Well Done Bbc! Giovanni Will Be In...
Film, Media & TV1 min ago
What is happening to England?
159 Answers
http
It would now seem that our children are no longer safe walking home from school these days.
This brutal savage sex attack, comes close on the heels of the death of a 85 year old woman, who was knocked to the ground and killed, by two young muggers snatching her bag.
http
Also A man who carried out a shocking unprovoked attack on a young 16-year-old girl who was punched to the ground from behind.
http
It would now seem that our children are no longer safe walking home from school these days.
This brutal savage sex attack, comes close on the heels of the death of a 85 year old woman, who was knocked to the ground and killed, by two young muggers snatching her bag.
http
Also A man who carried out a shocking unprovoked attack on a young 16-year-old girl who was punched to the ground from behind.
http
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"To which I finely replied "No such visions comes from living long enough to be able to make comparisons". "
Yes, and people disagree with the conclusions you've made from your comparisons with the past - and showed why they disagreed with it using evidence. That's how debates work, especially ones that are involved in making judgements about the past.
People have only tried to answer the question you have asked them. Your question was, "What has happened to England?", which a question that to some degree or another necessarily involves talking about the past, so that's what people have done. The way you've responded makes no attempt to engage with the evidence or arguments put forward by anyone disagreeing with you.
Frankly, I think the reason for that is because you can't.
Yes, and people disagree with the conclusions you've made from your comparisons with the past - and showed why they disagreed with it using evidence. That's how debates work, especially ones that are involved in making judgements about the past.
People have only tried to answer the question you have asked them. Your question was, "What has happened to England?", which a question that to some degree or another necessarily involves talking about the past, so that's what people have done. The way you've responded makes no attempt to engage with the evidence or arguments put forward by anyone disagreeing with you.
Frankly, I think the reason for that is because you can't.
No, its because people have rightly pointed out your breathtaking hypocrisy.
You made 6-7 contributions to this thread, all on the theme that "it was better then than it is today".Not once did you assert that this was not the main point of your thread - you know, the one entitled "what is happening to England", and containing the phrase "no longer safe walking home from school these days."
Many posters rebutted your assertions, backed up with links and evidence - so you change tack and attempt to assert some sort of moral superiority by criticising everyone for ignoring the plight of the victims you linked to in the OP, the ones that you ignored for 7 of your own posts and 50 posts in total.
Its a low tactic, and a shameful one. Continuing to defend it just compounds your hypocrisy.
You made 6-7 contributions to this thread, all on the theme that "it was better then than it is today".Not once did you assert that this was not the main point of your thread - you know, the one entitled "what is happening to England", and containing the phrase "no longer safe walking home from school these days."
Many posters rebutted your assertions, backed up with links and evidence - so you change tack and attempt to assert some sort of moral superiority by criticising everyone for ignoring the plight of the victims you linked to in the OP, the ones that you ignored for 7 of your own posts and 50 posts in total.
Its a low tactic, and a shameful one. Continuing to defend it just compounds your hypocrisy.
\\\Many posters rebutted your assertions, backed up with links and evidence\\
"Links and evidence" ----unfortunately, that they may well be misleading and don't tell the whole story.
The "perception" of safety and the "reality" of safety are often quite different and advocates have often picked out the statistics of a narrow era to support their argument of "dangers in the past" and quote serial killers et al to which i have no objection.
People who have lived in the early post WW2 era, or the majority of them, would suggest that despite any statistics to the contrary "felt" safer in that period than they do today..........take that for what it is worth
"Links and evidence" ----unfortunately, that they may well be misleading and don't tell the whole story.
The "perception" of safety and the "reality" of safety are often quite different and advocates have often picked out the statistics of a narrow era to support their argument of "dangers in the past" and quote serial killers et al to which i have no objection.
People who have lived in the early post WW2 era, or the majority of them, would suggest that despite any statistics to the contrary "felt" safer in that period than they do today..........take that for what it is worth
@Sqad - I think you might be missing the point, at least of the more recent posts.
You are perfectly correct that people will have different views about relative safety and levels of violence when comparing today with recent history- indeed for around 50 posts or so, including 7 or so of AoGs own, thats what we were all talking about. And thats fine, thats what debate is all about.
Then, AoG, fearing he was losing the argument, changed tack and posted that the responses were "nothing short of disgusting", that a "young school child had to undergo an operation", and that all of us "should be ashamed of ourselves" for "just making comparisons." Whilst of course excluding his own 7 posts from the shame for just making comparisons. Thats just hypocritical.
I would imagine that AoG is going to be very cross with you Sqad, for your shameful continuance of the theme of comparative safety and ignoring the plight of the victims he linked to in his OP- the ones he himself then went on to conspicuously ignore for 7 of his own posts and around 50 odd posts from other contributors.
This is rank hypocrisy by AoG. The only person acting shamefully here is him.
You are perfectly correct that people will have different views about relative safety and levels of violence when comparing today with recent history- indeed for around 50 posts or so, including 7 or so of AoGs own, thats what we were all talking about. And thats fine, thats what debate is all about.
Then, AoG, fearing he was losing the argument, changed tack and posted that the responses were "nothing short of disgusting", that a "young school child had to undergo an operation", and that all of us "should be ashamed of ourselves" for "just making comparisons." Whilst of course excluding his own 7 posts from the shame for just making comparisons. Thats just hypocritical.
I would imagine that AoG is going to be very cross with you Sqad, for your shameful continuance of the theme of comparative safety and ignoring the plight of the victims he linked to in his OP- the ones he himself then went on to conspicuously ignore for 7 of his own posts and around 50 odd posts from other contributors.
This is rank hypocrisy by AoG. The only person acting shamefully here is him.
LazyGun
\\ I think you might be missing the point, at least of the more recent posts.\\
LOL..Something i tend to excel in.........I am not a great one for links as you will have perceived and find them often confusing, difficult to interpret and often biased towards which ever point of view that you choose.
\\ I think you might be missing the point, at least of the more recent posts.\\
LOL..Something i tend to excel in.........I am not a great one for links as you will have perceived and find them often confusing, difficult to interpret and often biased towards which ever point of view that you choose.
Since this horrific story is national news, and this happens to be the news section, I will try again to get some proper answers from the more balanced ABers
"Is it safe for our children to walk home safe from school alone?
Notice I have provided three different links from three different political persuasions.
http
http
http
"Is it safe for our children to walk home safe from school alone?
Notice I have provided three different links from three different political persuasions.
http
http
http
-- answer removed --
You are dissembling again AoG.
From you, about 4 posts in.No correction of earlier posters, saying that had missed your point, that all you were doing was highlighting a terrible crime.
No, you post this
"Only 'appears' to some, in reality it has not.
Even in the days of the WW2 blackouts, women and girls were safe to walk home alone, but today's sexual predators do not even wait for the hours of darkness to commit their brutal sex attacks, they even strike during the hours of daylight."
One of your pre-occupations, and the obvious agenda behind your OP - that england was safer in a previous generation than it is now.
And when, some 50 posts in, and after 6 or so more posts of yours,in none of which to you attempt to correct any misapprehension about your agenda, you finally decide to talk about the shameful attitude of respondents ignoring your point.
Yours is the shameful action AoG, yours the hypocrisy.
From you, about 4 posts in.No correction of earlier posters, saying that had missed your point, that all you were doing was highlighting a terrible crime.
No, you post this
"Only 'appears' to some, in reality it has not.
Even in the days of the WW2 blackouts, women and girls were safe to walk home alone, but today's sexual predators do not even wait for the hours of darkness to commit their brutal sex attacks, they even strike during the hours of daylight."
One of your pre-occupations, and the obvious agenda behind your OP - that england was safer in a previous generation than it is now.
And when, some 50 posts in, and after 6 or so more posts of yours,in none of which to you attempt to correct any misapprehension about your agenda, you finally decide to talk about the shameful attitude of respondents ignoring your point.
Yours is the shameful action AoG, yours the hypocrisy.
LazyGun
/// Then, AoG, fearing he was losing the argument, changed tack and posted that the responses were "nothing short of disgusting", that a "young school child had to undergo an operation", and that all of us "should be ashamed of ourselves" for "just making comparisons." ///
I am getting a little tired of your insinuations, I was not losing the argument, there was no argument to lose, simply because no one was prepared to address the correct argument.
As regards changing tack, I was forced to do so, just by trying to get others to get back on track.
And I still stand by my statement that;
"responses were "nothing short of disgusting", that a "young school child had to undergo an operation", and that all of us "should be ashamed of ourselves" for "just making comparisons"
But I have given you all another chance at redeeming yourselves, not that many will, it is not in your nature.
/// Then, AoG, fearing he was losing the argument, changed tack and posted that the responses were "nothing short of disgusting", that a "young school child had to undergo an operation", and that all of us "should be ashamed of ourselves" for "just making comparisons." ///
I am getting a little tired of your insinuations, I was not losing the argument, there was no argument to lose, simply because no one was prepared to address the correct argument.
As regards changing tack, I was forced to do so, just by trying to get others to get back on track.
And I still stand by my statement that;
"responses were "nothing short of disgusting", that a "young school child had to undergo an operation", and that all of us "should be ashamed of ourselves" for "just making comparisons"
But I have given you all another chance at redeeming yourselves, not that many will, it is not in your nature.
aroundtheblock
/// Heard on the radio driving home an hour ago that an 11 year old girl was attacked sexually. ///
/// Not sure of the details but it appears that it is not safe for children to walk home alone. ///
Abysmal, pathetic, disgustingly sarcastic, it is little wonder some of you can sleep at night, taking the sorry plight of a young child so as to try and be funny.
Words fail me, but I hope others are taking note, that this is the sort of thing that has turned a perfectly legitimate if not disturbing news story, into what it has become.
I would have thought that in the circumstances this was an ideal time for the ED to have intervened at the beginning, especially when it first became obvious from the removed answers where some were taking this thread.
There was no place for "I know but things where never different" "what about??????????? then out come the history books, there is just no need for it, stick to the news item in question, not something that happened years ago, or has been similar committed by others.
/// Heard on the radio driving home an hour ago that an 11 year old girl was attacked sexually. ///
/// Not sure of the details but it appears that it is not safe for children to walk home alone. ///
Abysmal, pathetic, disgustingly sarcastic, it is little wonder some of you can sleep at night, taking the sorry plight of a young child so as to try and be funny.
Words fail me, but I hope others are taking note, that this is the sort of thing that has turned a perfectly legitimate if not disturbing news story, into what it has become.
I would have thought that in the circumstances this was an ideal time for the ED to have intervened at the beginning, especially when it first became obvious from the removed answers where some were taking this thread.
There was no place for "I know but things where never different" "what about??????????? then out come the history books, there is just no need for it, stick to the news item in question, not something that happened years ago, or has been similar committed by others.
<<<aroundtheblock
/// Heard on the radio driving home an hour ago that an 11 year old girl was attacked sexually. ///
/// Not sure of the details but it appears that it is not safe for children to walk home alone. ///
Abysmal, pathetic, disgustingly sarcastic, it is little wonder some of you can sleep at night, taking the sorry plight of a young child so as to try and be funny>>>
Where on earth have you got the impression that the above comments are supposed to be sarcastic???!!
Your tantrum has obviously extended, now, to all and sundry and only serves to illustrate that not only have you lost your argument, you appear to have lost the plot, too!
/// Heard on the radio driving home an hour ago that an 11 year old girl was attacked sexually. ///
/// Not sure of the details but it appears that it is not safe for children to walk home alone. ///
Abysmal, pathetic, disgustingly sarcastic, it is little wonder some of you can sleep at night, taking the sorry plight of a young child so as to try and be funny>>>
Where on earth have you got the impression that the above comments are supposed to be sarcastic???!!
Your tantrum has obviously extended, now, to all and sundry and only serves to illustrate that not only have you lost your argument, you appear to have lost the plot, too!
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Latest Posts
Shopping & Style2 mins ago
ChatterBank5 mins ago
Wintry Weather Heading Our Way
News8 mins ago
Trump/Ukraine, What Will He Do?
News8 mins ago
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |