Airsoft shooting range provides Donald Trump target

[Slamz]

And while some people that says being made stateless is a punishment, that's no better either because it's arbitrary punishment without law, ahah, without a trial, it isn't 'proven' that she has contravened any laws. It doesn't matter our opinions, if she got treated this way anyone could be next, would you like to be punished without the state proving you did something wrong?

This. This is exactly what everyone in the UK should be worried about. Unfortunately most people are too enthralled in their hate of her to see the dangerous and worrying precedent that taking away someones citizenship without trial sets. 

 

[Lozart]

The fact is, we've never had so many kids trying to kill themselves, half of all girls cut themselves, and we're getting on a tangent of a tangent here, but, that didn't happen in the 1950s, and maybe ti was faith, maybe it was discipline, maybe it was better parenting or promoting independence, or authority, or maybe the ones who were troubled weren't in school at all, but we do have this problem now, and it serves the purposes of absolutely no one.

It absolutely did happen but it went unreported and was swept under the carpet thanks to the way society viewed young people at the time.

 

[Vulpiness]

It absolutely did happen but it went unreported and was swept under the carpet thanks to the way society viewed young people at the time.

It did happen of course, stupid of me to say that. Sorry.

 

[Lozart]

This. This is exactly what everyone in the UK should be worried about. Unfortunately most people are too enthralled in their hate of her to see the dangerous and worrying precedent that taking away someones citizenship without trial sets. 

You know who was behind the Immigration Act 2014, right?

Ultimately though the Act allows the state to remove citizenship if they are believed to have rights to dual nationality and their "conduct is seriously prejudicial to the United Kingdom’s vital interests". Now, the whys and wherefores of how she ended up making the decision to go aside, her actions ie leaving the UK to travel to Syria with the intent to join ISIS as a wife to provide offspring to bolster the Caliphate are not in question. She herself has stated that she does not regret going and is only coming home because her previous two children died due to malnutrition and doesn't want her third child to suffer the same fate. Had she at any point showed some sign of acknowledging that she had joined a terrorist group and that she recognised that that was wrong (even if she didn't mean it) I could get behind objecting to her loss of citizenship.

Given the cost of monitoring the 700 odd active terror investigations currently running one could ask if we really need another one? Of course, not letting her back in may well be counter productive in that sense because it will most likely feed the bad feeling among the Muslim community that has allowed the radicalisation of the young.

 

[SgtTalbert]

I believe 18 is the current line drawn, the boy who killed that girl on ayr would have had identity hidden til 18, and will be given a new one, records are sealed at that age for less notable offenses.  

That's up for debate. 16, 18, 21? that's something you'll need to ask a physiologist, a hormonal specialist, a teacher, a judge, parents and a policy maker for. 

Should adults be screwing teens? Some people say no, make it 18, some people say 16 isn't keeping up for the time because 12 year olds are screwing each other on a regular basis, there isn't a consensus. 

But given how the bullshit at my school continued til I left it behind, I'd suggest something more, in the later side of that. By 19, I was someone unrecognizable. 

Maybe age is the wrong metric to measure. 

We also have to recognize that teenagers are high as fuck. Like when I got rejected by one girl I was into, I went off the RAILS, because it seemed like the end of the world, because hormones and emotional inexperience. 

Discipline in our schools is so poor, maybe if it was harsher, we wouldn't have these sorts of issues. 

The fact is, we've never had so many kids trying to kill themselves, half of all girls cut themselves, and we're getting on a tangent of a tangent here, but, that didn't happen in the 1950s, and maybe ti was faith, maybe it was discipline, maybe it was better parenting or promoting independence, or authority, or maybe the ones who were troubled weren't in school at all, but we do have this problem now, and it serves the purposes of absolutely no one.

No but after your wall of text you said the sentence i quoted. Adults wouldn't dick children and there needs to be a line. Adults can 'dick' 16yr olds, so based on your final sentence there is the line.

 

[EvilMonkee]

Re taking away citizenship - its not something a normal subject (I choose that word on purpose as opposed to citizen but I digress) has to worry about.  Under international law everyone has to have citizenship of somewhere you cannot be stateless.  Ergo, as most people in this country are only of UK citizenship it is not something that will apply to 98% of people and they shouldn't worry.  I, however, being Northern Irish, am just waiting for the storm troopers of the state to come batter down my backdoors (ohh err) and take away my UK passport as technically I am a dual citizen.

Let me explain, historically executions have been preformed at the tower of London, this rides roughshod over that tradition. 

 

Wrong.  Historically executions in London have been carried out all over the place.  The most notable being Charles I outside of the Banqueting Hall.  Tyburn (where Marble Arch is now) was another popular location.

Personally I think it depends on the crime to whether or not they deserve redemption. Case in point the James Bulger case one child has not (that we know of) done anything since release. The other has broken the rules of his release numerous times and broken the law, should he be allowed more and more chances?

This girl knowingly went to a country at the age of 15 which is above the age in which we by law say that children know right from wrong (think the age is currently 10?)

Correct, the criminal age of responsibility in England at least is 10.

 

[Vulpiness]

No but after your wall of text you said the sentence i quoted. Adults wouldn't dick children and there needs to be a line. Adults can 'dick' 16yr olds, so based on your final sentence there is the line.

It's A line.

It's the least contentious line. 

It's the most middle line.

Between 8 and 18.
 

I'm not a fan of that line, I think that line is, redundant, i think this is the 21st century, and we have much better measurements than the average age of maturity.

I didn't spend weeks crafting that post, don't read too much into where things are, it was snappy, so ended my post with it, there are 3 other lines in there based on age. 
 

Re taking away citizenship - its not something a normal subject (I choose that word on purpose as opposed to citizen but I digress) has to worry about.  Under international law everyone has to have citizenship of somewhere you cannot be stateless.  Ergo, as most people in this country are only of UK citizenship it is not something that will apply to 98% of people and they shouldn't worry.  I, however, being Northern Irish, am just waiting for the storm troopers of the state to come batter down my backdoors (ohh err) and take away my UK passport as technically I am a dual citizen.

Wrong.  Historically executions in London have been carried out all over the place.  The most notable being Charles I outside of the Banqueting Hall.  Tyburn (where Marble Arch is now) was another popular location.

Oh? The only ones I knew of were at towerhill. 

I didn't know london had swallowed up tyburn, it was just a place to name to me, didn't know where it was. 

But thank you for enlightening me. 

Correct, the criminal age of responsibility in England at least is 10.

"James Patrick Bulger (16 March 1990 – 12 February 1993) was a boy from Kirkby, Merseyside, England, who was abducted, tortured and killed by two 10-year-old boys, Robert Thompson and Jon Venables."

They're both 10. They both don't have to live with the shadow of what they did. How is this girl different? (Other than being an adult now who's frankly not a very pleasant person) 

 

[EvilMonkee]

Personally, I think its fucking hilarious.  I have heard of similar things happening to dual UK nationals that have been in Syria before.  Imagine being that person, sat there watching your valuable UK passport being ripped in two and replaced with a Bangladeshi one ROFL.

 

[Slamz]

You know who was behind the Immigration Act 2014, right?

Ultimately though the Act allows the state to remove citizenship if they are believed to have rights to dual nationality and their "conduct is seriously prejudicial to the United Kingdom’s vital interests". Now, the whys and wherefores of how she ended up making the decision to go aside, her actions ie leaving the UK to travel to Syria with the intent to join ISIS as a wife to provide offspring to bolster the Caliphate are not in question. She herself has stated that she does not regret going and is only coming home because her previous two children died due to malnutrition and doesn't want her third child to suffer the same fate. Had she at any point showed some sign of acknowledging that she had joined a terrorist group and that she recognised that that was wrong (even if she didn't mean it) I could get behind objecting to her loss of citizenship.

Given the cost of monitoring the 700 odd active terror investigations currently running one could ask if we really need another one? Of course, not letting her back in may well be counter productive in that sense because it will most likely feed the bad feeling among the Muslim community that has allowed the radicalisation of the young.

While I do agree with you, my issues reside from the choice seeming like a knee jerk reaction. Obviously I don't have access to the Home Secretary, so I can't say for sure if this is the case, so I'm just going on my interpretation (however correct or wrong these are) She's also been stripped of it without actual confirmation that she's got, or able to apply for, Bangladesh Citizenship. Bangladesh have also come out and said she hasn't and cannot.

Part of me couldn't give a toss what happens to her, she's made her bed and can lie in it, and even contemplating joining a group like isis disgusts me. But another part of me feels we should be questioning quick decisions to revoke citizenships in such a way, as we should always be questioning politicians (especially in the UK's current state!)

 

[Lozart]

While I do agree with you, my issues reside from the choice seeming like a knee jerk reaction. Obviously I don't have access to the Home Secretary, so I can't say for sure if this is the case, so I'm just going on my interpretation (however correct or wrong these are) She's also been stripped of it without actual confirmation that she's got, or able to apply for, Bangladesh Citizenship. Bangladesh have also come out and said she hasn't and cannot.

Part of me couldn't give a toss what happens to her, she's made her bed and can lie in it, and even contemplating joining a group like isis disgusts me. But another part of me feels we should be questioning quick decisions to revoke citizenships in such a way, as we should always be questioning politicians (especially in the UK's current state!)

I think the thing to bear in mind is that taking into consideration the potential legal ramifications for the UK in making someone stateless, it's not something that the Home Office have done quickly or without full consideration (even though it may seem that way). It is more than likely that all potential scenarios for the return of any UK nationals that have travelled in support of terrorist groups have been assessed and prepared for way in advance of any of them actually trying to return. Also of note is that more than 100 dual nationals have already been stripped of their UK passports for this very reason already!

 

[Druid799]

Stuck a nerve there druid? 

I had grandparents, emphasis on had, I've done both those things. 

I'm sorry if you you have only experienced acts of empathy and respect in grand, one off gestures, that is indeed a a very fine thing to do.

But it can also be small acts, daily, saying hello to your building manager, of a morning, not flitting past him on the way to work, thanking shop assistants when they take your basket, or listening politely when someone speak about whatever bulshit religion they believe in. 

Those two people, are still people, and when I last looked, this was still a civilized society that did not stoop to such levels, we do not peddle hate and hostility. 

One of those people is a diplomatic ally, the other a civilian. 

Your problem with it is you do not like them, my problem is it could be our Queen up on a target, or Sir David Attenborugh,  or the 98 year old you have so fetishized above, and I understand how I feel about that, and how some other people feel about these characters,a nd how that creates division and discordance within our community unnecessarily by pillorying their image. 

It seems for you, empathy and respect are grand spectacles, they need not be, it's just what you do. 

You seem to think I'm in some great row, or upset by people doing this, I'm not, I'm offended, I'm also offended by the smell of dogshit, and small children, offended, does not mean upset. 

And I am a special kind of snowflake, an iron one: 


But allow me to end by saying, I don't wish for you to feel bag, it is a very fine thing for you to be so hardy, and unaffected by irritants, but don't expect us all to subscribe to your philosophy. 

When someone says they're offended, they're being restrained, what they in fact mean is someone is being rude and that they will remember that. 

Cheers,
 

Now see this is genuinely offends me.

Let me explain, historically executions have been preformed at the tower of London, this rides roughshod over that tradition. 

 

I like you , you make me laugh , my ‘grand gestures’ as you put it were just examples of what the terms actually mean to me , so you want day to day then ?

Empathy is just placing your hand gently on someone’s shoulder when there in distress/in pain or just upset to show them they do matter to someone else .

Respect can be as simple as actually looking at someone when there talking to you and not dicking around with your bloody phone .

The examples you gave there not examples of empathy or respect there examples of common decency that you should show any body ! 

Of course I don’t like trump , immaterial he’s a political ally the man is a coward and a bully , do you honestly say your happy that the leader of one of the three great superpowers is the kind of person who openly mocks disabled people , denigrates women , tells out right lies and then blames the press for ‘fake news’ when they prove he’s lied and the list goes on and on ! 

As for her , she’s only wanting to return to the uk as the caliphate is no more and the very fact she has only now appeared among the final hold outs says to me she is hardcore isis , so yes she is a genuine threat to this country . 

PS who you kidding with that ‘snowflake’ ? As if ! ?‍

The safe space world you live in you wouldn’t be allowed that , way too many pointy bits on it ! ?

?????

Modern. ? I'm guessing you don't know what groomed means.

I like flowers.

Oh your such a wit ! Well half of one anyway ? ?

The girls in Bradford and the other northern towns that were the victims of the Asian sex gangs there victims of grooming , the kid who’s persuaded to take pictures or perform sexual acts on a web cam there victims of grooming when they travel halfway around the world with two friends to join a new religious society that’s stretching it a lot !

you like flowers ? 

Here you go cupcake .?

View attachment 43048

 

[Albiscuit]

Ah, so you do have an opinion then. I can't speak for trump (I'd like trump if pence wasn't in the picture pulling his strings), but ms begun has not put herself in the spotlight at all, when she left she did it of her own volition (and not for attention), albiet as a 15 year old groomed (for sex), and was in the news more because of the cluster nature of that event than the actual act; and when she returned to the public eye it was because she naively allowed unscruptuous journalists to interview her without anyone looking out for her welbeing. And those journalists failed to point out that when she was interviewed she was surrounded by ISIS sympathisers and couldn't really speak ill for them for fear of, you know, being murdered the next day.

Your premise that she "put herself" is wrong. She was put in the public eye by main steam media.

To save you asking where I might stand on the greater issue (largely irrelevant here) I think it's a great injustice that she has commited a crime in the UK and then gotten away with it without any punishment under law. That is offensive to me, she should be back here doing the time for her offences (whatever they might be).

Apart from the trump thing  I like what you have said.

Summed up what most people with an opinion have failed to notice by not being able to read between the lines due to the media and (anti)social media hype around it all. We would rather talk about some twat on a video offering out Danny dyer for having (for a change) quite a sensible opinion (if you actually see the whole interview in context rather than taking a snippet like the daily rags have) that look at the facts for what they are.

But this thread is gold. So many conversations blended into something which has gone quite off topic, not the only thread like this on here either at the mo. 

And so many comments I really want to jump on and things I want to challenge but this is not really the place and frankly I cannot be bothered  

At least I am kept amused at work reading everyones comments!.

 

[Tommikka]

........half of all girls cut themselves......

Going on a real tangent here, but teenage girls cutting themselves is just one form of self harm, which is more visible in today’s society.

Statistics show higher trends of self harm in girls and young women.  But in teenage boys and men the default method of self harm is to go out to get drunk and fight - or punch a brick wall

 

[Vulpiness]

Going on a real tangent here, but teenage girls cutting themselves is just one form of self harm, which is more visible in today’s society.

Statistics show higher trends of self harm in girls and young women.  But in teenage boys and men the default method of self harm is to go out to get drunk and fight - or punch a brick wall

That is entirely true, but unfortunately, much harder to track.  

 

[Tommikka]

That is entirely true, but unfortunately, much harder to track.  

Exactly 

I’ve gone through it with my best lady friend, M, which ended badly with me breaking into her flat.

A good thing in the inquest was the coroners findings agreeing with my belief that the end was accidental.  Death in her sleep as a result of cut wounds that went too deep.

My now best lady friend was a common friend of M and we had gone through all of that together.

Ive spotted the early signs in another lady friend, and happily I am saved from having to insitigate that conversation as our common friend is in there doing that and supporting her.

Theres one guy I knew where I had to step in, he’s a definite self harm case.  I’ve lost touch and at that time it will have gone either way - ideally he’ll have been able to sort out the issues and getting on with life, but I suspect the other route of prison or death

We men don’t do well with help, the signs if we see them are easily misinterpreted as just one of the lads

 

[Immortal]

would you like to be punished without the state proving you did something wrong?

I understand where you're coming from however the proof IMHO is that she openly joined a terrorist group. I think that is enough proof.

Now it's been all but wiped out except in ideology these people (in general) are returning to where they left and think there is no come back for their actions. Had the movement not collapsed I doubt this would be happening.

I do think it is an unusual action that has been taken in terms of not allowing her back but perhaps the simplest logical solution.

Certainly the less riskier option.

 

[Albiscuit]

I understand where you're coming from however the proof IMHO is that she openly joined a terrorist group. I think that is enough proof.

Now it's been all but wiped out except in ideology these people (in general) are returning to where they left and think there is no come back for their actions. Had the movement not collapsed I doubt this would be happening.

I do think it is an unusual action that has been taken in terms of not allowing her back but perhaps the simplest logical solution.

Certainly the less riskier option.

But what proof?

Yeah she has stated she joined them, but proof of laws being broken can and should only be proved in court, buy peers or professionals with all the evidence presented. 

Trial by media is no proof..

 

[Immortal]

It's not a trial by media, she's openly said she didn't object and joined up. That's proof (and how most cases are won, self incrimination).

Joining a terrorist group AFAIK is illegal. That's enough for me. I don't object to people's objections to my views but that's my opinion and it's not changing anytime soon. I don't have the authority to stop or enforce any of this, however I don't object in this case. Like it or not.

I freely admit I don't know the law fully in regards to this case but I've had my fill of this topic. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Albiscuit]

It's not a trial by media, she's openly said she didn't object and joined up. That's proof (and how most cases are won, self incrimination).

Joining a terrorist group AFAIK is illegal. That's enough for me. I don't object to people's objections to my views but that's my opinion and it's not changing anytime soon. I don't have the authority to stop or enforce any of this, however I don't object in this case. Like it or not.

I freely admit I don't know the law fully in regards to this case but I've had my fill of this topic. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

I can say that...

Doesnt mean its true and I should be locked up.

My point is the law has not stepped in at any point.

Everything we know (or think we know) has come from media sources. Even her interviews are not a reliable source as she would have said what:

1) she thought was the best thing to say at that point

2) what she felt she should/could say, there was no way she could condemn ISIS or anyone as she would be a target

3) what the media had told her was the best thing to say, Either way its all edited/shown in a way to provoke reaction. 

It has divided the nation yet its not really our business. Let her come back and face trial. Then let the law work out what to do with her one way or another.  It has been handled so badly by the media for their own outcomes its crazy. 

there has been no LEGAL trial therefore unproven guilty, not that im saying shes IS innocent just its not for me to decide and the law (in which ever country) needs to decide what to do. 

Its strange as where she is and with the UK not seemingly giving a shit she is in a weird limbo and seems will never be held accountable for whatever laws she has or hasnt broke..

 

[bladerunner168]

Joining a terrorist group AFAIK is illegal.

I agree, but in her 15 year old, brainwashed and distorted mind, she probably thought she was joining the Rebel Alliance.