Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
®i©ardo wrote:
Your attitude seems to be: "F*ck the thousands of innocent people who
potentially suffer because of attacks of wanton vandalism and theft such
as these, it is far better that they do so than the guilty be punished
in any way - even if it be by their own stupidity".

You seem to love making things up as I've never even implied that thieves
go unpunished.

How dare you have such contempt for society - a contempt at least as
great as those who commit such acts. The potential outcome is no
different to planting bombs amongst innocent civilians by the IRA.

There is no one potential outcome - it depends on circumstances.
Tell me, are you a headline writer for a tabloid? You seem to see things
in a black and white way.

You also should consider the difference between setting out to kill
someone and the possible result of a simple theft. But it's probably too
hard for you.

That of course depends on whether you judge things according to motive
and responsibility, or results....

"A rattlesnake ain't reponsible fer bein' a rattlesnake, but ah puts mah
heel on em jess the same if I catches un around ma chillun"

Faced with a definitely deprived individual waving a loaded gun, are you
going to have a social philosophical discussion, or just fire first...