RMweb Gold Gilbert Posted October 20, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 20, 2017 I heard via Facebook that someone has been caught. Apparently was also responsible for a previous break in at a preserved railway. Lets hope the stolen items are recovered - or at least some of them 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Brasher Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 If the stolen items are recovered will they still be in mint condition? If not will the insurance company or the thief pay the difference between mint items and used items? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob D2 Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 If the stolen items are recovered will they still be in mint condition? If not will the insurance company or the thief pay the difference between mint items and used items? Well ask the thief if he ran any of them in, or if he " creased " any boxes when he put them in the swag bag... Insurance I'd imagine Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogbox321 Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 I just hope the thief is caught and the magistrates deal appropriately. Don't get your hopes up! The law in this country is a total A**, and just looks after criminals! I got assulted at work, had to have time off, medication etc., and the fine this person got didnt even cover my prescription costs and a visit to my consultant, never mind the loss of earnings.... Likewise I were talking to a police officer a couple of weeks ago - he reckoned that he'd been told not to tazer anyone carrying acid, in case they burn themselves! Regards, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rue_d_etropal Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 Unfortunately there are also a lot of stories going round that only help those keep us under control(divide and conquer). I have a family in the police, and I don't think it is as grim as some are keen to portray for their own political goals. Things are tough, money is tight, but I wonder who voted for the politicians who are not putting more money into srvices such as the police. Not uncommon for those who shout the loudest about how criminals get away with too much, often are willing to buy items at knock down prices and not question where they came from. Not sure what insurence would pay out.Do they cover the lost profit from selling items? I presume it would depend on the type of business insurene someone has. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Huw Griffiths Posted October 21, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2017 Not uncommon for those who shout the loudest about how criminals get away with too much, often are willing to buy items at knock down prices and not question where they came from. Although I can't comment about anyone else, I've always been very careful only to buy stuff from reputable sources. Why would anyone with any principles, or common sense, wish to encourage thieves? I were talking to a police officer a couple of weeks ago - he reckoned that he'd been told not to tazer anyone carrying acid, in case they burn themselves! Some people might regard this as a pretty compelling reason to taser people carrying acid. After all, if they get burnt etc, who's really to blame? Huw. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogbox321 Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 Unfortunately there are also a lot of stories going round that only help those keep us under control(divide and conquer). I have a family in the police, and I don't think it is as grim as some are keen to portray for their own political goals. Things are tough, money is tight, but I wonder who voted for the politicians who are not putting more money into srvices such as the police. Not uncommon for those who shout the loudest about how criminals get away with too much, often are willing to buy items at knock down prices and not question where they came from. Not sure what insurence would pay out.Do they cover the lost profit from selling items? I presume it would depend on the type of business insurene someone has. I'm very sorry for going to work to provide for my family, and doing my best to keep my customers safe - it's obviously my fault someone was intoxicated and made a mistake, and then decided they'd take it out on me by verbally and physically assulting me. The police then took them to court and the sentencing was a complete and utter joke. Sorry but No, never herd such rubbish in my life! Typical do gooder philosophy, trying to blame everyone else, politics, the economy etc., for someone acting as a criminal. Bottom line is, that we all make choices in this world and ultimately its our responsibility to act in an acceptable way, lawfully and not to harm others. If punishment was severe enough, it would be a deterrent and people would think twice before they willingly committed criminal acts. Prisoners have rights, what rights do the victims of their crimes have? None! With regards purchasing items at knock down prices - sorry I only go for genuine bargains from shops - if a deal is too good to be true, theres always a catch! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted October 24, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 24, 2017 I understand a man will appear in Exeter Crown Court in mid-November, and, as others have said, it would seem he had been on a bit of a spree, involving other premises. Some models have been recovered, but these are evidence and will not be released any time soon. So until these have been returned to the shop, the insurers are not about to pay up, either. Bubble-wrap is great stuff, but hardly copes with the intricate details of modern models unboxed. My guess is a lot of models - and a large number were stolen - will be superficially damaged. Apparently a number of locals assisted in identifying the alleged culprit, incensed that he was misbehaving in his own community. The shop is open for normal business, the proprietors are upbeat, if a little tired, the display cases are decently full, and apart from the hole in the ceiling, you wouldn’t know anything had been amiss. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
71000 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Unfortunately there are also a lot of stories going round that only help those keep us under control(divide and conquer). I have a family in the police, and I don't think it is as grim as some are keen to portray for their own political goals. Things are tough, money is tight, but I wonder who voted for the politicians who are not putting more money into srvices such as the police. Not uncommon for those who shout the loudest about how criminals get away with too much, often are willing to buy items at knock down prices and not question where they came from. Not sure what insurence would pay out.Do they cover the lost profit from selling items? I presume it would depend on the type of business insurene someone has. The Business Insurance on my shop burglary was only willing to pay 50% of the Cost Price of the stolen goods. That included only 50% for the loss of my personal camera, based on the purchase receipt. Business Insurance I discovered is a lot harsher than Private Insurance. Indeed this situation is not confined to Britain. More recently the Restaurant in a house I owned in Germany suffered €13,000 damage due to icy conditions, when the tenant did a "moonlight flit" without leaving the key. Again only 50% was offered towards the cost, even though my Insurance Policy was for the complete house, domestic and business. The Duke 71000 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
71H Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Kernow Models has shown a still image on their Twitter feed: https://twitter.com/kernowmodelrail/status/917139071113334784 For a newspaper, it beggars belief where did they learn the Queens English ? Here is what I saw after clicking the link...........The picture shows the culprit wrapping Horny carriages and engines in bubble wrap during the well-planned burglary. Bubble wrap is now the latest fetish then is it, what scale may I ask ? On a serious note, good to see on here that 'someone' was caught. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenman Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 ... If punishment was severe enough, it would be a deterrent and people would think twice before they willingly committed criminal acts. ... I agree with your views about all of us being responsible for ourselves, but you do know the bit I've quoted from you is complete nonsense, right? Criminals commit crimes in the certain knowledge that *they* won't get caught. Therefore the theoretical punishment is irrelevant to them. Anyone who has done even some basic reading on this subject will know that the position you put forward is not correct. The U.K. has the highest imprisonment rates in Western Europe. If we follow your logic, we should have the lowest crime levels, right? Er... If your view is right, can you explain why the "War on Drugs" hasn't already been won? Or why the US had to give up on Prohibition (though the legacy of organised crime continues to haunt them getting on for a century later)? Anyway, I'm pleased this guy has been caught; and I hope the model shop comes out of it as well as they could hope for. Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium John Isherwood Posted October 24, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 24, 2017 I agree with your views about all of us being responsible for ourselves, but you do know the bit I've quoted from you is complete nonsense, right? Criminals commit crimes in the certain knowledge that *they* won't get caught. Therefore the theoretical punishment is irrelevant to them. Anyone who has done even some basic reading on this subject will know that the position you put forward is not correct. The U.K. has the highest imprisonment rates in Western Europe. If we follow your logic, we should have the lowest crime levels, right? Er... If your view is right, can you explain why the "War on Drugs" hasn't already been won? Or why the US had to give up on Prohibition (though the legacy of organised crime continues to haunt them getting on for a century later)? Anyway, I'm pleased this guy has been caught; and I hope the model shop comes out of it as well as they could hope for. Paul Fine - let's accept for a moment that you are correct. Presumably, you have an alternative to imprisonment that will, in time, significantly reduce offending? May we know what it is - with credible evidence that it works? My view? There is a small portion of society who just can't / won't be bothered to conform to the norms that the vast majority of us accept and respect. The vast majority would be better served if this recalcitrant minority were out of circulation. By all means offer rehabilitation, but if that fails - they should have to face the consequences. Obviously, keeping them out of circulation costs money - more money than we currently provide. Solution? Increase prison sentences, and increase taxes to keep those who still aren't deterred out of temptation's way. I, for one, would gladly pay up. Most of us will experience hardship at some time, and we could all take the easy way out by resorting to crime - but we don't. There has to be seen to be undesirable consequences for those who choose to take the apparently easy course. Regards, John Isherwood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenman Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 ... Obviously, keeping them out of circulation costs money - more money than we currently provide. Solution? Increase prison sentences, and increase taxes to keep those who still aren't deterred out of temptation's way. ... Bizarre. You're unhappy at criminals depriving owners of their property through stealing stuff, so your solution is to make the owners hand over bigger wads of cash to the government? Er... Nope, not seeing the logic! But as it happens I'm not at all averse to the principle of taking criminals out of circulation (as I wrote, we must all be responsible for our actions). My objection was to the "hang 'em"-style approach to deterrence proposed by the OP, since that just does not work. I'd suggest you have a look at restorative justice for some crimes (that might also be more useful to the model shop owners); and that we think about decriminalising stuff which is victimless (or which only has victims because it was criminalised in the first place - the UK's sycophantic adoption in the 1950s of the US war on drugs is a good example of this: before that, we had a public health approach and a much smaller problem). Frankly, I can think of better uses for taxes than spending more than is necessary on locking people up. Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rue_d_etropal Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Logically(???) some might think that a bigger deterent would result in less crime, but it is often the other way. Just look at some of the recent articles about how the Netherlands has reduced crime, not by locking people up, but by using other positive ways. And I know someone will say they have a more relaxed attitude to drugs, but it goes way beyond that. Rates of re-offending are a fraction of what they are in the UK. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
devonseasider Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 My objection was to the "hang 'em"-style approach to deterrence proposed by the OP, since that just does not work. On the other hand, if we did hang 'em it would certainly stop them re-offending. I don't think anyone can argue against that! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium John Isherwood Posted October 25, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 25, 2017 Bizarre. You're unhappy at criminals depriving owners of their property through stealing stuff, so your solution is to make the owners hand over bigger wads of cash to the government? Er... Nope, not seeing the logic! But as it happens I'm not at all averse to the principle of taking criminals out of circulation (as I wrote, we must all be responsible for our actions). My objection was to the "hang 'em"-style approach to deterrence proposed by the OP, since that just does not work. I'd suggest you have a look at restorative justice for some crimes (that might also be more useful to the model shop owners); and that we think about decriminalising stuff which is victimless (or which only has victims because it was criminalised in the first place - the UK's sycophantic adoption in the 1950s of the US war on drugs is a good example of this: before that, we had a public health approach and a much smaller problem). Frankly, I can think of better uses for taxes than spending more than is necessary on locking people up. Paul Sorry - I can't go with the 'fluffy' approach. IMHO, if you don't want to conform to the generally accepted norms, go somewhere (or be put somewhere) where your unacceptable behaviour will not impinge on those self-disciplined people who do conform. Simples !! Regards, John Isherwood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenman Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 Sorry - I can't go with the 'fluffy' approach. IMHO, if you don't want to conform to the generally accepted norms, go somewhere (or be put somewhere) where your unacceptable behaviour will not impinge on those self-disciplined people who do conform. Simples !! Regards, John Isherwood. Quite right. Who cares if it actually works? What we always need is policy-based evidence-making, never ever evidence-based policy-making. The latter requires thought and is difficult. The former just feels so right, it must be true! As I have already said, I agree with locking up people where that is the best (least-worst?) solution: to take an obvious example, unreconstructed violent criminals should obviously be locked up until they are no longer a danger to the rest of us. No argument from me. What I resent is my taxes being spent to make some bar-room braggarts feel good about being Tough On Crime, irrespective of whether or not that policy works. I am assuming devonseasider's suggestion that we should hang people is just a joke: I don't trust the state to make a decent job of buying a few trains, why on earth would I trust them to hang me only if I was certainly guilty of the crime of which they accused me? There ain't no going back from a wrongful hanging. Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 So, Mr Isherwood, who is to decide the ‘norms’? And, exactly how narrowly do you wish to set them? I ask, because I have no desire to live anywhere where ‘not like me’ is a criminal offence. Kevin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenman Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 (edited) So, Mr Isherwood, who is to decide the ‘norms’? And, exactly how narrowly do you wish to set them? I ask, because I have no desire to live anywhere where ‘not like me’ is a criminal offence. Kevin It is difficult, isn't it? England reputedly had a very high tolerance of "eccentrics" (though that generally seemed only to be eccentrics who were also very rich); Quentin Crisp, to take a famous example of someone who did not conform to the "norms", did not find England very tolerant and had to move to a different continent before he could live his life as he wished. I would hope we are a bit more enlightened in the 21st century, but I'm sure it's not easy for anyone who wants to be different: my first thought was of those horrific cases of wanton violence against young people who adopt the dress of "Goths". But another example of people who want to be different might be railway modellers. Paul Edited October 25, 2017 by Fenman Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 Something concerns me about this robbery. As retail prices for products rise (for example, in 2011 a 'Royal Scot' cost £102.75 direct from Hornby, now it costs £169.99 IIRC) is there the danger of more robberies from model shops as less people are willing to pay increasing prices? Just an observation; I'm not trying to accuse anyone of anything. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free At Last Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 SVRlad, on 25 Oct 2017 - 13:43, said: Something concerns me about this robbery. As retail prices for products rise (for example, in 2011 a 'Royal Scot' cost £102.75 direct from Hornby, now it costs £169.99 IIRC) is there the danger of more robberies from model shops as less people are willing to pay increasing prices? Just an observation; I'm not trying to accuse anyone of anything. It wouldn't surprise me if there are some modellers who are different and don't think they should have to pay for them like others do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium John Isherwood Posted October 25, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 25, 2017 So, Mr Isherwood, who is to decide the ‘norms’? And, exactly how narrowly do you wish to set them? I ask, because I have no desire to live anywhere where ‘not like me’ is a criminal offence. Kevin Dead easy - the norm should be behaviour that does not impinge adversely on fellow citizens. This could apply to anything from playing loud music or allowing your dog to bark incessantly at one extreme, to mass murder at the other extreme. I'm sure that there will be those who will plead the case of the loud music fan or the besotted dog-owner exercising their individual 'rights', as there will be those that will argue that the mass murderer is a victim of an unfeeling society - but they won't convince me however long they try !! Regards, John Isherwood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
devonseasider Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 I am assuming devonseasider's suggestion that we should hang people is just a joke No joke intended - it was merely a statement of fact. If someone is "hanged by the neck until dead", as the saying goes, they certainly ain't going to re-offend! Actually, if you read my post a little more carefully I'm sure you'll find that at no point did I suggest that people should be hanged. That is your misinterpretation of my words - I was simply "stating the bleedin' obvious" to quote John Cleese. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenman Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 No joke intended - it was merely a statement of fact. If someone is "hanged by the neck until dead", as the saying goes, they certainly ain't going to re-offend! Actually, if you read my post a little more carefully I'm sure you'll find that at no point did I suggest that people should be hanged. That is your misinterpretation of my words - I was simply "stating the bleedin' obvious" to quote John Cleese. Quite right. Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 Mr I, So, what constitutes adverse impingement? Is it a synonym for “annoy” at the low- grade end? And, are we talking about the sort of thing that annoys a grumpy old misanthrope, or the sort of thing that annoys, say 80% of the population? And, are people to be ‘banged up’ for annoying one another? Because, if they are, everyone will be imprisoned fairly rapidly ....... probably annoying one another incessantly. Kevin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now