haha the right to be offended...I kinda like that.
"I demand the right to be an irrational dick!"
"I demand the right to be an irrational dick!"
Anelka
- Thread starter Sheik Yerbouti
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
The law doesn't care about rights in that sense either. It essentially constructs an avatar of you, which appears before the court. So when you say "I was offended" it technically doesn't mean you are offended, you could be laughing your fucking bollocks off at the prospect of sending the thick cunt to prison, it matters not. What the phrase "I was offended" means is that the avatar of yourself, whom you are representing in the court, was offended in the legal sense of the word.
That avatar is then filled out with the rights, statutes, common law, contractual obligations and so forth. And the court asks itself whether in the circumstances, with regard to the law, that avatar has been offended. If so, the guilty party pays the price. It's brilliant.
That avatar is then filled out with the rights, statutes, common law, contractual obligations and so forth. And the court asks itself whether in the circumstances, with regard to the law, that avatar has been offended. If so, the guilty party pays the price. It's brilliant.
Its all about being zen. Whats the point of getting het up about it? There will always be idiots in this world and frankly I can't be bothered getting het up about idiots. Well not that much!
Its all about being zen. Whats the point of getting het up about it? There will always be idiots in this world and frankly I can't be bothered getting het up about idiots. Well not that much!
Related to this why I could never understand how there was uproar if 3 people in a crowd make monkey noises at a player, but no one bats an eyelid at 10 thousand people singing 'your missus takes it up the arse' to Beckham. Or 10 thousand people singing 'you fat bastard' to campo/adam.
It's seems some offence is worse than others, depending on how the outside world view it, not how the person being offended takes it. What happens if 3 people make monkey noises at Balotelli and he brushes it off, but then what about if Adam tops himself from the abuse he takes about being a fat? Obviously that will be neither here nor there.
ah yes the old PERSON..legal personality.
statutes are enforced in a court of equity (a mixture of maritime admiralty jurisdiction/roman law) not common law.
I think what you are saying in a long winded way is that there is no injured party (common law)
however as Thomas coke I think it was stated "where law and equity clash equity will prevail"
hence the shite state of affairs we have today.
hence the mockery or our legal system...ask yourself...where is the injured party? to whom have they caused loss or harm?
if I smoke a reefer...where is the injured party?
if I incite racial hatred (can you see the newspeak yet?) where is the injured party?
I do like the position that the "freeman on the land" movement takes however in our "soft tyranny" state we have to live with it until enough people wake up to the mechanisms of the system
Their mistake is in using that concept in a mass delusion about freeing themselves from some tyranny. The point is to use the concept to bring about your own tyranny upon your enemies, which in this case would be Anelka.
So for the purposes of getting Anelka in a shit load of trouble, you simply make the argument that you are offended. Whether or not you choose to actually be offended is down to you. I suppose an idiot would actually get offended and have to take some sort of medication. Spionkop and yourself would remain unphased and continue smoking a joint. Dantes would laugh joyfully at the opportunity he now has to fuck Anelka.
I think my reaction is better, it achieves something positive and makes me happy. You achieve nothing. And the pityful people who get offended diminish their own lives.
I think my reaction is better, it achieves something positive and makes me happy. You achieve nothing. And the pityful people who get offended diminish their own lives.
well the kop are a pretty liberal and knowledgeable bunch and if they are chanting "beckhams misses takes it up the teatowl holder"
then id tend to side with my comrades....
then id tend to side with my comrades....
Righto, I'm away to take a piss on the gates of Auschwitz while singing 'there ain't no black on the union jack'. Then I might draw a black person being hung by the KKK on a wall with my own shit. But I'm just expressing a point of view. Don't you dare feel offense.
dear mr irrational facetious,
don't worry about me im not offended and I hope you are happy following your pursuits!
just please don't rub your shite on my walls and we will all be happy
kind regards
totally not fucking arsed
Should I be offended or not? Irrational? Facetious? how dare you/you are welcome to your opinion.
I don't get offended by very much, never have done. I'm quite chill and all laid back like that.
That said, I can't say that I've never been offended. It's a very human response. Even if you say there is nothing that offends you (as I have done in the past), someone at some point in time will find just the right thing to do or say that will pierce through that zen like calm you purport to have.
That said, I can't say that I've never been offended. It's a very human response. Even if you say there is nothing that offends you (as I have done in the past), someone at some point in time will find just the right thing to do or say that will pierce through that zen like calm you purport to have.
allow me to reword that for you 😛
dear Mr thick cunt of Kensington,
lay a brick near my house and ill torch every house from the
last jigger on brownlow hill to the old swan.
all the best (left alone)
😀
What if 100 started making monkey noises instead of 3, does it make it worse because of the numbers?
Not sure what colour you are and not going to say one crime is worse than another, but I suggest you try putting yourself in place of a black or asian 15 yr old playing on a sunday league game and getting shouts of skin the paki/nigger by middle aged parents and then think how you would feel and react at that point of dimissing those reacting or feeling crap because they can't feel like Gandhi at the point. I'm not saying any form of abuse/freedom speech should be banned or tolerated but it's a whole lot worse when you receieve it. I have seen this in park football to various degrees in the last 20yrs in the south and seen the faces of an offended player, at the moment I could never heart to say "chin up lad and feel bad for the offender".
Remember, the offended isn't often some 32 old pro, it can be a kid who's just playing the game he loves probably with 10 other white players, try and put yourself in their shoes.
Completely agree Rubans. I started another thread to cover it 🙂
I'm not sure how a black/asian 15yr old is any different to a white 15yr old if they are receiving abuse though? What about if say for example the white child was playing in a country where he was in a minority?
I wasn't implying one is worse than the other, think you missed my point there, racism is shit regardless of which ever minority. I was just reflecting on racism I have seen here that's all. My point was attributed to a specific offended race otherwise I would have listed chinese/arabs/tories etc.
I guess Anelka can consider himself lucky:
Uefa hand Belgium's Omar Rahou 10-match ban after making 'quenelle' gesture during Uefa Futsal Euro 2014
Uefa hand Belgium's Omar Rahou 10-match ban after making 'quenelle' gesture during Uefa Futsal Euro 2014
he can still get his ban increased I believe. Independent panel found him guilty for 5 games while FA have appealed that decision as they want to increase it, so this is not done yet...
Sorry, but this is utter tosh. You're completely mistaken about the origins and function of equity, and its relation to the common law and legislation.
Which is partly your fault too. If lawyers said case law instead of a vague term like common law there would be no confusion.
Or if lawyers had a fraction of my genius/aspergers syndrome, they could draft legislation for everything, every offence in every context and permutation, then there would be no need for case law.
Legislation for everything? You're a bit late to the party, mate. The likes of France, Germany and Japan have pretty much codified their laws for everything. Even so, they do consider case law and precedent if sufficiently uniform and consistent, so I'd say they haven't remotely approached your genius.
Statutes are codified.
Both Equity and Common law are 'uncodified' (The difference between equity and common law is one of historical origin and principle - Equity isn't really based on 'law')
But Equity, Statutes and Common law are all interpreted through case law. They are also applied (now) by the same Courts and interact. Statutes will trump an uncodified law where the two collide.
I think another confusion here is between Civil Law and Criminal Law. In the 2nd, there is no 'injured party' because the party on the other side is the State.
Equity is new to me, you would have to be desperate to ask the king for a fair ruling which would only have resulted in a beheading.
You have more control over the judges decision, since they copy paste your submissions into their judgement. The freeman people are nuts, they don't make any submissions and effectively want the courts to use some type of morality. Dicks, at that point I'll pull out the Old Testament, turn to Deuteronomy, and smile.
You have more control over the judges decision, since they copy paste your submissions into their judgement. The freeman people are nuts, they don't make any submissions and effectively want the courts to use some type of morality. Dicks, at that point I'll pull out the Old Testament, turn to Deuteronomy, and smile.
I'm sure they will have left countless loopholes and contradictions. Dantes you are charged with first degree murder of your boss. My lord, at the time I was blind folded and wearing ear plugs, it was impossible that I acted with intent required to prove the charge. I submit that shit happens. Hmmm oh hmmm it seems the legislation has no provision on this. Really? Good. When you add that provision I will of course abide by it. See ya round.
He makes fun of it constantly and talks about it being a 'lie' ... His famous song mocks it (Shoaanans, or however you spell it.)
Ah for fucks sake, you had to ruin it.
I'll have to go looking for YouTube videos of monkeys juggling or this kind of amusement from now on.
It's actually very interesting stuff if you ignore the conspiracy theory element. The way they piece together the significance of a birth certificate, contract law, history, the amendments to the US constitution. It's a really complex story that makes you think about law more than any law lecturer ever could.Kind of like in science where a crackpot makes you think about the second law of thermodynamics more than any lecturer did. I'd rather watch something complicated like that on Youtube than waste my time watching TV or a movie.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
