egg

That depends on your outlook mate. The more you earn, ordinarily the more you can afford. I have no issue with a progressive system.

The more you earn, the more you pay. That's how society should be imo. Do I want to pay as much tax as I do? Of course I don't. Do I accept that I should, can, and be grateful that I'm doing better than most? Yes.

Widespread is probably more suitable than universal, but yes, until the US call out the Israeli government behaviour out for what it is, they'll carry on filling their boots.

Yep. The explanation given today is appalling. Essentially, unarmed people apparently walked where they shouldn't in a threatening way, so they shot them. Hard to understand why there isn't universal condemnation for what we're seeing on a daily basis.

Israeli forces killing people desperate for aid for for the 3rd consecutive day. Horrendous. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cvg5vyp33j1t?post=asset%3A8ff83e7e-c91e-4294-90f8-f697490c99f3#post

Pharmacy

How do you know he did? Anyways, it's important to remember that the fella hasn't got to prove a thing. On the current charges as I understand them, the CPS need to establish that he intended to severely harm/wound those people, and that if he drove dangerously, that he didn't fear death or serious injury from the baying mob attacking him.

Yep. The idiot who opened the car door has a lot to answer for as well. If gid car hadn't been attacked, and his door opened, what happened after wouldn't have happened.

Yep. Aintforever has convicted him. I'm with the Farmer on this, so far, but let's see how it plays out. My suspicion though is that he'll cop a guilty plea to lesser offences. There's no doubt he's caused GBH, but I'm not seeing any intent to cause harm, just a bloke who shouldn't have been where he was panicking.

That much is known, and that was based on mere suspicion.

Was it ever formally said that he was under the influence? It seemed to a suspicion only.

Yep. And if they accept that he didn't intend to kill, I'm not sure how they feel they can prove that he intended to harm or wound. I think his only intent was to get out unharmed himself.

I more or less agree with you. Having your car door opened, people banging on your windows/roof and shouting kill him, is going to instil panic in anyone. Putting aside why he was in his car to begin with (perhaps feeling unsafe in the crowd and needing a way out), it seems highly possible that the main incident wouldn't have happened if his car wasn't attacked.

Any thoughts about the people collided with, or are you only interested if it was a brown person driving?

Fentanyl innit. China/Mexico/Canada are reaping what they've shown. Or something.

You still miss the point. None of us knew his/her sex, there was no credible information. By the olympic definition he/she was able to fight as a woman, and did. Whether the olympic people's approach to it was correct is another matter, but it doesn't alter that rightly or wrongly he/she was able to compete in the Olympics as a woman. And as others has said, your citing a spurious online rag as evidence is/was scraping the barrel. I'm sure you've actually read the words in the article you've posted, but if you have, you'll note that the issue of this person's sex is still unresolved anyway.

Err, the issue was that the Olympic people and the boxing people had a different approach. The other issue is that your obsession with this is pretty tragic.

I've answered the point you make. I appreciate that the answer wasn't amongst your multiple choices, but it's my answer and I suspect other people's. Your last point misses the point I, and I'm sure Badger, make. I'm relieved though that this isn't terror related, as I'm sure anyone is, but I'm not "pleased it was a white not a brown bloke" - any suggestion is ridiculous and offensive.

It was a question with you deciding what the answers can be. Those aren't the only answers. The incident was appalling and I'm sure everyone feels for those involved. What's more to say than that.

I'm not sure how you get to that inference. Previous incidents involving cars have led to people excitedly assuming the perpetrator is a brown Muslim. Sure, they're correct sometimes, but it's pretty tragic that people lurch to making those assumptions. Pointing out how some people usually react is entirely about those people, not the perpetrator of the incident.

Or removing from the forum. In fact, the same should apply to anyone making a habit of planting laughing emojis on threads which are of no laughing matter.

I can guarantee that if the details of the perpetrator weren't disclosed so soon, this thread would have been full of assumptions that it was a brown Muslim. Yep, some will be disappointed that they're assumptions were wrong. Sad state of affairs.

Shed

Was he driving erratically before someone opened his door and others starting attacking the car? Looks like he panicked after that and tried to get away. Sad whatever.

Probably best not. 53 yo white British bloke apparently. Find out some facts first is always sensible.