Was I right to say something?
That's great, don't give a ****. My point is where do you draw the line? At what point do you actually 'give a ****' and get off your backside to do something?
Is it a sliding scale? Is there some sort of measure we should use to determine whether we should give a **** or not? I mean, I once had a go at someone mugging a woman in London, she managed to hold onto her bag, I didn't do much, I just shouted and he scarpered. I didn't know here, it wasn't my bag, should I have not given a **** and avoided poking my nose in? It's not like it's a serious crime is it?
Let me know if you are grasping the concept yet.
5t.
Is it a sliding scale? Is there some sort of measure we should use to determine whether we should give a **** or not? I mean, I once had a go at someone mugging a woman in London, she managed to hold onto her bag, I didn't do much, I just shouted and he scarpered. I didn't know here, it wasn't my bag, should I have not given a **** and avoided poking my nose in? It's not like it's a serious crime is it?
Let me know if you are grasping the concept yet.
5t.
Obviously if some old lady is getting mugged - an act of violence against a person who cant deffend themselves would be an ideal time to step in and make your opinion known.
I think what a lot of people fail to see is the difference between taking the moral high ground, and defending rights or liberties. See if you can grab that concept.
It also seems like there are a lot of peole who get involved with other peoples business, when it doesn't strictly concern them. What they should be doing is informing or reporting to those whos job it is to take action in that situation.
Good reading in this thread.... welcome to Thatcher's Utopia everybody... she said there is no such thing as society and then dismantled it with her 'I'm alright Jack' policies.... what you are now reaping are the rewards of those wonderful times
Richyp
FWIW I think you are the one who doesn't know where to draw the line correctly.
Disabled people should have a right to support from any society that purports to be civilised, so if that means us able bodied have to walk a little bit further then so what. The parker was at best a lazy ****, but basically was wrong in what he did and I would have done the same as Chopper (and have done).
My views are more than probably biased by the fact that my other half has MS and regularly experiences ar5ehole jack the lads parking in the disabled slots.
FWIW I think you are the one who doesn't know where to draw the line correctly.
Disabled people should have a right to support from any society that purports to be civilised, so if that means us able bodied have to walk a little bit further then so what. The parker was at best a lazy ****, but basically was wrong in what he did and I would have done the same as Chopper (and have done).
My views are more than probably biased by the fact that my other half has MS and regularly experiences ar5ehole jack the lads parking in the disabled slots.
Maggie -
I think we have gone through a period when too many children and people have been given to understand"I have a problem, it is the Government's job to cope with it!" or"I have a problem, I will go and get a grant to cope with it!" "I am homeless, the Government must house me!" and so they are casting their problems on society and who is society? There is no such thing! There are individual men and women and[fo 1] there are families and no government can do anything except through people and people look to themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour and life is a reciprocal business and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations, because there is no such thing as an entitlement unless someone has first met an obligation and it is, I think, one of the tragedies in which many of the benefits we give, which were meant to reassure people that if they were sick or ill there was a safety net and there was help, that many of the benefits which were meant to help people who were unfortunate—" It is all right. We joined together and we have these insurance schemes to look after it" . That was the objective, but somehow there are some people who have been manipulating the system and so some of those help and benefits that were meant to say to people:"All right, if you cannot get a job, you shall have a basic standard of living!" but when people come and say:"But what is the point of working? I can get as much on the dole!" You say:"Look" It is not from the dole. It is your neighbour who is supplying it and if you can earn your own living then really you have a duty to do it and you will feel very much better!"
And people wonder why politicians are so careful with their words. Socialism took responsibility away from the individual and placed it with the state and rampant capitalism promoted borderline psychopathic greed amongst an elite which filtered down to the proles in the form of instant gratification and unbridled materialism. She was no Gandhi, but you can't pin this one squarely on her shoulders and certainly not with the quote you've selected. I agree with the principle of your post.
Richyp
FWIW I think you are the one who doesn't know where to draw the line correctly.
Disabled people should have a right to support from any society that purports to be civilised, so if that means us able bodied have to walk a little bit further then so what. The parker was at best a lazy ****, but basically was wrong in what he did and I would have done the same as Chopper (and have done).
My views are more than probably biased by the fact that my other half has MS and regularly experiences ar5ehole jack the lads parking in the disabled slots.
FWIW I think you are the one who doesn't know where to draw the line correctly.
Disabled people should have a right to support from any society that purports to be civilised, so if that means us able bodied have to walk a little bit further then so what. The parker was at best a lazy ****, but basically was wrong in what he did and I would have done the same as Chopper (and have done).
My views are more than probably biased by the fact that my other half has MS and regularly experiences ar5ehole jack the lads parking in the disabled slots.
The issue here I think is actions of somone telling another person what they should or should not be doing without any official capacity to do so, then expecting the other person to be perfectly ok with it.
You wouldn't want some random stranger asking you to roll down your window and then giving you a speech about speeding would you?


