cost, if they are vaccinated it’s business as usual.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Facecloth said:

The other way to think about is once it's in a prison it'll pass round like mad because of them being in close contact. And you're happy to keep spending money on extra testing, protocols etc in prisons rather then just jab them and forget about them?

You can isolate wings, blocks etc. They aren’t allowed out of their cells so once a bubble pops it theoretically should stay there. They managed this with schools for a good few months and it would be easier in prisons because again the majority of people in prison aren’t going anywhere or mixing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dames said:

You can isolate wings, blocks etc. They aren’t allowed out of their cells so once a bubble pops it theoretically should stay there. They managed this with schools for a good few months and it would be easier in prisons because again the majority of people in prison aren’t going anywhere or mixing. 

They haven't managed it with schools at all, that's one of the many criticisms of how this has been held.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

Entirely correct to say that the usual suspects on here and in the press would be going apeshit if Corbyn said nonces shouldn't lose their place in the queue though.

Quite possible.  It is unpleasant, but the fact is that prisoners have rights.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

They haven't managed it with schools at all, that's one of the many criticisms of how this has been held.

They did manage it for a few months but the basis of what they did in schools could be successfully implemented in prisons because they wouldnt have to worry about people going out and mixing.

Edited by Dames
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Strokes said:

But it’s an ongoing cost, if they are vaccinated it’s business as usual.

 

Lockdown is costing too and if a few thousand prisoners being vaccinated holds us up for a few days thats going to cost too. 
 

The government has lost control and is using the vaccination as a quick fix in prisons. And back to my most original point that for a home sec that wanted to be tougher on crime, criminals and prisons it doesnt look good. If this happened under a Corbyn Government the press would be demanding blood.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dames said:

Lockdown is costing too and if a few thousand prisoners being vaccinated holds us up for a few days thats going to cost too. 
 

The government has lost control and is using the vaccination as a quick fix in prisons. And back to my most original point that for a home sec that wanted to be tougher on crime, criminals and prisons it doesnt look good. If this happened under a Corbyn Government the press would be demanding blood.

When we are vaccinating 500k a day, I don’t think doing a few prisoners is delaying the countries lockdown exit. 
So what if the press would be demanding blood, who cares what might happen in a hypothetical world?

Edited by Strokes
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Strokes said:

When we are vaccinating 500k a day, I don’t think doing a few prisoners is delaying the countries lockdown exit. 
So what if the press would be demanding blood, who cares what might happen in a hypothetical world?

This whole discussion has been derailed from my original point with hypothetical situations. 
 

My original point, which I believe to be valid. Is that a Home Sec who has in the past supported the death penalty and has campaigned heavily on a platform for tougher punishments for criminals, tougher sentences and tougher conditions in prison. Has had convicted nonces and murders have priority vaccinations before the general public. 
 

I think its hypocritical and she shouldn’t be taken as seriously in the future because the 2 things shes claimed to be toughest on, criminals and borders, shes been the softest on during this pandemic. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

@Dames

 

You've got me and @Buce, and @Carl the Llamadisagreeing with you along with @FoxesDeb, @Strokes, @Jon the Hat. We all normally disagree with each other. So I think you're probably fighting a losing battle here.

Yeah it’s creepy as fùck. I’ve gone away and splashed cold water on my face and I’m still thinking the same way. Maybe you could change your opinion and we could put the world back to normal?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Facecloth said:

@Dames

 

You've got me and @Buce, and @Carl the Llamadisagreeing with you along with @FoxesDeb, @Strokes, @Jon the Hat. We all normally disagree with each other. So I think you're probably fighting a losing battle here.

I’ll admit that in current circumstances the argument you guys are making is probably the best course of action.. because its the only course of action left.

 

The point I made about the Government losing control of the virus in prisons is valid. They could have done so much more to make those environments covid secure and they should have, theoretically prisons should have been one of the safest places in the country from Covid. 
 

For a Government and Home sec that have been carping on about taking back control, being tougher on criminals, crime and immigration this latest headline is not a good look politically which was my original point before it got derailed into this discussion. 
 

My other point is that it should never have come to a point where convicted criminals are getting vaccinated ahead of normal people regardless of their age because they should be in the most covid secure environments in the country.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dames said:

This whole discussion has been derailed from my original point with hypothetical situations. 
 

My original point, which I believe to be valid. Is that a Home Sec who has in the past supported the death penalty and has campaigned heavily on a platform for tougher punishments for criminals, tougher sentences and tougher conditions in prison. Has had convicted nonces and murders have priority vaccinations before the general public. 
 

I think its hypocritical and she shouldn’t be taken as seriously in the future because the 2 things shes claimed to be toughest on, criminals and borders, shes been the softest on during this pandemic. 

I don’t think this is an example of being either tough on crime or not, it’s just a sensible way to manage a pandemic.

Do you think not vaccinating nonces will be deterrent to future nonces?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dames said:

I’ll admit that in current circumstances the argument you guys are making is probably the best course of action.. because its the only course of action left.

 

The point I made about the Government losing control of the virus in prisons is valid. They could have done so much more to make those environments covid secure and they should have, theoretically prisons should have been one of the safest places in the country from Covid. 
 

For a Government and Home sec that have been carping on about taking back control, being tougher on criminals, crime and immigration this latest headline is not a good look politically which was my original point before it got derailed into this discussion. 
 

My other point is that it should never have come to a point where convicted criminals are getting vaccinated ahead of normal people regardless of their age because they should be in the most covid secure environments in the country.

That wasn't your original point at all. It was that Patel says she's tough on crime, but we are vaccinating nonces. Then it was that he's taking a jab off someone else. You even moved onto this idea that we could have managed prisons better. Maybe we could, but as @Strokes said earlier there'll be numerous legal red tapes to cut through and human rights legislation. Just vaccinate them and forget about them. When you're doing 500k a day, the numbers of prisoners that fall into the age or vulnerable categories will be a tiny number of that. Remember this isn't every prisoner, just the old and vulnerable ones.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Strokes said:

I don’t think this is an example of being either tough on crime or not, it’s just a sensible way to manage a pandemic.

Do you think not vaccinating nonces will be deterrent to future nonces?

You’re cherry picking part of my argument and ignoring everything else i’m saying. I’ve yet to have one person make a valid point against the fact that the pandemic management in prisons has been woefully below standards when in theory it should have been one of the easiest parts of the pandemic to manage. 

 

And again my original point is that its ironic that Patel is someone who advocated for the death penalty for the worst of criminals and those same criminals are getting priority vaccinations on her watch. She would be a hypocrite to continue to stand on that platform. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Facecloth said:

That wasn't your original point at all. It was that Patel says she's tough on crime, but we are vaccinating nonces. Then it was that he's taking a jab off someone else. You even moved onto this idea that we could have managed prisons better. Maybe we could, but as @Strokes said earlier there'll be numerous legal red tapes to cut through and human rights legislation. Just vaccinate them and forget about them. When you're doing 500k a day, the numbers of prisoners that fall into the age or vulnerable categories will be a tiny number of that. Remember this isn't every prisoner, just the old and vulnerable ones.

It makes no sense to exclude anyone by way of punishment as the whole point is if we all are vaccinated we all safer.

Where do you draw the line? Is just nonces in jail or should exclude those on parol too? What about those on remand but not convicted? It’s far easier just get on and vaccinate without prejudice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Facecloth said:

That wasn't your original point at all. It was that Patel says she's tough on crime, but we are vaccinating nonces. Then it was that he's taking a jab off someone else. You even moved onto this idea that we could have managed prisons better. Maybe we could, but as @Strokes said earlier there'll be numerous legal red tapes to cut through and human rights legislation. Just vaccinate them and forget about them. When you're doing 500k a day, the numbers of prisoners that fall into the age or vulnerable categories will be a tiny number of that. Remember this isn't every prisoner, just the old and vulnerable ones.

None of my points of posts contradict the original point and many of them are responses to the points and hypothetical situations that you brought up, thats what happens in a discussion right?

 

And if you reread my post I reiterate that my original point is that they bang on about being tough on crime and this latest headline/act is not reflective of that stance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...