Ah, the old joke:
“150 years?! – I can’t do it”
“Well, do as much as you can”

Anyway, with that man’s mastery of figures, they’re probably just being on the safe side.

Making an example of him is one thing but he was investigated eight times by the US Securities and Exchange Commission. I hope they’ve got that flaw fixed as well.

Just a little note for the Moderators. I realise that as it is mainly Sandra and myself involved in this thread we could carry on via email. I would like to let the thread run if that’s ok as I have learned an awful lot from threads like this and perhaps someone else might find the sources and information discussed in the thread useful in their own research.

You might be the only ones writing but I’m fascinated by it – just nothing to contribute yet. Please keep us all informed with the results of your research and, as Kevin knows, I’ll help if I can.

Allan

See: http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/vehicles/vssafety/motorcyclehelmetsvisorsandgo4563?page=2

If you are driving or riding on a 2-wheeled motorcycle on a road you must wear a helmet. Passengers in a sidecar don’t have to wear a helmet and neither does a Sikh who is wearing a turban. Also, no helmet is needed if someone is pushing the motorcycle on foot.

and:
Motorcyclist converts to a sikh to avoid wearing helmet

… and the Great Hamster Wheel Debate circles on and on. :rolleyes:

But nobody has mentioned the death penalty or turning anything to glass yet :confused:

Hope I can pick your brain/photos further Allan…any details about the main hangar(s) types on the southern part of the site??… ie the apron area on my original post !We have seen quite a few shots of the main parking area but not of the main Hangar area…they looked like they were of a reasonable size !
How far south are you moving ?

I’m afraid my knowledge of the layout is just about exhausted. The apron area was the home to the main maintenance hangars, some distance south of the storage area so well illustrated above.

I have a small pamphlet “Stranraer in World War 2” which briefly mentions Wig Bay and 57MU. It says the land alongside the road between the maintenance hangar and the storage was excavated to allow a Sunderland to be towed along it without the floats fouling.

In the aerial photo above (post 13) you can see a jetty in the bottom corner of the pic. The hangars were just out of shot to the south. The jetty had fuel lines from underground tanks used for refueling. The pamphlet only has a poor photo of the hangars, two perhaps three. I can’t tell what type.

There is a new revised edition of the pamphlet out, available at the bottom of this page:
http://www.stranraerhistory.org.uk/text/publications.htm

I’m sure there is somebody out there who knows a lot more then me though.

Allan

PS I’m moving a long way south, somewhere called Staffordshire. I’ve never been before but it looks nice and the people are friendly.

If anyone knows any good books on the subject that ive missed Id love to know

Yes, me too. The only one I’ve got is James Longworth’s book, “Triplane to Typhoon; Aircraft produced by factories in Lancashire and the North West of England from 1910” 2005 Lancashire County Developments Ltd. It includes Woodford among many others.

As anybody who knows me will tell you, my specialist interest is Short Brothers’ aircraft factories but information is not as easy to come by as for the aircraft they built. Well worth the effort to record the history though.

Kev,
We are all the products of our experiences. I would never judge who is right here because I cannot imagine what you might be feeling from what you have been through. My experiences lead me to my views and, if we were ever to discuss road safety, I would have strong views on people being forced to drive while too tired – but that is not for today.

Now please tell me what any of you think would be a just and appropriate sentence had he been caught and how you would propose to rehabilitate the man who killed my Uncle.

In my view the correct sentence would be the ones currently reserved for unlawful killing. I’m genuinely shocked at the responses your family have had from the police.
Rehabilitation depends on the person – in this case they may or may not be capable of it. A cop out answer I know but I cling to my hope that there will always be those who show genuine remorse and the system should be geared to rehabilitating where possible.

Further cloudied by the case that some lads are pressured into doing this. So very difficult call that one.

If somebody can be turned in one direction then can they be turned back? I’ve suggested we keep that option open.

There is an old pagan way that involves rituals etc that can be traced into witchcraft aswell. This being either white witchcraft or black it doesnt really matter but it does stem from the pagans. That if you carry out an act on somebody expect to get it back 10 fold.

“Eye for an eye” is about vengeance but the original Babylonian system was intended to restrict retribution to an equal response.
If this method was to indeed restrict retribution to an equal response then it sounds like a bloody good system then doesnt it.

One answers the other – the origin in Babylonian law was for vengeful action to be proportionate.

I think this could be argued over for years to come and none of us will ever agree on this.

I don’t think agreement should be our aim here. But by listening to others views we can, occasionally, learn something new. Since this thread became a little less extreme I’ve gained something from it – although you might find I’m not a convert.

It has gone a long way off topic but has, eventually, served some purpose.

Allan

You have a man who quite calmly plants a bomb, he places it where he has calculated it will cause the greatest death and injury, prepares so well that he knows exactly what time would be best to set the bomb to go off to cause maximum devastation. He then leaves the site and returns to his family offering no warning.

I think the liklihood is that he will die in custody – whether there is a death penalty in force or not.

But what if he immediately feels remorse, realising that he has been influenced by others, horror struck by what he has done. Should he be punished? Of course he must be. That is the deterrent part of the punishment. Should he be allowed the chance to reform – only if he is capable of change. Would somebody who killed 20 be allowed out again? I doubt it but I don’t know.

Or do you consider the human rights of the victims to be of less value than the bomber? Of course not. So how then can you actually reason that he deserves opportunities he denied to his victims.

Obviously the human rights of the victim are the same as the murderer. The right to life is the most sacred, although the European Human Rights Act does allow the taking of life as a punishment or in self defence. (See BBC summary) Part of punishment is the denial of other rights, liberty, privacy etc.

A life without freedom is still a life. If we believe that life is precious then the most fitting punishment would be to deny the bomber a life of any kind.

I think that if life is so precious then the state should demonstrate that by not allowing executions.

The majority of countries in the world have now abolished, or no longer practice the death penalty, and the trend is in that direction. The only so called “fully developed countries” still with the death penalty are the USA, Japan and Singapore.

When one looks into specific details in this way it is a tough subject.

Allan