Thursday, 11 August 2011

The last post.

Well folks, it's been an exciting day for little old Wolfers, with an avalanche of traffic as a result of my latest post. What is clear from the stats though is that it hasn't been here, with only about 300 of you dropping in.

I've been mirroring the new site over here since I set it up and the traffic all seems to have moved over now. As a result, this will be the last posting over here.

One last call to update your bookmarks, and, if you're one of the lovely bloggers who links here, one last appeal to update your blogrolls.

Cheers folks,


Wednesday, 10 August 2011

A few thoughts.

A few thoughts have occurred to me over the last 24 or so hours. I’ve decided to lump them all into one place.
Spot the difference
There was a young man from Tottenham on the radio earlier. He had a style of speech which would have had Daily Wail readers reaching for the cornflour blue notepaper and calligraphy pen, but he made some very interesting points.
He was perfectly explicit in his opposition to the idiots doing the looting and burning, and unlike some media commentators made no attempt to excuse the actions of the morons at large. However, he did draw some fascinating parallels about the relationship between the ‘great and good’ of our society and the so-called rioters.
I’ll not try to paraphrase his words, nor to replicate his style, but argument went something like this:
‘The answer is simple, because it is wrong, but when you get past that, why should these people not go and do what they’ve been doing? What are the examples that they have been set?
The bankers have ruined the country and have not been held accountable, they have stolen billions of pounds from us and give themselves enormous bonuses from what they have taken. They’ve looted the country and got away with it. They’ve had their hands in the till.
The journalists have shocked and sickened the nation, they have violated people and destroyed their livelihoods, left them bereft. It isn’t just the phone hacking, but the constant untruths and innuendo that all the media peddles, and they get paid handsomely for it, while being courted by the rich and famous. A few token heads on poles will mollify the masses and things will carry on pretty much as before. They’ve profited from the wilful and spiteful destruction of people.
The politicians have lied to us since free, open elections have existed. They’ve had their hands in the till, and have made up their own rules to allow them to do so, it goes far beyond those prosecuted. What is the difference between a kid smashing a shop window and taking a £500 TV and a politician taking your wages before you’ve even got them and buying a £500 TV with it before turning round and proclaiming ‘I’m entitled’ ?’
At this point the example of people being punched and beaten in the street was being made. His response (same caveat as before);
‘Yes, and politicians, against the will of the people send our planes to bomb and our soldiers to shoot people, and when we say we don’t want it, they go and do it anyway, and then send us the bill. They act like children screaming and shouting at each other, in their own way getting in each other’s faces, they destroy everybody’s lives and businesses. They too act like the law doesn’t apply to them and then can do what they want, and they get away with it.’
The man was at pains to point out that all of these, looting and destroying included, was wrong, and all of them need to be stamped out and punished. I see where he is coming from, the looters may be more graphic, but is there such a big difference between the lot of them, the damage they do and misery they cause?
Taking the law into your own hands.
The next thought is about the phenomenon of groups of people banding together to protect their families and property. I’ve heard the line a few times today ‘taking the law into your own hands’, well, here’s a shock, it is our law, the common law is owned by all of us, that’s why it is common, the statutes are made in our name, by people chosen by us for this purpose, they belong to us as well. Once you make the law the sole concern of a group of arbitrarily selected ‘appropriate’ people, lawlessness is the only outcome.
The riots have been a prime example of this. The same line has been trotted out by the police that it is best left to them. Yet the common law is clear, and goes back almost 800 years; it is not only permissible, yet would seem to be our duty to apprehend criminals, whether one is a constable or not. You can be prosecuted for refusing to assist.
The police cannot be everywhere at once, unless you hold the above to be true, and accept the seventh Peelian Principle:
Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
So, in the absence of uniformed members of the public nominated as police officers, what are people supposed to do? Silently stand aside and let their businesses be looted and houses burned? No, people banding together to protect their property and lives is an honourable duty, and a truer mark of civilisation and functioning society than a welfare state and cohesion outreach diversity officers could ever be.
I’ve heard the word vigilante trotted out by the BBC this afternoon. The definition is quite enlightening as it would seem to refer to two states which have subtle but important differences:
1. a member of a vigilance committee.
2. any person who takes the law into his or her own hands, as by avenging a crime.
Now, in the first instance we have a group of people who are being vigilant, keeping watch over someone or something. In the second instance we have someone who is looking to mete out some form of justice.
There’s a whole world of difference between keeping watch over your property and going out with the intent to seek out potential rioters and do them over. So let’s drop this idea that people joining forces to ensure the peace is not breached in their street are somehow doing something not entirely permissible, shall we? This is not a case of ‘oh they really shouldn’t be doing that, but desperate times, etc.’
While we’re on the subject, I also think it shows how far the police and public have become estranged in recent years. I attribute no blame to the front line officers, I can only imagine that they are immensely frustrated with the scene that has played itself out in front of them. It is precisely because of situations like this that the vast majority of officers join the police. Despite all the criticism the police come in for, from me included, I know that an overwhelming number of them join because they want to make a difference. However, their management, station environment, bureaucracy and social-workeresque environment do them a disservice. These incidents have demonstrated a huge disconnect and lack of public confidence in a police force that they feel no longer serves them. Good people will avoid the police in general because they simply do not trust them. I don’t know what the answer is, but sometimes I think people want a little bit more Gene Hunt, even if he wasn’t perfect.
Let the punishment fit the crime.
And now for the controversial bit. A number of adults who are directing and facilitating the actions of the looters aside, the majority of people involved in these disturbances have been minors or young adults. I’m not sure that prison and/or youth detention is the solution.
In the majority of cases, this isn’t going to be a case of an individual making a foolish decision in an otherwise fairly blameless life – in those instances prison can be an answer, I think the problem here is that we have individuals who are completely dysfunctional, in themselves, their families (such as they may be) and their environments. They are not being taught how to be people in the home, by equally dysfunctional parents/siblings/carers and school is not the place for these lessons to be taught, that is an institution for an academic education, there should be no place for citizenship classes in school.
Re-offending rates show that youth detention and/or supervision is not working. However, there is a kernel of a good idea at play, it frustratingly is prevented from germinating, though, because the thing is, locking them up will prevent them from acting like a clot on the streets for a while, but we can’t lock them up indefinitely. Taking them out under ‘supervision’ for this, that and the other seems like a reward, many would say it is, although it is true to say that valuable life lessons can be learned from the activities they are taking part in. Can. Under the right circumstances.
Unfortunately the youth supervision system is not the right circumstances. I truly believe for some of these kids can be helped, but in the first stage it would not pretty. Channel 4 ran a series a while ago called ‘Bad Lad’s Army’, and I was quite taken with it. The premise of the show was simple, take a load of ‘bad’ 20 somethings and give them some good old 1950′s style National Service. It was entertaining TV, especially with the tantrums in the early weeks, but much more often than not the young men found that the experience had a profound effect upon them, it taught them the importance of self reliance, teamwork, compassion, justice and more important than anything else, self respect.
I’m not for a moment suggesting we bring back National Service, it ain’t going to happen for a whole number of reasons. Nor am I suggesting that people be conscripted as some sort of punishment, I don’t see why the army should be lumbered with them and they don’t have the resources.
However, I think there is a definite advantage to be had in drawing up a programme along the lines of the show. I’m not talking about the short, sharp shock of yesteryear, but a programme run by former army instructors, designated as prison officers, on a closed site where youngsters (let’s say from 14 to 23) have the cockiness metaphorically knocked out of them and then, more importantly, are showed something that these kids have never been shown in their lives; they can achieve where their whole life, partly through their own faults, partly through the fault of their parents, and partly through the fault of a broken system has shown them to be nothing but failures. They can rely on themselves and their peers where their whole life has been a litany of neglect and broken promises. They can learn, they do have a brain, there is something they can be good at, when their whole lives they’ve been told they are stupid and useless. They can do something right, and be congratulated and thanked, something they’ve probably never heard in their lives.
The workers who run the current supervision schemes have little or no sanction. The people running this scheme would have to be given pretty far ranging powers, powers including control and restraint, however if it is one thing I’ve seen demonstrated by the personnel running the ‘bad lad’s army’ is their drive to turn these kids around and the deep conviction that these kids/lads can be good and can contribute. It would provide very useful employment to those leaving the forces and, if successful, would save the State (so, us) a small fortune in ongoing benefits payments.
It would not be a timed course, there would be no home release, there would be no visits until a certain point in the course had been passed. The course would last until the youngster had displayed a change in attitude and attained a certain level of performance.
It could change and save lives.
I’m not naive enough to suggest it would suit everybody, although I see no reason to discriminate on the basis of gender (although I would prefer the centres were single sex), it would be wasted if the newly graduated youngster was to go straight back into a home with abusive/neglectful parents, it would be inappropriate for younger children. It would not teach the youngsters to kill, but it would teach them weapons respect. It would take them abseiling, canoeing, climbing and all the other stuff that the supervision orders take the youths out to do, but that would only be once the foundation had been laid, and as part of a properly constructed programme with teeth and sanction that would teach them real life lessons that they’ve been denied – at the moment the programme tells them ‘mis-behave and get a fun day out’, this programme would still provide a fun day out, probably many fun days out, but there would be a lot of work to do to earn it, a concept alien to many of them. The carrot is fine, but there must be a stick, not to aimlessly beat them with to say ‘bad kid’, but a stick to prod and guide.
People that have earned respect from themselves will respect others.
Oh, the hand-wringers would be aghast at the idea, but sorry, hand-wringers, we’ve followed your approach for the last twenty years, look what it has got us.
I really do think it would be worth a try. There’s no point beating these youngsters down (again, metaphorically) unless we help them up afterwards.
Also available on

Monday, 8 August 2011

All getting a bit silly now.

I wrote yesterday about the bovver in Tottenham on Saturday night. Last night we saw sporadic events in Brixton, Enfield and other spots. This evening I’m seeing pictures on Sky News from Hackney and Lewisham where it is kicking off.
What is surprising me is the simplicity with which the media are approaching these events. I do not see a connection between the events in Tottenham, where I maintain that a small number who were angry about the shooting were joined by a larger number who were just generally pissed off.
What we have seen yesterday and will no doubt see this evening is a different beast altogether. These are not demonstrations (whether I agree with the focus of the demo or not is irrelevant) but wilful acts of vandalism and looting. A tear-up as the result of emotions running high is one thing, pre-meditated destruction of property is another.
As I drove home from work, there was a discussion on the radio about the causes of this. Both the BBC and Sky have referred to these morons as ‘anarchists’, I’m not sure if they’ve sat down with them and discussed their feelings about the State and how it infringes on the private individual. I get the feeling it is just an easy tag to hang on people.
This has been described as violence by social network. Evil social networking. Before twitter and facebook it was impossible to sort this sort of thing out. Except when it’s happened in the past it was caused by mobile phones and the dangers of text messaging. Before then it would have been people talking to each other in the street and in the pub. Let’s not kid ourselves, this has nothing to do social networking, don’t be lazy. People have always communicated.
‘What could have caused this?’ comes the plaintive cry. Referring once again to yesterday’s posting, I believe that people are just generally angry and frustrated. This ain’t it. It has been suggested that it is due to the cuts. Don’t be bloody silly, it’s nothing to do with that either. It isn’t down to racial tension.
What has caused this is a systematic removal of people’s ability to think and act for themselves. We’ve had twenty years of people being told that they are not responsible for themselves, that the State will look after them, guide them on every step of their journey through life. We’ve had twenty years of the State providing, telling people they are entitled, telling people that when they do bad things it isn’t their fault. We’ve had twenty years of the judicial system, or more accurately the politicians behind it, failing to deal with recidivist offenders put before them, handing them ridiculously short sentences in a prison system which sees prisoners getting more rights and better conditions than those staying in NHS hospitals, or worse still, no prison sentence at all.
These people have been told they can do what they want almost entirely without consequence. They see the actions of the anti-cuts movement, of UAF and the EDL, of the people in Tottenham and they see a police force which seems helpless to intervene, a police force that will arrest people for singing ‘Kung Fu Fighting’ yet that will not move in to stop violent and criminal damage for fear of upsetting the left wing hand wringers, and a police force that has its hands tied by the judicial system. They think to themselves, ‘looks like a laugh, why not?’
The word being trotted out time and again is ‘community’ the community is angry, upset, fearful about and of these disturbances. Yet the powers that be demonstrate that the community doesn’t matter, it is ignored, insulted and destroyed, by successive Labour, Conservative and Coalition governments.
There’s been a spokesman from Lewisham council saying that it is the school holidays and there are many young people with not much to do. Well, who’s fault is that? I used to make my own fun, never stretched to setting light to a police car or a shop though. Once again, it is the people like the fabled ‘community outreach officers’ who have told people that they cannot, indeed must not, do anything unless it has been organised by some agency; controlled, regulated, register checked.
So, we’ve a generation of people who have been told that nothing is their fault, not to think for themselves, that their actions have no consequences, that they have no responsibilities, that they can have and do what they want, for free.
Your monster has just escaped. Scary, isn’t it?
Also available on

Sunday, 7 August 2011

STFU, Prole.

Just in case you still had any remaining doubts, just in case you were not certain if our politicians placed any value or import in our voice or opinion, just in case you wondered if our Prime Minister was a man of his word and capable of critical thought, I bring you this:
When we were never asked if we wanted this.
. . . he said Britons should be grateful for the EU’s “useful work” on global warming and global poverty. . .
Really? Really? Because when I last looked we were still being threatened with the bogeyman of Warble Gloaming and people were still living in tarpaulin shelters around the world. Perhaps the EU isn’t as wonderful as we’ve been led to believe?
These are compelling arguments why we believe Britain should be an active member.
No. They’re not. And I can state many more compelling arguments as to why we should get out. But there’s no point, because Cameron has made it clear that he has not the slightest interest in listening to what anyone has to say. He’s the PM, what he says goes, sit down, shut up, do as you are told, you disgusting little peasant.
Who was this letter to? Well, that’s the good bit:
His letter was sent to Anita Segar, a senior Conservative Party member in Mr Cameron’s home county of Oxfordshire and president of the Society for Graduates at Oxford University.
She had written to the Prime Minister last month threatening to resign from the party in protest over his “betrayal” to fulfil manifesto pledges and demanding a referendum.
She urged him to “stand up to the imperious, bombastic and arrogant pirates in Brussels” who are “plundering what remains of our heritage”.
So, he’s not even prepared to listen to the people that have come through the very same institutions as him. (The full text of the letter is here)
Meanwhile, Tottenham burned last night. The media is telling us that a few hundred people rioted because the police shot some bloke. Uh-huh, from what I can gather, this man was not exactly a pillar of the community. It seems unlikely to me that a few hundred would be so outraged by his death that they would go on the rampage.
My suspicion is that a small number were reacting to the shooting, the rest of them joined in because they are very very angry, and they don’t know why.
They’ll figure it out eventually. Could it be that they are angry because they feel they don’t matter, because nobody cares about them, because the system is not only incapable of caring about them but actively fears and despises them?
The markets are tanking, the EU is hanging by a thread, the politicians have been caught stealing, the media have been caught spying on the vulnerable as well as the ‘elite’ and the old bill have been caught helping them. We are constantly bullied, nagged and hectored, we are all treated as potential paedophiles and suspected criminals, we are told what to eat, drink and think. We look at the news and see the Arabs rising up, and our governments bombing the people who swat them down, yet our governments speak to us in a way not too far removed from the way the very people we bomb act. Closer to home in Spain we see protesters treated in a shocking fashion by their police.
People are angry and confused, and I can’t help the feeling that we are counting down to something big, it goes further than a PM’s slavish devotion to the EU and the police shooting a not very nice man dead.
Call out the instigators. . .
Also available on

Saturday, 6 August 2011

Dinner Time

I was awoken this morning by the someone on the radio talking about an investigation into how British schoolboy could possibly have been eaten by a polar bear. No doubt the investigation will be conducted with suitable gravitas by a thoroughly credible and competent Norwegian administration, but I’ll tell you now that the correct answer will not be forthcoming. There’ll be talk of better training for the guides on trips such as this, improved security, more accessible communications and so forth. But the real answer is simple.
What happened was a group of kids ventured onto the turf of the world’s largest land predator.
The problem is the human race is arrogant. Deeply assured of its own magnificence and excellence. We think we’re the pinnacle of evolution. We’re not. Oh sure, we’re the most intelligent, the best communicators, the most inventive. But top of the tree? Not even close.
We’re not the best in the Arctic, those polar bears survive and thrive in an environment where we need specialist kit to make sure we don’t freeze to death.
We’re certainly not the best in the sea. Get into a fight with a great white shark in his back yard and there will be just one winner.
In the jungles of India a Tiger can rip your throat out before you’ve even realised he’s close.
The African savannah plays host to the lion. Mr Lion is a huge beast who can finish you off in a heartbeat, his wife is even more deadly, and they’ll hunt you in packs.
The human lives in an environment that it has a degree of control over. We have to, we’re actually quite puny. Even our close cousins the chimpanzee, orang-utan and gorilla would beat seven bells out of us in short order. When lesser creatures encroach on ‘our’ territory we chase them down. Yet, we’re not even particularly good at that. Rats and other vermin abound.
No, we’re not the super-beings we imagine ourselves to be.
Yet the cry goes up, ‘bad polar bear! How dare you kill one of us? Now you must die!’ You see the same off the Australian coast when someone gets chomped by a great white. Granted the shark spits you out, having discovered you aren’t nearly as tasty as you looked. The boats will leave port, bent on killing the beast that so offended us. ‘He’s a killer!’ they’ll cry. Well, of course he’s a killer, he’s a bloody shark.
And therein lies the hint, a great white shark doesn’t need a boat and a rifle to do its killing. It just swims up and bites. Human arrogance attributes fault at the door of the animal. No, the animal is doing what is meant to do, what it lives to do, the only thing it knows how to do.
If you go into a part of the world which is ruled by fecking enormous predators, then you run the risk of meeting them. They may not be pleased to see you. Don’t take it personally, it is just business. They don’t answer to politicians and committees. There is no moral and ethical debate about their actions. Policemen and the law are unknown to them. Except the oldest law of all; I’m bigger and better than you.
If you don’t want to run into a polar bear, lion, tiger or shark then stay in Berkshire. If a polar bear walks down the street in Windsor, knocks on your door and punches you in the face, you may have cause for complaint.
This planet doesn’t belong to the human race, and that means that sometimes you have to give up centre stage and deal with the fact that you aren’t number one.
It doesn’t make what happened any less tragic, but it is the way the world is.
Also available at

Friday, 5 August 2011

Could this be it?

Things must be getting bad. Sky News this evening has the stock market ticker going in the top corner of the screen, and it’s in black.
The Italians have been on the blower to the US treasury, and the Spanish have been on the phone to Sarkozy.
There is only one way this is going to go; Spain and Italy are going down. I fail to see how the Germans are going to be able, let alone willing to dip into their pockets here. To rescue one of them would be almost impossible, to rescue both? Forget it.
Barroso, so bullish when it was suggested a plan b was needed is now backtracking at an alarming pace.  ”We are no longer managing a crisis just in the euro-area periphery.” He has said. Even the Maoist knows the gig is up. But still, it isn’t the fault of anyone in the EU, oh no. It is apparently the fault of the authorities for failing to prevent the sovereign debt crisis from spreading.
Yes. You read that right. The head of the organisation which has done nothing beyond strip the sovereignty of it members has now thrown that sovereignty into a bush and said ‘Sovereignty? What sovereignty? None of that here. This is nothing to do with us!’ They make Gordon Brown look self-aware and contrite.
No, this is the evil markets, sullying the pure political ideal with their grubby dealings. Olli Rehn, European Commissioner for Economic and Financial affairs (and it would seem pure delusion) has branded the market’s actions as ‘unjustified’ and ‘incomprehensible’. You can almost hear him stamping his feet and whining that it isn’t fair.
Well, listen to me, you detestable little shits, you’ve lorded it over us since the 1960′s, and you’ve finally run out of our money. God help you, and any national politician who backs you up. Yes, Cameron, Clegg and Miliband, I’m looking at you.
Your project isn’t dead yet, but it is lying on the floor, bleeding to death. There’s no point in attempting a transfusion, the lacerations are such that any blood that is pumped in will seep out immediately.
Your arrogance, your hubris, your chasing of your own agenda – to the exclusion of everything and everyone else – has ruined us all. I despise you for it. You have imposed your will on us, against the wishes of the majority of a whole continent, you have insulted us, belittled us, accused us of the most unspeakable crimes and perverse predilections and you have charged us for the privilege. You have stolen from us, you have lied to us, you have appropriated the fruits of our toil and you have squandered it.
I defy you. I spit on you. I hope beyond hope that your hateful organisation comes crashing down around your ears, and I hope you find yourself as bereft and destitute as the continent you have defiled and raped for the last four decades.
I hope that you take the domestic politicians across Europe who pander to your every whim and massage your egos whilst committing the most appalling treasons against their own countries with you. I hope you take a financially and politically bankrupt American president, who is cut from exactly the same cloth as you, down as well.
Make no mistake, I would have preferred a moderate, political dissolution to the EU. This is going to hurt. A lot. It will likely hurt me personally as a public sector employee. I care not. My disdain for you is such that I will grit my teeth and gladly pay the price of freedom for my country and the other countries who have been so comprehensively betrayed. We all of us, from the western most tip of Ireland to the eastern most island of Greece, the far north of Finland to the southern beaches of Malta, deserve better than you.
You have failed, utterly. You have left us in a level of debt unimaginable at the end of the second world war, and you’ve done it without firing a shot.
Your Fabian window lies smashed on the ground. And, as it suits your baseless prejudices against me, I shall cheer like a thug on Kristallnacht. Yet it is you who best reflect the perpetrators of that evening, you are the destroyers of nations, races, religions, creeds and cultures. You spread fear, hatred and suspicion. If Stalin and Hitler were alive today they would embrace you as brothers.
Begone. You can still walk away, just. Leave it too long and the entire continent will be chasing you, and it will get damn ugly. It is no more than you deserve, but unlike you, I have the qualities of humanity and compassion. Perhaps even forgiveness.
Take the opportunity and leave. Now.
Also available on

Thursday, 4 August 2011

The Hempen Rope.

As alluded to in an earlier post, The Sun has a campaign running to re-introduce capital punishment. Anna has had a couple of articles about the same subject over at her place. I had starting composing a comment before I realised it was going to go on a bit, so decided to express myself here instead.
There are several points as to why I oppose the death penalty completely;
Firstly – If someone were to kill someone close to me, and I went and killed them, I would be, quite rightly, charged with murder. I see no difference between me going and killing someone and the State going and killing someone on my behalf.
Secondly – Taking the above into account, I see no distinction between the two acts, yet if I were to do it, it would be described as revenge. If the State did it, it would be described as ‘justice’. How is it just? It is not justice, it is revenge. Revenge carried out in the heat of the moment is bad enough, but revenge as a dish served cold? That really is chilling.
Thirdly – The signal it sends out is clear; you belong to the State. If the State has the power to decide to let you live or to condemn you to death then it takes the ultimate in power over our lives. Oh, sure there’ll be conditions and qualifiers and what-not, but things change. Remember the free trade block we joined? That’s all it was. How’s it looking now? No. I belong to me and no-one, no-one at all has the authority to say if I deserve to live or die.
Fourthly – It simply doesn’t act as a deterrent. It just doesn’t. Figures from the US show that the number of people on death row in 1968 was 517. In 2010 it was 3242. Granted, you are most unlikely to be executed in the year of your conviction, but even so, if the death penalty was effective we should still expect to see that 1968 figure decreasing, or at least holding steady.
Fifthly – How does locking someone up for 15 years in prison and then killing them constitute justice? If someone’s been sentenced to death, then take them down and kill them. Keeping them hanging around for a decade is expensive, and I would submit, perverse. What are we doing? Teaching them a lesson? Surely the point of doing that is so the offender can see the error of their ways and not do it again of their own free will. Teaching them the lesson and then killing them is a lesson wasted.
Sixthly – For what offences will the death sentence be handed down? The Sun goes for killing children and policemen. Well, what about little old ladies, what about terrorist attacks? How about planning terrorist attacks? Drug smuggling? Human trafficking? Rape? Arson? How about a crime of passion? Showing dissent and disrespect to the State? Eco-crimes? Being a pain in the arse? As I said earlier, that which is implemented today can look very different tomorrow. Once you give them that tool, they will use it and they will expand its use.
Seventhly – What when (and it will be when, not if) you get it wrong? Is it really acceptable to kill an innocent person? This all comes about because an innocent person has been killed, does killing an innocent person in return make it OK? Will ‘sorry’, a posthumous pardon and a compo payout to the relatives make that better? The phrase ‘for the greater good’ looms large in my mind here – that is a phrase which means individuals are worthless, and that if a mistake is made it is regretful but irrelevant, it is for some greater good.
Finally – What method do we use? Stoning? Oh, no, that’s too barbaric. No, no, you want a method that does the job, but doesn’t actually make someone feel like they’re killing another person, even though that’s what they’re doing. It means the executioner will not get upset and add a veneer of respectability to proceedings. Firing squad? Too military? Oh, OK. Guillotine? Too French. Hanging? A bit old school. Electric chair? Yeah, well, I’ve seen The Green Mile. Lethal injection, then. Yes, that’s nice and clinical, isn’t it? Again, I don’t know which is more horrific, the blind fury of a public stoning, or the cold calculated practice of tying someone to a table and injecting them with a cocktail of fatal chemicals.
If we absolutely have to have the death penalty, then I suggest it must be at the unanimous request of the immediate family of the victim and with the agreement of both judge and jury in unanimity. The entire immediate family of the victim (including children) and the entire jury and judge must be present at the execution, and the condemned must be killed by way of beheading, and the beheading must be carried out by a member of the family of the victim no more than three years from the date of conviction or dismissal of appeal. The family member will be obliged to take breakfast at the same table with the condemned on the appointed day. The remaining family, judge and jury must stand face on to the condemned as the sentence is carried out, in the same room, and at a distance of no more than four metres.
There will be no repeat performances, and any failure to meet the conditions above will lead to an automatic commuting to a life sentence.
Also available on