Jump to content

IOM COURTS SENTENCING


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

But you agree surely that if jail is such the “massive “deterrent” you claim it is then surely people would have stopped after around 5 were jailed as this “shock and awe” treatment would have worked over and above a fine or similar? 

What you're missing is that there are loads of people who have massive gaps in their perception. Rules don't apply to them, or that they are somehow immune to the virus therefore unable to transmit the virus. As far as they're concerned this sort of thing only applies or happens to other people, certainly not them. This narcissistic arrogance also carries into their perception of threat in as much as the example of others being jailed for not following the rules won't put them off throwing caution to the wind. Until they're caught out that is. How is so difficult for you to understand? The same reasoning applies to weirdos who feel it a necessity to incessantly bleat on a subject all the while saying the same thing over and over again, ad nauseum. Albeit using different words and characters. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 891
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Twenty years ago when the schools became devolved and management of the school budgets lay with the head teachers is when things began to change. The money was and is in exam enrolment.  When the

That was a big McSteak.

Sigh. Why is it that we have to wait for a major incident (jail, controversy on the world wide stage) before someone realises that perhaps expecting workers to come from the U.K. to a different j

Posted Images

1 minute ago, thesultanofsheight said:

I wouldn’t be too hard on yourself in that respect. 

What a shallow lonely existence you must lead, the only outlet for your frustrations being a platform like this, or your similar witterings, so apparent over on twitter or iomtoady morning noon and night.

I do somehow feel sorry for you though. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, quilp said:

What a shallow lonely existence you must lead, the only outlet for your frustrations being a platform like this, or your similar witterings. 

Somewhat ironically that comes from a poster who has made 14,000 posts on this forum over 8 years unfortunately often interlaced with aggressive islamophobia 🙃 If you don’t like what I post I’d prefer if you just put me on block. It’s easier for all concerned. Thanks. If people actually think that imprisoning people in these sort of circumstances makes a jot of difference in stopping COVID-19 transmission in the IOM at least be prepared to defend your stance with some facts to support your argument as there’s been 17 imprisonments now and still no apparent change in behaviours.

Edited by thesultanofsheight
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

You sound quite cross. Are you ok? It isn’t having the desired effect though is it? How many before you think it does? We’ve jailed 17 already so when will it have the desired effect in your opinion 27? 47? 67? We might as well go straight to public hanging to be honest if you believe the most brutal solution possible is the only way to effectively enforce compliance by fear as prison clearly isn’t working!

Good night Mr Sheight. I've got better things to do with my time than argue with a perpetually confused individual who insists on word-twisting hyperbole. 

Sleep well, I know I will. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

🙃If you don’t like what I post I’d prefer if you just put me on block. It’s easier for all concerned. Thanks. If people actually think that imprisoning people in these sort of circumstances makes a jot of difference in stopping COVID-19 transmission in the IOM at least be prepared to defend your stance with some facts to support your argument as there’s been 17 imprisonments now and still no apparent change in behaviours.

Ah, the usual swift edit...

Well, any change in behaviour brought about by the threat of a custodial would be hard to gauge. We can't possibly know who or how many might find the threat enough of a deterrent to change their perception. No one is gonna write in and come clean about it are they? But I would speculate that in a roundabout way, the threat of loss of liberty has, and continues to have a small indefinite effect on the uber-mensch blaggards who might assume they're beyond reproach and consider themselves above the law. Fortunately, those of such an ilk would appear to be few, well, 17 in fact. And as we have since learned, a few of that number produced a positive result for covid as it turned out, so yes, a small but important effect, in theory, on the rate of transmission. Unless you've forgotten that it only takes one subject with enough viral load out in the community, like a pub, or a supermarket, to kick the whole thing off again.

Put you on block? Because it's "easier for all concerned"? Nah, easier for you maybe. I've never blocked anyone and frankly your behaviour toward other posters using your collective gang of one to fortify your repetitive ranting requires sturdy rebuttal.

Thanks.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Dick around and you go to prison" is very much having the desired effect on contractors/key workers. And, even more importantly, it is having that effect on their employers. So yes, the deterrent effect caused by following through on a threat is working.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, tetchtyke said:

So yes, the deterrent effect caused by following through on a threat is working.

So how have 17 people ended up in prison then if seeing other people being harshly jailed is allegedly such a massive deterrent to everyone? Clearly it isn’t. The prison only has about 80 prisoners normally I think so that’s over 20% of the prison population that have been covid breaches and it’s still happening. So how is it more effective than fines and other punishments exactly? As for the key workers I’d say it’s more about the signs they were forced to put on the boat informing people better of the rules not explicitly the threat of jail (which has always been there).

Edited by thesultanofsheight
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

So how have 17 people ended up in prison then if seeing other people being harshly jailed is allegedly such a massive deterrent to everyone? Clearly it isn’t. The prison only has about 80 prisoners normally I think so that’s nearly 20% of the prison population that have been covid breaches and it’s still happening. So how is it more effective than fines and other punishments exactly? 

Er, no.  Because most of them have only been given 4-5 weeks and will only serve 2 weeks (so effectively the self-isolation they should have been doing anyway).  But those 17 will have been spread over the 20 or so weeks since  travel started again.  So there will usually only have been a couple if that at any time, except for groups like the Doncaster lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Er, no.  Because most of them have only been given 4-5 weeks and will only serve 2 weeks (so effectively the self-isolation they should have been doing anyway).  But those 17 will have been spread over the 20 or so weeks since  travel started again.  So there will usually only have been a couple if that at any time, except for groups like the Doncaster lot.

Er, but most normal sentences will be 6 months or longer so if over a 6 months period 17 have been in and out on covid charges but the long term population has remained static at around 80 then that’s about 20% of the prison population over the last 6 months that have been covid breach cases. Concerning really if its believed that it’s such a huge deterrent. 

Edited by thesultanofsheight
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

So how have 17 people ended up in prison then if seeing other people being harshly jailed is allegedly such a massive deterrent to everyone?

Plainly it isn't a "massive deterrent to everyone" because as we've seen, there's always gonna be the chancers and the ill-informed, and legally ignorance is really no defence...

5 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

Clearly it isn’t.

How would we, in reality, actually know who is, or has been, deterred by the threat of incarceration? Nobody is gonna hold their hands up to it.

5 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

So how is it more effective than fines and other punishments exactly?

Well, which would you, or anyone for that matter, prefer- being out of pocket or denied your freedom? Which sentence carries the greater personal cost?

5 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

As for the key workers I’d say it’s more about the signs they were forced to put in the boat informing people better not the threat of jail. 

You've answered your own question here. The policy of putting signs up on the boat came a little late for the first of the key-workers but as it transpired those likely lads were aware of the rules, as was the gaffer and their employer and still they chanced their arm. The fact they were jailed, as you continually claim, just for going for a sarnie is completely wrong, they were banged-up for flouting our rules, whatever your or my personal opinion is of said rules. Again, wilful ignorance is legally no defence.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, quilp said:

Ah, the usual swift edit...

Well, any change in behaviour brought about by the threat of a custodial would be hard to gauge. We can't possibly know who or how many might find the threat enough of a deterrent to change their perception. No one is gonna write in and come clean about it are they? But I would speculate that in a roundabout way, the threat of loss of liberty has, and continues to have a small indefinite effect on the uber-mensch blaggards who might assume they're beyond reproach and consider themselves above the law. Fortunately, those of such an ilk would appear to be few, well, 17 in fact. And as we have since learned, a few of that number produced a positive result for covid as it turned out, so yes, a small but important effect, in theory, on the rate of transmission. Unless you've forgotten that it only takes one subject with enough viral load out in the community, like a pub, or a supermarket, to kick the whole thing off again.

Put you on block? Because it's "easier for all concerned"? Nah, easier for you maybe. I've never blocked anyone and frankly your behaviour toward other posters using your collective gang of one to fortify your repetitive ranting requires sturdy rebuttal.

Thanks.

Be careful, you’ll get a moderator warning...

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would definitely say that the absolute expectation of a jail sentence is a huge deterrent. Having spent the last two weeks in self isolation might I have pulled my trainers on and gone for a quick jog around the block if I knew being caught would have resulted in a warning? Possibly. Did I even give such a thing a second thought knowing it would mean jail time? Absolutely not.

I firmly believe that the draconian approach has resulted in far less piss takery by the populus and it should be a reminder of how dangerous this virus can be.

I wonder if the people being treated in hospital over here at the moment for Covid would agree that a far more lenient approach should be taken with rule breakers? I'd wager they wouldn't

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, The Duck of Atholl said:

I wonder if the people being treated in hospital over here at the moment for Covid would agree that a far more lenient approach should be taken with rule breakers? I'd wager they wouldn't

Or all the people who have strived to keep to the rules all these months. And those in high risk groups too.

There are some on this thread who are all the evidence needed that severe measures are needed.

  • Like 3
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Duck of Atholl said:

I wonder if the people being treated in hospital over here at the moment for Covid would agree that a far more lenient approach should be taken with rule breakers? I'd wager they wouldn't

There’s nobody being treated for covid in the hospital according to the last update issued by government so I guess nobody could ask them.

1D1B9C08-2431-48CC-948C-51DCD19305AD.jpeg

Edited by thesultanofsheight
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...