Sir David Amess MP. RIP
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
I think in all the "tributes" that are being made detail of language is very important e.g. "representing his constituents" is very different from "helping his constituents". Were his constituents in favour of capital punishment or against same sex marriage, etc.?
I don't know this Amess chap beyond his voting record, but in the case of my own MP, he might help local constituents (or rather businesses) but he represents his own ideology (or Johnson's wishes) and so representing and helping constituents might sound trivial but I regard it as a big distinction.
Ian
I don't know this Amess chap beyond his voting record, but in the case of my own MP, he might help local constituents (or rather businesses) but he represents his own ideology (or Johnson's wishes) and so representing and helping constituents might sound trivial but I regard it as a big distinction.
Ian
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
His voting record includes :-Psamathe wrote: ↑20 Oct 2021, 11:24am I think in all the "tributes" that are being made detail of language is very important e.g. "representing his constituents" is very different from "helping his constituents". Were his constituents in favour of capital punishment or against same sex marriage, etc.?
I don't know this Amess chap beyond his voting record, but in the case of my own MP, he might help local constituents (or rather businesses) but he represents his own ideology (or Johnson's wishes) and so representing and helping constituents might sound trivial but I regard it as a big distinction.
Ian
Generally voted against a right to remain for EU nationals already in living in the UK.
Consistently voted against restricting the provision of services to private patients by the NHS
Almost always voted for a reduction in spending on welfare benefits
Generally voted against raising welfare benefits at least in line with prices
Almost always voted against paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability
Almost always voted against greater public control of bus services
Almost always voted against equal gay rights
Generally voted against laws to promote equality and human rights
Almost always voted for requiring the mass retention of information about communications
Generally voted against measures to prevent climate change
Consistently voted for more restrictive regulation of trade union activity.
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10009 ... tes#reform
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
Perhaps I now know better than to simply express human sympathy regarding some one violently murdered in the course of their work. I was neither supporting or condemning him: just trying to show humanity.
John
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
Yes.
It's his democratic right - and probably duty - to do the things he has done in parliament, after being ELECTED by his voters.
I may not agree with his politics, but that's just how democracy works. I certainly don't agree with murdering him for his politics. (or indeed any physical aggresion, or harm or threat of harm)
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
I agree with your motive " to simply express human sympathy regarding some one violently murdered in the course of their work" . However, given what has come to light (via quoted sources) about his track record, maybe your initial points about his characteristics were a bit "rose-tinted" which is where tributes do need to be very careful when people have a controversial record.
His murder was a horrendous crime and family, colleagues etc. have my sympathy. For me that does not mean I need to be presented (repeatedly everywhere) with a highly edited selective history of his stance in Parliament.
Ian
-
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
IMO perhaps the most significant voting info would be how often he voted against his party's whip when in government. Talking is one thing .............His voting record includes :- (etc)
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
Although that does not tell the whole story e.g. he voted against party (rebel) for Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Bill — New Clause 1 — Marriage of Same-Sex Couples — 9 Jul 2019 i.e. party was saying yes to same sex marriage bill, Amess said no voting against majority (of Conservatives) (https://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division. ... number=427)thirdcrank wrote: ↑20 Oct 2021, 12:11pmIMO perhaps the most significant voting info would be how often he voted against his party's whip when in government. Talking is one thing .............His voting record includes :- (etc)
Ian
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
When I wrote the piece I had researched the man and was aware of his views and even referred to his political stance. I did not edit his career and was not writing a history, biography, eulogy or obituary. I did not see his career through rose-tinted spectacles at all. But it simply did not seem necessary to address that in the context of this post. It didn’t seem quite the thing to bring it all out at such a time. He isn’t even buried yet.Psamathe wrote: ↑20 Oct 2021, 12:04pmI agree with your motive " to simply express human sympathy regarding some one violently murdered in the course of their work" . However, given what has come to light (via quoted sources) about his track record, maybe your initial points about his characteristics were a bit "rose-tinted" which is where tributes do need to be very careful when people have a controversial record.
His murder was a horrendous crime and family, colleagues etc. have my sympathy. For me that does not mean I need to be presented (repeatedly everywhere) with a highly edited selective history of his stance in Parliament.
Ian
Clearly people think otherwise. That is equally your prerogative. But I have learned that there are places angels fear to tread and so I will keep quiet in such events in future and when there are unpleasant arguments over a murdered man it at least won’t be on account of anything I have tried to do or say.
John
-
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
On the really important issue of penal reform, there's nothing there to say he was a thorn in the government's side or that he made any sort of long-term contribution.
Threads about a death have sometimes been a problem on here: usually when the deceased died in a crash. The thread can soon turn into a discussion of the deceased's riding etc and on at least one occasion another fatal crash was added to the same thread so it became confused who was commenting on what. Now, on a cycling forum, discussion of the death of a cyclist might easily be read by friends and family. A further problem then, as is happening now, is it turns into a discussion of how the forum deals with it. (I refrained from posting for the first few days for those reasons.)
Threads about a death have sometimes been a problem on here: usually when the deceased died in a crash. The thread can soon turn into a discussion of the deceased's riding etc and on at least one occasion another fatal crash was added to the same thread so it became confused who was commenting on what. Now, on a cycling forum, discussion of the death of a cyclist might easily be read by friends and family. A further problem then, as is happening now, is it turns into a discussion of how the forum deals with it. (I refrained from posting for the first few days for those reasons.)
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
I would see it in a different light. Different people will place different importance on different aspects so no reason you should not (or stop) posting such views. As I probably said before, his murder was horrendous, etc. and I think everybody would agree with that and feel sympathy for family, colleagues, etc.. But I also see nothing wrong with discussing his record and views - some will regard it positively, others negatively but I see nothing wrong with such differing opinions. I don't see being critical of his voting record or expressed views as conflicting with abhorrence of his murder.Oldjohnw wrote: ↑20 Oct 2021, 12:56pmWhen I wrote the piece I had researched the man and was aware of his views and even referred to his political stance. I did not edit his career and was not writing a history, biography, eulogy or obituary. I did not see his career through rose-tinted spectacles at all. But it simply did not seem necessary to address that in the context of this post. It didn’t seem quite the thing to bring it all out at such a time. He isn’t even buried yet.Psamathe wrote: ↑20 Oct 2021, 12:04pmI agree with your motive " to simply express human sympathy regarding some one violently murdered in the course of their work" . However, given what has come to light (via quoted sources) about his track record, maybe your initial points about his characteristics were a bit "rose-tinted" which is where tributes do need to be very careful when people have a controversial record.
His murder was a horrendous crime and family, colleagues etc. have my sympathy. For me that does not mean I need to be presented (repeatedly everywhere) with a highly edited selective history of his stance in Parliament.
Ian
Clearly people think otherwise. That is equally your prerogative. But I have learned that there are places angels fear to tread and so I will keep quiet in such events in future and when there are unpleasant arguments over a murdered man it at least won’t be on account of anything I have tried to do or say.
So many tributes have introduced his Parliamentary record that I feel it has become a relevant aspect to the discussion.
Ian
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
Whatever his attributes and beliefs, David Amess was a member of parliament and thus his murder is abhorrent on that level.
I would however question the reason for his death. The man who killed him is either insane (in the normal understanding of that word) or he did it as part of a campaign against the British state. AFAIK, it wasn't done in connection with the views of this particular MP and indeed, IIUIC, Davis Amess' views may be closer to those of the killer than those of many MPs in terms of traditional morality and such like.
The government characterises those who carry out acts of violence as "terrorists" and that their acts are another form of warfare in the absence of any coventional capabilty. I would like to know therefore with whom we are at war, why this is the case and what is being done about it. Labelling somebody as a terrorist as though that is the self-explanatory end of the matter isn't good enough.
The MP's murderer deserves whatever punishment is meted out - we deserve an explanation, one that seems to be missing from the media and government information. If the man is mad, then he is a lunatic and not a terrorist. If he is a terrorist then what he did has a rational basis and it is something we may need to confront. Otherwise David Amess' death is simply a prelude to further violence and, for the public, wasted tears. I wonder whether the wall-to-wall sympathetic coverage (which I actually don't object to given his role) is pushing more difficult issues off the table and out of sight.
I would however question the reason for his death. The man who killed him is either insane (in the normal understanding of that word) or he did it as part of a campaign against the British state. AFAIK, it wasn't done in connection with the views of this particular MP and indeed, IIUIC, Davis Amess' views may be closer to those of the killer than those of many MPs in terms of traditional morality and such like.
The government characterises those who carry out acts of violence as "terrorists" and that their acts are another form of warfare in the absence of any coventional capabilty. I would like to know therefore with whom we are at war, why this is the case and what is being done about it. Labelling somebody as a terrorist as though that is the self-explanatory end of the matter isn't good enough.
The MP's murderer deserves whatever punishment is meted out - we deserve an explanation, one that seems to be missing from the media and government information. If the man is mad, then he is a lunatic and not a terrorist. If he is a terrorist then what he did has a rational basis and it is something we may need to confront. Otherwise David Amess' death is simply a prelude to further violence and, for the public, wasted tears. I wonder whether the wall-to-wall sympathetic coverage (which I actually don't object to given his role) is pushing more difficult issues off the table and out of sight.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
We do indeed differ. I do not see why a simple respectful acknowledgment can not be made without an analysis of someone’s life. There is plenty of time for that in a more reflective way.
Imv it would be premature for the government or the press to attempt an explanation since there has been no inquest, no investigation and no trial as yet. To do so would be injustice, not justice.
Imv it would be premature for the government or the press to attempt an explanation since there has been no inquest, no investigation and no trial as yet. To do so would be injustice, not justice.
John
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
Agreed.
I agree totally,but feel it's the subject of different and seperate thread,perhaps titled "Terrorism and the reasons for it in the UK today"I would however question the reason for his death. The man who killed him is either insane (in the normal understanding of that word) or he did it as part of a campaign against the British state. AFAIK, it wasn't done in connection with the views of this particular MP and indeed, IIUIC, Davis Amess' views may be closer to those of the killer than those of many MPs in terms of traditional morality and such like.
The government characterises those who carry out acts of violence as "terrorists" and that their acts are another form of warfare in the absence of any coventional capabilty. I would like to know therefore with whom we are at war, why this is the case and what is being done about it. Labelling somebody as a terrorist as though that is the self-explanatory end of the matter isn't good enough.
The MP's murderer deserves whatever punishment is meted out - we deserve an explanation, one that seems to be missing from the media and government information. If the man is mad, then he is a lunatic and not a terrorist. If he is a terrorist then what he did has a rational basis and it is something we may need to confront. Otherwise David Amess' death is simply a prelude to further violence and, for the public, wasted tears. I wonder whether the wall-to-wall sympathetic coverage (which I actually don't object to given his role) is pushing more difficult issues off the table and out of sight.
Please start the thread it could throw up some interesting discussion on the subject.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
When he voted against gay marriage and EU citizens having the right to remain it was against the party whip.thirdcrank wrote: ↑20 Oct 2021, 12:11pmIMO perhaps the most significant voting info would be how often he voted against his party's whip when in government. Talking is one thing .............His voting record includes :- (etc)
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
-
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Sir David Amess MP. RIP
Thanks for that.
Re gay marriage I can see that anybody with religious faith is likely to vote in line with that rather than on party lines.
Perhaps decisions about EU citizens are more constituency-related eg if the likes of Nigel Farage attract a lot of support in the area.
I was really posing the question in respect of things like penal reform, which all parties have tended to sideline.
Re gay marriage I can see that anybody with religious faith is likely to vote in line with that rather than on party lines.
Perhaps decisions about EU citizens are more constituency-related eg if the likes of Nigel Farage attract a lot of support in the area.
I was really posing the question in respect of things like penal reform, which all parties have tended to sideline.