Not extremists?

[BoldonLad]

That was the point I was making really, it’s one of the ways that people are softened up to accept attempts to dismantle the checks and balances that at least try to keep us from extremism.

You think THIS Government are that smart?

 

[BoldonLad]

From reading that article I didn't get from it that it was about tougher sentences, but about the much more important aspect of ensuring that the government of the day acts within the rules of law in arriving at its decisions and actions. Much more important than populist or dog-whistle arguments about sentencing.

I think you may have quoted the wrong post(s)? The OP mentioned lenient sentencing.

 

[Pale Rider]

From reading that article I didn't get from it that it was about tougher sentences, but about the much more important aspect of ensuring that the government of the day acts within the rules of law in arriving at its decisions and actions.

That's true, but @Bromptonaut and a couple of others on here seem to think 'the public' are unable to tell the difference.

Nonsense, of course, as you've just demonstrated.

 

[Rusty Nails]

I think you may have quoted the wrong post(s)? The OP mentioned lenient sentencing.

I didn't mention the OP, just replied to two early posts that I thought concentrated on the sentencing aspect. I based my thoughts on the article rather than the OP's views.

 

[Pale Rider]

I didn't mention the OP, just replied to two early posts that I thought concentrated on the sentencing aspect. I based my thoughts on the article rather than the OP's views.

I was attempting to ridicule the notion that lenient sentences were somehow arranged by the government to soften up the public for an attack on a different branch of the judiciary.

 

[BoldonLad]

I didn't mention the OP, just replied to two early posts that I thought concentrated on the sentencing aspect. I based my thoughts on the article rather than the OP's views.

Yeah… ok

 

[Rusty Nails]

You think THIS Government are that smart?

I think this government thinks they are.

Not the same thing.

 

[Bromptonaut]

I was attempting to ridicule the notion that lenient sentences were somehow arranged by the government to soften up the public for an attack on a different branch of the judiciary.

Straw man alert. Nobody suggested that.

 

[Pale Rider]

Straw man alert. Nobody suggested that.

Yes they did,

Although I'm liking the use of 'straw man' just to wind me up.

That was the point I was making really, it’s one of the ways that people are softened up to accept attempts to dismantle the checks and balances that at least try to keep us from extremism.

 

[newfhouse]

I think you may have quoted the wrong post(s)? The OP mentioned lenient sentencing.

I did because I think it plays a part but it wasn't the main point of the post.

I thought it was worth discussing the story that a government that often loses in court is reportedly planning to change the rules to ensure that is less likely. Should they achieve that by complying with the law or by making it harder to contest their behaviour?

 

[BoldonLad]

I did because I think it plays a part but it wasn't the main point of the post.

I thought it was worth discussing the story that a government that often loses in court is reportedly planning to change the rules to ensure that is less likely. Should they achieve that by complying with the law or by making it harder to contest their behaviour?

OK... no big deal... but... then you followed up with:

That was the point I was making really, it’s one of the ways that people are softened up to accept attempts to dismantle the checks and balances that at least try to keep us from extremism.

Which rather suggested that it (supposed lenient sentencing) was rather relevant?

But, as I say... no big deal, it is your thread

 

[newfhouse]

Which rather suggested that it (supposed lenient sentencing) was rather relevant?

Bu no big deal, it is your thread

It was the point of the part that you responded to (supposedly lenient sentences), but not the main thrust (an attempt to stifle court scrutiny).

 

[theclaud]

I'm liking the use of 'straw man' just to wind me up.

I'm absolutely lovin' it. 'Conflate' was even better tho.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

I did because I think it plays a part but it wasn't the main point of the post.

I thought it was worth discussing the story that a government that often loses in court is reportedly planning to change the rules to ensure that is less likely. Should they achieve that by complying with the law or by making it harder to contest their behaviour?

I'm of the same point of view. From what I saw of the Times link (without registering), it fitted with what I have been fearing most, that of trying to legislate to make the government above the law. I find it hard to believe any other explanation; a government faced with a series of challenges wanting the right to veto judges' verdicts.

The rule of law is one thing. The overrule of law is another. And the rule of law is our last defence against tyranny.

The obvious desire of our local Tory boy paleyontologist to pour scorn on the idea - and bucketloads of scorn are his chief asset - only serves to make that belief stronger.

 

[Pale Rider]

I'm of the same point of view. From what I saw of the Times link (without registering), it fitted with what I have been fearing most, that of trying to legislate to make the government above the law. I find it hard to believe any other explanation; a government faced with a series of challenges wanting the right to veto judges' verdicts.

The rule of law is one thing. The overrule of law is another. And the rule of law is our last defence against tyranny.

The obvious desire of our local Tory boy paleyontologist to pour scorn on the idea - and bucketloads of scorn are his chief asset - only serves to make that belief stronger.

Instead of yet another feeble personal attack, why not post on topic?

The notion that lenient criminal sentences are somehow forced through to soften the public up for an attack on the civil High Court is the worst form of tin hat twattery.