PDA

View Full Version : This will divide opinion....



Hibbyradge
17-07-2012, 10:51 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-18873631

Gatecrasher
18-07-2012, 06:58 AM
If its illegal to walk around in the scud then he should be arrested IMO. If you continue to shoplift will the police eventually just let you away with it?

speedy_gonzales
18-07-2012, 07:48 AM
What does he keep in his bergen?

hibsbollah
18-07-2012, 08:27 AM
His barefaced cheek is absolutely shocking.


kerboosh.

Sylar
18-07-2012, 09:21 AM
His barefaced cheek is absolutely shocking.


kerboosh.

Willy never learn?

Jack
18-07-2012, 11:49 AM
He’ll be the butt of many jokes, but joking aside this man should have had a restriction order put on him and been banned from Scotland.

Why should we have to put up with his self indulgence and waste our money, local and national, catching him and locking him up?

Tosser!

Future17
18-07-2012, 01:50 PM
He’ll be the butt of many jokes, but joking aside this man should have had a restriction order put on him and been banned from Scotland.

Why should we have to put up with his self indulgence and waste our money, local and national, catching him and locking him up?

Tosser!

If he literally was (while naked in public), then we'd have a problem worth spending money on to lock him up. Until then, who cares?

Unless of course, you were born with clothes on and dress up all animals that you see?

steakbake
18-07-2012, 03:19 PM
If he literally was (while naked in public), then we'd have a problem worth spending money on to lock him up. Until then, who cares?

Unless of course, you were born with clothes on and dress up all animals that you see?

Ridiculous that the country has spent money keeping this guy locked up. Absolutely unbelievable that he's done around 6 years for it as well. 6 years - for being naked in public??

He's naked - what of it? We're all naked.

Hibbyradge
18-07-2012, 03:30 PM
If he literally was (while naked in public), then we'd have a problem worth spending money on to lock him up. Until then, who cares?

Unless of course, you were born with clothes on and dress up all animals that you see?

I imagine loads of folk would care.

Society has codes of behaviour and conventions which generally reflect the views and sensitivities of the community in which they apply.

Some parts of the world tolerate and accept nudity, others don't.

Some communities prohibit almost any show of flesh, particularly by women.

In our society, there's a time and a place to get your kit off, and it isn't in the middle of Princes Street.

I'm no prude, but I'm not sure I'm comfortable with folk wandering around naked.

(Cue the obvious hot totty comments.)

Hibbyradge
18-07-2012, 03:34 PM
Ridiculous that the country has spent money keeping this guy locked up. Absolutely unbelievable that he's done around 6 years for it as well. 6 years - for being naked in public??

He's naked - what of it? We're all naked.

I live next to a primary school. He could be my neighbour.

Should he be allowed to wander up and down my street at 8.45am and at 3.30pm?

Do you think it would be safe for him to do so?

For me, it's ridiculous that this man won't put a pair of pants on, but thinks he should be allowed to flash his meat and two veg in public.

steakbake
18-07-2012, 03:46 PM
I live next to a primary school. He could be my neighbour.

Should he be allowed to wander up and down my street at 8.45am and at 3.30pm?

Do you think it would be safe for him to do so?

Perish the thought that your neighbour might be naked underneath those clothes!

Why would he specifically wander up and down your street, near the primary school at those particular times? This guy wasn't arrested for doing that. If he was, then yes of course, there is an issue in that. But as far as I have read about him, he isn't behaving in a lewd and libidinous way towards children or anyone. He's just not got clothes on.

To come back to the risk to children: if someone did make a point of walking around naked near a primary school, you'd have to ask what the point of that would be and what their intentions are. However, it's a bit like saying - but what if he was creeping around in the Meadows, flashing at women on their way home? He wasn't and he's not - he's only bothering people who want to be bothered.

If this guy had a history of causing alarm through being lecherous or behaving in an overtly sexual way, then fair enough. But all this guy is doing is being naked. A bit like the TV programme that offends, just don't watch.

Just Alf
18-07-2012, 03:48 PM
We've been paying his board and lodgings for too long.... Take him to the border and let him go..... At this rate he'll reach the Lothians and end up with Lothian and Borders polis and visits to Saughton for the next few years :-/

ginger_rice
18-07-2012, 04:31 PM
We've been paying his board and lodgings for too long.... Take him to the border and let him go..... At this rate he'll reach the Lothians and end up with Lothian and Borders polis and visits to Saughton for the next few years :-/

Anyone who wants to walk around Scotland in the buff deserves to be sectioned, it's the Royal Ed for him next stop!

Holmesdale Hibs
18-07-2012, 05:24 PM
Deary me, what an absolute bellend. If he's that bothered about seeing his kids then there's an easy solution... he's had 6 years to figure it out FFS.

Pretty Boy
18-07-2012, 09:48 PM
Personally I have no problem if people want to stroll around naked.

However whilst someone may claim its their 'right' to walk wherever they want naked equally other people would claim its their 'right' not to witness it. Why can't they guy walk around his house naked and naturist camps naked but put on clothes when he's in areas where kids etc are walking about? Seems a reasonable enough compromise to me.

VivaPalmeiras
18-07-2012, 10:04 PM
This boy will have some cv !

Remember to explain those gaps in employment history... :)

Hibbyradge
18-07-2012, 10:38 PM
Perish the thought that your neighbour might be naked underneath those clothes!

Why would he specifically wander up and down your street, near the primary school at those particular times?

Well, if he was my neighbour, he'd be out in the street at those times, like those of us who wear clothes are, and we live next to a school.

I really don't understand why anyone doesn't think he should simply put his pants on.

He consistently breaks the law, yet folk think he should be allowed to do so.

Strange.

steakbake
18-07-2012, 11:01 PM
No, I agree there is a point to this. But really, he's been locked up for 6 years - for being naked persistently. Surely the law has to have better things to do?

You wonder whether if he'd not courted all this legal controversy, that he'd probably have got bored of wandering around in the buff?

Hibbyradge
18-07-2012, 11:22 PM
No, I agree there is a point to this. But really, he's been locked up for 6 years - for being naked persistently. Surely the law has to have better things to do?

You wonder whether if he'd not courted all this legal controversy, that he'd probably have got bored of wandering around in the buff?

On a scale of 1 to 100, how important can the right to wander about naked be?

All he needs to do, is put a pair of pants on, ffs.

It's not like we're asking him to wear a maroon jersey or anything.

He really doesn't deserve sympathy.

It's not crime of the century, granted, but neither is non-payment of a parking ticket and you can be jailed for that too.

easty
19-07-2012, 08:17 AM
Ridiculous that the country has spent money keeping this guy locked up. Absolutely unbelievable that he's done around 6 years for it as well. 6 years - for being naked in public??

He's naked - what of it? We're all naked.

We all piss and **** as well, but should we be alllowed to do that wherever, and whenever, we want?

Does the guy have any mental health problems? What is his reason for wanting to ramble around in the nudie? I'd continue to have him arrested and jailed until he decides he no longer wants to be an ********, and starts wearing, at least, a pair of pants.

Hibrandenburg
20-07-2012, 07:10 AM
Think hygene would be my main concern. Our society is built around us wearing clothes and the idea of sitting on or touching a public item that someone has had his naked arse on just doesn't fill me with delight.

--------
20-07-2012, 10:22 AM
Perish the thought that your neighbour might be naked underneath those clothes!

Why would he specifically wander up and down your street, near the primary school at those particular times? This guy wasn't arrested for doing that. If he was, then yes of course, there is an issue in that. But as far as I have read about him, he isn't behaving in a lewd and libidinous way towards children or anyone. He's just not got clothes on.

To come back to the risk to children: if someone did make a point of walking around naked near a primary school, you'd have to ask what the point of that would be and what their intentions are. However, it's a bit like saying - but what if he was creeping around in the Meadows, flashing at women on their way home? He wasn't and he's not - he's only bothering people who want to be bothered.

If this guy had a history of causing alarm through being lecherous or behaving in an overtly sexual way, then fair enough. But all this guy is doing is being naked. A bit like the TV programme that offends, just don't watch.


What exactly do you mean by 'naked underneath these clothes'? If my neighbour has clothes on, he/she isn't naked. 'Naked underneath these clothes' sounds like bullcrap to me.

Nor is he 'only bothering people who want to be bothered'. Some people ARE alarmed - seriously alarmed - when unexpectedly confronted by a naked man. He may very well not 'mean' to alarm them, but his behaviour IS alarming to some people.

Nor am I convinced it's just a case of 'he isn't all there' - on at least one occasion he was happy enough to wear clothes to be allowed to board an aeroplane, only to strip off and refuse to get dressed again after the plane had taken off. Now that IS behaviour that will certainly alarm and distress the onlookers, and it appears to me to be deliberate and premeditated. He knows what he's doing, and he knows it's illegal, in other words.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/4994596.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/4994596.stm)

IMO he's a stroppy exhibitionist, and I'm very uncomfortable with the idea that if you keep breaking a specific law long enough, the police will eventually give up. He's also a big strong guy, an ex-Marine. I don't buy the 'he only offends people who want to be offended' line. meeting him when you're out walking the dog isn't 'offensive' - for a lot of people, it's frightening.

And now, following on this decision, supposing others decide to follow in this guys naked footsteps, are Tayside going to turn a blind eye to them too? This could be an awfully handy defence for people who DO lurk around the city parks flashing their equipment at women and kids.

"I was only out for a stroll, officer. It's all HER fault - she WANTED to be offended."

Aye, right!

Pretty Boy
21-07-2012, 07:38 AM
Arrested yesterday for a 'breach of the peace' in Dunfermilne.

steakbake
21-07-2012, 08:08 AM
Busted again. The guy doesn't help himself.

How much is it going to cost the taxpayer this time?

Big Ed
21-07-2012, 09:52 AM
Busted again. The guy doesn't help himself.

How much is it going to cost the taxpayer this time?

You mention the cost to the taxpayer and you have mentioned the cost of keeping him locked up in a previous post on this subject.
Using an economic arguement to tell us what and what not to do is becoming increasingly prevelent in public discorse and I think that that is unhealthy.
Our society is damaged enough, without the appliance of the rule of law being determined by cost, so that serial offenders can simply continue to offend, once the amount of money it takes to put an individual through the judicial process becomes prohibitive.

--------
21-07-2012, 11:51 AM
Arrested yesterday for a 'breach of the peace' in Dunfermilne.


Good. He's a menace.

I agree with Big Ed - the application and enforcement of the law should NOT depend on how much it costs.

I noticed that when he was in Perth he was in solitary most of the time.

Would this be because he's classed as an SO?

Or to protect him from his fellow cons?

ginger_rice
23-07-2012, 11:07 AM
Deary me, what an absolute bellend. If he's that bothered about seeing his kids then there's an easy solution... he's had 6 years to figure it out FFS.

:faf:

Hibs Class
23-07-2012, 09:12 PM
Maybe an outfit made of this material would keep everyone happy!

8459

IWasThere2016
23-07-2012, 10:48 PM
Busted again. The guy doesn't help himself.

How much is it going to cost the taxpayer this time?

Tazer the prick right in the nuts! :agree: