Blog powered by Typepad

« I must avoid premature ejaculation! | Main | It would have been kinder if Lear had died in Act I scene i »

Thursday, 01 August 2013

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

A little unfair. "Lessons will be learned," after all.

Given that these lovely people are called Krezolek and Luczac, it's worth asking why this shit was dumped in the UK anyway. Do we have a shortage of British psychopaths?

Uh-oh - "mother and stepfather".

In other words, mother's latest boyfriend.

Latest, no doubt, of a long and unpleasant series.

What Whyaxye said.

Well, just suppose Social Services were effective and quickly transferred children at risk to a safe, secure, loving home where an excellent education was provided followed by help into further education/or a decent job. No nasty oiks hanging round to abuse and no nasty staff either. All done properly, a bit like a decent public school. Perfectly feasible - so why not?

For a start the bill would be pretty stiff, but the real problem is that it would be just too attractive an option - 'come on Tarqin, take another bashing and you will save Daddy all those fees at Greyfriars - and get a big earner when he comes out of chokey and Mummy has lived on the social'. So just not going to happen - Sir Humphrey and the Minister will not countenance the cost. So keep blaming the Social Workers for I suspect everyone else has a Teflon overcoat.

As for the parents - do what you like - but the kids are the big expense - or not.

I'd have them dancing the Tyburn Jig if I had my way but then I'm a mental case so...

I have been saying for 40 years that people should be licensed before being allowed to breed and everybody thinks I'm joking.
I'm not.
The wrong people are having the babies and for the wrong reasons.
People just have to stop breeding like bloody rabbits and be responsible for their actions.

A licence isn't needed Andra, just remove all benefits for doing so and ... only those who really want, and will care and cherish them will have them (and I bet all of a sudden men would get a slightly better deal in the 'family' courts too when the rewards for keeping the exclusive 'right' to a child doesn't have a £ sign as an incentive).

Then remove housing, benefits, etc. rights from immigrants and ... we'd suddenly have only those who wanted to work and contribute (instead of being seen as a dumping ground for every lowlife, lazy, alcohol/drug addled, criminal in the world - maybe all those culturally enriching types already here could be encouraged to go too).

As to theses two ... things (and yes the 'mother' is as involved, most actual real research shows child abuse [not sexual] is a massively female dominated area - not that they ever face punishment) deport them, preferably in a box.

Let's say it grates on me a tad that having worked hard my whole life I have only one child - as I couldn't afford more. My neighbour, who has never worked has a better house, more gadgets, a better car and eight children - and yep, he's a bloody furiner!

David, I think I said the wrong thing.
Have I offended you. I do hope not. Because you're my favourite.

Louise, my darling, you were so spot on with what you said that I thought any comment from me was superfluous - er, well, and also my usually sedate life which allows me to 'converse' with my commenter/friends has been somewhat haywire recently ("Events, dear boy, events") and by the time I get round to them it feels a bit late. And I wish I was half as 'mental' as you! Take care . . .

Methinks that the re-introduction of The Rack (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rack_%28torture%29) might serve to deter such evil in the future. The State might even gain extra revenue by charging to witness the extended demise of the condemned.

Hello, Mouse, and welcome to D&N. Perhaps the rack is a stretch too far (boom-boom!) but a quick, clean execution would, I think, suitable.

The comments to this entry are closed.