|
Post by Moose on Apr 5, 2013 16:38:10 GMT
A lot of news coverage this week has been given to an utterly depressing story about a middle aged man and his wife who 'accidentally' killed six of their children by starting a house-fire with which they had intended to frame someone else. Pretty grim reading - a man with SEVENTEEN children by various different reading who, from what I can see, feels no remorse at all about the deaths of six of them and feels sorry only for himself. It does make me despair a little for the human race. Why did he have seventeen children? Why did the mothers tolerate his abuse? Why on earth did the mother of the six who died agree to go alone with this plan, putting her children in danger?
*wanders off, holding head*
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Apr 5, 2013 16:54:39 GMT
It is very depressing. I just wonder how many people there are in the world who are like him.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Apr 5, 2013 16:56:57 GMT
Just utterly ... amoral. I don't understand how anyone, even someone who is patently stupid, can put the lives of a bunch of children in danger like that .. out of spite.
|
|
|
Post by Mari on Apr 6, 2013 18:30:54 GMT
Because some people simply only care about themselves. I could start a rant on how individualisation has made all of us less sympathetic and helpful than we would have been a couple of decades ago, but I won't
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Apr 6, 2013 22:15:34 GMT
Because some people simply only care about themselves.
|
|
|
Post by ProdigalAlan on Apr 6, 2013 23:43:11 GMT
The guy in question went to school with my brother. They are well known in this neck of the woods, he came from the same council estate as me. This will go on until someone has the guts to say "you can have as many kids as you like, but you will not get an increase in benefit payments".
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Apr 6, 2013 23:50:54 GMT
You sound like the Daily Mail Alan. Do you really think that this man killed his children because of the UK welfare system?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2013 9:00:32 GMT
I do not think that having many children is generally a bad thing in itself and I would be against not giving parents money at a certain point because they have "too many" children. The question is how they are raised. Once or twice I heard about families with 12 children (a few twins in there) where the whole family worked well together and the older children helped the parents with the younger children. But there are also those families where there are too many children and they are neglected.
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Apr 7, 2013 10:11:57 GMT
It's shocking that this has been politicised and linked to the benefit system. "Women were your chattels, there to look after you and your children. You bark orders and they obey... you were king-pin, no-one else mattered," judge Mrs Justice Thirlwall told Philpott during sentencing. Over 30 years, Philpott exercised both physical and psychological abuse towards a string of women. The wages and benefits earned by his wife and mistress were paid into his account which he controlled. They did not have their own front door keys and had to ask permission to leave. if Philpott had had 9 children instead of 17 and claimed the £29000 instead of £60000, would this have stopped his abusive controlling behaviour over the past 30 years? Of course not. The benefits system is a red herring. Shame on George Osborne for trying to distract attention away from the real issues and turning it into political propaganda.
|
|
|
Post by juju on Apr 7, 2013 12:18:38 GMT
It's shocking that this has been politicised and linked to the benefit system. "Women were your chattels, there to look after you and your children. You bark orders and they obey... you were king-pin, no-one else mattered," judge Mrs Justice Thirlwall told Philpott during sentencing. Over 30 years, Philpott exercised both physical and psychological abuse towards a string of women. The wages and benefits earned by his wife and mistress were paid into his account which he controlled. They did not have their own front door keys and had to ask permission to leave. if Philpott had had 9 children instead of 17 and claimed the £29000 instead of £60000, would this have stopped his abusive controlling behaviour over the past 30 years? Of course not. The benefits system is a red herring. Shame on George Osborne for trying to distract attention away from the real issues and turning it into political propaganda. Hear hear. This was an evil man, full stop. And from what I can gather, both the females were working, and getting tax credits and child benefit (like many millions of families, mine included) but were forced to hand everything over to him. Being on tax credits or any kind of benefits did not make this man a murderer, any more than being a doctor made Harold Shipman one. Some people are just evil.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2013 12:50:10 GMT
Being on tax credits or any kind of benefits did not make this man a murderer, any more than being a doctor made Harold Shipman one. Some people are just evil. I agree!
|
|
|
Post by ProdigalAlan on Apr 7, 2013 13:16:34 GMT
You sound like the Daily Mail Alan. Do you really think that this man killed his children because of the UK welfare system? Certainly not. As the court case showed, it was never his intention to kill the children. What was clearly displayed was that it was his intention to implicate his ex on the day of a court hearing over custody of her children. This was done in order to have full custody of the children and gain financial benefits thereby. Mick philpot was a cynical abuser of the benefits system and used procreation to line his own pockets. He came from the same estate I come from and he was there at the same time as my family and he is well known. What I said is not an attack on the benefits system, but it is an attack on all those who exploit it and sadly there are far too many.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Apr 7, 2013 16:51:10 GMT
I think that even 'benefit exploiters' would generally baulk at the idea of setting fire to a house full of children for financial reasons. The guy is simply wicked.
|
|
|
Post by ProdigalAlan on Apr 7, 2013 17:18:03 GMT
Well this was hardly a first offence. But we ( that's you, me and all the other tax payers ) allowed him to go on making a very lucrative living out of having more and more children by two different women. We should not be rewarding people like Philpot.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Apr 7, 2013 17:35:14 GMT
I am not a tax payer. Would you put me against a wall and shoot me?
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Apr 7, 2013 17:46:30 GMT
He would be like that if there were no such thing as welfare. He raked in money from two women, he would have had a harem if he could.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Apr 7, 2013 17:55:12 GMT
Yes. And quite frankly it feels bad enough to be what the BBC has recently designated as a 'pleb' without the whole ' anyone who is on welfare of any sort is a murdering scumbag' mentality. Not that that is what Alan is doing but some of the right wing press have been really vicious this week .. more so than normal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2013 18:21:20 GMT
I think I understand how you feel, Jo. Frank has been on benefits in the past and I hated when people talked like anyone on benefits just tries to screw the tax payers for their money and is being lazy. And my parents struggled with that when my dad was unemployed. They had their third child and many people couldn't understand why they would have a child in that situation.
|
|
|
Post by ProdigalAlan on Apr 7, 2013 22:24:56 GMT
I am not a tax payer. Would you put me against a wall and shoot me? Of course you are Jo! You pay VAT on many products and thus contribute ( I'm not being argumentative, you are a tax payer ).
|
|