[user104658]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Apparently there's a hierarchy of abuse and assault, and it's very important to establish where everyone fits on it?

There's certainly a hierarchy of who should be allowed to serve as an elected representative, and it shouldn't include anyone convicted of any violent offense (including milkshake-girl, tbf)

[Cherry Christmas]

The girl who threw the milkshake will be in court in the Autumn, and that is no bad thing in my eyes, nip these things in the bud

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

There's certainly a hierarchy of who should be allowed to serve as an elected representative, and it shouldn't include anyone convicted of any violent offense (including milkshake-girl, tbf)

Yeah they should only be allowed to break the law after they get elected

As they all seem to do

[user104658]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Yeah they should only be allowed to break the law after they get elected

As they all seem to do

I'm not even saying "anyone who has ever broken a law" - I'd say 100% any violent or sexual offense, I'd extend that to things like fraud, and yes anyone convicted of any of the above after getting into a political office should be removed immediately.

Key thing here also is that he wasn't just "accused of something", it's not cancel-culture, he was clearly charged and found guilty of the offense.

[Parmy]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

I'm not even saying "anyone who has ever broken a law" - I'd say 100% any violent or sexual offense, I'd extend that to things like fraud, and yes anyone convicted of any of the above after getting into a political office should be removed immediately.

Key thing here also is that he wasn't just "accused of something", it's not cancel-culture, he was clearly charged and found guilty of the offense.

In 2012, 43 percent of mps had a criminal conviction...nowadays mps do not have to disclose if they have a criminal conviction, and under the human rights act a freedom of information request on an individual would not be accepted..

I can only assume the percentage is higher now.

[Parmy]

Originally Posted by parmnion

In 2012, 43 percent of mps had a criminal conviction...nowadays mps do not have to disclose if they have a criminal conviction, and under the human rights act a freedom of information request on an individual would not be accepted..

I can only assume the percentage is higher now.

43percent...that's massive, that's nearly 50 percent.

The national average is 33 percent....


And we are allowing this....we are mugs.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by parmnion

43percent...that's massive, that's nearly 50 percent.

The national average is 33 percent....


And we are allowing this....we are mugs.

Most of it will be for fraud and tax dodging, which is bad enough.

[Parmy]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

Most of it will be for fraud and tax dodging, which is bad enough.

I would argue those are worse crimes for a politician to commit than assault.