If You Had A Twin, But Didn't Realise...
Family Life11 mins ago
Five car thieves killed whilst driving a stolen car.
Don't know whether this news has gone countrywide, but dahn sarf over the weekend five people (15 to 16 year olds) were killed whilst racing along in a stolen car (they all knew it was stolen and were there voluntarilly). Now call me harsh, but I really couldn't possibly care any less if I tried - I feel sorry for the families, but couldn't give tinker's cuss about the people who died, as they died in the furtherance of a crime.
So, the question is, am I a heartless uncaring bar steward? I suspect I probably am, but I genuinely can't conjure up any sympathy at all.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Ding-Dong. 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.
I have less sympathy for them but not none at all. I mean, at 16 years old, you're just a daft wee kid who knows nothing. I'm not claiming that they were oblivious to the fact that what they were doing was illegal but they probably didn't appreciate all of the ramifications or consequences.
If they had a long history of crime then I'd have less sympathy again. If they were adults who habitually committed crime ofter crime knowing the consequences then my sympathy would be close to zero.
If they had a long history of crime then I'd have less sympathy again. If they were adults who habitually committed crime ofter crime knowing the consequences then my sympathy would be close to zero.
Don't wish to sound like a whimpering liberal but I do find it a bit sad. Afterall your talking about ill educated individuals who are easily swayed by peer pressure. I disagree with the crime/s but how many of us did something naughty when we were younger? How many of us still speed in our cars? I see it as a waste of 5 lives, young lives at that, and its a poor reflection on any of us to call that a blessing.
"I mean, at 16 years old, you're just a daft wee kid who knows nothing. "
"but how many of us did something naughty when we were younger? How many of us still speed in our cars? "
Sorry but there is a whole difference between doing something a naughty when we are kids and car theft (and no doubt driving without a license). Don't feel any sympathy for them.
As for the idea they are wee kids at 16, they are legally entitled to leave home and have children themselves.
"but how many of us did something naughty when we were younger? How many of us still speed in our cars? "
Sorry but there is a whole difference between doing something a naughty when we are kids and car theft (and no doubt driving without a license). Don't feel any sympathy for them.
As for the idea they are wee kids at 16, they are legally entitled to leave home and have children themselves.
Perhaps the stevie feels that 16 is too young for children to leave home... i certainly do! And we ALL know that 16 is too young 99% of the time to have kids, even if it's not too young to be having sex.
There is a certain feeling of "serves them right" about it, and perhaps society has been spared the existence of 5 career criminals. However, some kids, however wayward and criminal at 16, go on to lead helpful, productive and positive lives... and society has lost that potential now too. Big hypothetical though... I concede that easily and happily!
Anyway - who EVER feels sorry for the dead person?! Surely the sympathy lies with the families (or not) every time!?! I mean feeling sorry for a dead person is just STUPID. If you believe in no after life, you're pitying a corpse, and if you do - well, if they were good, they have heaven awaiting them, if not, they'll go to hell. And if you believe in karma they'll get a less crude sense of just deserts. So really, even if it was someone who deserved a Nobel Prize, or even just an ordinary, hard-working family man, would you EVER feel sorry for him, or just his family!?!
To me, the question itselfis a bit loopy - based on my arguement above. And I'm not being a bleeding heart liberal, their deaths do appear to have been their own stupid fault, IF they were all in on it equally and not "bullied" into it in anyway.
I agree Greggo, but by the same token, I don't agree!!! Higher sentencing wouldn't do much harm, that's for sure, but I'm not sure it would be an effective deterrent. The sort of 16 year olds who take a car and go joy riding are probably the sort who think they are above the law and won't get caught. Therefore, the prospect of time in a YOI isn't something that will scare them, as they think they're "too smart" to get caught, or too good at driving for the police to catch them.
That's not to say that I think we shouldn't imprison joyriders - of COURSE we should, but I think it only works as punishment and rehabilitation, without fulfilling the 3rd aim of sentencing.... acting as a deterrent.
That's my point - if people think they're above the law, there's little you can do. It doesn't mean we shouldn't try though. It's similar with office crimes such as insider trading or other forms of corporate fraud... the sheers arrogance of people makes them hard to deter.
If you'd read my posts above, you'll see that I have not stereotyped and that I recognised the peer pressure element here. If you read my posts generally you'll see that I hate sweeping generalisations and stereotyping and do my best to avoid making such comments myself. So worrynot about that! :-)
However, one thing that would probably scare ANYONE is images of maimed victims, and weeping mothers - but then that doesn't work with fireworks, because of the probability of an accident and people thinking they can cheat the statistics.
So Greggo your challenge hasproved a point well, there is little else I can suggest to deter teenage joyriders, and I don't suggest stopping current attempts. Perhaps the deaths of 5 friends will at least deter the young people who knew these dead children from taking part in such activities themselves in the future. I suppose we can at least hope for that.
I'm still looking forward to Ding-Dong coming back to this thread. :-)
We will look back on this era of carnage and wonder how it was ever legal for humans to control vehicles at such lethal speeds. It's rarely I make a jouney by car and don't witness something that could have gone really wrong if others weren't on the ball, and I've made mistakes, probably a small fraction of which I was aware, that could have killed myself or someone else. OK being young and drunk just makes this more likely, but road carnage is still the most likely cause of death for healthy people in the modern world.
Chessman there is a fundamental difference between a firearm and a car - design purpose.
Firearms (particularly handguns which is what we're probably talking about here) have a single-purpose - to kill something. Somebody in illeagal possession of a handgun can therefore be interpreted as having an intent to kill or maim. The same can't be said about stolen cars. It's a matter of intent over wreckless disregard.
To sentence a joyrider who kills somebody by wreckless driving to the same punishment as somebody who deliberately murders somebody would be disproportionate and proportionality is one of the main things that seperates a judge from a lynch-mob.
Incidently I still cannot understand how it is possible to steal a car without a key. With so many cars now controlled by engine management and small transponders capable of strong encryption being available for a few quid it's simply unacceptable for cars to be sold than can have their steering lock forced and ignition fired up by some moron with a crowbar and a screwdriver.
Anybody would think the motor industry had something to gain by having cars stolen and written off!
Chessman - technically it should be equivalent to STEALING an illegal firearm. OTherwise, merely possessing a car should be equivalent to possessing a firearm, and that would put a LOT of us in trouble!!
Calvesy - WHO - if you look around this section of the WHO website, you will see that cancer and heart disease kill scores more people than cars accidents do every year in the UK alone. Road traffic accidents are the most common cause of death by accident but not of death per se. I also find it most unliekly that car accidents kill more people than AIDs, starvation or malaria in many African nations.
I feel very sorry for the families. It must be terrible to loose one of your children like that but kids of 16 know the difference between right and wrong and this wasn't just a silly prank. It's a good job there wasn't more people involved. I do get very peeved when people say oh they were only kids they didn't really know what they were doing. Of course they knew what they were doing and it has cost them their lives.
Christ, it was a shame that the car didn't take out some of their family aswell. Did you see them? Scum of the modern world. Little more than dog s*** on the sole of a Reebok Classic.
What did that poor brick wall do to derserve being destroyed by a bunch of lower-class hooligans who probably smoke crack? Tttttt I ask ya!
PPS - Perhaps it was an old car without an imobiliser. It's still supposedly reasonable to hotwire cars. And perhaps they DID have a key... does anyone have details on this? Had they broken into a house first, or stolen a car belonging to a relative,family "friend", or other adult they have contact with (even a teacher)?
Latest Posts
Crosswords11 mins ago
How Do I Request A Hotel For An Early...
Travel12 mins ago
Body & Soul32 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles38 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles40 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.