There you have it, three headlines in one day (click on darkened links, and I make no apologies for the photo) that sum up the failed social Liberal experiment the socialist elite started decades ago and that the modern un-conservatives and finally nu-labour have cemented with their wilful spiteful neglect of the rule of law since.
Ben Gardner, beaten and kicked to death in an alcohol hate filled, senseless, unprovoked attack, becoming yet another one of those statistics to be filed away in Police records that a violent attack occurs once every thirty seconds in the Britain of today and finally the most shameful betrayal of all, the puerile diatribe from the supposed guardian of public safety Keir Starmer QC, the Director of Public Prosecutions, stating defendants “Human Rights” need to be considered before a prosecution is considered.
Well what about Ben Gardner’s right to life Mr. Starmer? His right; to walk safely about his lawful business, enjoy his life free from intimidation and violence? And finally the right of his family to justice, now that his life has been kicked out. Those are duties you are charged with and handsomely remunerated to defend, not the rights of people who commit such acts.
The Wayne’s and Waynetta’s of this world do not respect those rights because they have no respect for them and mark this, no longer any fear of authority.
They laugh and scoff at the rule of law because there is none now. They know that even if convicted and if they are unlucky enough to even receive a custodial sentence that they will soon be whisked in, then out of the “revolving doors” of the “Five Star Hilton Hotel” style prison service after serving less than half the tariff imposed by a judge.
The semi politicised Police, when they can be dragged away from their diversity, trans-gender awareness and minority group sensitivity courses, only have time now to go after and criminalise the law abiding middle class and honest poor in their desperate attempt to fulfil the centrally dictated “targets” set out by Whitehall. As long as “crime” is being “administratively detected” and targets met with easy convictions of the honest poor and middle class, the government of the day can claim they are tackling crime.
In the broken Britain of today you can kill someone under the influence of drugs or alcohol with visceral violence, or hey even just for the hell of it and walk out after a cushy stint in a hotel, called prison, 8-10 years later. It is a shocking statistic that in the Britain of today that every three years two people are killed by someone released from prison who has killed before. There were over one million, yes one million instances of recorded violent attacks in Britain last year. Compare that to 1956 where there were only 94 convictions for homicide.
In 1958, when the softening of the law occurred with the introduction of the “diminished responsibility” defence there were a total of 113 homicide convictions, 1964 a total of 170, in 1966, 254 homicide convictions, skip this if you want but these figures are important. In 1975, 377 convictions, in 1985, 614 convictions, in 2004, 648 convictions but another 759 prosecutions on top of these failed to secure a conviction! In 2004 instances of wounding where convictions were secured were 7,054 and this has now risen to on average to over 19,000 each year!
Question: is there the fear of authority anymore?
Labour and the un-conservatives before them, through pretending that the people who get drunk, take drugs and/or choose to commit crime as somehow “victims” of circumstance allow the most violent and abhorrent crimes to be excused, the victims having to accept the mitigating circumstances of up bringing, drugs and abuse as somehow a “reason” to excuse their behaviour. It is even a mitigating part of a defence in court now!
Well I know a thing or two about poverty, I grew up in a North Durham Pit village, I remember well going to school in shoes with holes in the soles in rain and snow, I remember well not having even something that children today take for granted such as a bicycle and having to earn money to help pay for one with paper rounds. I remember the deprivation of the 3 day week, the power cuts and the miners strike and fishing for washed up coal on Crimdon beach and seeking out the “dollywash” (sort of compressed coal dust fudge) found on the pit slagheaps to burn on the fire to keep warm. But one thing I didn’t do was rob the granny’s in the village for their pension money to fuel a drug habit, or to get drunk on cheap easily obtained alcohol and attack strangers with mindless drunken or drugged up violence just for “a joke”. Why? Because I respected the law and had fear of authority. I understood the consequences of such behaviour were severe and something to be frightened of.
Taking drugs and committing crime is a lifestyle choice, nothing more nothing less, it’s a choice. You can either choose to be law abiding or choose not to, just as you can choose to take illegal drugs or not to, or drink alcohol to excess. The pathetic excuses these people, and their liberal supporters trot out to “excuse their behaviour are irrelevant.
Remember this come the next general election; “call me Dave” the boy king “heir to Blair” Camoron is man who will not admit to or even deny having taken illegal drugs in his youth, citing “right to privacy” the classic excuse of the liberal left. As an electorate I think we have every right to know this, why? Because if anyone seeking the highest political office of this land cannot be frank and honest about their past, then how can we trust their vision for our future? If he did so and acknowledged it was illegal and apologised and was regretful then maybe we could forgive him, if he didn’t then why dither and evade telling us so?
The Human Wrongs Act, defended so vigorously by the Keir Starmer’s of this world, is the worst piece of European diktat to be forced down the throats of the British people; it is in every respect a Liberal Leftist Elitist attempt to force selfish egalitarian outcomes over common sense. We managed well enough thank you very much before its invention with Magna Carta, Habeas Corpus and The Bill of Rights, all important Acts that defended individual liberty but in the interests of the common good.
This Act is used to promote the interests of individuals and minorities over the common good. I defy any of my readers to find a single instance where this piece of flawed legislation has provided the basis for a judgement that was in the interests of the common good of society, instead you will find countless examples of the judgements it metes out, like so much confetti at a wedding furthering the interests of terrorists, convicted criminals, selfish individuals and minority groups. All cause celebres of the liberal left.
It will be used if Mr. Starmer QC has his way, yet again to deny justice to the family of Ben Gardner and the families that follow, for their will be more instances of this. I have no desire to wish the experience Ben Gardner’s family have had to endure this week on Mr. Starmer and his ilk, such as the gutless politicians in the Westminster bubble, for they are immune from the injustices we have to endure daily behind their (often tax payer funded) high security walls and fences, but I fear until they do we will never see politicians with the moral courage to send lawfully convicted murderers to their judicious deaths.
If you deny people justice you will only promote vengeance, and vengeance and the endless blood feuds that come from it have no place in a civilised society.
We are at the beginning of the end now. If (as I fear is becoming all to common now) respect for the Police, and the criminal justice system continues to dwindle amongst the “targeted” middle class and especially among the abandoned honest poor, we can expect to see an increase of vigilante private 'justice', even lynch-mobs. What the left-liberals don't seem to grasp is that if they strangle justice, revenge is what they will get.
And then, rather too late, they will eventually be able to tell the difference between the two. I wish there was some other way to explain it to them.
No comments:
Post a Comment