cloud_9A lovely set of photos there civilspotter, thanks for sharing.
The UA 767-300 one is my favourite; I still think that old s-UA livery looks great and it’s a shame it wont be around for much longer as they’re all gradually being painted in the former CO livery!
Couple of questions though, not sure if you (or anyone else!) can answer them:
1. G-JEDT is a Flybe Dash8 Q400…any ideas as to why it’s flying in an all white livery, I’m assuming BE are in the process of leasing it to another operator (if so, who is/will it be?) or is it being returned to BE and just awaiting to be re-painted back into their livery?
2. How many of Darwin’s Saab 2000’s are painted in the new Etihad Regional livery?
cloud_9And where is a thief on the dole going to get £750? Ohhh wait, his next victim…
No, of course not. It would depend on their circumstances. If they were on the dole and/or had no concievable way of paying the financial fine then a lengthier community service would be necessary (rather than hours…make it weeks/months/years!), and/or there should be a payment system in place so that once the criminal had completed the re-habilitation course and was working and earning, then money would be taken from their wages over a period of time until the fine had been paid off.
cloud_9Ok you’re right it doesn’t add much to the debate directly…but the point I was getting across was the fact that I didn’t immediatley charge in like a bull in a chinashop, arm myself with a weapon/s and be willing to use it if someone was still in the property. There will be those on here that will probably think the police didn’t do a good enough job, or that I shouldn’t have had to call the locksmith out in order to get the additional security measures put in place as they no doubt would have simply attacked the criminal if they had come across them and claimed self-defence, but I just don’t see how this would make a difference! As I said above, no-one was hurt and the house is much safer than it was. I’ve since moved, but not as a result of the burglary, just in case you were wondering!
For the avoidance of doubt, perhaps I should explain what I would have done if I had caught/seen the criminals in the act…I probably would have given chase for as long as I could (I’m rather unfit and not that fast tbh!), and if I had caught up with them I would have grabbed hold of them and tackled them to the floor. I would have restrained them so that they could not cause me any injury, which would probably have meant sitting on them. I certainly wouldn’t have punched/kicked them or attacked them with a weapon because I just don’t see what that would achieve? I would have called the police and got them arrested.
If it went to court, I would expect the criminal to have to explain themselves and their actions so as to understand exactly why they did it. I wouldn’t allow them to hide behind a lousy excuse or have a defence lawyer do it for them (of course they’d be entitled to have one present though!), they would be expected to speak for themselves. Now, if it was a first-time offender, I would expect a hefty fine (£750+) along with costs of getting the damage at the house repaired and the replacing of the items that were stolen so lets say £1500. I would then expect some sort of community service and a re-habilitation course to be issued. If at any point these were ignored or disregarded, then a stint in jail would be necessary.
If it were a repeat offender, it would obviously depend on their past history as to whether I would expect them to be sent to jail or not.
I certainly wouldn’t just watch them walk away from court with a slapped wrist as has been suggested above.
Another thing I would do, although this is probably a completley seperate debate in itself, I would reform the prison service so that criminals do not get to have such a good lifestyle when they are in jail. No TV’s, no internet, just basic facilities. Plus, I wouldn’t have early release times for good behaviour…the sentance set by the court would be the amount of time that is spent in jail.
cloud_9Simple. Because until both the law and the attitude are changed…
Please explain to me what you would change about the law in this respect?
I hope to god you never get burgled cloud 9.I hope your house is so full of surveillance and anti theft devices that will stop a ram raider because with your outlook not only will the criminal take you and your family for everything you will stand by and watch them walk away from court with a slapped wrist.
Oddly enough trumper I have been burgled…and it happened within the last two years! Here’s my account of what happened:
I came home from work one-day and found the weelie-bin on its side, propped up against the kitchen window and the dining room window wide open as well.
Thinking this was a tad odd, considering that my now ex-girlfriend was at work at the time, I immediately assumed that someone had broken in. We didn’t have a burglur alarm at the time so no alarm had been raised.
I did a quick scout around, couldn’t see anyone inside or hear anything that suggested they were still in the property, however I still didn’t feel it was safe enough for me to enter on my own, so I got my mobile out and called 101. Admittedly I was on hold for a while as they tried to connect me to someone, so I hung up and dialled 999. Once through to them I explained that my house had been burgled and I tried to call the 101 number prior but couldn’t get through, they were understanding and said they would send someone round. About 20-25 minutes later two CID officers turned up. They came into the property with me, one checked the upstairs, the other went back outside to see if he could establish how the break-in happend. They also called for a Scenes of Crime officer to come have a look and dust for prints. Although they did a thorough dusting for prints, they could only find glove marks on the windows and the items within the property that they had touched.
All that was stolen was a rather cheap laptop and �300 in cash that was left on the bedside cabinet (we’d just sold some items to a friend the day before). They did try to take the XBox, but because it was wired into the TV and wall they must have given up on it and just left it dangling on the floor. Oddly enough they completley missed anything belonging to me, including my laptop and iPad.
Upon investigation, the officers concluded that we had left a small window open that could still be seen from the front even though it being behind a wooden gate/fence. I explained that we had a pet cat at the time and that was it’s entry/exit as we didn’t have a cat flap. They showed me that the wooden gate had been crowbared to gain access from the front of the property and hammer/screwdrivers had been used on the kitchen window in order to gain access to the property.
Overall they were very professional, compassionate and offered some good advice in order to help protect and secure the house to avoid it from happening again. We took them up on this advice and the very next day we called a locksmith who came around and repaired the kitchen window and he strengthend the wooden gate and put and additional lock and padlock on it as well as giving us even more advice about how to prevent a repeat.
For the next few days after, it was annoying to think that we had been broken into and that someone had been inside our house, looked through and taken some of our possessions, but at the end of the day…no ones life was endangered and we came out of the experience a lot wiser, and to me that was the most important thing.
cloud_9Yes charliehunt, I totally agree. I am in favour of tougher punishment as a clear deterrent as long as it is administered in the right way and by the right people. I would most certainly welcome a change in attitude by society.
What I cannot subscribe to is the thought of people taking the law into their owns hands and administering their own form of punishment that they feel fits the crime, whether it be at the time of the event or not.
We need to be tough on crime as well as the causes of crime. We need to work with those in society who are more likely to be led down a criminal path in order to instil the sense of responsibility for their actions, as you suggested earlier.
cloud_9But it clearly is not acting as a deterrent otherwise peoples homes would not be broken in to. Perhaps it is proportionate but not strong enough.
The ‘relevant authorities’ cannot be relied upon to administer proportionate punishment.
Punishment, to be effective, has to discourage further criminality.
Ok, so you’d rather we simply do away with the legal system and just have mob-rule on our streets would you?
Cloud 9, people like you, holding those opinions, are central to the problem of rising levels of criminality.
So just because I don’t agree with what you or others say or would do in certain situations, that makes me a bad person does it?
Let me ask you a question: You are with your wife/girl friend or just a female friend. You become the victims of an assault with the female threatened with rape. What do you do? Wring your hands and say a prayer? Offer would-be rapists tea and toast? Call NHS Direct/RSPCA/RNLI or grab a weapon and get stuck in?
To be honest, I’m not out much after midnight at the best of times and I rarely frequent dark places where this kind of activity is likely to happen.
Hypothetically speaking, if I did find myself in the exact situation that you describe above my response would be quite simple…I would do my level best to get the female friend to safety by putting as much distance as humanly possible between the attacker/s and her. I would instruct her to run and find the nearest payphone and/or person she can find to help and then call the police. I certainly wouldn’t engage in confrontation/violence. And if the attacker/s ended up injuring, maiming or possibly killing me me as a result, then so be it, I’d rather it happen to me than to her. Plus the criminals would not just be looking at charges of assault and attempted rape…it would also include attempted murder, which would gaurentee them a stint in jail and get them off the streets.
cloud_9WHY -Why should the onus be on the person to add to his security???
Why not?
If I were in the position of owning my own business, I would want to take all possible and necessary steps to add to the security of the business to avoid things from happening. Whether this be CCTV, a night-time security guard, whatever it takes, at least I know my business would be secure. Surely that’s a better and more proportiante response compared to giving chase and choosing to cave someone’s head in, breaking their bones or inflicting some other injury onto them?
punishment should be strong enough to be a deterrent.
Indeed, I’m minded to agree with you on this…but the “punishment” should be proportiate and administered by the relevant authorities, not by the victim him/herself!
cloud_9I think the feeling is more one that the guy should never have been charged in the first place, rather than one of hero worship. Frankly if the Police and CPS had done the job right in the first place, this discussion, this thread would not exist.
Well I believe that the Police and CPS have done a good job (of course I’d say that!)…why would they choose to pursue a case all the way through the courts if they didn’t feel/think that there was sufficient evidence or a reasonable prospect of a conviction?
…for me Mr Woodhouse has the right to react in anyway he feels fit at the time.
So you’re suggesting he has the right to injure, maim and perhaps kill someone so long as he does it at the time the crime is being committed or in the moments soon after?
cloud_9Cloud 9 – it is worrying that you are representative of the current passion for equating both victim and oppressor.
To my mind it is a morally corrupt society which fails to divide the attacker and the attacked.
Well perhaps I’m just seeing things from a more balanced perspective, unlike some on here who appear to want to parade the gentleman around as if he is some kind of hero?
Yes, what happend to him is very unfortunate, however it doesn’t give him the right to react the way that he did.
If I were him and had been the victim of a spate of burglaries in the past, I’d be more inclined to look at improving the security measures in order to minimise the risk of it happening again in the future.
It is a morally corrupt society which fails to instil the sense of responsibility for ones actions.
So you are suggesting that this should only be applied to criminals and that everyone else doesn’t need to have a sense of responsibility for their actions instilled into them; or are you suggesting that we are all in fact morally corrupt?
Guilty of a crime has almost been removed down to a level of he was only a little bit naughtier than an innocent person.
That’s a fairly generalised statement. Of course there is a scale in terms of the severity of guilt, just as much as there is a scale in terms of the type of crime committed.
cloud_9Thus making you as morally corrupt as the thief…
cloud_9To respond to a burglar alarm I doubt the Police would have been there within twenty-four hours…
That’s just sensationlist nonsense.
Re 32
I don’t wish to be too controversial, but I do think that you are living as your pen name suggests. Either that or cuckoo land.
Not too controversial at all, and no offence has been taken. I get told that all the time and frankly it doesn’t bother me.
Take note of 33 & 34.
“as I do my level best not to associate myself with such people.”
What on earth does that mean? You clearly think you can choose the type of people who trespass on your property to rob you!
No, of course you can’t choose the type of people who trespass on your property, but why please explain to me why I should choose to put my own life at risk by confronting someone who is potentially dangerous…?
At the end of the day, you and you alone are responsible for your actions, no-one else. If you choose to take the law into your own hands and engage in confrontation/violence to effect justice so be it, but you have to be prepared for the fact that you may very well be arrested/charged for whatever action/s you choose to take. No-one forced the gentleman to get into a confrontation with the thieves…he clearly reacted with anger and he made a consious decision to go after them. Had he of broken an arm during a struggle or something, I could see a use of self-defence, but breaking two arms and a leg is not a reasonable and/or proportionate response in my opinion. Guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this matter.
Yes, I agree, I would lose little sleep if the bandits had received life threatening injuries and then later, died. They would indeed be the architects of their own misfortune. Two less, to cause misery and mayhem.
And you’d happily recieve a criminal record and a custodial sentance for voluntary manslaughter?
I find it bizarre but also rather interesting that you’d be willing to completley wreck the rest of your life in the process…
…would you mind if I pop around to rob you ? I’m sure I’ll get a welcome, a cup of tea and a sandwich.
Of course I’d mind…it’s not as if I’m going to invite you over to rob my place is it…?!:stupid:
You’d have to work out where I actually live first (hint, my location field in my profile hasn’t been updated for quite sometime!).
And no, you wouldn’t get a cup of tea or a sandwich, but probably a response similar to this:
cloud_9My answer… see/re-read #23.
If you’re confronted by a physical bully… I’m not someone who likes confrontation/violence and I highly doubt I would ever find myself to be in such a position as I do my level best not to associate myself with such people. If in such a situation though I would do my upmost to diffuse the situation by trying to reach a non-violent conclusion. If things did become violent, I would shout/scream or do my level best to attract the attention of other people in the vicinity.
Once the alarm on his phone had been raised, Mr Woodhouse could have simply called the police who would have attended to the scene and apprehended the suspects. He could have gone to the scene to make sure that there was no major damage or significant items that had been stolen (perhaps even checked any CCTV if he had it in place), but to give chase to the theives and then batter them with something to the point where they sustain physical injuries is excessive in my opinion.
Would you still be saying that the thief deserved it if they suffered/sustained more serious injuries and later died as a result?
cloud_9But “taking the law into one’s own hands and attempting to effect justice according to one’s own understanding of right and wrong” is… http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Vigilantism
cloud_9Well none of us where there so technically speaking we’re all sitting on the side lines and pontificating to be fair; I guess I’m just struggling to see how/why everyone seems to think that the victim of the actual crime that took place is now somehow a hero…?
I would never suggest, nor could/would I ever endorse, a system whereby a scale of injuries is allowed to be inflicted on offenders by the victim…of any crime!
Vigilantism is not the answer to solving issues like this.
cloud_9Whilst I certainly don’t condone what the thieves did, I can’t condone what Mr Woodhouse did either.
The only things I do agree with is that Mr Woodhouse is certainly the victim as he was a victim of theft, and £75 as a fine to the thieves is frankly a joke. They should have been charged £750 each and been made to pay all legal costs and any damage caused to Mr Woodhouse’s business, plus some hours of community service.
Breaking both arms and a leg of someone who was merely taking £50 worth does strike me as a bit too heavy-handed to me.
Sign In
