anti BBC tirade
 

"Heracles Pollux" wrote in message
...

"Falcon" wrote in message
...

"Heracles Pollux" wrote in message
...

I do not however consider the benefit of these programmes is worth
£133.50 of my cash, and would rather deal with the "criminal justice
system" instead.

What a load of Pollux. Don't you think other self-opinionated loonies
have tried that on before? I had a conversation recently with an
acquaintance who thought he didn't use his car enough to warrant renewing
his road tax, and was as safe as houses on the road so didn't need car
insurance either.

He was dealt with by the local magistrates and was fined and
disqualified. Funnily enough they wouldn't accept his argument and they
won't accept yours either. One prosecution every eight years just about
should cover it; although I suspect once they've started with you they
will be back for more every year until you take you head out of your ass.

As opposed to "self-opinionated loonies" who get given slots on the BBC's
many TV shows.

Bad analogy. For where as most people do not drive their cars only inside
their private homes, I neither drive my TV set down public highways nor
within eyesight of officials. [...]

I don't think it's a bad analogy at all. I have no sympathy with criminals.
He was breaking the law; so are you. The story only serves to illustrate
that the courts will deal with your arrogance in exactly the same way as
they dealt with his, that's all.

--

Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)

anti BBC tirade
 

I don't think it's a bad analogy at all. I have no sympathy with
criminals.
He was breaking the law; so are you. The story only serves to illustrate
that the courts will deal with your arrogance in exactly the same way as
they dealt with his, that's all.

--

Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)







Ahh yes. It is truly evil and criminal not paying the BBC's army of luvies.

Ohh my conscience... woe unto me. ;-)

anti BBC tirade
 

"Heracles Pollux" wrote in message
...


I don't think it's a bad analogy at all. I have no sympathy with
criminals.
He was breaking the law; so are you. The story only serves to illustrate
that the courts will deal with your arrogance in exactly the same way as
they dealt with his, that's all.

--

Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)







Ahh yes. It is truly evil and criminal not paying the BBC's army of
luvies.

Ohh my conscience... woe unto me. ;-)





Except last night on "Newsnight" which I was watching via my unlicensed TV
set, they were saying how Blair plans to "decriminalise" TV Licensing
offences turning it into one of those "summary justice" civil matters.

It appears that H.M. Government don't think this henious crime should be
classed as a crime any more.

anti BBC tirade
 

"Heracles Pollux" wrote in message
...
[...]
Except last night on "Newsnight" which I was watching via my unlicensed TV
set, they were saying how Blair plans to "decriminalise" TV Licensing
offences turning it into one of those "summary justice" civil matters.

It appears that H.M. Government don't think this henious crime should be
classed as a crime any more.

It will cost less to take the £1000 fine off you.
That has to be a good thing.

--

Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)

anti BBC tirade
 

"charles" wrote...
Heracles Pollux wrote:

Except last night on "Newsnight" which I was watching via my
unlicensed TV set, they were saying how Blair plans to
"decriminalise" TV Licensing offences turning it into one of
those "summary justice" civil matters.

It appears that H.M. Government don't think this henious crime should
be classed as a crime any more.

but, if you were caught and fined and refused, on principle, to pay
the fine, that would then be a criminal offence.

It's true that those who are jailed for "refusing to pay a fine" are in
fact being jailed for contempt of court.

But in that case why are they released when someone else pays the fine
for them? It's most unfair.

Matti

anti BBC tirade
 

"Matti Lamprhey" wrote in message
...
"charles" wrote...
Heracles Pollux wrote:

Except last night on "Newsnight" which I was watching via my
unlicensed TV set, they were saying how Blair plans to
"decriminalise" TV Licensing offences turning it into one of
those "summary justice" civil matters.

It appears that H.M. Government don't think this henious crime should
be classed as a crime any more.

but, if you were caught and fined and refused, on principle, to pay
the fine, that would then be a criminal offence.

It's true that those who are jailed for "refusing to pay a fine" are in
fact being jailed for contempt of court.

But in that case why are they released when someone else pays the fine
for them? It's most unfair.

Matti



Well in the case of the BBC, the Courts are simply one more instrument of
coercion and intimidation. I fail to see any moral authority in what are
"private prosecutions" not Crown or Peoples' prosecutions, prosecuted by a
commission-based sales force using a rubber stamped justice process.

The sad thing is the BBC prosecutes the poor, the weak, the gullible, and
the vulnerable. These are the "nice" people who answer their doors to
strangers, yield at the slightest pretence of authority, and confess their
thoughts easily.

Capita Plc operates the TVaLiban regime as a "sales force" even calling
evaders "sales-leads" and staff "sales officers" who are paid a "commission"
of £18 per sale or per prosecution statement filled. Capita makes a point of
recording who the "suckers" are, and targeting the same suckers repeatedly.
Well a sales force would wouldn't they.

This is not justice, it is a commercial and cynical exploitation.

And at leaves the more careful, thoughtful, and militant "law breaker"
relatively "unenforced".

anti BBC tirade
 

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 15:54:39 +0100, "Heracles Pollux"
wrote:


snip
Except last night on "Newsnight" which I was watching via my unlicensed TV
set, they were saying how Blair plans to "decriminalise" TV Licensing
offences turning it into one of those "summary justice" civil matters.

It appears that H.M. Government don't think this henious crime should be
classed as a crime any more.

You're missing the point. Such summary penalties are designed to avoid
the inconvenience of someone presenting the case for their defence in
a normal trial. Even when it is a good case, the system builds in an
amount of inconvenience which, in combination with the lack of a
criminal penalty, encourages people to cough up the cash anyway. In
the end the civil penalties can build up to more than any court would
have applied by way of a fine.
--
_______
+---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //|
| Charles Ellson: | | \\ // |
+---------------------------------------------------+ | |
| // \\ |
Alba gu brath |//___\\|

anti BBC tirade
 

"Heracles Pollux" wrote in message
...

The law may "require" one to purchase a licence.

"Requiring" and doing are separate matters of course.

Generally people pay taxes and fees because they feel a benefit from doing
so outweighing the cost of not doing so. Knowing that were I to pay the
BBC, they would **** it away on Mark Byford, Jonathan Woss, pointless
advertising, their grafitti strewn digital plan, soap operas and tedious
dramas, biased news, politically correct idents, junkettes for their
super-annuated staff, and bidding against other UK broadcasters for
rights, let's just leave this to be a matter for the Courts and "criminal
justice system".

I don't believe for one second you don't pay your TV licence.

You are just a newsgroup troll, nothing more nothing less.
Filled with your own miss-guided self importance, and purely argueing for
arguement's sake.

****.

Loz

anti BBC tirade
 

"loz" wrote in message
...

"Heracles Pollux" wrote in message
...

The law may "require" one to purchase a licence.

"Requiring" and doing are separate matters of course.

Generally people pay taxes and fees because they feel a benefit from
doing so outweighing the cost of not doing so. Knowing that were I to pay
the BBC, they would **** it away on Mark Byford, Jonathan Woss, pointless
advertising, their grafitti strewn digital plan, soap operas and tedious
dramas, biased news, politically correct idents, junkettes for their
super-annuated staff, and bidding against other UK broadcasters for
rights, let's just leave this to be a matter for the Courts and "criminal
justice system".

I don't believe for one second you don't pay your TV licence.

You are just a newsgroup troll, nothing more nothing less.
Filled with your own miss-guided self importance, and purely argueing for
arguement's sake.

****.

Loz



Kill-filled for incivility, Larry.

anti BBC tirade
 

"Heracles Pollux" wrote in message
...
I don't believe for one second you don't pay your TV licence.

You are just a newsgroup troll, nothing more nothing less.
Filled with your own miss-guided self importance, and purely argueing for
arguement's sake.
****.
Kill-filled for incivility, Larry.

Bothered