chomer Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 How come this thread has gone from benefit fraud to murder and child abuse? It's all about the seriousness of the crime, I could go from turning a blind eye to showing my disapproval to going straight to the authorities depending on what it was that was going on. If somone is on the fiddle but actually needed the money, blind eye. If someone is on the major fiddle and buying luxury items I'd show my strong disapproval. Any incidence where someone was being directly hurt or abused, I don't care who they are, I'd go straight to the authorities for the sake of the victim. It's called a Thought Experiment. Testing a principle someone holds by following it through to an extreme set of circumstances. In this experiment, we have those who are saying they would never snitch on their family for any reason. By taking it to the level of murder and child abuse, I was trying to test if this principle would still hold regardless of the seriousness of the crime. Quite simple really. Looking at the responses so far, it doesn't appear there'll be many answering the question though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted March 14, 2012 Moderator Share Posted March 14, 2012 How come this thread has gone from benefit fraud to murder and child abuse?Because on VT if one side isn't getting their own way, the simplest thing is to move the goalposts (in this case considerably) rather than accept an alternative viewpoint. Actually, that's being harsh on VT tbh, it's a fairly typical argument style in every day life. Every discussion/argument is somehow a competition and one does what they can to 'win' *sigh* You'd think both sides would try to find a) what the other thinks and agree to differences. Instead it somehow becomes an exercise in picking fault; or if you can't find fault; finding exceptions that discredit the opponent (in this case harbouring a paedophile). Kinda like the American justice system where it's not about both sides finding out if someone is actually right or wrong, but rather it has more to do with who has the better arguing skills (read - dearer lawyer) in an adversarial situation. Apologies for that. A little rant slipped out unexpectedly :shock: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginko Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 To be fair though, when two people have vastly differing views as seems to be the case particularly in this thread, it can be hard to accept one another's viewpoints. I llike to think of myself as quite empathetic though, which is why I've not been posting in this thread too much. I can see both sides of the argument, however I do have a strong sense of justice and quite often I find myself judging people's choices on what I would personally do. In my heart I know I wouldn't ever commit benefit fraud, but it's a moot point really because these things, for me, are all to do with the specific situation the individual faces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voinjama Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Just reading through the contrast in views is astounding. I guess that is life, we all have our own opinions on things and think we are right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hogso Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 I don't really see what the problem is about 'shopping' family members in regard to benefit fraud. All that'll happen is they'll have to pay back what they werent supposed to have (probably not all of it (think of it as an interest free loan)), and then they will be paid what they are entitled to - if anything at all. Even if they are taken in by Fraud, they can sign an administrative penalty, meaning they wouldnt have any action taken against them in the courts, at the cost of owing an extra 1/3 (at the moment) of what they already owe. From my perspective loyalty and 'blood' doesn't really come in to it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 I'd blackmail the aforementioned family member for 50% of their ill gotten gains Does that make me just as bad or worse?! ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonno_2004 Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 A not-so-distant relative of my brother-in-law in the UK recently had himself declared insane to receive a higher benefit. They do say there's a fine line between genius and insanity.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMFy Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 You obviously dont value the meaning of family. I would walk through fire to protect my family. Child abuse is a different matter all together. They would no longer be consider family and i would disown them. When I consider these people are committing benefit fraud, the family aspect takes a step backwards. **** them. I'm not a supporter of 'the system', but I pay out a shitload in tax and NI to fund these people and they don't even acknowledge it. **** me, I've only just this year bought my first flat screen telly. Yet I have a cousin who has had a 40" LCD for years, thanks to her ability to operate a womb to a schedule on which she can maximise her benefit scrounging. And how the **** can unemployed people afford to have tattoos? If you are unemployed and can afford tattoos, booze and fags, you have more income than you require. I want my **** money back you cheating words removed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 You obviously dont value the meaning of family. I would walk through fire to protect my family. Child abuse is a different matter all together. They would no longer be consider family and i would disown them. When I consider these people are committing benefit fraud, the family aspect takes a step backwards. **** them. I'm not a supporter of 'the system', but I pay out a shitload in tax and NI to fund these people and they don't even acknowledge it. **** me, I've only just this year bought my first flat screen telly. Yet I have a cousin who has had a 40" LCD for years, thanks to her ability to operate a womb to a schedule on which she can maximise her benefit scrounging. And how the **** can unemployed people afford to have tattoos? If you are unemployed and can afford tattoos, booze and fags, you have more income than you require. I want my **** money back you cheating words removed! my thoughts exactly, i have absolutely no time for people who choose kids as a career, like i said before i hate my cousin who does it but to my knowledge she doesnt fiddle the amount she gets, she has though split from a perfectly decent boyfriend (who was great to the 2 kids that werent his) because it affected the money she could claim single parent, 2 kids, 42" tv, sky with every channel, iphone and the kids are never bloody there! they spend 3/4 nights of the week at my grans i dont actually know of anything that makes my blood boil more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brommy Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Turn on my family? Not for all the money in the world! Importantly moving away from talk of serial killing/child abuse and as my first view on this rather interesting thread - would you not consider that the moment your family committed what you considered illegal and/or immoral acts to be the moment they had 'turned' against you? It seems perverse that you'll stomach virtually anything that they do, yet you think it worse to do something that may be the only thing to stop them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 this thread is simple, what would you do in Skyrim? if I saw someone stealing it would be Fireball plus Mace of Molag ball = Dead person + lots of gold and free goodies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 oh by the way are you friend with them on facebook? if so wait till he is online then LIKE the wiki page on Facebook about "benefit fraud" then he will see that you "like benefit fraud". quite funny, and even funnier if he likes your post about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 So, what is the maximum size screen TV permitted for the unemployed (or a benefit claimant) and does it need to be (or need not to be) LCD, LED or Plasma? This thread needs clarity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StewieGriffin Posted March 14, 2012 Author Share Posted March 14, 2012 thanks for the er... interesting replies and opinions! Still cant decide what to do - the pros and cons have pretty much all been covered in here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Yes and have done. Only because i **** hate them. They are the scum side of the family. She stole from my mom so i got my own back, words removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMFy Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 So, what is the maximum size screen TV permitted for the unemployed (or a benefit claimant) and does it need to be (or need not to be) LCD, LED or Plasma? This thread needs clarity. That's not the point. Every **** on benefits seems to have the things working people struggle to pay for. I'd been watching knackered CRTs for years because I hadn't got £500 to spunk on a new telly, yet my cousin has had a big shiny flat screen for years, despite not actually working. If everyone took the benefits option instead of working we would be in the same situation as Greece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milfner Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 It'd depend on if I liked them or not pretty much. If they were a tosser, I'd have absolutely no qualms about doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 That's not the point. Whatever 'the point' is or was, you do appear to have missed it. Every **** on benefits... Edited previous post. No 'point' in bothering, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted March 15, 2012 Moderator Share Posted March 15, 2012 Yes and have done. Only because i **** hate them. They are the scum side of the family. She stole from my mom so i got my own back, words removed.Case in point. Done out of revenge and/or spite. Not out of some sense of morality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
privateer Posted March 15, 2012 Share Posted March 15, 2012 Nope, I **** wouldn't. Not a family member or anyone else for that matter. I couldn't give a rat's ass if someone defrauds the "state", whether it be benefits or tax. The "state" is happy to lie, cheat, defraud and generally **** over anyone it can so it will get no help from me. I find it particularly funny some of left-leaners on here would obviously be well up for grassing. Unfortunately Stasi Britannia isn't a career option since the last election. That must be galling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts