[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

You don't have to worry about the more intelligent people ...... I'm sure they can worry and think for themselves. about whether they wish to be regarded as a criminal or not.

Who is saying no one bats an eyelid at serious fraud as you are hinting at - I most certainly agreed with you 100% when you raised it (time and time again) thorughtout the thread - and I am quite sure many others would also concur.

However, we are not speaking of comparisons to the tune of £100k though - we are speaking of one thiing: tv licence that costs less than a family of 4 or 5 might spend on a night out in a nice restarant once a year.

It may not sound a lot of money: but multiply that by those who do not pay - and then you see the bigger picture (ya see what I did there ). Others have to cough up even more for those who don't pay.

That's hardly fair either is it or those who do act in accordance with the law - it's still making other people pay for your share. What's fair about comparison?

This makes no sense... I don't care if they wish to be regarded as criminal the fact is they are not....As defrauding the state of £100'000 is not a criminal offence.
I appreciate we are dealing with what to you may seem small change, which as you say adds up.
Are we to believe that David Laws is the only politician who fraudulently claims expenses?....
Potentially millions of pounds annually are seeping from the taxpayers purse, if you want to talk comparisons.
However let us remember that not paying for a £145 TV licence is against the law, why I am not sure, unless by 'licence' the government really mean 'entertainment tax'.
A lot of people not paying a small amount...Some people defauding a large amount.
Both could be seen as theft in some respects, yet only one is considered a criminal act, does that not strike you as odd?
You can fool some of the people all of the time, you can fool all of the people some of the time ......
I find it really hard to feel sory for those who are so blinkered they cannot or will not see that those who scamming thousands and thousands are no better than benefit fraudsters and TV licence avoiders.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by kizzy

This makes no sense... I don't care if they wish to be regarded as criminal the fact is they are not....As defrauding the state of £100'000 is not a criminal offence.
I appreciate we are dealing with what to you may seem small change, which as you say adds up.
Are we to believe that David Laws is the only politician who fraudulently claims expenses?....
Potentially millions of pounds annually are seeping from the taxpayers purse, if you want to talk comparisons.
However let us remember that not paying for a £145 TV licence is against the law, why I am not sure, unless by 'licence' the government really mean 'entertainment tax'.
A lot of people not paying a small amount...Some people defauding a large amount.
Both could be seen as theft in some respects, yet only one is considered a criminal act, does that not strike you as odd?
You can fool some of the people all of the time, you can fool all of the people some of the time ......
I find it really hard to feel sory for those who are so blinkered they cannot or will not see that those who scamming thousands and thousands are no better than benefit fraudsters and TV licence avoiders.

At the risk of repeating myself - this is not a Political Party Broadcast Kizzy.

Plenty of very politically minded threads for you to vent your disgust at the Tories for - you know, the ones that inherited what Labour left for them after..... oh, let me think, about ten years or so? Can you try to remain on topic - after all, this is not about only the BBC, the TV licence encompasses so much more.

For the sake of civility, I would politely ask that you refrain from being quite so sanctimonious with comments suc as such as 'you feel sorrry for those who are so blinkered that they they cannot or will not see.....". People are entitle to their opinion Kizzy, without the need for such withering words. It really is unnecessary and adds nothing to good debate. I understand your opinion, I respect your right to your opinoin on not paying for a tv lic, I simply don't agree with it.

You may not agree with me, but the bottom line is and the fact of the matter is: not paying for a tv licence and watching the live services in the manner you do: is a criminal offence - that is fact and no matter what you bring into play as a deflective on the topic: will not change that.

It matters not what other things out there are not a criminal offence that you regard as 'should be' - it does not dilute the matter of tv licencing and the legalities that surround it, and the reason that it is exists currently.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

At the risk of repeating myself - this is not a Political Party Broadcast Kizzy.

Plenty of very politically minded threads for you to vent your disgust at the Tories for - you know, the ones that inherited what Labour left for them after..... oh, let me think, about ten years or so? Can you try to remain on topic - after all, this is not about only the BBC, the TV licence encompasses so much more.

For the sake of civility, I would politely ask that you refrain from being quite so sanctimonious with comments suc as such as 'you feel sorrry for those who are so blinkered that they they cannot or will not see.....". People are entitle to their opinion Kizzy, without the need for such withering words. It really is unnecessary and adds nothing to good debate. I understand your opinion, I respect your right to your opinoin on not paying for a tv lic, I simply don't agree with it.

You may not agree with me, but the bottom line is and the fact of the matter is: not paying for a tv licence and watching the live services in the manner you do: is a criminal offence - that is fact and no matter what you bring into play as a deflective on the topic: will not change that.

It matters not what other things out there are not a criminal offence that you regard as 'should be' - it does not dilute the matter of tv licencing and the legalities that surround it, and the reason that it is exists currently.

I am well aware of that, just trying to clarify my point pyra,

Why are you suggesting my comparison to the expenses frauds are aimed specifically at the conservatives?...I was not party specific, any politician defrauding is the same in my book.

If it's not about the BBC what is it about?...What more does it encompass?

I am well aware it is a criminal offence, I still have no idea why?...Nobody has shed any light on that issue....

You feel my view is sanctamonious?...''Those who don't pay their TV licence are no better than benefit cheats''....that's sanctimonious....