Heard it all now !!!! - Page 2

Ramrod · 07-04-2005, 00:08

On a different tack............(thought I'd throw this one in)...........by keeping suicidal depressives alive (protecting them from themselves) aren't we screwing up the gene pool by allowing such people to live and probably procreate? Shouldn't we be be allowing natural selection to run it's course?

Russ · 07-04-2005, 00:17

Suicide is hereditary???

danielf · 07-04-2005, 00:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramrod

On a different tack............(thought I'd throw this one in)...........by keeping suicidal depressives alive (protecting them from themselves) aren't we screwing up the gene pool by allowing such people to live and probably procreate? Shouldn't we be be allowing natural selection to run it's course?

Genetically speaking, Is a hormonal imbalance much worse a condition than say a bad back?

MovedGoalPosts · 07-04-2005, 00:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ D

Whilst I'll stay neutral on the subject of self-harm, what a complete waste of time and money in bringing this silly case to court. I wonder how long it will take for 'human rights' to be brought in to it

But I bet this case was brought under Human Rights legislation.

12-04-2005, 01:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramrod

On a different tack............(thought I'd throw this one in)...........by keeping suicidal depressives alive (protecting them from themselves) aren't we screwing up the gene pool by allowing such people to live and probably procreate? Shouldn't we be be allowing natural selection to run it's course?

I say, give the moron a bloody great big knife and a day or two of quiet, quality time on his own. I bet after 48 hours he'll have removed himself from the gene-pool.

And I cant say I'd miss him. Waste of taxpayers money, and free oxygen.

Nikko · 12-04-2005, 01:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ D

Suicide is hereditary???

I have not heard of it being passed on by a pre-natal successfully suicidal mother, although I imagine a terminally absent father could be construed as being genetically disposed to influencing any later demise.

me283 · 12-04-2005, 08:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by MovedGoalPosts

But I bet this case was brought under Human Rights legislation.

You mean "human rights"? I wouldn't bet against it. What a pathetic waste of time this case was, and I will lay odds that it was brought about with Legal Aid. The guy wants to cut himself... if he was given blades and DID harm himself, or even manage suicide, you can bet a case would be brought against the authorities for allowing him to do it. But he is still allowed to go to court to bring this case anyway?

This is another exmaple of how the country is going to s**t.

Oh, and for the bleeding hearts out there who say we should sympathise with his "illness"... fine, give him medication, that's what we have a Health Service for. Don't waste taxpayers' money on a ludicrous court case.

12-04-2005, 09:14

Look this is someone's life we're talking about here. Someone with mental health issues. Yes, an illness (that's illness without the annoying, sytupid quote marks). The fact that some people think this guy's life is worth nothing because he has psychological problems disgusts me. Once more you should be ashamed.

You may disagree with this case being brough to court - fine - but can we keep posts on the right side of decency when talking about a life.

me283 · 12-04-2005, 09:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyl

Look this is someone's life we're talking about here. Someone with mental health issues. Yes, an illness (that's illness without the annoying, sytupid quote marks). The fact that some people think this guy's life is worth nothing because he has psychological problems disgusts me. Once more you should be ashamed.

You may disagree with this case being brough to court - fine - but can we keep posts on the right side of decency when talking about a life.

And what exactly is on the "wrong" side of "decency"? Apart from the fact that taxpayers' money has been wasted on such a case... that's the most obscene thing of all.

12-04-2005, 09:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by me283

And what exactly is on the "wrong" side of "decency"? Apart from the fact that taxpayers' money has been wasted on such a case... that's the most obscene thing of all.

Wishing someone who is ill to be dead is, in my book at least, the wrong side of decency. Self harm is widespread and increasing - I suggest posters think before putting up such indecent and insensitive views.

me283 · 12-04-2005, 10:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyl

Wishing someone who is ill to be dead is, in my book at least, the wrong side of decency. Self harm is widespread and increasing - I suggest posters think before putting up such indecent and insensitive views.

Sure, I agree with that. I thought you were pointing at me... but as you can see I've said no such thing.

12-04-2005, 10:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by me283

Sure, I agree with that. I thought you were pointing at me... but as you can see I've said no such thing.

I was pointing at a few. But I did take issue with your placing illness in inverted commas, implying that this is not a serious health issue.

One point that hasn't been picked up is that this bloke says he wanted razors for self harming to prevent him killing himself. That might sound odd to some, but that's the nature of self harming. The other question I would raise viz this coming to court is why this bloke does not appear to be getting the treatment and help he needs. I could mischievously argue that those hang-em-and-flog-em folk out there might want to think on - had this guy received proper help in prison think of the taxpayers money saved on this case!

Plonking · 12-04-2005, 10:36

I agree with andyl here, I think the comments have got out of hand. I wonder what is worse - someone who is ill succumbing to that illness and wasting some money because of it - or people who are not ill saying that person should die. there are more important things in this world than money, although it doesn't seem like many have noticed that.

P

me283 · 12-04-2005, 10:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyl

I was pointing at a few. But I did take issue with your placing illness in inverted commas, implying that this is not a serious health issue.

One point that hasn't been picked up is that this bloke says he wanted razors for self harming to prevent him killing himself. That might sound odd to some, but that's the nature of self harming. The other question I would raise viz this coming to court is why this bloke does not appear to be getting the treatment and help he needs. I could mischievously argue that those hang-em-and-flog-em folk out there might want to think on - had this guy received proper help in prison think of the taxpayers money saved on this case!

Andy, the implication is in your perception.

But one thing confuses me in your post: the guy is obviously mentally/psychologically ill; in that case, how can it be safe to let him decide the level of his self-harming? Anyone who has handled a razor blade knows they can slice through flesh. If a sane person can accidentally cut themself, then a person attempting to do so can just as easily cut themself worse than anticipated. And who foots the bill for the resulting treatment?

Maybe he is getting treatment, I don't think that was mentioned in the article. It would seem odd that he has access to a solicitor, but possibly no access to a doctor?

Maybe he shouldn't be hung... but the people who allowed the case to come to court should be!

12-04-2005, 10:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by me283

Andy, the implication is in your perception.

Why the quote marks?

Quote:

But one thing confuses me in your post: the guy is obviously mentally/psychologically ill; in that case, how can it be safe to let him decide the level of his self-harming? Anyone who has handled a razor blade knows they can slice through flesh. If a sane person can accidentally cut themself, then a person attempting to do so can just as easily cut themself worse than anticipated. And who foots the bill for the resulting treatment?

Maybe he is getting treatment, I don't think that was mentioned in the article. It would seem odd that he has access to a solicitor, but possibly no access to a doctor?

Hard to say but the Prison Service's provision of welfare has in the past been found lacking. I find it hard to believe that this case would have come to court had appropriate treatment been available. One has to wonder if prison is indeed the right place for him.

Quote:

Maybe he shouldn't be hung...

Just maybe?