Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Punters remain convinced that BJ will last the course – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited November 24 in General
imagePunters remain convinced that BJ will last the course – politicalbetting.com

I have been following politics for long enough to know that the chances of PMs going early is almost always overstated by the media and commentators – something that political gamblers are not doing.

Read the full story here

«13456710

Comments

  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 9,811
    edited November 24
    Yeah prolly will.

    my inner Amol Rajan speaking there.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,589
    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Who could have predicted? Master Rittenhouse's stated intention of living a quiet life away from the limelight going well.


    What did the left expect, when they tried to make someone defending himself into a racist figure of hate?

    The only way America comes back together, is if people start loving each other again, and stop trying to make everything hyper-partisan, black or white (often literally) issue.
    ‘Hey mom, I’m off on a road trip to defend myself. Yeah, yeah, I’ll pick up an AR-15 on the way.’
    Trump endorsing an armed vigilante shows what a dark place America is heading into.
    I have not followed this case in much detail. However, it is clear that there were protests going on in 2020 in America where people were turning up with guns and attacking private property, in violation of all sorts of laws. The left were, and remain, supportive of these protests; and the current president is implicitly supporting these protests with his recent statements. Whilst the attempted coup by Trump supporters was disgraceful, the democrats are really just as bad; but as we know, educated people have an entrenched bias towards the "progressive" left which means that they don't see the problem correctly.
    Ah yes, if there are sins on both sides that MUST mean all sins are equal, of course.
    Another phenomenon is that people look at the 'coup' and conclude that the republican party are now beyond the pale - in to Nazi territory. But this coup came in the wake of other parts of the government bowing down to a mob and suspending essential state functions. As the incumbent, Biden appears to guard the integrity of the system; but also continues to make pretty astounding statements about the finding of juries.
    Biden? The same Biden who said “I stand by what the jury has concluded.” and “The jury system works. We have to abide by it.”

    The kid is legally innocent of his proven vigilante murders. Pointing out that this is bonkers isn't seeking to undermine a jury system which preserves at its heart the jury's absolute right to acquit if it sees fit for any reason it likes and that you are innocent until proven guilty even if you are in fact guilty.

    Its imperfect but nobody is calling for its replacement with a "people's court" type mob trial of the kind wanted by the insurrectionists seeking out Vice President Pence that day.
    From what I have heard I don't think it is murder but manslaughter of some kind would seem correct. It is at least as bad as causing death by drunk driving imo.
    My personal view is that there should be a serious crime of 'taking weapons to a riot'. That would apply to rioters, and to vigilantes.

    Obviously, if it's your own home, you wouldn't be guilty (as you wouldn't have taken weapons to a riot).

    But if you cross state lines to go to a riot and to carry an AR15 assault rifle then (as with driving a vehicle when impaired) you are dramatically increasing the chance that someone dies.

    In a civilized society, the government has the monopoly on the use of force. Here, the police seem to have tacitly chosen to back militias to take on protestors. That's never going to end well.
    But that effectively nullifies the Second Amendment; you just define pretty much everything as a riot.

    why do you hate Freedom, boy?
    "A well regulated militia"...

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 36,561
    Third rate, like..
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 15,500
    edited November 24
    Fourth rate. Can expect almost owt from the PM. Not a market I want to touch.
    But most stuff doesn't happen. Except in the past 5 years.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,496
    edited November 24
    I don't think there'll be too many incidents like Rittenhouse, where someone with (And I did watch the trial intently) genuine intent to help out heads to a protest/riot armed with an AR15, is attempted to be assaulted by someone who isn't really part of the protest (Rossenbaum); is then attacked on the floor and has a gun pointed at him and uses his (Completely correctly in the eyes of Wisconsin law) AR to defend himself.
    Certainly not the KKK style lynching of Arbery.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    On topic - Did the Labour MPs who defected to the Conservatives send letters to the 1922?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236

    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Who could have predicted? Master Rittenhouse's stated intention of living a quiet life away from the limelight going well.


    What did the left expect, when they tried to make someone defending himself into a racist figure of hate?

    The only way America comes back together, is if people start loving each other again, and stop trying to make everything hyper-partisan, black or white (often literally) issue.
    ‘Hey mom, I’m off on a road trip to defend myself. Yeah, yeah, I’ll pick up an AR-15 on the way.’
    Trump endorsing an armed vigilante shows what a dark place America is heading into.
    I have not followed this case in much detail. However, it is clear that there were protests going on in 2020 in America where people were turning up with guns and attacking private property, in violation of all sorts of laws. The left were, and remain, supportive of these protests; and the current president is implicitly supporting these protests with his recent statements. Whilst the attempted coup by Trump supporters was disgraceful, the democrats are really just as bad; but as we know, educated people have an entrenched bias towards the "progressive" left which means that they don't see the problem correctly.
    Ah yes, if there are sins on both sides that MUST mean all sins are equal, of course.
    Another phenomenon is that people look at the 'coup' and conclude that the republican party are now beyond the pale - in to Nazi territory. But this coup came in the wake of other parts of the government bowing down to a mob and suspending essential state functions. As the incumbent, Biden appears to guard the integrity of the system; but also continues to make pretty astounding statements about the finding of juries.
    Biden? The same Biden who said “I stand by what the jury has concluded.” and “The jury system works. We have to abide by it.”

    The kid is legally innocent of his proven vigilante murders. Pointing out that this is bonkers isn't seeking to undermine a jury system which preserves at its heart the jury's absolute right to acquit if it sees fit for any reason it likes and that you are innocent until proven guilty even if you are in fact guilty.

    Its imperfect but nobody is calling for its replacement with a "people's court" type mob trial of the kind wanted by the insurrectionists seeking out Vice President Pence that day.
    From what I have heard I don't think it is murder but manslaughter of some kind would seem correct. It is at least as bad as causing death by drunk driving imo.
    My personal view is that there should be a serious crime of 'taking weapons to a riot'. That would apply to rioters, and to vigilantes.

    Obviously, if it's your own home, you wouldn't be guilty (as you wouldn't have taken weapons to a riot).

    But if you cross state lines to go to a riot and to carry an AR15 assault rifle then (as with driving a vehicle when impaired) you are dramatically increasing the chance that someone dies.

    In a civilized society, the government has the monopoly on the use of force. Here, the police seem to have tacitly chosen to back militias to take on protestors. That's never going to end well.
    But that effectively nullifies the Second Amendment; you just define pretty much everything as a riot.

    why do you hate Freedom, boy?
    Just declare 2022 the year of The Purge and have done with it. If you don't want to participate feel free to depart before New Year's Eve. From midnight in Times Square its free reign until the survivors found Gilead.
    A question - what do you see, when you see this?

    image
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Yeah prolly will.

    my inner Amol Rajan speaking there.

    Buʔ 'e's noʔ as cerʔain to as iʔ mighʔ've seemed.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Who could have predicted? Master Rittenhouse's stated intention of living a quiet life away from the limelight going well.


    What did the left expect, when they tried to make someone defending himself into a racist figure of hate?

    The only way America comes back together, is if people start loving each other again, and stop trying to make everything hyper-partisan, black or white (often literally) issue.
    ‘Hey mom, I’m off on a road trip to defend myself. Yeah, yeah, I’ll pick up an AR-15 on the way.’
    Trump endorsing an armed vigilante shows what a dark place America is heading into.
    I have not followed this case in much detail. However, it is clear that there were protests going on in 2020 in America where people were turning up with guns and attacking private property, in violation of all sorts of laws. The left were, and remain, supportive of these protests; and the current president is implicitly supporting these protests with his recent statements. Whilst the attempted coup by Trump supporters was disgraceful, the democrats are really just as bad; but as we know, educated people have an entrenched bias towards the "progressive" left which means that they don't see the problem correctly.
    Ah yes, if there are sins on both sides that MUST mean all sins are equal, of course.
    Another phenomenon is that people look at the 'coup' and conclude that the republican party are now beyond the pale - in to Nazi territory. But this coup came in the wake of other parts of the government bowing down to a mob and suspending essential state functions. As the incumbent, Biden appears to guard the integrity of the system; but also continues to make pretty astounding statements about the finding of juries.
    Biden? The same Biden who said “I stand by what the jury has concluded.” and “The jury system works. We have to abide by it.”

    The kid is legally innocent of his proven vigilante murders. Pointing out that this is bonkers isn't seeking to undermine a jury system which preserves at its heart the jury's absolute right to acquit if it sees fit for any reason it likes and that you are innocent until proven guilty even if you are in fact guilty.

    Its imperfect but nobody is calling for its replacement with a "people's court" type mob trial of the kind wanted by the insurrectionists seeking out Vice President Pence that day.
    From what I have heard I don't think it is murder but manslaughter of some kind would seem correct. It is at least as bad as causing death by drunk driving imo.
    My personal view is that there should be a serious crime of 'taking weapons to a riot'. That would apply to rioters, and to vigilantes.

    Obviously, if it's your own home, you wouldn't be guilty (as you wouldn't have taken weapons to a riot).

    But if you cross state lines to go to a riot and to carry an AR15 assault rifle then (as with driving a vehicle when impaired) you are dramatically increasing the chance that someone dies.

    In a civilized society, the government has the monopoly on the use of force. Here, the police seem to have tacitly chosen to back militias to take on protestors. That's never going to end well.
    But that effectively nullifies the Second Amendment; you just define pretty much everything as a riot.

    why do you hate Freedom, boy?
    Just declare 2022 the year of The Purge and have done with it. If you don't want to participate feel free to depart before New Year's Eve. From midnight in Times Square its free reign until the survivors found Gilead.
    A question - what do you see, when you see this?

    image
    The reason why I have no interest in going to America any time soon...
  • She's wearing GLOVES!!1!!
  • Pulpstar said:

    I don't think there'll be too many incidents like Rittenhouse, where someone with (And I did watch the trial intently) genuine intent to help out heads to a protest/riot armed with an AR15, is attempted to be assaulted by someone who isn't really part of the protest (Rossenbaum); is then attacked on the floor and has a gun pointed at him and uses his (Completely correctly in the eyes of Wisconsin law) AR to defend himself.
    Certainly not the KKK style lynching of Arbery.

    Do you think so? Surely Rittenhouse is a shitkicker's wet dream.
    See black people protesting at murder by white cop in another state.
    Take a huge fuck-off rifle you can't legally possess and drive to the protest
    Go out patrolling someone else's town in someone else's state pretending to be part of the local vigilante militia defending the town against uppity black communists or whatever
    Get to shoot two people dead.
    Get acquitted, thus upholding the second, and get lauded by President Trump!

    Surely we will see a lot more of this kind of thing. As we did in Portland and other cities where well armed good 'ol boys went riding into town whipping and a whopping every living thing within an inch of its life to uphold law and order and the American way.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 32,016

    She's wearing GLOVES!!1!!

    Good trigger finger discipline I would say.

    Otherwise looks like a father taking his daughter to school what's the big problem. I assume this is in Peckham just by the Broadway?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,074
    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Who could have predicted? Master Rittenhouse's stated intention of living a quiet life away from the limelight going well.


    What did the left expect, when they tried to make someone defending himself into a racist figure of hate?

    The only way America comes back together, is if people start loving each other again, and stop trying to make everything hyper-partisan, black or white (often literally) issue.
    ‘Hey mom, I’m off on a road trip to defend myself. Yeah, yeah, I’ll pick up an AR-15 on the way.’
    Trump endorsing an armed vigilante shows what a dark place America is heading into.
    I have not followed this case in much detail. However, it is clear that there were protests going on in 2020 in America where people were turning up with guns and attacking private property, in violation of all sorts of laws. The left were, and remain, supportive of these protests; and the current president is implicitly supporting these protests with his recent statements. Whilst the attempted coup by Trump supporters was disgraceful, the democrats are really just as bad; but as we know, educated people have an entrenched bias towards the "progressive" left which means that they don't see the problem correctly.
    Ah yes, if there are sins on both sides that MUST mean all sins are equal, of course.
    Another phenomenon is that people look at the 'coup' and conclude that the republican party are now beyond the pale - in to Nazi territory. But this coup came in the wake of other parts of the government bowing down to a mob and suspending essential state functions. As the incumbent, Biden appears to guard the integrity of the system; but also continues to make pretty astounding statements about the finding of juries.
    Biden? The same Biden who said “I stand by what the jury has concluded.” and “The jury system works. We have to abide by it.”

    The kid is legally innocent of his proven vigilante murders. Pointing out that this is bonkers isn't seeking to undermine a jury system which preserves at its heart the jury's absolute right to acquit if it sees fit for any reason it likes and that you are innocent until proven guilty even if you are in fact guilty.

    Its imperfect but nobody is calling for its replacement with a "people's court" type mob trial of the kind wanted by the insurrectionists seeking out Vice President Pence that day.
    From what I have heard I don't think it is murder but manslaughter of some kind would seem correct. It is at least as bad as causing death by drunk driving imo.
    My personal view is that there should be a serious crime of 'taking weapons to a riot'. That would apply to rioters, and to vigilantes.

    Obviously, if it's your own home, you wouldn't be guilty (as you wouldn't have taken weapons to a riot).

    But if you cross state lines to go to a riot and to carry an AR15 assault rifle then (as with driving a vehicle when impaired) you are dramatically increasing the chance that someone dies.

    In a civilized society, the government has the monopoly on the use of force. Here, the police seem to have tacitly chosen to back militias to take on protestors. That's never going to end well.
    But that effectively nullifies the Second Amendment; you just define pretty much everything as a riot.

    why do you hate Freedom, boy?
    "A well regulated militia"...

    And a rogue Supreme Court...
  • StockyStocky Posts: 7,069
    I'll tune in to PMQs today (I usually don't bother).

    I think Johnson is in bigger trouble than Mike does.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,074

    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Who could have predicted? Master Rittenhouse's stated intention of living a quiet life away from the limelight going well.


    What did the left expect, when they tried to make someone defending himself into a racist figure of hate?

    The only way America comes back together, is if people start loving each other again, and stop trying to make everything hyper-partisan, black or white (often literally) issue.
    ‘Hey mom, I’m off on a road trip to defend myself. Yeah, yeah, I’ll pick up an AR-15 on the way.’
    Trump endorsing an armed vigilante shows what a dark place America is heading into.
    I have not followed this case in much detail. However, it is clear that there were protests going on in 2020 in America where people were turning up with guns and attacking private property, in violation of all sorts of laws. The left were, and remain, supportive of these protests; and the current president is implicitly supporting these protests with his recent statements. Whilst the attempted coup by Trump supporters was disgraceful, the democrats are really just as bad; but as we know, educated people have an entrenched bias towards the "progressive" left which means that they don't see the problem correctly.
    Ah yes, if there are sins on both sides that MUST mean all sins are equal, of course.
    Another phenomenon is that people look at the 'coup' and conclude that the republican party are now beyond the pale - in to Nazi territory. But this coup came in the wake of other parts of the government bowing down to a mob and suspending essential state functions. As the incumbent, Biden appears to guard the integrity of the system; but also continues to make pretty astounding statements about the finding of juries.
    Biden? The same Biden who said “I stand by what the jury has concluded.” and “The jury system works. We have to abide by it.”

    The kid is legally innocent of his proven vigilante murders. Pointing out that this is bonkers isn't seeking to undermine a jury system which preserves at its heart the jury's absolute right to acquit if it sees fit for any reason it likes and that you are innocent until proven guilty even if you are in fact guilty.

    Its imperfect but nobody is calling for its replacement with a "people's court" type mob trial of the kind wanted by the insurrectionists seeking out Vice President Pence that day.
    From what I have heard I don't think it is murder but manslaughter of some kind would seem correct. It is at least as bad as causing death by drunk driving imo.
    My personal view is that there should be a serious crime of 'taking weapons to a riot'. That would apply to rioters, and to vigilantes.

    Obviously, if it's your own home, you wouldn't be guilty (as you wouldn't have taken weapons to a riot).

    But if you cross state lines to go to a riot and to carry an AR15 assault rifle then (as with driving a vehicle when impaired) you are dramatically increasing the chance that someone dies.

    In a civilized society, the government has the monopoly on the use of force. Here, the police seem to have tacitly chosen to back militias to take on protestors. That's never going to end well.
    But that effectively nullifies the Second Amendment; you just define pretty much everything as a riot.

    why do you hate Freedom, boy?
    Just declare 2022 the year of The Purge and have done with it. If you don't want to participate feel free to depart before New Year's Eve. From midnight in Times Square its free reign until the survivors found Gilead.
    A question - what do you see, when you see this?

    image
    Guns.
  • Pulpstar said:

    I don't think there'll be too many incidents like Rittenhouse, where someone with (And I did watch the trial intently) genuine intent to help out heads to a protest/riot armed with an AR15, is attempted to be assaulted by someone who isn't really part of the protest (Rossenbaum); is then attacked on the floor and has a gun pointed at him and uses his (Completely correctly in the eyes of Wisconsin law) AR to defend himself.
    Certainly not the KKK style lynching of Arbery.

    Do you think so? Surely Rittenhouse is a shitkicker's wet dream.
    See black people protesting at murder by white cop in another state.
    Take a huge fuck-off rifle you can't legally possess and drive to the protest
    Go out patrolling someone else's town in someone else's state pretending to be part of the local vigilante militia defending the town against uppity black communists or whatever
    Get to shoot two people dead.

    Get acquitted, thus upholding the second, and get lauded by President Trump!

    Surely we will see a lot more of this kind of thing. As we did in Portland and other cities where well armed good 'ol boys went riding into town whipping and a whopping every living thing within an inch of its life to uphold law and order and the American way.
    "Rochdale, can you show me how you've not followed the Rittenhouse trial without stating you've not followed the Rittenhouse trial."

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    Nigelb said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Who could have predicted? Master Rittenhouse's stated intention of living a quiet life away from the limelight going well.


    What did the left expect, when they tried to make someone defending himself into a racist figure of hate?

    The only way America comes back together, is if people start loving each other again, and stop trying to make everything hyper-partisan, black or white (often literally) issue.
    ‘Hey mom, I’m off on a road trip to defend myself. Yeah, yeah, I’ll pick up an AR-15 on the way.’
    Trump endorsing an armed vigilante shows what a dark place America is heading into.
    I have not followed this case in much detail. However, it is clear that there were protests going on in 2020 in America where people were turning up with guns and attacking private property, in violation of all sorts of laws. The left were, and remain, supportive of these protests; and the current president is implicitly supporting these protests with his recent statements. Whilst the attempted coup by Trump supporters was disgraceful, the democrats are really just as bad; but as we know, educated people have an entrenched bias towards the "progressive" left which means that they don't see the problem correctly.
    Ah yes, if there are sins on both sides that MUST mean all sins are equal, of course.
    Another phenomenon is that people look at the 'coup' and conclude that the republican party are now beyond the pale - in to Nazi territory. But this coup came in the wake of other parts of the government bowing down to a mob and suspending essential state functions. As the incumbent, Biden appears to guard the integrity of the system; but also continues to make pretty astounding statements about the finding of juries.
    Biden? The same Biden who said “I stand by what the jury has concluded.” and “The jury system works. We have to abide by it.”

    The kid is legally innocent of his proven vigilante murders. Pointing out that this is bonkers isn't seeking to undermine a jury system which preserves at its heart the jury's absolute right to acquit if it sees fit for any reason it likes and that you are innocent until proven guilty even if you are in fact guilty.

    Its imperfect but nobody is calling for its replacement with a "people's court" type mob trial of the kind wanted by the insurrectionists seeking out Vice President Pence that day.
    From what I have heard I don't think it is murder but manslaughter of some kind would seem correct. It is at least as bad as causing death by drunk driving imo.
    My personal view is that there should be a serious crime of 'taking weapons to a riot'. That would apply to rioters, and to vigilantes.

    Obviously, if it's your own home, you wouldn't be guilty (as you wouldn't have taken weapons to a riot).

    But if you cross state lines to go to a riot and to carry an AR15 assault rifle then (as with driving a vehicle when impaired) you are dramatically increasing the chance that someone dies.

    In a civilized society, the government has the monopoly on the use of force. Here, the police seem to have tacitly chosen to back militias to take on protestors. That's never going to end well.
    But that effectively nullifies the Second Amendment; you just define pretty much everything as a riot.

    why do you hate Freedom, boy?
    Just declare 2022 the year of The Purge and have done with it. If you don't want to participate feel free to depart before New Year's Eve. From midnight in Times Square its free reign until the survivors found Gilead.
    A question - what do you see, when you see this?

    image
    Guns.
    Can't help feeling that the chap should have spent less on the huge scope and more on the AR-15 clone.

    A scope that size is great for 500 yards - but the gun isn't up to that.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,074
    Good interview with Hamilton.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/59369648

    I admire the guy.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 9,811
    Stocky said:

    I'll tune in to PMQs today (I usually don't bother).

    I think Johnson is in bigger trouble than Mike does.

    Well reminded
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    TOPPING said:

    She's wearing GLOVES!!1!!

    Good trigger finger discipline I would say.

    Otherwise looks like a father taking his daughter to school what's the big problem. I assume this is in Peckham just by the Broadway?
    Quite a lot of places it is so cold that not wearing gloves while carrying metal is a health risk.

    Shooting with gloves takes a bit of practise, and selecting the right gloves - I've done it for clay pigeon shooting.
  • Nigelb said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Who could have predicted? Master Rittenhouse's stated intention of living a quiet life away from the limelight going well.


    What did the left expect, when they tried to make someone defending himself into a racist figure of hate?

    The only way America comes back together, is if people start loving each other again, and stop trying to make everything hyper-partisan, black or white (often literally) issue.
    ‘Hey mom, I’m off on a road trip to defend myself. Yeah, yeah, I’ll pick up an AR-15 on the way.’
    Trump endorsing an armed vigilante shows what a dark place America is heading into.
    I have not followed this case in much detail. However, it is clear that there were protests going on in 2020 in America where people were turning up with guns and attacking private property, in violation of all sorts of laws. The left were, and remain, supportive of these protests; and the current president is implicitly supporting these protests with his recent statements. Whilst the attempted coup by Trump supporters was disgraceful, the democrats are really just as bad; but as we know, educated people have an entrenched bias towards the "progressive" left which means that they don't see the problem correctly.
    Ah yes, if there are sins on both sides that MUST mean all sins are equal, of course.
    Another phenomenon is that people look at the 'coup' and conclude that the republican party are now beyond the pale - in to Nazi territory. But this coup came in the wake of other parts of the government bowing down to a mob and suspending essential state functions. As the incumbent, Biden appears to guard the integrity of the system; but also continues to make pretty astounding statements about the finding of juries.
    Biden? The same Biden who said “I stand by what the jury has concluded.” and “The jury system works. We have to abide by it.”

    The kid is legally innocent of his proven vigilante murders. Pointing out that this is bonkers isn't seeking to undermine a jury system which preserves at its heart the jury's absolute right to acquit if it sees fit for any reason it likes and that you are innocent until proven guilty even if you are in fact guilty.

    Its imperfect but nobody is calling for its replacement with a "people's court" type mob trial of the kind wanted by the insurrectionists seeking out Vice President Pence that day.
    From what I have heard I don't think it is murder but manslaughter of some kind would seem correct. It is at least as bad as causing death by drunk driving imo.
    My personal view is that there should be a serious crime of 'taking weapons to a riot'. That would apply to rioters, and to vigilantes.

    Obviously, if it's your own home, you wouldn't be guilty (as you wouldn't have taken weapons to a riot).

    But if you cross state lines to go to a riot and to carry an AR15 assault rifle then (as with driving a vehicle when impaired) you are dramatically increasing the chance that someone dies.

    In a civilized society, the government has the monopoly on the use of force. Here, the police seem to have tacitly chosen to back militias to take on protestors. That's never going to end well.
    But that effectively nullifies the Second Amendment; you just define pretty much everything as a riot.

    why do you hate Freedom, boy?
    Just declare 2022 the year of The Purge and have done with it. If you don't want to participate feel free to depart before New Year's Eve. From midnight in Times Square its free reign until the survivors found Gilead.
    A question - what do you see, when you see this?

    image
    Guns.
    GLOVES.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 32,016
    edited November 24

    TOPPING said:

    She's wearing GLOVES!!1!!

    Good trigger finger discipline I would say.

    Otherwise looks like a father taking his daughter to school what's the big problem. I assume this is in Peckham just by the Broadway?
    Quite a lot of places it is so cold that not wearing gloves while carrying metal is a health risk.

    Shooting with gloves takes a bit of practise, and selecting the right gloves - I've done it for clay pigeon shooting.
    SOP in many theatres.

    Edit: Apart from The Ambassadors IIRC.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,074

    Nigelb said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Who could have predicted? Master Rittenhouse's stated intention of living a quiet life away from the limelight going well.


    What did the left expect, when they tried to make someone defending himself into a racist figure of hate?

    The only way America comes back together, is if people start loving each other again, and stop trying to make everything hyper-partisan, black or white (often literally) issue.
    ‘Hey mom, I’m off on a road trip to defend myself. Yeah, yeah, I’ll pick up an AR-15 on the way.’
    Trump endorsing an armed vigilante shows what a dark place America is heading into.
    I have not followed this case in much detail. However, it is clear that there were protests going on in 2020 in America where people were turning up with guns and attacking private property, in violation of all sorts of laws. The left were, and remain, supportive of these protests; and the current president is implicitly supporting these protests with his recent statements. Whilst the attempted coup by Trump supporters was disgraceful, the democrats are really just as bad; but as we know, educated people have an entrenched bias towards the "progressive" left which means that they don't see the problem correctly.
    Ah yes, if there are sins on both sides that MUST mean all sins are equal, of course.
    Another phenomenon is that people look at the 'coup' and conclude that the republican party are now beyond the pale - in to Nazi territory. But this coup came in the wake of other parts of the government bowing down to a mob and suspending essential state functions. As the incumbent, Biden appears to guard the integrity of the system; but also continues to make pretty astounding statements about the finding of juries.
    Biden? The same Biden who said “I stand by what the jury has concluded.” and “The jury system works. We have to abide by it.”

    The kid is legally innocent of his proven vigilante murders. Pointing out that this is bonkers isn't seeking to undermine a jury system which preserves at its heart the jury's absolute right to acquit if it sees fit for any reason it likes and that you are innocent until proven guilty even if you are in fact guilty.

    Its imperfect but nobody is calling for its replacement with a "people's court" type mob trial of the kind wanted by the insurrectionists seeking out Vice President Pence that day.
    From what I have heard I don't think it is murder but manslaughter of some kind would seem correct. It is at least as bad as causing death by drunk driving imo.
    My personal view is that there should be a serious crime of 'taking weapons to a riot'. That would apply to rioters, and to vigilantes.

    Obviously, if it's your own home, you wouldn't be guilty (as you wouldn't have taken weapons to a riot).

    But if you cross state lines to go to a riot and to carry an AR15 assault rifle then (as with driving a vehicle when impaired) you are dramatically increasing the chance that someone dies.

    In a civilized society, the government has the monopoly on the use of force. Here, the police seem to have tacitly chosen to back militias to take on protestors. That's never going to end well.
    But that effectively nullifies the Second Amendment; you just define pretty much everything as a riot.

    why do you hate Freedom, boy?
    Just declare 2022 the year of The Purge and have done with it. If you don't want to participate feel free to depart before New Year's Eve. From midnight in Times Square its free reign until the survivors found Gilead.
    A question - what do you see, when you see this?

    image
    Guns.
    GLOVES.
    If I see anyone walking down the street with an assault rifle, whether or not they are wearing gloves isn't really a concern.
  • All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 5,263

    She's wearing GLOVES!!1!!

    They're really snazzy bright gloves too.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,074
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    She's wearing GLOVES!!1!!

    Good trigger finger discipline I would say.

    Otherwise looks like a father taking his daughter to school what's the big problem. I assume this is in Peckham just by the Broadway?
    Quite a lot of places it is so cold that not wearing gloves while carrying metal is a health risk.

    Shooting with gloves takes a bit of practise, and selecting the right gloves - I've done it for clay pigeon shooting.
    SOP in many theatres.

    Edit: Apart from The Ambassadors IIRC.
    John Wilkes Booth...
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 5,263
    On topic. I think a 2-in-5 chance of Johnson not contesting the next general election as Tory leader is overstating the chance of Johnson going early.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 9,811

    Nigelb said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Who could have predicted? Master Rittenhouse's stated intention of living a quiet life away from the limelight going well.


    What did the left expect, when they tried to make someone defending himself into a racist figure of hate?

    The only way America comes back together, is if people start loving each other again, and stop trying to make everything hyper-partisan, black or white (often literally) issue.
    ‘Hey mom, I’m off on a road trip to defend myself. Yeah, yeah, I’ll pick up an AR-15 on the way.’
    Trump endorsing an armed vigilante shows what a dark place America is heading into.
    I have not followed this case in much detail. However, it is clear that there were protests going on in 2020 in America where people were turning up with guns and attacking private property, in violation of all sorts of laws. The left were, and remain, supportive of these protests; and the current president is implicitly supporting these protests with his recent statements. Whilst the attempted coup by Trump supporters was disgraceful, the democrats are really just as bad; but as we know, educated people have an entrenched bias towards the "progressive" left which means that they don't see the problem correctly.
    Ah yes, if there are sins on both sides that MUST mean all sins are equal, of course.
    Another phenomenon is that people look at the 'coup' and conclude that the republican party are now beyond the pale - in to Nazi territory. But this coup came in the wake of other parts of the government bowing down to a mob and suspending essential state functions. As the incumbent, Biden appears to guard the integrity of the system; but also continues to make pretty astounding statements about the finding of juries.
    Biden? The same Biden who said “I stand by what the jury has concluded.” and “The jury system works. We have to abide by it.”

    The kid is legally innocent of his proven vigilante murders. Pointing out that this is bonkers isn't seeking to undermine a jury system which preserves at its heart the jury's absolute right to acquit if it sees fit for any reason it likes and that you are innocent until proven guilty even if you are in fact guilty.

    Its imperfect but nobody is calling for its replacement with a "people's court" type mob trial of the kind wanted by the insurrectionists seeking out Vice President Pence that day.
    From what I have heard I don't think it is murder but manslaughter of some kind would seem correct. It is at least as bad as causing death by drunk driving imo.
    My personal view is that there should be a serious crime of 'taking weapons to a riot'. That would apply to rioters, and to vigilantes.

    Obviously, if it's your own home, you wouldn't be guilty (as you wouldn't have taken weapons to a riot).

    But if you cross state lines to go to a riot and to carry an AR15 assault rifle then (as with driving a vehicle when impaired) you are dramatically increasing the chance that someone dies.

    In a civilized society, the government has the monopoly on the use of force. Here, the police seem to have tacitly chosen to back militias to take on protestors. That's never going to end well.
    But that effectively nullifies the Second Amendment; you just define pretty much everything as a riot.

    why do you hate Freedom, boy?
    Just declare 2022 the year of The Purge and have done with it. If you don't want to participate feel free to depart before New Year's Eve. From midnight in Times Square its free reign until the survivors found Gilead.
    A question - what do you see, when you see this?

    image
    Guns.
    GLOVES.
    Natty little orange radios. Vigilantes.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 14,101
    edited November 24

    Pulpstar said:

    I don't think there'll be too many incidents like Rittenhouse, where someone with (And I did watch the trial intently) genuine intent to help out heads to a protest/riot armed with an AR15, is attempted to be assaulted by someone who isn't really part of the protest (Rossenbaum); is then attacked on the floor and has a gun pointed at him and uses his (Completely correctly in the eyes of Wisconsin law) AR to defend himself.
    Certainly not the KKK style lynching of Arbery.

    Do you think so? Surely Rittenhouse is a shitkicker's wet dream.
    See black people protesting at murder by white cop in another state.
    Take a huge fuck-off rifle you can't legally possess and drive to the protest
    Go out patrolling someone else's town in someone else's state pretending to be part of the local vigilante militia defending the town against uppity black communists or whatever
    Get to shoot two people dead.

    Get acquitted, thus upholding the second, and get lauded by President Trump!

    Surely we will see a lot more of this kind of thing. As we did in Portland and other cities where well armed good 'ol boys went riding into town whipping and a whopping every living thing within an inch of its life to uphold law and order and the American way.
    "Rochdale, can you show me how you've not followed the Rittenhouse trial without stating you've not followed the Rittenhouse trial."

    Tis true. Which bits have I got wrong? Yes I know that the people he killed were white.

    EDIT - with thanks to @BannedInParis for his perspective and correcting me on attempted murder by cop not murder by cop
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 9,811
    "In December 2019 and January 2020, residents of Satilla Shores reported three break-ins or thefts. On December 8, 2019, a Satilla Shores resident reported rifles stolen from the resident's unlocked car. Police recorded a theft on December 28, 2019. On January 1, 2020, Travis McMichael filed a report of a firearm stolen from his unlocked truck."

    Top tip: don't go innocently jogging into building sites at night in areas where that sort of shit happens. The thought of leaving rifles in unlocked vehicles...
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 15,500

    All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

    Not sure the distance is particularly relevant. You're either crossing the border or not. The US authorities in Blaine, Washington, never used to let me get away with that argument.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    edited November 24
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    She's wearing GLOVES!!1!!

    Good trigger finger discipline I would say.

    Otherwise looks like a father taking his daughter to school what's the big problem. I assume this is in Peckham just by the Broadway?
    Quite a lot of places it is so cold that not wearing gloves while carrying metal is a health risk.

    Shooting with gloves takes a bit of practise, and selecting the right gloves - I've done it for clay pigeon shooting.
    SOP in many theatres.

    Edit: Apart from The Ambassadors IIRC.
    Silk gloves at the opera, one hopes.

    EDIT - no gloves, but well dressed

    image
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    She's wearing GLOVES!!1!!

    Good trigger finger discipline I would say.

    Otherwise looks like a father taking his daughter to school what's the big problem. I assume this is in Peckham just by the Broadway?
    Quite a lot of places it is so cold that not wearing gloves while carrying metal is a health risk.

    Shooting with gloves takes a bit of practise, and selecting the right gloves - I've done it for clay pigeon shooting.
    SOP in many theatres.

    Edit: Apart from The Ambassadors IIRC.
    John Wilkes Booth...
    Used a rifled pistol, IIRC. Sign of a cad, that.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 9,811

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    She's wearing GLOVES!!1!!

    Good trigger finger discipline I would say.

    Otherwise looks like a father taking his daughter to school what's the big problem. I assume this is in Peckham just by the Broadway?
    Quite a lot of places it is so cold that not wearing gloves while carrying metal is a health risk.

    Shooting with gloves takes a bit of practise, and selecting the right gloves - I've done it for clay pigeon shooting.
    SOP in many theatres.

    Edit: Apart from The Ambassadors IIRC.
    John Wilkes Booth...
    Used a rifled pistol, IIRC. Sign of a cad, that.
    The internet seems to think that in the US pistols have by law to be rifled, otherwise they are classified as shotguns.
  • Anyway, I'm just glad that however people want to treat the whys and wherefores of America that we don't have the same gun madness as they do.

    You can't even argue that their possession of guns is the issue. Other countries have a lot of guns and manage to avoid the American problem.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236

    Anyway, I'm just glad that however people want to treat the whys and wherefores of America that we don't have the same gun madness as they do.

    You can't even argue that their possession of guns is the issue. Other countries have a lot of guns and manage to avoid the American problem.

    Switzerland - the country where you can be sent to prison for *not possessing* a rifle with full auto. And mowing the lawn on Sunday.
  • Anyway, I'm just glad that however people want to treat the whys and wherefores of America that we don't have the same gun madness as they do.

    You can't even argue that their possession of guns is the issue. Other countries have a lot of guns and manage to avoid the American problem.

    Switzerland - the country where you can be sent to prison for *not possessing* a rifle with full auto. And mowing the lawn on Sunday.
    Exactly. You can't argue against the concept of citizens forming an armed militia when the Swiss do it so well. Its just *Americans* who can't do it, for reasons that seem pretty obvious.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    IshmaelZ said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    She's wearing GLOVES!!1!!

    Good trigger finger discipline I would say.

    Otherwise looks like a father taking his daughter to school what's the big problem. I assume this is in Peckham just by the Broadway?
    Quite a lot of places it is so cold that not wearing gloves while carrying metal is a health risk.

    Shooting with gloves takes a bit of practise, and selecting the right gloves - I've done it for clay pigeon shooting.
    SOP in many theatres.

    Edit: Apart from The Ambassadors IIRC.
    John Wilkes Booth...
    Used a rifled pistol, IIRC. Sign of a cad, that.
    The internet seems to think that in the US pistols have by law to be rifled, otherwise they are classified as shotguns.
    Required link to ....

    image
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 4,579

    Anyway, I'm just glad that however people want to treat the whys and wherefores of America that we don't have the same gun madness as they do.

    You can't even argue that their possession of guns is the issue. Other countries have a lot of guns and manage to avoid the American problem.

    What I find fascinating (in a grim way) is the response to mass shootings. When Hungerford happened, or Dunblane, the UK response is to try to reduce gun ownership/use. In the US, many people think the answer is more guns, so that active shooters can be taken out by any passing, armed, person.
  • dixiedean said:

    All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

    Not sure the distance is particularly relevant. You're either crossing the border or not. The US authorities in Blaine, Washington, never used to let me get away with that argument.
    I don't think crossing state lines is particularly relevant to how bad what he did was.

    If Antioch were just inside Wisconsin I think it would have been an equally bad idea to drive there to a riot with a gun.

    If Antioch were in Wisconsin, but was 150 miles away and he had little connection with the place, I think it would have been worse despite not crossing state lines in this hypothetical.

    Do you really think state line crossing makes any difference to the ethical issue?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,074
    IshmaelZ said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    She's wearing GLOVES!!1!!

    Good trigger finger discipline I would say.

    Otherwise looks like a father taking his daughter to school what's the big problem. I assume this is in Peckham just by the Broadway?
    Quite a lot of places it is so cold that not wearing gloves while carrying metal is a health risk.

    Shooting with gloves takes a bit of practise, and selecting the right gloves - I've done it for clay pigeon shooting.
    SOP in many theatres.

    Edit: Apart from The Ambassadors IIRC.
    John Wilkes Booth...
    Used a rifled pistol, IIRC. Sign of a cad, that.
    The internet seems to think that in the US pistols have by law to be rifled, otherwise they are classified as shotguns.
    Not sure that was an issue back in 1865 ?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 15,500

    Anyway, I'm just glad that however people want to treat the whys and wherefores of America that we don't have the same gun madness as they do.

    You can't even argue that their possession of guns is the issue. Other countries have a lot of guns and manage to avoid the American problem.

    What I find fascinating (in a grim way) is the response to mass shootings. When Hungerford happened, or Dunblane, the UK response is to try to reduce gun ownership/use. In the US, many people think the answer is more guns, so that active shooters can be taken out by any passing, armed, person.
    See Canada too. A very relevant comparison. 20m firearms. Same response to mass shootings.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236

    dixiedean said:

    All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

    Not sure the distance is particularly relevant. You're either crossing the border or not. The US authorities in Blaine, Washington, never used to let me get away with that argument.
    I don't think crossing state lines is particularly relevant to how bad what he did was.

    If Antioch were just inside Wisconsin I think it would have been an equally bad idea to drive there to a riot with a gun.

    If Antioch were in Wisconsin, but was 150 miles away and he had little connection with the place, I think it would have been worse despite not crossing state lines in this hypothetical.

    Do you really think state line crossing makes any difference to the ethical issue?
    It seems fairly clear that Rittenhouse made sure that the weapon he carried at the riot was *technically* legal.

    Carrying guns at a riot is stupid and leads to predictable results. I would argue that doing so, deliberately, gets you into the reckless endangerment/manslaughter zone. On an ethical basis, that is.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236

    Anyway, I'm just glad that however people want to treat the whys and wherefores of America that we don't have the same gun madness as they do.

    You can't even argue that their possession of guns is the issue. Other countries have a lot of guns and manage to avoid the American problem.

    Switzerland - the country where you can be sent to prison for *not possessing* a rifle with full auto. And mowing the lawn on Sunday.
    Exactly. You can't argue against the concept of citizens forming an armed militia when the Swiss do it so well. Its just *Americans* who can't do it, for reasons that seem pretty obvious.
    To use an NRA slogan in a way they wouldn't like - The problem in America isn't guns. It's the gun owners.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 15,500

    dixiedean said:

    All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

    Not sure the distance is particularly relevant. You're either crossing the border or not. The US authorities in Blaine, Washington, never used to let me get away with that argument.
    I don't think crossing state lines is particularly relevant to how bad what he did was.

    If Antioch were just inside Wisconsin I think it would have been an equally bad idea to drive there to a riot with a gun.

    If Antioch were in Wisconsin, but was 150 miles away and he had little connection with the place, I think it would have been worse despite not crossing state lines in this hypothetical.

    Do you really think state line crossing makes any difference to the ethical issue?
    No. But it is a sacred tenet of US law and Constitution. You can do stuff in Kansas City, Mo., which isn't allowed across the street in KC, Kansas.
    No difference ethically.
    Legally. He crossed a State line.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 9,811
    Nigelb said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    She's wearing GLOVES!!1!!

    Good trigger finger discipline I would say.

    Otherwise looks like a father taking his daughter to school what's the big problem. I assume this is in Peckham just by the Broadway?
    Quite a lot of places it is so cold that not wearing gloves while carrying metal is a health risk.

    Shooting with gloves takes a bit of practise, and selecting the right gloves - I've done it for clay pigeon shooting.
    SOP in many theatres.

    Edit: Apart from The Ambassadors IIRC.
    John Wilkes Booth...
    Used a rifled pistol, IIRC. Sign of a cad, that.
    The internet seems to think that in the US pistols have by law to be rifled, otherwise they are classified as shotguns.
    Not sure that was an issue back in 1865 ?
    Reasonable point.

    At a guess I'd have said that duelling pistols would be rifled, others not so much. But I'd be wrong about that: US Civil War Colt revolvers had rifling as standard

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rifling
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,496

    dixiedean said:

    All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

    Not sure the distance is particularly relevant. You're either crossing the border or not. The US authorities in Blaine, Washington, never used to let me get away with that argument.
    I don't think crossing state lines is particularly relevant to how bad what he did was.

    If Antioch were just inside Wisconsin I think it would have been an equally bad idea to drive there to a riot with a gun.

    If Antioch were in Wisconsin, but was 150 miles away and he had little connection with the place, I think it would have been worse despite not crossing state lines in this hypothetical.

    Do you really think state line crossing makes any difference to the ethical issue?
    It seems fairly clear that Rittenhouse made sure that the weapon he carried at the riot was *technically* legal.

    Carrying guns at a riot is stupid and leads to predictable results. I would argue that doing so, deliberately, gets you into the reckless endangerment/manslaughter zone. On an ethical basis, that is.
    Your final para is essentially the difference between the USA and most of the rest of the world wrt guns.
  • dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

    Not sure the distance is particularly relevant. You're either crossing the border or not. The US authorities in Blaine, Washington, never used to let me get away with that argument.
    I don't think crossing state lines is particularly relevant to how bad what he did was.

    If Antioch were just inside Wisconsin I think it would have been an equally bad idea to drive there to a riot with a gun.

    If Antioch were in Wisconsin, but was 150 miles away and he had little connection with the place, I think it would have been worse despite not crossing state lines in this hypothetical.

    Do you really think state line crossing makes any difference to the ethical issue?
    No. But it is a sacred tenet of US law and Constitution. You can do stuff in Kansas City, Mo., which isn't allowed across the street in KC, Kansas.
    No difference ethically.
    Legally. He crossed a State line.
    I know. I posted a picture of the State line that he crossed.

    I think the emphasis on it is weird as it doesn't make what he did any worse.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    IshmaelZ said:

    Nigelb said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    She's wearing GLOVES!!1!!

    Good trigger finger discipline I would say.

    Otherwise looks like a father taking his daughter to school what's the big problem. I assume this is in Peckham just by the Broadway?
    Quite a lot of places it is so cold that not wearing gloves while carrying metal is a health risk.

    Shooting with gloves takes a bit of practise, and selecting the right gloves - I've done it for clay pigeon shooting.
    SOP in many theatres.

    Edit: Apart from The Ambassadors IIRC.
    John Wilkes Booth...
    Used a rifled pistol, IIRC. Sign of a cad, that.
    The internet seems to think that in the US pistols have by law to be rifled, otherwise they are classified as shotguns.
    Not sure that was an issue back in 1865 ?
    Reasonable point.

    At a guess I'd have said that duelling pistols would be rifled, others not so much. But I'd be wrong about that: US Civil War Colt revolvers had rifling as standard

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rifling
    Rifled pistols were considered a bit murderous in duelling*. Hence the cad joke....

    *But, naturally, lots of duelling pistols *were* rifled.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 7,462
    dixiedean said:

    Anyway, I'm just glad that however people want to treat the whys and wherefores of America that we don't have the same gun madness as they do.

    You can't even argue that their possession of guns is the issue. Other countries have a lot of guns and manage to avoid the American problem.

    What I find fascinating (in a grim way) is the response to mass shootings. When Hungerford happened, or Dunblane, the UK response is to try to reduce gun ownership/use. In the US, many people think the answer is more guns, so that active shooters can be taken out by any passing, armed, person.
    See Canada too. A very relevant comparison. 20m firearms. Same response to mass shootings.
    It's quite understandable that when gun ownership reaches a certain level so many people want to own guns for their own protection that the situation becomes irreversible.

    We should just be thankful that in the UK we are not at that level.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Who could have predicted? Master Rittenhouse's stated intention of living a quiet life away from the limelight going well.


    What did the left expect, when they tried to make someone defending himself into a racist figure of hate?

    The only way America comes back together, is if people start loving each other again, and stop trying to make everything hyper-partisan, black or white (often literally) issue.
    ‘Hey mom, I’m off on a road trip to defend myself. Yeah, yeah, I’ll pick up an AR-15 on the way.’
    Trump endorsing an armed vigilante shows what a dark place America is heading into.
    I have not followed this case in much detail. However, it is clear that there were protests going on in 2020 in America where people were turning up with guns and attacking private property, in violation of all sorts of laws. The left were, and remain, supportive of these protests; and the current president is implicitly supporting these protests with his recent statements. Whilst the attempted coup by Trump supporters was disgraceful, the democrats are really just as bad; but as we know, educated people have an entrenched bias towards the "progressive" left which means that they don't see the problem correctly.
    Ah yes, if there are sins on both sides that MUST mean all sins are equal, of course.
    Another phenomenon is that people look at the 'coup' and conclude that the republican party are now beyond the pale - in to Nazi territory. But this coup came in the wake of other parts of the government bowing down to a mob and suspending essential state functions. As the incumbent, Biden appears to guard the integrity of the system; but also continues to make pretty astounding statements about the finding of juries.
    Biden? The same Biden who said “I stand by what the jury has concluded.” and “The jury system works. We have to abide by it.”

    The kid is legally innocent of his proven vigilante murders. Pointing out that this is bonkers isn't seeking to undermine a jury system which preserves at its heart the jury's absolute right to acquit if it sees fit for any reason it likes and that you are innocent until proven guilty even if you are in fact guilty.

    Its imperfect but nobody is calling for its replacement with a "people's court" type mob trial of the kind wanted by the insurrectionists seeking out Vice President Pence that day.
    From what I have heard I don't think it is murder but manslaughter of some kind would seem correct. It is at least as bad as causing death by drunk driving imo.
    My personal view is that there should be a serious crime of 'taking weapons to a riot'. That would apply to rioters, and to vigilantes.

    Obviously, if it's your own home, you wouldn't be guilty (as you wouldn't have taken weapons to a riot).

    But if you cross state lines to go to a riot and to carry an AR15 assault rifle then (as with driving a vehicle when impaired) you are dramatically increasing the chance that someone dies.

    In a civilized society, the government has the monopoly on the use of force. Here, the police seem to have tacitly chosen to back militias to take on protestors. That's never going to end well.
    But that effectively nullifies the Second Amendment; you just define pretty much everything as a riot.

    why do you hate Freedom, boy?
    Just declare 2022 the year of The Purge and have done with it. If you don't want to participate feel free to depart before New Year's Eve. From midnight in Times Square its free reign until the survivors found Gilead.
    A question - what do you see, when you see this?

    image
    The reason why I have no interest in going to America any time soon...
    My son said that yesterday
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759
    dixiedean said:

    Anyway, I'm just glad that however people want to treat the whys and wherefores of America that we don't have the same gun madness as they do.

    You can't even argue that their possession of guns is the issue. Other countries have a lot of guns and manage to avoid the American problem.

    What I find fascinating (in a grim way) is the response to mass shootings. When Hungerford happened, or Dunblane, the UK response is to try to reduce gun ownership/use. In the US, many people think the answer is more guns, so that active shooters can be taken out by any passing, armed, person.
    See Canada too. A very relevant comparison. 20m firearms. Same response to mass shootings.
    Port Arthur, Australia.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,516
    edited November 24
    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 2,303

    IshmaelZ said:

    Yeah prolly will.

    my inner Amol Rajan speaking there.

    Buʔ 'e's noʔ as cerʔain to as iʔ mighʔ've seemed.
    You mean "mighʔ'aʔ" surely?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 9,811
    Chris said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyway, I'm just glad that however people want to treat the whys and wherefores of America that we don't have the same gun madness as they do.

    You can't even argue that their possession of guns is the issue. Other countries have a lot of guns and manage to avoid the American problem.

    What I find fascinating (in a grim way) is the response to mass shootings. When Hungerford happened, or Dunblane, the UK response is to try to reduce gun ownership/use. In the US, many people think the answer is more guns, so that active shooters can be taken out by any passing, armed, person.
    See Canada too. A very relevant comparison. 20m firearms. Same response to mass shootings.
    It's quite understandable that when gun ownership reaches a certain level so many people want to own guns for their own protection that the situation becomes irreversible.

    We should just be thankful that in the UK we are not at that level.
    My shotgun (which I use because it's a very good shotgun, not for historical reenactment reasons) was made in the 1880s. So banning guns now is hopeless, the existing ones don't obsolesce out of the system. you'd have to restrict ammunition to get anywhere.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759
    Chris said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyway, I'm just glad that however people want to treat the whys and wherefores of America that we don't have the same gun madness as they do.

    You can't even argue that their possession of guns is the issue. Other countries have a lot of guns and manage to avoid the American problem.

    What I find fascinating (in a grim way) is the response to mass shootings. When Hungerford happened, or Dunblane, the UK response is to try to reduce gun ownership/use. In the US, many people think the answer is more guns, so that active shooters can be taken out by any passing, armed, person.
    See Canada too. A very relevant comparison. 20m firearms. Same response to mass shootings.
    It's quite understandable that when gun ownership reaches a certain level so many people want to own guns for their own protection that the situation becomes irreversible.

    We should just be thankful that in the UK we are not at that level.
    Who will be their Toyotomi Hideyoshi and ban (peasants) from carrying weapons? (Despite having been a peasant IIRC)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    Pulpstar said:

    dixiedean said:

    All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

    Not sure the distance is particularly relevant. You're either crossing the border or not. The US authorities in Blaine, Washington, never used to let me get away with that argument.
    I don't think crossing state lines is particularly relevant to how bad what he did was.

    If Antioch were just inside Wisconsin I think it would have been an equally bad idea to drive there to a riot with a gun.

    If Antioch were in Wisconsin, but was 150 miles away and he had little connection with the place, I think it would have been worse despite not crossing state lines in this hypothetical.

    Do you really think state line crossing makes any difference to the ethical issue?
    It seems fairly clear that Rittenhouse made sure that the weapon he carried at the riot was *technically* legal.

    Carrying guns at a riot is stupid and leads to predictable results. I would argue that doing so, deliberately, gets you into the reckless endangerment/manslaughter zone. On an ethical basis, that is.
    Your final para is essentially the difference between the USA and most of the rest of the world wrt guns.
    Indeed - which comes back to a point I sometimes raise. The "Social Contract" involves the individual giving up the right to do various things, which are then taken on by the State. So, for example, Hot Trod is no longer a thing.

    This means that the State has a *duty* to do effective law enforcement. And I have a *duty* not to do vigilante stuff.

    What is happening in America is that the populace no longer believes that the State is taking this on effectively. Hence the reversion to.....
  • StockyStocky Posts: 7,069
    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    I'd be surprised if Sunak doesn't already poll better than Johnson does given the last couple of weeks.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    kle4 said:

    Chris said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyway, I'm just glad that however people want to treat the whys and wherefores of America that we don't have the same gun madness as they do.

    You can't even argue that their possession of guns is the issue. Other countries have a lot of guns and manage to avoid the American problem.

    What I find fascinating (in a grim way) is the response to mass shootings. When Hungerford happened, or Dunblane, the UK response is to try to reduce gun ownership/use. In the US, many people think the answer is more guns, so that active shooters can be taken out by any passing, armed, person.
    See Canada too. A very relevant comparison. 20m firearms. Same response to mass shootings.
    It's quite understandable that when gun ownership reaches a certain level so many people want to own guns for their own protection that the situation becomes irreversible.

    We should just be thankful that in the UK we are not at that level.
    Who will be their Toyotomi Hideyoshi and ban (peasants) from carrying weapons? (Despite having been a peasant IIRC)
    He was quite deliberately pulling up the ladder, to make sure that no more peasants turned themselves into Toyotomi Hideyoshi....
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,516
    edited November 24
    Stocky said:

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    I'd be surprised if Sunak doesn't already poll better than Johnson does given the last couple of weeks.
    Against Starmer he doesn't.

    Latest poll has Boris preferred PM over Starmer 41% to 32% but Sunak only preferred PM over Starmer by 39% to 32%.

    Yes most Labour and LD voters may prefer Sunak to Boris but would they vote for Sunak over Starmer? No.

    However a few 2019 Tory voters would clearly go RefUK or not vote if Boris was no longer Tory leader
    https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-gb-voting-intention-21-november-2021/
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,496
    HYUFD said:


    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    "Sorry sorry. Forgive me, forgive me"

    I'd hope US students would protest their university paying their huge loans out to Boris on a jolly.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,724

    Pulpstar said:

    dixiedean said:

    All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

    Not sure the distance is particularly relevant. You're either crossing the border or not. The US authorities in Blaine, Washington, never used to let me get away with that argument.
    I don't think crossing state lines is particularly relevant to how bad what he did was.

    If Antioch were just inside Wisconsin I think it would have been an equally bad idea to drive there to a riot with a gun.

    If Antioch were in Wisconsin, but was 150 miles away and he had little connection with the place, I think it would have been worse despite not crossing state lines in this hypothetical.

    Do you really think state line crossing makes any difference to the ethical issue?
    It seems fairly clear that Rittenhouse made sure that the weapon he carried at the riot was *technically* legal.

    Carrying guns at a riot is stupid and leads to predictable results. I would argue that doing so, deliberately, gets you into the reckless endangerment/manslaughter zone. On an ethical basis, that is.
    Your final para is essentially the difference between the USA and most of the rest of the world wrt guns.
    Indeed - which comes back to a point I sometimes raise. The "Social Contract" involves the individual giving up the right to do various things, which are then taken on by the State. So, for example, Hot Trod is no longer a thing.

    This means that the State has a *duty* to do effective law enforcement. And I have a *duty* not to do vigilante stuff.

    What is happening in America is that the populace no longer believes that the State is taking this on effectively. Hence the reversion to.....
    We came close in August 2011. One more night of rioting and I'm sure there would have been killings (albeit not with guns).
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,074
    Stocky said:

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    I'd be surprised if Sunak doesn't already poll better than Johnson does given the last couple of weeks.
    Is Sunak any better ?
    He appears, for instance, to be largely to blame for the rail debacle (though I note the Treasury is briefing that's it's all a problem of No10 'presentation').
  • LeonLeon Posts: 13,085
    25,864 cases today in Czechia. Their highest ever. The equivalent in the UK would be around 160,000 (a peak we never reached)

    I suspect the whole of central Europe is heading back into lockdown. Slovakia is set to announce theirs today

    https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1463459951414853635?s=20
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,992

    dixiedean said:

    All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

    Not sure the distance is particularly relevant. You're either crossing the border or not. The US authorities in Blaine, Washington, never used to let me get away with that argument.
    I don't think crossing state lines is particularly relevant to how bad what he did was.

    If Antioch were just inside Wisconsin I think it would have been an equally bad idea to drive there to a riot with a gun.

    If Antioch were in Wisconsin, but was 150 miles away and he had little connection with the place, I think it would have been worse despite not crossing state lines in this hypothetical.

    Do you really think state line crossing makes any difference to the ethical issue?
    Not to the ethical issue, but most definitely to the legal issue. If Rittenhouse had crossed the state line in possession of the gun (he didn’t), that would have been worthy of a felony charge on its own.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    IshmaelZ said:

    Chris said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyway, I'm just glad that however people want to treat the whys and wherefores of America that we don't have the same gun madness as they do.

    You can't even argue that their possession of guns is the issue. Other countries have a lot of guns and manage to avoid the American problem.

    What I find fascinating (in a grim way) is the response to mass shootings. When Hungerford happened, or Dunblane, the UK response is to try to reduce gun ownership/use. In the US, many people think the answer is more guns, so that active shooters can be taken out by any passing, armed, person.
    See Canada too. A very relevant comparison. 20m firearms. Same response to mass shootings.
    It's quite understandable that when gun ownership reaches a certain level so many people want to own guns for their own protection that the situation becomes irreversible.

    We should just be thankful that in the UK we are not at that level.
    My shotgun (which I use because it's a very good shotgun, not for historical reenactment reasons) was made in the 1880s. So banning guns now is hopeless, the existing ones don't obsolesce out of the system. you'd have to restrict ammunition to get anywhere.
    The next fun thing to hit the UK...

    Much has been made of 3D printed guns. If you have a very expensive metal printer, you can make quite a good gun. But there is a still an issue with ammunition.

    Quite soon though, the following will happen - improved multi-material 3D printing will allow construction of coil guns, easily. Given the improvements in batteries, someone will be able to construct a weapon that will, pretty silently, chuck a 5mm ball bearing at 2 times the speed of sound. With a bit of design, 20 times a second.

    The biggest barrier at the moment is hand winding the coils, and the circuit boards. You can print the rest of the coil gun - if you have a design. Now.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 24,566
    edited November 24

    dixiedean said:

    All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

    Not sure the distance is particularly relevant. You're either crossing the border or not. The US authorities in Blaine, Washington, never used to let me get away with that argument.
    I don't think crossing state lines is particularly relevant to how bad what he did was.

    If Antioch were just inside Wisconsin I think it would have been an equally bad idea to drive there to a riot with a gun.

    If Antioch were in Wisconsin, but was 150 miles away and he had little connection with the place, I think it would have been worse despite not crossing state lines in this hypothetical.

    Do you really think state line crossing makes any difference to the ethical issue?
    It seems fairly clear that Rittenhouse made sure that the weapon he carried at the riot was *technically* legal.

    Carrying guns at a riot is stupid and leads to predictable results. I would argue that doing so, deliberately, gets you into the reckless endangerment/manslaughter zone. On an ethical basis, that is.
    My understanding of the case is that there was the possibility of going for lesser charges (indeed he was charged with one count of reckless endangerment) and one of the criticisms of the prosecution is that they were so hell bent on going for 1st degree murder charges which were always going to be much harder to prove and which tilted the whole court case against the other charges as well.

    The crossing state lines with a firearm was thrown out because the defence proved he obtained the gun after crossing the state line so there was technically no way he could be found guilty on that one.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,992
    Nigelb said:

    Stocky said:

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    I'd be surprised if Sunak doesn't already poll better than Johnson does given the last couple of weeks.
    Is Sunak any better ?
    He appears, for instance, to be largely to blame for the rail debacle (though I note the Treasury is briefing that's it's all a problem of No10 'presentation').
    It’s definitely not all plain sailing this week for Sunak:

    FPT:

    The Chancellor is getting it this week, for having let the Free Ports initiative get watered down by the Treasury civil servants, despite having authored a report on their advantage five years ago.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/20/freeports-risk-killed-officials-treasury/
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/23/freeports-embody-low-tax-brexit-dream-treasury-cant-stand/

    “The idea of reviving freeports had come from then-international trade secretary Liz Truss. She invited me and others to join a working group to push it forward. When I got there, I was pleased to see Rishi Sunak, who had recently published a think tank report extolling the virtues of freeports. I was less pleased to see ranks of Treasury civil servants, almost outnumbering those of us round the table. “They insisted on being here,” a trade official told me. This was now a joint Trade-Treasury project.

    “I had the sinking feeling that — despite the support of the Prime Minister, the Trade Secretary, and the man who would become Chancellor — the freeports revival was already in its last throes. And so it proved. Oxbridge professors on the panel said freeports would only relocate jobs from one part of the UK to another. (Oxbridge economics says very little about entrepreneurship. It regards firms as a "given" rather than asking how and why new ones are generated. Hence the idea that jobs can only be moved around, not created.)

    “The Treasury officials, meanwhile, complained of the complexity of changing the customs and VAT rules, hinting of fraud and tax avoidance. The number of freeports would be limited to 10 and politics, not economics, would decide where they were located. And they would have to focus on "high-tech" jobs (the politicians’ mantra) rather than what the market might produce. None of the people I suggested, who actually created or ran successful freeports around the world, were ever contacted. After one meeting, the freeports "working group" quietly expired.

    “Recently there have been reports that ministers and businesses have said that Treasury is killing freeports with a lack of ambition on tax cuts and planning relaxation. This comes as the first freeport started operating in Teesside on Friday.”
  • LeonLeon Posts: 13,085
    The FT spent much of early summer bewailing the British re-opening, accusing Boris of mad libertinism

    "Monday is surrender day, not freedom day, in England

    Removing all restrictions is a foolhardy strategy for mass infection with Covid-19"


    https://www.ft.com/content/c9a6c0f0-985c-4563-91bb-aee51f0ab926



    Today, with gritted teeth, they admit he was probably right



    "UK boosted by third-jab success as infections surge in much of Europe

    Early push on top-ups and immunity from earlier wave puts UK on different trajectory from some continental neighbours"

    https://www.ft.com/content/974487ab-54be-4b43-945c-597277aa1292
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    dixiedean said:

    All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

    Not sure the distance is particularly relevant. You're either crossing the border or not. The US authorities in Blaine, Washington, never used to let me get away with that argument.
    I don't think crossing state lines is particularly relevant to how bad what he did was.

    If Antioch were just inside Wisconsin I think it would have been an equally bad idea to drive there to a riot with a gun.

    If Antioch were in Wisconsin, but was 150 miles away and he had little connection with the place, I think it would have been worse despite not crossing state lines in this hypothetical.

    Do you really think state line crossing makes any difference to the ethical issue?
    It seems fairly clear that Rittenhouse made sure that the weapon he carried at the riot was *technically* legal.

    Carrying guns at a riot is stupid and leads to predictable results. I would argue that doing so, deliberately, gets you into the reckless endangerment/manslaughter zone. On an ethical basis, that is.
    Your final para is essentially the difference between the USA and most of the rest of the world wrt guns.
    Indeed - which comes back to a point I sometimes raise. The "Social Contract" involves the individual giving up the right to do various things, which are then taken on by the State. So, for example, Hot Trod is no longer a thing.

    This means that the State has a *duty* to do effective law enforcement. And I have a *duty* not to do vigilante stuff.

    What is happening in America is that the populace no longer believes that the State is taking this on effectively. Hence the reversion to.....
    We came close in August 2011. One more night of rioting and I'm sure there would have been killings (albeit not with guns).
    I was in Hoxton at the time, fairly frequently. It was very hot in the evenings....

    The Polish off-license owners and the Vietnamese cooks from the restaurants were sitting out behind the row of shops/bars/restaurants there. Armed with machetes and baseball bats. Smoking, drinking and talking. Waiting for the rioters to move half a mile more.....

    All very cross cultural.
  • eekeek Posts: 15,853
    Nigelb said:

    Stocky said:

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    I'd be surprised if Sunak doesn't already poll better than Johnson does given the last couple of weeks.
    Is Sunak any better ?
    He appears, for instance, to be largely to blame for the rail debacle (though I note the Treasury is briefing that's it's all a problem of No10 'presentation').
    Sadly the biggest problem with No 10's presentation was that they presented it rather than telling the Treasury to find the money and get on with the original plan.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,496
    edited November 24

    dixiedean said:

    All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

    Not sure the distance is particularly relevant. You're either crossing the border or not. The US authorities in Blaine, Washington, never used to let me get away with that argument.
    I don't think crossing state lines is particularly relevant to how bad what he did was.

    If Antioch were just inside Wisconsin I think it would have been an equally bad idea to drive there to a riot with a gun.

    If Antioch were in Wisconsin, but was 150 miles away and he had little connection with the place, I think it would have been worse despite not crossing state lines in this hypothetical.

    Do you really think state line crossing makes any difference to the ethical issue?
    It seems fairly clear that Rittenhouse made sure that the weapon he carried at the riot was *technically* legal.

    Carrying guns at a riot is stupid and leads to predictable results. I would argue that doing so, deliberately, gets you into the reckless endangerment/manslaughter zone. On an ethical basis, that is.
    My understanding of the case is that there was the possibility of going for lesser charges (indeed he was charged with one count of reckless endangerment) and one of the criticisms of the prosecution is that they were so hell bent on going for 1st degree murder charges which were always going to be much harder to prove and which tilted the whole court case against the other charges as well.

    The crossing state lines with a firearm was thrown out because the defence proved he obtained the gun after crossing the state line so there was technically no way he could be found guilty on that one.
    At one point I'm sure the prosecutor made the point to Rittenhouse with one of those god awful fake surprise lawyer faces that

    And did he (Grosskreutz) take a 2 handed standard shooting aim stance at you, (Implying that till he took this stance he wouldn't have been ready to shoot and thus you can't shoot back)
    He could have shot you from further away, why didn't he take the opportunity

    I've never seen a line of questioning quite like it, it was unbelievably bad - making out that unless and until Rittenhouse had his brains blown out by Grosskreutz that he had no right to self defense.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,724

    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    dixiedean said:

    All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

    Not sure the distance is particularly relevant. You're either crossing the border or not. The US authorities in Blaine, Washington, never used to let me get away with that argument.
    I don't think crossing state lines is particularly relevant to how bad what he did was.

    If Antioch were just inside Wisconsin I think it would have been an equally bad idea to drive there to a riot with a gun.

    If Antioch were in Wisconsin, but was 150 miles away and he had little connection with the place, I think it would have been worse despite not crossing state lines in this hypothetical.

    Do you really think state line crossing makes any difference to the ethical issue?
    It seems fairly clear that Rittenhouse made sure that the weapon he carried at the riot was *technically* legal.

    Carrying guns at a riot is stupid and leads to predictable results. I would argue that doing so, deliberately, gets you into the reckless endangerment/manslaughter zone. On an ethical basis, that is.
    Your final para is essentially the difference between the USA and most of the rest of the world wrt guns.
    Indeed - which comes back to a point I sometimes raise. The "Social Contract" involves the individual giving up the right to do various things, which are then taken on by the State. So, for example, Hot Trod is no longer a thing.

    This means that the State has a *duty* to do effective law enforcement. And I have a *duty* not to do vigilante stuff.

    What is happening in America is that the populace no longer believes that the State is taking this on effectively. Hence the reversion to.....
    We came close in August 2011. One more night of rioting and I'm sure there would have been killings (albeit not with guns).
    I was in Hoxton at the time, fairly frequently. It was very hot in the evenings....

    The Polish off-license owners and the Vietnamese cooks from the restaurants were sitting out behind the row of shops/bars/restaurants there. Armed with machetes and baseball bats. Smoking, drinking and talking. Waiting for the rioters to move half a mile more.....

    All very cross cultural.
    Even more eye-opening was the sight of West Ham and Millwall fans patrolling the streets together.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    Pulpstar said:

    dixiedean said:

    All this "driving across state lines" emphasis does rather ignore how close his hometown, Antioch, and Kenosha are to the Wisconsin - Illinois border. Each place is literally touching the border, and there's about 5 miles between the corners of them.

    It was coincidence that the google map image contained the business "5 Star Firearms" in the bottom right corner.

    Not sure the distance is particularly relevant. You're either crossing the border or not. The US authorities in Blaine, Washington, never used to let me get away with that argument.
    I don't think crossing state lines is particularly relevant to how bad what he did was.

    If Antioch were just inside Wisconsin I think it would have been an equally bad idea to drive there to a riot with a gun.

    If Antioch were in Wisconsin, but was 150 miles away and he had little connection with the place, I think it would have been worse despite not crossing state lines in this hypothetical.

    Do you really think state line crossing makes any difference to the ethical issue?
    It seems fairly clear that Rittenhouse made sure that the weapon he carried at the riot was *technically* legal.

    Carrying guns at a riot is stupid and leads to predictable results. I would argue that doing so, deliberately, gets you into the reckless endangerment/manslaughter zone. On an ethical basis, that is.
    My understanding of the case is that there was the possibility of going for lesser charges (indeed he was charged with one count of reckless endangerment) and one of the criticisms of the prosecution is that they were so hell bent on going for 1st degree murder charges which were always going to be much harder to prove and which tilted the whole court case against the other charges as well.

    The crossing state lines with a firearm was thrown out because the defence proved he obtained the gun after crossing the state line so there was technically no way he could be found guilty on that one.
    At one point I'm sure the prosecutor made the point to Rittenhouse with one of those god awful fake surprise lawyer faces that

    And did he (Grosskreutz) take a 2 handed standard shooting aim stance at you, (Implying that till he took this stance he wouldn't have been ready to shoot and thus you can't shoot back)
    He could have shot you from further away, why didn't he take the opportunity

    I've never seen a line of questioning quite like it, it was unbelievably bad - making out that unless and until Rittenhouse had his brains blown out by Grosskreutz that he had no right to self defense.
    The most stupid moment was when the prosecution tried to get round the 5th Amendment (right to silence) in a US courtroom.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759

    kle4 said:

    Chris said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyway, I'm just glad that however people want to treat the whys and wherefores of America that we don't have the same gun madness as they do.

    You can't even argue that their possession of guns is the issue. Other countries have a lot of guns and manage to avoid the American problem.

    What I find fascinating (in a grim way) is the response to mass shootings. When Hungerford happened, or Dunblane, the UK response is to try to reduce gun ownership/use. In the US, many people think the answer is more guns, so that active shooters can be taken out by any passing, armed, person.
    See Canada too. A very relevant comparison. 20m firearms. Same response to mass shootings.
    It's quite understandable that when gun ownership reaches a certain level so many people want to own guns for their own protection that the situation becomes irreversible.

    We should just be thankful that in the UK we are not at that level.
    Who will be their Toyotomi Hideyoshi and ban (peasants) from carrying weapons? (Despite having been a peasant IIRC)
    He was quite deliberately pulling up the ladder, to make sure that no more peasants turned themselves into Toyotomi Hideyoshi....
    Sound strategy. Our politicians should take note.

    Also avoid invading Korea.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,074
    edited November 24
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Stocky said:

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    I'd be surprised if Sunak doesn't already poll better than Johnson does given the last couple of weeks.
    Is Sunak any better ?
    He appears, for instance, to be largely to blame for the rail debacle (though I note the Treasury is briefing that's it's all a problem of No10 'presentation').
    It’s definitely not all plain sailing this week for Sunak:

    FPT:

    The Chancellor is getting it this week, for having let the Free Ports initiative get watered down by the Treasury civil servants, despite having authored a report on their advantage five years ago.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/20/freeports-risk-killed-officials-treasury/
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/23/freeports-embody-low-tax-brexit-dream-treasury-cant-stand/

    “The idea of reviving freeports had come from then-international trade secretary Liz Truss..
    (snip)
    “Recently there have been reports that ministers and businesses have said that Treasury is killing freeports with a lack of ambition on tax cuts and planning relaxation. This comes as the first freeport started operating in Teesside on Friday.”
    I doubt more than a handful of people care about, that, though.
    Whereas the betrayal of the north over rail is an issue of great political salience.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    Leon said:

    25,864 cases today in Czechia. Their highest ever. The equivalent in the UK would be around 160,000 (a peak we never reached)

    I suspect the whole of central Europe is heading back into lockdown. Slovakia is set to announce theirs today

    https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1463459951414853635?s=20

    They test at a different rate - therefore comparing testing like that does't work. Simply multiplying by populations and testing rates doesn't either. Because testing is self selected (partially)

    Compare hospitalisation rates.

    https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/weekly-hospital-admissions-covid-per-million?country=GBR~CZE

  • LeonLeon Posts: 13,085

    Leon said:

    25,864 cases today in Czechia. Their highest ever. The equivalent in the UK would be around 160,000 (a peak we never reached)

    I suspect the whole of central Europe is heading back into lockdown. Slovakia is set to announce theirs today

    https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1463459951414853635?s=20

    They test at a different rate - therefore comparing testing like that does't work. Simply multiplying by populations and testing rates doesn't either. Because testing is self selected (partially)

    Compare hospitalisation rates.

    https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/weekly-hospital-admissions-covid-per-million?country=GBR~CZE

    Fair enough. So it's actually even worse than I implied?!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Stocky said:

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    I'd be surprised if Sunak doesn't already poll better than Johnson does given the last couple of weeks.
    Is Sunak any better ?
    He appears, for instance, to be largely to blame for the rail debacle (though I note the Treasury is briefing that's it's all a problem of No10 'presentation').
    It’s definitely not all plain sailing this week for Sunak:

    FPT:

    The Chancellor is getting it this week, for having let the Free Ports initiative get watered down by the Treasury civil servants, despite having authored a report on their advantage five years ago.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/20/freeports-risk-killed-officials-treasury/
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/23/freeports-embody-low-tax-brexit-dream-treasury-cant-stand/

    “The idea of reviving freeports had come from then-international trade secretary Liz Truss..
    (snip)
    “Recently there have been reports that ministers and businesses have said that Treasury is killing freeports with a lack of ambition on tax cuts and planning relaxation. This comes as the first freeport started operating in Teesside on Friday.”
    I doubt more than a handful of people care about, that, though.
    Whereas the betrayal of the north over rail is an issue of great political salience.
    Normal people - by which I naturally mean 'me, but less interested in politics' - don't really know what free ports are unless involved in them. But anyone can understand and empathise about rail upgrade failings.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 17,899
    Lol, is Mike trolling us?

    Johnson's "got the chance to remind voters of his authority at PMQs at noon."
  • HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    Boris was, as well as Telegraph writer, motoring correspondent for GQ. I'm surprised he does not make more of this.

    But Boris will not earn millions on the business lecture circuit because he treats audiences with contempt as we have seen this week, and a few weeks ago at the Conservative Party conference.

    No, the future for Boris lies on the American academic circuit, starting with seven figures as a moosehead professor at the University of Wazoo, and free to write and make hay on the after-dinner circuit.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,832
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Stocky said:

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    I'd be surprised if Sunak doesn't already poll better than Johnson does given the last couple of weeks.
    Is Sunak any better ?
    He appears, for instance, to be largely to blame for the rail debacle (though I note the Treasury is briefing that's it's all a problem of No10 'presentation').
    It’s definitely not all plain sailing this week for Sunak:

    FPT:

    The Chancellor is getting it this week, for having let the Free Ports initiative get watered down by the Treasury civil servants, despite having authored a report on their advantage five years ago.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/20/freeports-risk-killed-officials-treasury/
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/23/freeports-embody-low-tax-brexit-dream-treasury-cant-stand/

    “The idea of reviving freeports had come from then-international trade secretary Liz Truss. She invited me and others to join a working group to push it forward. When I got there, I was pleased to see Rishi Sunak, who had recently published a think tank report extolling the virtues of freeports. I was less pleased to see ranks of Treasury civil servants, almost outnumbering those of us round the table. “They insisted on being here,” a trade official told me. This was now a joint Trade-Treasury project.

    “I had the sinking feeling that — despite the support of the Prime Minister, the Trade Secretary, and the man who would become Chancellor — the freeports revival was already in its last throes. And so it proved. Oxbridge professors on the panel said freeports would only relocate jobs from one part of the UK to another. (Oxbridge economics says very little about entrepreneurship. It regards firms as a "given" rather than asking how and why new ones are generated. Hence the idea that jobs can only be moved around, not created.)

    “The Treasury officials, meanwhile, complained of the complexity of changing the customs and VAT rules, hinting of fraud and tax avoidance. The number of freeports would be limited to 10 and politics, not economics, would decide where they were located. And they would have to focus on "high-tech" jobs (the politicians’ mantra) rather than what the market might produce. None of the people I suggested, who actually created or ran successful freeports around the world, were ever contacted. After one meeting, the freeports "working group" quietly expired.

    “Recently there have been reports that ministers and businesses have said that Treasury is killing freeports with a lack of ambition on tax cuts and planning relaxation. This comes as the first freeport started operating in Teesside on Friday.”
    Were circumstances ever bizarre enough that I was put in charge, I would shut down the Treasury at once. And I would create a new department from the ground up with entirely new people.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,759

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    Boris was, as well as Telegraph writer, motoring correspondent for GQ. I'm surprised he does not make more of this.

    But Boris will not earn millions on the business lecture circuit because he treats audiences with contempt as we have seen this week, and a few weeks ago at the Conservative Party conference.

    No, the future for Boris lies on the American academic circuit, starting with seven figures as a moosehead professor at the University of Wazoo, and free to write and make hay on the after-dinner circuit.
    If people pay May hundreds of thousands to speak for an hour, because she is an ex PM, I'm sure Boris will have bidders. Surely that's the point more than what they say or how contempful they are.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,496
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    25,864 cases today in Czechia. Their highest ever. The equivalent in the UK would be around 160,000 (a peak we never reached)

    I suspect the whole of central Europe is heading back into lockdown. Slovakia is set to announce theirs today

    https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1463459951414853635?s=20

    They test at a different rate - therefore comparing testing like that does't work. Simply multiplying by populations and testing rates doesn't either. Because testing is self selected (partially)

    Compare hospitalisation rates.

    https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/weekly-hospital-admissions-covid-per-million?country=GBR~CZE

    Fair enough. So it's actually even worse than I implied?!
    We're now 30th in the world in terms of official death rate. We've been steadily dropping, and our performance is at least as good as the official numbers (Russia, India...)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    25,864 cases today in Czechia. Their highest ever. The equivalent in the UK would be around 160,000 (a peak we never reached)

    I suspect the whole of central Europe is heading back into lockdown. Slovakia is set to announce theirs today

    https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1463459951414853635?s=20

    They test at a different rate - therefore comparing testing like that does't work. Simply multiplying by populations and testing rates doesn't either. Because testing is self selected (partially)

    Compare hospitalisation rates.

    https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/weekly-hospital-admissions-covid-per-million?country=GBR~CZE

    Fair enough. So it's actually even worse than I implied?!
    In this case - possibly. The raw case comparison per million is 593 vs 93.

    Then we need to check the data at source - some of the aggregation sites use some dodgy site scraping to get their data.

    Also, what they compare with what. IIRC there was a South American country where they were counting "turning up at ER with a positive test" as "hospitalisation"
  • LeonLeon Posts: 13,085
    edited November 24

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    Boris was, as well as Telegraph writer, motoring correspondent for GQ. I'm surprised he does not make more of this.

    But Boris will not earn millions on the business lecture circuit because he treats audiences with contempt as we have seen this week, and a few weeks ago at the Conservative Party conference.

    No, the future for Boris lies on the American academic circuit, starting with seven figures as a moosehead professor at the University of Wazoo, and free to write and make hay on the after-dinner circuit.
    He will get £10m for his memoirs. A fortune to see him to his grave

    He is the first British Prime Minister since Thatcher with a story that the whole world wants to hear, especially the USA. Arguably, he is the most bankable PM since Churchill

    This is not because he is a great PM, but simply events, dear boy. He was the winner of the Brexit referendum - one of the great geopolitical events of the century so far, and he has been PM during a once-a-century pandemic, when Britain was also at the centre of events producing vaccines AND variants

    And he is a naturally good writer, and he he has had a colourful life apart from all this. Publishers will throw money at him; there will be a glossy Netflix series about him
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,236
    moonshine said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Stocky said:

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    I'd be surprised if Sunak doesn't already poll better than Johnson does given the last couple of weeks.
    Is Sunak any better ?
    He appears, for instance, to be largely to blame for the rail debacle (though I note the Treasury is briefing that's it's all a problem of No10 'presentation').
    It’s definitely not all plain sailing this week for Sunak:

    FPT:

    The Chancellor is getting it this week, for having let the Free Ports initiative get watered down by the Treasury civil servants, despite having authored a report on their advantage five years ago.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/20/freeports-risk-killed-officials-treasury/
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/23/freeports-embody-low-tax-brexit-dream-treasury-cant-stand/

    “The idea of reviving freeports had come from then-international trade secretary Liz Truss. She invited me and others to join a working group to push it forward. When I got there, I was pleased to see Rishi Sunak, who had recently published a think tank report extolling the virtues of freeports. I was less pleased to see ranks of Treasury civil servants, almost outnumbering those of us round the table. “They insisted on being here,” a trade official told me. This was now a joint Trade-Treasury project.

    “I had the sinking feeling that — despite the support of the Prime Minister, the Trade Secretary, and the man who would become Chancellor — the freeports revival was already in its last throes. And so it proved. Oxbridge professors on the panel said freeports would only relocate jobs from one part of the UK to another. (Oxbridge economics says very little about entrepreneurship. It regards firms as a "given" rather than asking how and why new ones are generated. Hence the idea that jobs can only be moved around, not created.)

    “The Treasury officials, meanwhile, complained of the complexity of changing the customs and VAT rules, hinting of fraud and tax avoidance. The number of freeports would be limited to 10 and politics, not economics, would decide where they were located. And they would have to focus on "high-tech" jobs (the politicians’ mantra) rather than what the market might produce. None of the people I suggested, who actually created or ran successful freeports around the world, were ever contacted. After one meeting, the freeports "working group" quietly expired.

    “Recently there have been reports that ministers and businesses have said that Treasury is killing freeports with a lack of ambition on tax cuts and planning relaxation. This comes as the first freeport started operating in Teesside on Friday.”
    Were circumstances ever bizarre enough that I was put in charge, I would shut down the Treasury at once. And I would create a new department from the ground up with entirely new people.
    As unDictator of Britain, there would be a lot of candidates for creating shade in the style of Crassus and The Appian Way.
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,023
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    Boris was, as well as Telegraph writer, motoring correspondent for GQ. I'm surprised he does not make more of this.

    But Boris will not earn millions on the business lecture circuit because he treats audiences with contempt as we have seen this week, and a few weeks ago at the Conservative Party conference.

    No, the future for Boris lies on the American academic circuit, starting with seven figures as a moosehead professor at the University of Wazoo, and free to write and make hay on the after-dinner circuit.
    He will get £10m for his memoirs. A fortune to see him to his grave

    He is the first British Prime Minister since Thatcher with a story that the whole world wants to hear, especially the USA. Arguably, he is the most bankable PM since Churchill

    This is not because he is a great PM, but simply events, dear boy. He was the winner of the Brexit referendum - one of the great geopolitical events of the century so far, and he has been PM during a once-a-century pandemic, when Britain was also at the centre of events producing vaccines AND variants

    And he is a naturally good writer, and he he has had a colourful life apart from all this. Publishers will throw money at him; there will be a glossy Netflix series about him
    I cant wait to see the chapter about his downfall......
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 25,493
    I don't disagree with the verdict on racist killer Rittenhouse - with the laws they have - and he is only 18. I hope he manages to turn things around in his life. His chances of this aren't helped by the MAGA right treating him like a hero celeb.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,496
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    Boris was, as well as Telegraph writer, motoring correspondent for GQ. I'm surprised he does not make more of this.

    But Boris will not earn millions on the business lecture circuit because he treats audiences with contempt as we have seen this week, and a few weeks ago at the Conservative Party conference.

    No, the future for Boris lies on the American academic circuit, starting with seven figures as a moosehead professor at the University of Wazoo, and free to write and make hay on the after-dinner circuit.
    If people pay May hundreds of thousands to speak for an hour, because she is an ex PM, I'm sure Boris will have bidders. Surely that's the point more than what they say or how contempful they are.
    I'd be furious if it was my cash, but there's sycophancy by the oil tanker load in the world.
  • eekeek Posts: 15,853
    moonshine said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Stocky said:

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    I'd be surprised if Sunak doesn't already poll better than Johnson does given the last couple of weeks.
    Is Sunak any better ?
    He appears, for instance, to be largely to blame for the rail debacle (though I note the Treasury is briefing that's it's all a problem of No10 'presentation').
    It’s definitely not all plain sailing this week for Sunak:

    FPT:

    The Chancellor is getting it this week, for having let the Free Ports initiative get watered down by the Treasury civil servants, despite having authored a report on their advantage five years ago.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/20/freeports-risk-killed-officials-treasury/
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/23/freeports-embody-low-tax-brexit-dream-treasury-cant-stand/

    “The idea of reviving freeports had come from then-international trade secretary Liz Truss. She invited me and others to join a working group to push it forward. When I got there, I was pleased to see Rishi Sunak, who had recently published a think tank report extolling the virtues of freeports. I was less pleased to see ranks of Treasury civil servants, almost outnumbering those of us round the table. “They insisted on being here,” a trade official told me. This was now a joint Trade-Treasury project.

    “I had the sinking feeling that — despite the support of the Prime Minister, the Trade Secretary, and the man who would become Chancellor — the freeports revival was already in its last throes. And so it proved. Oxbridge professors on the panel said freeports would only relocate jobs from one part of the UK to another. (Oxbridge economics says very little about entrepreneurship. It regards firms as a "given" rather than asking how and why new ones are generated. Hence the idea that jobs can only be moved around, not created.)

    “The Treasury officials, meanwhile, complained of the complexity of changing the customs and VAT rules, hinting of fraud and tax avoidance. The number of freeports would be limited to 10 and politics, not economics, would decide where they were located. And they would have to focus on "high-tech" jobs (the politicians’ mantra) rather than what the market might produce. None of the people I suggested, who actually created or ran successful freeports around the world, were ever contacted. After one meeting, the freeports "working group" quietly expired.

    “Recently there have been reports that ministers and businesses have said that Treasury is killing freeports with a lack of ambition on tax cuts and planning relaxation. This comes as the first freeport started operating in Teesside on Friday.”
    Were circumstances ever bizarre enough that I was put in charge, I would shut down the Treasury at once. And I would create a new department from the ground up with entirely new people.
    Nope, I would relocate all of it to somewhere well outside London (Darlington) and get them to understand how the rest of the UK works.

    But the reality is that the treasury needs separate guidance in what they are planning to do, which for levelling up means - you need to fix things so that GDP per capita is increasing higher up North than in London. And if you don't no further promotions.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,992
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Stocky said:

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    I'd be surprised if Sunak doesn't already poll better than Johnson does given the last couple of weeks.
    Is Sunak any better ?
    He appears, for instance, to be largely to blame for the rail debacle (though I note the Treasury is briefing that's it's all a problem of No10 'presentation').
    It’s definitely not all plain sailing this week for Sunak:

    FPT:

    The Chancellor is getting it this week, for having let the Free Ports initiative get watered down by the Treasury civil servants, despite having authored a report on their advantage five years ago.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/20/freeports-risk-killed-officials-treasury/
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/23/freeports-embody-low-tax-brexit-dream-treasury-cant-stand/

    “The idea of reviving freeports had come from then-international trade secretary Liz Truss..
    (snip)
    “Recently there have been reports that ministers and businesses have said that Treasury is killing freeports with a lack of ambition on tax cuts and planning relaxation. This comes as the first freeport started operating in Teesside on Friday.”
    I doubt more than a handful of people care about, that, though.
    Whereas the betrayal of the north over rail is an issue of great political salience.
    Possibly so, although I will continue to stand by my comments last week that most people in the north of England are much more interested in road improvements than rail, and that those pushing rail are more London-centric in their thinking.

    I’m only half way through reading the actual proposal at this point, but it does seem more comprehensive than anything since Beeching, even if it’s not the full original HS2 plan. Personally, I think that both the regional improvements and the HS2 plan should have gone ahead, these are once-in-a-century projects which increase capacity significantly.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 17,899

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    As columnist on the Telegraph Boris was earning £275,000 a year, only about £100k more than he gets as PM now and without the rent and mortgage free town house in Westminster and mansion in Buckinghamshire (with chef and staff) and government provided chauffeur driven car and police escort and flights he gets as perks of his job as PM.

    If he stayed PM through the next general election and won it and headed to 10 years as PM he would be in the Blair and Thatcher league and could command millions on the lecture circuit as they did.

    So Boris will want to stay and Tory MPs won't remove him unless Labour gets a clear poll lead and an alternative Tory leader polls better against Starmer than he does

    Boris was, as well as Telegraph writer, motoring correspondent for GQ. I'm surprised he does not make more of this.

    But Boris will not earn millions on the business lecture circuit because he treats audiences with contempt as we have seen this week, and a few weeks ago at the Conservative Party conference.

    No, the future for Boris lies on the American academic circuit, starting with seven figures as a moosehead professor at the University of Wazoo, and free to write and make hay on the after-dinner circuit.
    He will get £10m for his memoirs. A fortune to see him to his grave

    He is the first British Prime Minister since Thatcher with a story that the whole world wants to hear, especially the USA. Arguably, he is the most bankable PM since Churchill

    This is not because he is a great PM, but simply events, dear boy. He was the winner of the Brexit referendum - one of the great geopolitical events of the century so far, and he has been PM during a once-a-century pandemic, when Britain was also at the centre of events producing vaccines AND variants

    And he is a naturally good writer, and he he has had a colourful life apart from all this. Publishers will throw money at him; there will be a glossy Netflix series about him
    I cant wait to see the chapter about his downfall......
    It's not totally inconceivable that the (as yet unknowable) manner of his downfall makes him persona non grata for any of these lucrative retriement projects.
  • Lol, is Mike trolling us?

    Johnson's "got the chance to remind voters of his authority at PMQs at noon."

    PB thread writers do not troll in thread headers.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 3,001

    Lol, is Mike trolling us?

    Johnson's "got the chance to remind voters of his authority at PMQs at noon."

    Ten minutes to PMQs. I would imagine Boris is dreading it, for once. Starmer will, I suspect, go on the contempt for business shown at the CBI knockabout speech, and try to demonstrate that he has a more serious approach to business investment. Lots of material for Starmer to use. As I said before, I think Boris is safe for now, but it could be a rocky ride.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 2,430
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    25,864 cases today in Czechia. Their highest ever. The equivalent in the UK would be around 160,000 (a peak we never reached)

    I suspect the whole of central Europe is heading back into lockdown. Slovakia is set to announce theirs today

    https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1463459951414853635?s=20

    They test at a different rate - therefore comparing testing like that does't work. Simply multiplying by populations and testing rates doesn't either. Because testing is self selected (partially)

    Compare hospitalisation rates.

    https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/weekly-hospital-admissions-covid-per-million?country=GBR~CZE

    Fair enough. So it's actually even worse than I implied?!
    One way to compare how bad it is across nations is the number of people in ICU beds, data taken form Our would in data:

    Bulgaria: 108.02
    Slovenia: 106.80
    Romania: 92.64
    Czechia: 56.79
    Austria: 47.88
    Belgaum: 44.45
    Germany: 35.99
    US: 35.41
    Netherlands: 21.95
    Ireland: 21.27
    Switzerland: 19.96
    France: 17.91
    UK 12.43
    Spain: 8.43
    Italy: 7.59

    Note there are a few places like France that look to be doing better than the UK on cases but when it comes to ICU they have a higher rate, also Spain and Italy look like they have a lot less cases but are much close in terms of ICU usage. also worth noting that ICU usage is a lagging indicator, the big rises in cases in, say Germany over the last week will not have fed though yet.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 7,069

    Leon said:

    25,864 cases today in Czechia. Their highest ever. The equivalent in the UK would be around 160,000 (a peak we never reached)

    I suspect the whole of central Europe is heading back into lockdown. Slovakia is set to announce theirs today

    https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1463459951414853635?s=20

    They test at a different rate - therefore comparing testing like that does't work. Simply multiplying by populations and testing rates doesn't either. Because testing is self selected (partially)

    Compare hospitalisation rates.

    https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/weekly-hospital-admissions-covid-per-million?country=GBR~CZE

    Excellent utility - thanks for that.
Sign In or Register to comment.