Born Hunter
-
Content Count
18,002 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
31
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Articles
Gun Dealer's and Fieldsports Shop's
Reloading Room
Blogs
Calendar
Store
Classifieds
Everything posted by Born Hunter
-
I'm sorry. Am I coercing you to take part in this thread? -
Totally wrong. Which way round it happened has no bearing. As for the more personal situation you use as an example. Nope again. Any loved one of mine would be told to walk away and provided with all the support they need to do that. Finally, name calling. The lowest form of debate. Congratulations.
-
I came across as a bit of a wanker there but my point stands. As I said, just swamps the debate with emotion. Likewise, you have flashbacks, I have premonitions of a dystopian regime! FYI, if you like, do the political tests on Chris Jones's thread. Be interesting to see where you fall fella as you seem to represent a very different view to many on here. VERY different to mine, LOL. If you like, not an order.
-
Yes I have. Lets not make this personal, it'll turn shitty.
-
I'm not making light of anything. I'm simply concerned about a shift to an authoritarian democracy. Every single incremental step towards such is 'justified' by stats and an emotionally persuasive argument. I don't agree that it's good for society. It's dangerous.
-
If she does it more than once you will have a strong case!
-
I've read the law as it is on the statute. Yes legally the judge would have I believe. It wouldn't exist if wounding needed to occur simultaneously and hence separate wounding charges were prosecuted. IMO this law is a dangerous nanny state law which shows a worrying progression towards an authoritarian democracy, not the liberal democracy we allegedly have now. If we now accept that a person in a consensual relationship doesn't have the responsibility to walk away from a c**t, then how long until that extends to criminalising being in less than intimate relationships? How long until i
-
Comes with the nature, people in this country don't get it. How can I put this to try and get it across. There are people in society that we recognise as vulnerable, children are an obvious one, they are protected. They are not considered responsible for their own lives and as such do not have the same liberties that adults do. I guess mentally disabled adults are another group. Again they aren't expected to be responsible for their actions but equally aren't allowed the same freedom we are. I hope I'm getting across here that every time we give up responsibility to the government, we los
-
There are already laws which cover wounding.....
-
That is covered by a separate and very valid law, for which she was prosecuted. His vulnerability from his medical condition is not considered by the Controlling Behaviour law really, other than that it probably makes him more prone to "control" and "serious effect". http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/9/section/76/enacted And I dare say there is already a law which protects adults who have some sort of disability. We accept that some people can't be considered fully responsible for themselves, children and adults with certain disabilities. Just concerns me a bit that now anyone in a
-
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/16/controlling-girlfriend-first-woman-convicted-new-domestic-abuse/ I get that she was probably a shitty human being and the charges of GBH and assault are unquestionably valid. But "controlling behaviour"..... really? This seems like one of those dangerous laws that will be abused and simply shifts the burden of being a f***ing adult onto someone else. Maybe I'm being a c**t, which is why I have posted this. But surely we should expect folks to have the strength and character to take on the responsibility for their own lives and have t
-
Aye I didn't miss that mate. Well done
-
A neutral moderate centrist...... you're at no risk of upsetting anyone. Except foreigners perhaps. LOL
-
There's quite reasonable agreement. Neo-Lib, Classical Liberal, Right wing Libertarian, Loonatic, all round about where I feel I am. Much of the UK would score more towards equality and tradition which are obviously conflicting on the simple Left-Right method. It;s good though, it challenges overly simple derogatory terms.
-
I think it's great for that and was enlightening for me when I first found it. I think this is the next level. Breaking politics down further into a few more key dimensions. Which of course could be broken down further. Bit like matter, atoms, subatomic, quarks, strings LOL! https://8values.github.io/ Economic; Socialism - Capitalism Diplomatic; Nationalism - Globalism State; Libertarianism - Totalitarianism Society; Traditional conservatism - Progressivism Mine;
-
FYI for anyone interested. Loads of stuff like this.
-
Well if my views are pertinent to the topic of discussion yeah I'll lay it out as I see it. I can't really be arsed with an argument though so if I think the others are inclined to get offended and lose their heads over it I'll consider the whole thing pointless. About a year ago I was sat down in a restaurant in Paris having a meal with a load of peers from all over Europe and America and the topic of Brexit came up. I kept out of it because I'm polite like that ........ well, until I felt it was all a bit one sided. That was a crack and shut everyone up fairly sharpish! "Oh shit, he's o
-
See, economically I'd put myself to the right of the UK! LOL. Shit, I don't believe there should be minimum wage, interest limits for pay day loans and ideologically at least I would bin corporation tax entirely! I consider 'tax havens' a good thing ffs.... as in the UK should be one! Even the Tories would reckon I'm a extremist! But I'm apparently well left of them? Does the scale wrap around? Have I shot of the end and started lapping everyone?
-
I'd have pushed myself further south than the test did. Perhaps a nudge right too but not so much. I know what questions pushed me towards the centre but I answered the actual question rather than what my political feeling was on the subject.
-
Good point. A liberal or conservative in the 21stC is not the same as a liberal or conservative from the 18thC for example. Though I do think the question subjects were relevant for today's politics. For instance I don't recall a question on the rights of slave owners or the minimum wage of child prostitutes!
-
With a trad' bow, 15 yards is further than it sounds! Nice group!
-
I don't suppose you can link the thread or re-post the picture please mate? Be interesting to see as the only stuff I've seen has been the whippet crosses.
-
Agreed. My issue is the massive assumption that political beliefs are aligned with personal. For most that is true enough but certainly not me. My result is below and IMO I should be a bit more 'extreme' than that. Then again I suppose being anywhere in the Libertarian-Right in the UK is full blown extremism!
-
I've said for a long time a lot of folks on here flirt with socialism! That ain't a dig, it's just clear on many of the threads on here.
-
The problem I have with the accuracy of that test is that it asks you questions on your personal beliefs, not so much your political. It doesn't really differentiate, assuming that if for instance you don't like something then you would want to ban it. I reckon it'll put you in the right quadrant at least though.
