No smilies, no avatars, no flashing gifs. Just discuss the issues of the day, from last night's telly via football to science or philosophy.
Started by RankBajin on Oct 29, 2011 2:57:01 PM
Sir Jimmy Savile dies aged 84


  • Kiddly fiddler?
  • Corpse toucher?
  • Other? (please specify)
  • All of the above?

Post by deleted user
Isolde - 27 Nov 2012 00:56:36 (#8682 of 17327)

Well, the Oxford, Merriam and and Cambridge dictionaries agree with you, kurwamac, regarding the use of disinterest anyway. But a style guide disagrees, perhaps because few people make the distinction where the use of disinterest refers to a lack of bias.

Anyway, we digress. Interesting though. Hah, maybe not to all. Or should it be ha...

Cavewoman - 27 Nov 2012 01:01:51 (#8683 of 17327)

That's interesting, kur. How on earth is one to make sense of anything if "infer" and "imply" are the same?

Post by deleted user
Isolde - 27 Nov 2012 01:13:40 (#8685 of 17327)

Sorry, it seems I'm tripping up all over the place so will depart.

Post by deleted user
Isolde - 27 Nov 2012 01:25:10 (#8687 of 17327)

I didn't say that you did. Cheers, no problem.

Wireman - 27 Nov 2012 01:32:40 (#8688 of 17327)

A former chief sub writes: Use whatever words you want. This is NtT. We'll work out what you mean. Eventually.

Post by deleted user
Bobthebuilder - 27 Nov 2012 09:37:03 (#8690 of 17327)

Like the sun rising in the morning and setting at night, the mighty garrick, stomping the boards and keeping people on topic, as always.

It's the consistency of the inevitable that keeps us sane. Thank you garrick.

springplease - 27 Nov 2012 14:08:13 (#8691 of 17327)


I misunderstood your point, I think. I do agree that labeling young gay men in their early 20s having sex with older gay teens with a very small age difference between them could be, by law, subject to being charged with sexual abuse, but that would be a misuse of the law.

I do think, or hope, that the legal system takes into account the age differences because that is definitely a factor of power, development, intent, etc.

ubername - 27 Nov 2012 15:38:26 (#8692 of 17327)

The claim that something is a 'misuse of law' only makes sense if you don't think the law is properly formed.

Brunothecat - 27 Nov 2012 16:02:40 (#8693 of 17327)

Not entirely. In the case of gay sex, the law has changed such that a situation in which it was impossible to be over the age of consent for gay sex has become less restrictive.

To apply now the law as it was in the sixties would be considered a misuse by most people.

Bobthebuilder - 27 Nov 2012 16:04:40 (#8694 of 17327)

For an adult to have gay or straight sex with a fourteen year old in the 60s was not on and it still isn't.

ubername - 27 Nov 2012 16:44:29 (#8695 of 17327)

What I was trying to say (and still believe) is that if it's the law, and people don't like the application of it, it's because it is a poor law, rather than being a 'misuse of law'.

In your example Bruno, the law which is poor is the law that says we retrospectively apply the law as it then was, rather than it being a misuse of that law.

But it's semantics. (Except semantics are what constitute the law, so it's not really 'but')

ChiliFiredNappyRash - 27 Nov 2012 17:51:13 (#8696 of 17327)

Cyril Smith should've been done say the CPS.

pmcblonde - 27 Nov 2012 18:12:35 (#8697 of 17327)

The statement from GMP on Smith makes for interesting reading. Very direct

bevernbridge - 27 Nov 2012 18:27:53 (#8698 of 17327)

The CPS would still roll over in a similar case if told to by Westminster.

GethsemeneDump - 27 Nov 2012 18:39:20 (#8699 of 17327)

I think you mean the DPP. And I'm not sure how corruptible he or she is.

JohnIlly - 27 Nov 2012 18:39:25 (#8700 of 17327)

the law which is poor is the law that says we retrospectively apply the law as it then was

That's a law?

Check Subscriptions
Home » Media