|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Aug 27, 2024 8:59:10 GMT
A total of 56 people were questioned on suspicion of drugs supply offences and several dealers were handed lengthy prison sentences. And now shock new figures reveal that just FOUR out of more than 100 reported sexual offences at Reading and Leeds since 2018 have so far resulted in prosecutions. The figures include 16 reported rapes of women at Leeds festival between 2018 and 2023, none of which have so far led to a prosecution. From the report very little mentioned re stabbings or violence. Mainly around drugs offences. In respect to the sexual offences clearly very serious but not much information given around them so it’s hard to know whether the allegations were genuine (I’m sure some were) but they need a little more context. I think the point there is that you (and many others) don't seem to regard sexual offences as violence. www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/aug/17/appalling-conviction-rate-for-over-100-sexual-offences-at-leeds-and-reading-festivals#:~:text=Ten%20of%20the%20arrests%20at,increase%20in%20arrests%20at%20Leeds. 16 rapes is appalling but no-one seems particularly bothered about that at a predominantly white middle class 'festival' whereas there seems to be a constituency that was just dying for a London multi-cultural street event to kick off. Is one worse than the other? I've no idea and I don't know what metric you would use to decide either. But one certainly gets more scrutiny than the other. Christ your first comment is pretty disgraceful
|
|
|
Stabbings
Aug 27, 2024 9:02:56 GMT
via mobile
Post by Seymour Beaver on Aug 27, 2024 9:02:56 GMT
Christ your first comment is pretty disgraceful ....and out come the Pearl Clutchers.
|
|
|
Stabbings
Aug 27, 2024 9:05:33 GMT
via mobile
Post by Seymour Beaver on Aug 27, 2024 9:05:33 GMT
“I think the point there is that you (and many others) don't seem to regard sexual offences as violence.” With respect to that comment I find it extremely offensive. Rape is an incredibly serious offence and can ruin the victims life for ever so I’d rather you didn’t judge me around what I think when you don’t know anything about me. Moving on though what I would say is when the figures refer to “sexual offences” they can also cover indecent exposure and tapping someone on the bum (or grinding against someone without their permission that has been shown in various videos at Notting Hill) and does not always necessarily refer to the most erupts offence which is rape which is why they need closer scrutiny as do the reports / allegations. As has been shown in a number of cases in the past where suspects have had malicious allegations quashed so the figures aren’t necessarily as high as they may appear particularly as they are only allegations. Rape is a truly awful thing to happen to anyone but is an offence where often the incident has no witnesses bar those involved so very difficult to know exactly what happened so is a lot less difficult to prove it happened (doesn’t mean it did or didn’t). If found guilty those responsible should have the key chucked away. In respect to the offence I do think part of what you’re saying is right in respect to there being less shock or disgust re those found guilty of the offence than what there used to be. That needs to change. If you don't want to be offended then don't say '16 rapes' and 'very little mentioned violence' in the same post then. 16 rapes is a very lot of violence.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 27, 2024 9:44:32 GMT
How do you get tickets for 2025. Sounds great. Let's see if anyone gets fastracked through the courts today. The purpose of fast tracking people through the courts was to put a stop to the widespread violence as soon as possible. Doesn't seem much point to 'fasttracking' in this scenario since this is an annual event 🤔
|
|
|
Stabbings
Aug 27, 2024 10:27:23 GMT
via mobile
Post by cobhamstokey on Aug 27, 2024 10:27:23 GMT
“I think the point there is that you (and many others) don't seem to regard sexual offences as violence.” With respect to that comment I find it extremely offensive. Rape is an incredibly serious offence and can ruin the victims life for ever so I’d rather you didn’t judge me around what I think when you don’t know anything about me. Moving on though what I would say is when the figures refer to “sexual offences” they can also cover indecent exposure and tapping someone on the bum (or grinding against someone without their permission that has been shown in various videos at Notting Hill) and does not always necessarily refer to the most erupts offence which is rape which is why they need closer scrutiny as do the reports / allegations. As has been shown in a number of cases in the past where suspects have had malicious allegations quashed so the figures aren’t necessarily as high as they may appear particularly as they are only allegations. Rape is a truly awful thing to happen to anyone but is an offence where often the incident has no witnesses bar those involved so very difficult to know exactly what happened so is a lot less difficult to prove it happened (doesn’t mean it did or didn’t). If found guilty those responsible should have the key chucked away. In respect to the offence I do think part of what you’re saying is right in respect to there being less shock or disgust re those found guilty of the offence than what there used to be. That needs to change. If you don't want to be offended then don't say '16 rapes' and 'very little mentioned violence' in the same post then. 16 rapes is a very lot of violence. “From the report very little mentioned re stabbings or violence. Mainly around drugs offences.” Was what I said. Fair play though a great attempt to join 2 separate sentences together and to make them into something completely different. My comment was more how the report was made. For what it’s worth I don’t bracket rape as just being violence it’s far worse and should be seperate to normal assaults.
|
|
|
Stabbings
Aug 27, 2024 11:15:06 GMT
via mobile
Post by Seymour Beaver on Aug 27, 2024 11:15:06 GMT
If you don't want to be offended then don't say '16 rapes' and 'very little mentioned violence' in the same post then. 16 rapes is a very lot of violence. “From the report very little mentioned re stabbings or violence. Mainly around drugs offences.” Was what I said. Fair play though a great attempt to join 2 separate sentences together and to make them into something completely different. My comment was more how the report was made. For what it’s worth I don’t bracket rape as just being violence it’s far worse and should be seperate to normal assaults. You wouldn't have said 'very little mentioned re violece' if their had been 16 attempredm urders by strangulation or shootings though would you? That would unequivocalky have been regarded as violence. But you said it when there were rapes. When you say you take rape seriously I believe you - but from what you wrote it was reasonable to deduce otherwise and from life experience I stand by what I saud about others - if not you - not taking rape seriously - because I've heard it and stats wiuld underline it.
|
|
|
Post by emretezzy on Aug 27, 2024 11:37:32 GMT
How do you get tickets for 2025. Sounds great. Let's see if anyone gets fastracked through the courts today. The purpose of fast tracking people through the courts was to put a stop to the widespread violence as soon as possible. Doesn't seem much point to 'fasttracking' in this scenario since this is an annual event 🤔 Yeah probably right. Actually why even bother charging them at all. Only once a year.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Aug 27, 2024 12:19:11 GMT
|
|
|
Stabbings
Aug 27, 2024 12:23:26 GMT
via mobile
Post by Seymour Beaver on Aug 27, 2024 12:23:26 GMT
You wouldn't have said 'very little mentioned re violece' if their had been 16 attempredm urders by strangulation or shootings though would you? That would unequivocalky have been regarded as violence. But you said it when there were rapes. When you say you take rape seriously I believe you - but from what you wrote it was reasonable to deduce otherwise and from life experience I stand by what I saud about others - if not you - not taking rape seriously - because I've heard it and stats wiuld underline it. Why do you never challenge crouch potato on his posts Seymour? I do as he'll tell you. You clearly need to improve your stalking.
|
|
|
Stabbings
Aug 27, 2024 12:30:46 GMT
via mobile
Post by elystokie on Aug 27, 2024 12:30:46 GMT
The purpose of fast tracking people through the courts was to put a stop to the widespread violence as soon as possible. Doesn't seem much point to 'fasttracking' in this scenario since this is an annual event 🤔 Yeah probably right. Actually why even bother charging them at all. Only once a year. Probably because they've broken the law? But I'm no legal expert...
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Aug 27, 2024 16:25:07 GMT
“From the report very little mentioned re stabbings or violence. Mainly around drugs offences.” Was what I said. Fair play though a great attempt to join 2 separate sentences together and to make them into something completely different. My comment was more how the report was made. For what it’s worth I don’t bracket rape as just being violence it’s far worse and should be seperate to normal assaults. You wouldn't have said 'very little mentioned re violece' if their had been 16 attempredm urders by strangulation or shootings though would you? That would unequivocalky have been regarded as violence. But you said it when there were rapes. When you say you take rape seriously I believe you - but from what you wrote it was reasonable to deduce otherwise and from life experience I stand by what I saud about others - if not you - not taking rape seriously - because I've heard it and stats wiuld underline it. We’ll leave it at that then. No problem with you having an observation around society but I don’t like people judging me as an individual based on the way somethings worded. Maybe it wasn’t as clear as it shouldn’t have been but I know how I feel and what i meant.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Aug 27, 2024 23:05:44 GMT
Love this. If only we had guys like this representing our nation in Parliament.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Aug 27, 2024 23:18:36 GMT
How do you get tickets for 2025. Sounds great. Let's see if anyone gets fastracked through the courts today. The purpose of fast tracking people through the courts was to put a stop to the widespread violence as soon as possible. Doesn't seem much point to 'fasttracking' in this scenario since this is an annual event 🤔 So you're happy to see middle aged protestors without a criminal record who committed mild public disorder such as lobbing the odd brick through a Greggs window "fasttracked" into jail on the grounds of "widespread violence"? On the other hand, you're comfortable with not fasttracking those who are walking about with knives and guns and in some cases committing actual acts of violence in the form of stabbing people. Why? Presumably it's because you'd rather see people you view as right wing locked up before anyone else?
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 28, 2024 5:23:31 GMT
The purpose of fast tracking people through the courts was to put a stop to the widespread violence as soon as possible. Doesn't seem much point to 'fasttracking' in this scenario since this is an annual event 🤔 So you're happy to see middle aged protestors without a criminal record who committed mild public disorder such as lobbing the odd brick through a Greggs window "fasttracked" into jail on the grounds of "widespread violence"? On the other hand, you're comfortable with not fasttracking those who are walking about with knives and guns and in some cases committing actual acts of violence in the form of stabbing people. Why? Presumably it's because you'd rather see people you view as right wing locked up before anyone else? Where did I say that? As I've explained (obviously not clearly enough) the purpose was to stop the violent protests as soon as possible. There is little point imo in prioritising offenders if the next event is a year away, if there was a Nottinghill Carnival every week then, no matter what the political persuasion of the offenders, I'd expect the same, but there isn't. I know it upset some that were getting moist at the thought of widespread civil disorder for months on end to prove a point, however it appears, thankfully, the matter was dealt with swiftly and fairly efficiently.
|
|
|
Post by Tom_stokiepmre89 on Aug 28, 2024 5:39:05 GMT
So you're happy to see middle aged protestors without a criminal record who committed mild public disorder such as lobbing the odd brick through a Greggs window "fasttracked" into jail on the grounds of "widespread violence"? On the other hand, you're comfortable with not fasttracking those who are walking about with knives and guns and in some cases committing actual acts of violence in the form of stabbing people. Why? Presumably it's because you'd rather see people you view as right wing locked up before anyone else? I know it upset some that were getting moist at the thought of widespread civil disorder for months on end to prove a point, however it appears, thankfully, the matter was dealt with swiftly and fairly efficiently. Unfortunate turn of phrase there even though I know what you actually mean. “The matter” most certainly has not been dealt with. This country/continent is a political supervolcano threatening to erupt.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 28, 2024 5:50:36 GMT
I know it upset some that were getting moist at the thought of widespread civil disorder for months on end to prove a point, however it appears, thankfully, the matter was dealt with swiftly and fairly efficiently. Unfortunate turn of phrase there even though I know what you actually mean. “The matter” most certainly has not been dealt with. This country/continent is a political supervolcano threatening to erupt. What I meant was the disruption at the time, the protests stopped, meaning it was dealt with. The amount of people that turned up for the counter protests and for the clearing up the mess was something I found very uplifting tbh.
|
|
|
Post by Tom_stokiepmre89 on Aug 28, 2024 6:21:12 GMT
Unfortunate turn of phrase there even though I know what you actually mean. “The matter” most certainly has not been dealt with. This country/continent is a political supervolcano threatening to erupt. What I meant was the disruption at the time, the protests stopped, meaning it was dealt with. The amount of people that turned up for the counter protests and for the clearing up the mess was something I found very uplifting tbh. I knew what you actually meant… I’ll preface what I’m about to say by laying my bias out on the table. I fully sympathise with much of the anger we saw; even though I don’t for one second condone the means of expressing it. There are fully legitimate grievances that were lost in chaos. I don’t think the highly choreographed counter-protests are a reason to celebrate. It was merely a mass exercise in state-sponsored gaslighting. For every scumbag who saw this as an opportunity to act out their worst desires, there are a 1000 people like me who are angry but unwilling to allow that anger to spill into anarchy. But I suspect what we saw was the tip of the iceberg, and creepy authoritarian-globalist leaders are only going to succeed in using sticking-plaster solutions to kick the can down the road. There’s nothing to feel uplifted about. It’s a dire political landscape and one that has been foretold for years now.
|
|
|
Post by knype on Aug 28, 2024 6:21:14 GMT
Unfortunate turn of phrase there even though I know what you actually mean. “The matter” most certainly has not been dealt with. This country/continent is a political supervolcano threatening to erupt. What I meant was the disruption at the time, the protests stopped, meaning it was dealt with. The amount of people that turned up for the counter protests and for the clearing up the mess was something I found very uplifting tbh. Why did the protests stop though? Were all of the protesters fears and worries sorted out? Or did a dictator stop freedom of speech for a lot of people?
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 28, 2024 6:42:50 GMT
What I meant was the disruption at the time, the protests stopped, meaning it was dealt with. The amount of people that turned up for the counter protests and for the clearing up the mess was something I found very uplifting tbh. I knew what you actually meant… I’ll preface what I’m about to say by laying my bias out on the table. I fully sympathise with much of the anger we saw; even though I don’t for one second condone the means of expressing it. There are fully legitimate grievances that were lost in chaos. I don’t think the highly choreographed counter-protests are a reason to celebrate. It was merely a mass exercise in state-sponsored gaslighting. For every scumbag who saw this as an opportunity to act out their worst desires, there are a 1000 people like me who are angry but unwilling to allow that anger to spill into anarchy. But I suspect what we saw was the tip of the iceberg, and creepy authoritarian-globalist leaders are only going to succeed in using sticking-plaster solutions to kick the can down the road. There’s nothing to feel uplifted about. It’s a dire political landscape and one that has been foretold for years now. It has been foretold about for years, started with the Irish didn't it? Or possibly before 🤔 I was uplifted by the reaction of the general public, not the political situation, I'm surprised you conflated the two.
|
|
|
Stabbings
Aug 28, 2024 6:46:14 GMT
via mobile
Post by elystokie on Aug 28, 2024 6:46:14 GMT
What I meant was the disruption at the time, the protests stopped, meaning it was dealt with. The amount of people that turned up for the counter protests and for the clearing up the mess was something I found very uplifting tbh. Why did the protests stop though? Were all of the protesters fears and worries sorted out? Or did a dictator stop freedom of speech for a lot of people? They stopped because decisive and swift action was taken. Why did so many people take part in the counter protests? Do their opinions not matter?
|
|
|
Post by knype on Aug 28, 2024 6:51:51 GMT
Why did the protests stop though? Were all of the protesters fears and worries sorted out? Or did a dictator stop freedom of speech for a lot of people? They stopped because decisive and swift action was taken. Why did so many people take part in the counter protests? Do their opinions not matter? No, it didn't stop because of that at all! It stopped because people didn't dare to voice their fears in case they got jailed! Why did so many attend the counter protests? Is that because Nick Lowles's cronies and Unite combined together just like BLM, etc etc etc etc
|
|
|
Stabbings
Aug 28, 2024 6:57:42 GMT
via mobile
Post by elystokie on Aug 28, 2024 6:57:42 GMT
They stopped because decisive and swift action was taken. Why did so many people take part in the counter protests? Do their opinions not matter? No, it didn't stop because of that at all! It stopped because people didn't dare to voice their fears in case they got jailed! Why did so many attend the counter protests? Is that because Nick Lowles's cronies and Unite combined together just like BLM, etc etc etc etc Yeh, that'll be it, not because of how they felt. Obviously in complete contrast to the protesters who weren't doing the bidding of the likes of Yaxley Kennon and Farage over something that was made up by a bloke in Pakistan..
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 28, 2024 7:13:57 GMT
They stopped because decisive and swift action was taken. Why did so many people take part in the counter protests? Do their opinions not matter? No, it didn't stop because of that at all! It stopped because people didn't dare to voice their fears in case they got jailed! Why did so many attend the counter protests? Is that because Nick Lowles's cronies and Unite combined together just like BLM, etc etc etc etc Voice their fears? When did attacking police officers, threatening to burn down buildings with people in them, setting cars alight and looting shops become "voicing their fears". Half the people convicted weren't even motivated by voicing anything - they were just in it for an adrenaline rush, act up to impress their mates our pocket some freebies in the mayhem. If you are that concerned about the suppression of legitimate political speech setup a charity to free those convicted for having their concerned voices quashed by a repressive police state. You could start by circulating this article about a bunch of innocent concerned citizens brutally sentenced for merely voicing their concerns: BBC News - Men who attacked police and set van on fire in riots jailed www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy39gxekv5o. I'm sure the money will flood in.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Aug 28, 2024 7:25:24 GMT
So you're happy to see middle aged protestors without a criminal record who committed mild public disorder such as lobbing the odd brick through a Greggs window "fasttracked" into jail on the grounds of "widespread violence"? On the other hand, you're comfortable with not fasttracking those who are walking about with knives and guns and in some cases committing actual acts of violence in the form of stabbing people. Why? Presumably it's because you'd rather see people you view as right wing locked up before anyone else? Where did I say that? As I've explained (obviously not clearly enough) the purpose was to stop the violent protests as soon as possible. There is little point imo in prioritising offenders if the next event is a year away, if there was a Nottinghill Carnival every week then, no matter what the political persuasion of the offenders, I'd expect the same, but there isn't. I know it upset some that were getting moist at the thought of widespread civil disorder for months on end to prove a point, however it appears, thankfully, the matter was dealt with swiftly and fairly efficiently. You're openly advocating for two tier policing. Surely every crime should be treated equally and depending on the severity, the same level of priority? If anything, one would expect violent knife disorder to be prioritised over a middle aged lady posting a comment on twitter or middle aged bloke with no criminal record chucking a brick through a window? I'd hazard a guess you were less vocal on encouraging jail sentences for those who committed disorder crimes during the 2011 riots or indeed, the BLM protests.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 28, 2024 7:32:44 GMT
Where did I say that? As I've explained (obviously not clearly enough) the purpose was to stop the violent protests as soon as possible. There is little point imo in prioritising offenders if the next event is a year away, if there was a Nottinghill Carnival every week then, no matter what the political persuasion of the offenders, I'd expect the same, but there isn't. I know it upset some that were getting moist at the thought of widespread civil disorder for months on end to prove a point, however it appears, thankfully, the matter was dealt with swiftly and fairly efficiently. You're openly advocating for two tier policing. Surely every crime should be treated equally and depending on the severity, the same level of priority? If anything, one would expect violent knife disorder to be prioritised over a middle aged lady posting a comment on twitter or middle aged bloke with no criminal record chucking a brick through a window? I'd hazard a guess you were less vocal on encouraging jail sentences for those who committed disorder crimes during the 2011 riots or indeed, the BLM protests. I don't remember engaging much in either debate tbh. I haven't said every crime shouldn't be treated equally and dependent on the severity. Something clearly needed to be done quickly to stop more violent protests and widespread looting. I just don't see why there's an immediate urgency about something that won't happen for another 12 months. What would be gained from fast tracking those cases?
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Aug 28, 2024 7:37:30 GMT
They stopped because decisive and swift action was taken. Why did so many people take part in the counter protests? Do their opinions not matter? No, it didn't stop because of that at all! It stopped because people didn't dare to voice their fears in case they got jailed! Why did so many attend the counter protests? Is that because Nick Lowles's cronies and Unite combined together just like BLM, etc etc etc etc Pretty daming evidence that it was far more then "voicing genuine concerns" mate. I know you won't read the article as it doesn't suit your narrative, before you reply with one of your usual childish responses.
|
|
|
Stabbings
Aug 28, 2024 7:43:17 GMT
via mobile
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Aug 28, 2024 7:43:17 GMT
You're openly advocating for two tier policing. Surely every crime should be treated equally and depending on the severity, the same level of priority? If anything, one would expect violent knife disorder to be prioritised over a middle aged lady posting a comment on twitter or middle aged bloke with no criminal record chucking a brick through a window? I'd hazard a guess you were less vocal on encouraging jail sentences for those who committed disorder crimes during the 2011 riots or indeed, the BLM protests. I don't remember engaging much in either debate tbh. I haven't said every crime shouldn't be treated equally and dependent on the severity. Something clearly needed to be done quickly to stop more violent protests and widespread looting. I just don't see why there's an immediate urgency about something that won't happen for another 12 months. What would be gained from fast tracking those cases? Yeah.. So you're supporting two two tier policing. If a women is stabbed into a critical condition at the carnival (as one was) or walking around armed with a gun or knife (as many were) I, and i suspect, the vast majority of Brits would fully expect them to be sent to jail at a quicker speed than someone who was unarmed, with no past criminal record who posted a tweet or lobbed a brick through the window of Greggs (as was the case during the recent protests). Your stance appears to be that those committing disorder at the protests should be fast tracked into jail in order to stop further protesting. It's pretty authoritarian stuff. At least be subtle with your bias.☺️
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 28, 2024 7:51:02 GMT
I know it upset some that were getting moist at the thought of widespread civil disorder for months on end to prove a point, however it appears, thankfully, the matter was dealt with swiftly and fairly efficiently. Unfortunate turn of phrase there even though I know what you actually mean. “The matter” most certainly has not been dealt with. This country/continent is a political supervolcano threatening to erupt. So you think the authorities should just step aside and let it erupt? That's precisely why they did step in and crack down. There are people out there wanting to incite violence in support of a racist far right agenda - this is exactly what Musk was alluding to in his tweet about Britain on the edge of a civil war. Some of the people caught up in the violence weren't motivated by any political agenda - they were just morons out to cause trouble - but they did let themselves get sucked into something with a bigger agenda. You either choose to support the authorities in cracking down on politically motivated violence or you join those wanting to bring down the rule of law and acheive their political ends through violent means. Your call. I've made mine.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Aug 28, 2024 8:09:06 GMT
I don't remember engaging much in either debate tbh. I haven't said every crime shouldn't be treated equally and dependent on the severity. Something clearly needed to be done quickly to stop more violent protests and widespread looting. I just don't see why there's an immediate urgency about something that won't happen for another 12 months. What would be gained from fast tracking those cases? Yeah.. So you're supporting two two tier policing. If a women is stabbed into a critical condition at the carnival (as one was) or walking around armed with a gun or knife (as many were) I, and i suspect, the vast majority of Brits would fully expect them to be sent to jail at a quicker speed than someone who was unarmed, with no past criminal record who posted a tweet or lobbed a brick through the window of Greggs (as was the case during the recent protests). Your stance appears to be that those committing disorder at the protests should be fast tracked into jail in order to stop further protesting. It's pretty authoritarian stuff. At least be subtle with your bias.☺️ Only those that pleaded guilty were fast tracked into jail or other sentences. If you can't see why there was an immediate need for that particular course of action in order to prevent something that threatened to happen the next weekend and the weekend after that etc over something that isn't going to happen for another year there's not much I can do to help you.
|
|
|
Stabbings
Aug 28, 2024 8:22:16 GMT
via mobile
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Aug 28, 2024 8:22:16 GMT
Yeah.. So you're supporting two two tier policing. If a women is stabbed into a critical condition at the carnival (as one was) or walking around armed with a gun or knife (as many were) I, and i suspect, the vast majority of Brits would fully expect them to be sent to jail at a quicker speed than someone who was unarmed, with no past criminal record who posted a tweet or lobbed a brick through the window of Greggs (as was the case during the recent protests). Your stance appears to be that those committing disorder at the protests should be fast tracked into jail in order to stop further protesting. It's pretty authoritarian stuff. At least be subtle with your bias.☺️ Only those that pleaded guilty were fast tracked into jail or other sentences. If you can't see why there was an immediate need for that particular course of action in order to prevent something that threatened to happen the next weekend and the weekend after that etc over something that isn't going to happen for another year there's not much I can do to help you. You're view on this is literally mental 😂😂 Just re-read what your proposing. So because the event where they stabbed someone or carried weapons is only once a year, let's not prioritise their sentencing? But the nasty old right wing racist lady who posted shite on twitter, let's get her in jail ASAP!! Jesus.
|
|