If a policeman/soldier had seen Rigbys killers decapitate him and shot them there and then, would that have been so bad?
It could potentially have been very bad for the policeman - you could be talking about manslaughter / murder charges and a lot of time behind bars. Ah, who am I kidding, there wouldnt be any charges!
If the PC stated that he had concerns for the safety of the public no jury would convict.
Rather than the death penalty, we should re-establish our south seas penal colony, in the Falklands this time. No internet or TV, no visitors, just breaking rocks all day. They wouldn't like it.
"BNP leader Nick Griffin insisted the manifesto contained nothing new on immigration with a central policy of "shutting the doors" because "Britain is full", but the document contained other bizarre proposals such as setting up a "penal station" in the Falklands where dangerous and violent repeat offenders would be sent to carry out labouring work.
Asked about the proposal for a "penal station" in South Georgia, he said: "There's a certain element within the criminal population – the hard core, the murders or the rapists and so on – who simply could not be let loose even on the hills of Wales or whatever, digging trenches to put internet cables in. What are we going to do with them?
"Well, the Falklands is surrounded not only by fish but also oil and it's Britain's, and we need to develop it and we need to develop it fast. There is plenty of work to be done out there establishing a groundwork for that, which is pure labouring work.
"We don't see why criminals who commit the most appalling crimes should be able to be locked away in relative luxury in British prisons, enjoying a better standard of living than pensioners, when they could be somewhere out there working.
"South Georgia is a long way away, they can't escape, but they can do something useful for Britain and the British economy."
I am sure that I suggested it before 2010 on PB. We might even be able to go halves with the Aussies this time round!
My only concern is for the penguins...
Why subject the Falkland islanders to these criminals, they've been loyal subjects and this is how we reward them? Better to establish the colony on somewhere like Southern Thule. It could do with a bit of a tidy (also the Union flag seems to have come down from the flagpole, hope the Argies aren't up to something).
'What is interesting to me is that Populus still have Labour up at 35/36%. All the other pollsters have them now in the 32% range, with the clear trend that their support has been consistently dropping over the past year'
There is a danger of being a little YouGov centric because of the frequency of their polls. ICM has not shown the same fall in the Labour vote over the last 12 months - 35% in Jan 2014 33% Jan 2015 having been lower in Autumn 2014. Populus - and to a slightly lesser extent Opinium - has also shown little change. MORI has been more supportive of YouGov although its methodology is very different and its latest data shows some Labour recovery. Worth remembering again that the official election campaign period tends to favour the Opposition - on which basis the Tories now have barely 2 months left to build up a lead to offset likely campaign slippage.
I think if you look at the chart trends you will see a clear Labour drop..I can't remember who posted a great chart, but it was absolutely clear what was happening. Labour down, Tories up a tad, UKIP up a lot, greens risen a bit.
Labour weekly leads since August: twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/556882947656413186
I was talking not about the lead, but the absolute %'s. Somebody put a rolling average chart of all the parties, and it was crystal clear the changes over the past 12 months.
I think Sunil has an equivalent with a slightly different averaging scheme, but here you go:
'What is interesting to me is that Populus still have Labour up at 35/36%. All the other pollsters have them now in the 32% range, with the clear trend that their support has been consistently dropping over the past year'
There is a danger of being a little YouGov centric because of the frequency of their polls. ICM has not shown the same fall in the Labour vote over the last 12 months - 35% in Jan 2014 33% Jan 2015 having been lower in Autumn 2014. Populus - and to a slightly lesser extent Opinium - has also shown little change. MORI has been more supportive of YouGov although its methodology is very different and its latest data shows some Labour recovery. Worth remembering again that the official election campaign period tends to favour the Opposition - on which basis the Tories now have barely 2 months left to build up a lead to offset likely campaign slippage.
I think if you look at the chart trends you will see a clear Labour drop..I can't remember who posted a great chart, but it was absolutely clear what was happening. Labour down, Tories up a tad, UKIP up a lot, greens risen a bit.
Labour weekly leads since August: twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/556882947656413186
I was talking not about the lead, but the absolute %'s. Somebody put a rolling average chart of all the parties, and it was crystal clear the changes over the past 12 months.
I think Sunil has an equivalent with a slightly different averaging scheme, but here you go:
Lots of speculation on whether a Labour-SNP deal would hit the rocks over Trident.
snip
Is it possible that a referendum for some kind of downgrade could be offered, with both sides free to campaign on their side? With Labour and the Tories strongly for, they would believe they could win comfortably, so it may be a calcuated risk, if the alternative is a second general election?
Scrap Trident for Scotland (Move submarines from Clyde, make it clear the deterrent won't be used for them & eliminate their share of the costs for it) ?
Moving submarines from the Clyde is one thing if Scotland leaves the UK, but moving them somewhere else in the same country, the UK and not an independent Scotland, and being faced with all the extra costs of relocation and loss of Scottish jobs is another. And just how does Labour plan to conduct any foreign policy with anyone if it allows itself to be blackmailed from within its own country over a strategic nuclear deterrent?
Simply moving the deterrent is a very significant and difficult thing to do. Bringing the SNP into government on those terms would not simply downgrade the deterrent it would downgrade the UK in the world. It would be a hugely significant thing and one that would please lefty nutjobs enormously. It is one reason I think why the lefty nutjobs are moving to the SNP, they want SNP unilateralists to dictate to the UK.
Lots of speculation on whether a Labour-SNP deal would hit the rocks over Trident.
snip
Is it possible that a referendum for some kind of downgrade could be offered, with both sides free to campaign on their side? With Labour and the Tories strongly for, they would believe they could win comfortably, so it may be a calcuated risk, if the alternative is a second general election?
Scrap Trident for Scotland (Move submarines from Clyde, make it clear the deterrent won't be used for them & eliminate their share of the costs for it) ?
Moving submarines from the Clyde is one thing if Scotland leaves the UK, but moving them somewhere else in the same country, the UK and not an independent Scotland, and being faced with all the extra costs of relocation and loss of Scottish jobs is another. And just how does Labour plan to conduct any foreign policy with anyone if it allows itself to be blackmailed from within its own country over a strategic nuclear deterrent?
Simply moving the deterrent is a very significant and difficult thing to do. Bringing the SNP into government on those terms would not simply downgrade the deterrent it would downgrade the UK in the world. It would be a hugely significant thing and one that would please lefty nutjobs enormously. It is one reason I think why the lefty nutjobs are moving to the SNP, they want SNP unilateralists to dictate to the UK.
Hardly any Scottish jobs. Don't believe what SLAB telly you, believe the MoD - 512 jobs the last I heard. Not trivial, but nowhere near SLAB lies
Miiband almost certainly cannot win an overall majority if he is wiped out in Scotland, he'll be lucky to get a plurality, if the Greens get anything like 8-10% in England.
Best bet (as I've said before): he scrapes a tiny advantage in seats, is forced to rely on Lib Dem and SNP support, Sturgeon demands something mad - like the abolition of Trident - and we have a new election within six months.
The Tories then get a NOM and go into another 5 year Coalition with the LDs?
I'm not convinced we'll end up with Lab+LD+SNP (or at least not for very long)
Currently the 3 parties combined have 321 seats. Now if the SNP surge as the polls show this is not going to affect this total as they will be mainly taking seats from Lib+Lab. If they take the Tories 1 seat then we move up to 322
Now if LD lose 10 seats each to Lab and Con this actually reduces the combined total to 312.
Lab now need to gain 14 seats from Con to gain a notional majority of 1. If we say they gain 30-40 seats then that gives them a majority of 16-26.
Now bearing in mind that the Coalition has had a majority of 40 odd and has still had a number of prominent defeats, and bearing in mind that John Major's Government started off with a majority of 21 and barely made it to the election, it wouldn't take many by-election defeats or backbench rebellions to bring the whole thing down.
And of course that assumes all 3 parties sign up to it. I can't see any remaining SLAB MPs being chummy with the SNP, and some English MPs may well have concerns too.
SNP have a Westminster alliance with the Greens and Plaid Cymru, you need to add on their numbers for the SNP total but it would be S&C not Coalition, probably same for Liberals. But it would give over 323.
When's Ashcroft's Scottish polling coming out btw ?
Interesting piece from Alan Cochrane about the status of the stop Salmond campaign, he does mention a rumoured poll showing Salmond ahead of the LibDems by a margin of 2:1, perhaps this is a sign that the polls are finally underway.
Christine Jardine : "We believe in a unified Union response and support for one candidate - ME" Braden Davy : "We believe in a unified Union response and support for one candidate - ME" Colin Clark : "We believe in a unified Union response and support for one candidate - ME"
What's most interesting is the tone of the article. It's almost as if Cochrane has now reached Stage Five - acceptance.
Comments
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/67357144.jpg
"I think the BNP had a great there. Not often one can say that."
Not often, because as a sentence it makes no sense.
Hoist by your own pedantry?
And just how does Labour plan to conduct any foreign policy with anyone if it allows itself to be blackmailed from within its own country over a strategic nuclear deterrent?
Simply moving the deterrent is a very significant and difficult thing to do. Bringing the SNP into government on those terms would not simply downgrade the deterrent it would downgrade the UK in the world. It would be a hugely significant thing and one that would please lefty nutjobs enormously. It is one reason I think why the lefty nutjobs are moving to the SNP, they want SNP unilateralists to dictate to the UK.
Braden Davy : "We believe in a unified Union response and support for one candidate - ME"
Colin Clark : "We believe in a unified Union response and support for one candidate - ME"
What's most interesting is the tone of the article. It's almost as if Cochrane has now reached Stage Five - acceptance.