The Tories really shouldn’t be trying this angle, the best response from them when it comes to people bringing up their abysmal track record is to ignore it not to try to shift the blame onto political opponents who have never been in charge of actually running the country. It’s clear from the polls that the public is finally sick and tired of the Tories blaming all their faults and mistakes on other people. I personally hope that the next election’s messaging is exactly this, Labour pointing out what a state the Tories have let the country get into and the Tories trying to shift the blame and coming off as painfully desperate.
I guess like Beergate the daily mail will obsess over this and plaster it on front pages for the next coming weeks
> The crimes that were looked at, during this review, ranged from rape and sexual assault to prostitution, grooming, sex-trafficking, voyeurism, exposure and child pornography.
Eventually, the Council decided that 20 of these crimes could, in certain circumstances, be punished via community orders rather than prison sentences.
I read this bit and thought, maybe this is being blown out of proportion. Some of these crimes in my opinion don’t warrant imprisonment. But then I read the next paragraph:
> That number include a total of eight offences where the principal victim is a child. They range from ‘sexual assault of a child under 13’ to ‘possession of an indecent photograph of a child’ to ‘paying for the sexual services of a child’ and ‘arranging or facilitating the sexual exploitation of a child’.
Not really a good look, especially with the track record of the government, the BBC and the Monarchy.
On most left wing subreddits the general consensus is that criminals just need some support and increased benefits to help them make the right choices. Why shouldn’t they apply that logic to sex offenders too?
There’s a reason why the the far left can’t get into government. Their ideas are nonsense.
5 comments
The Tories really shouldn’t be trying this angle, the best response from them when it comes to people bringing up their abysmal track record is to ignore it not to try to shift the blame onto political opponents who have never been in charge of actually running the country. It’s clear from the polls that the public is finally sick and tired of the Tories blaming all their faults and mistakes on other people. I personally hope that the next election’s messaging is exactly this, Labour pointing out what a state the Tories have let the country get into and the Tories trying to shift the blame and coming off as painfully desperate.
I guess like Beergate the daily mail will obsess over this and plaster it on front pages for the next coming weeks
> The crimes that were looked at, during this review, ranged from rape and sexual assault to prostitution, grooming, sex-trafficking, voyeurism, exposure and child pornography.
Eventually, the Council decided that 20 of these crimes could, in certain circumstances, be punished via community orders rather than prison sentences.
I read this bit and thought, maybe this is being blown out of proportion. Some of these crimes in my opinion don’t warrant imprisonment. But then I read the next paragraph:
> That number include a total of eight offences where the principal victim is a child. They range from ‘sexual assault of a child under 13’ to ‘possession of an indecent photograph of a child’ to ‘paying for the sexual services of a child’ and ‘arranging or facilitating the sexual exploitation of a child’.
Not really a good look, especially with the track record of the government, the BBC and the Monarchy.
On most left wing subreddits the general consensus is that criminals just need some support and increased benefits to help them make the right choices. Why shouldn’t they apply that logic to sex offenders too?
There’s a reason why the the far left can’t get into government. Their ideas are nonsense.
“Was present at”
Christ, they’re desperate, aren’t they?