The government today announced their latest initiative to deal with inner
city crime. This radical overhaul of the incumbent Pff and Whuh Acts has
been almost seven minutes in the making, and is expected to reduce the long
term volume of crime by almost half what it should. It has been hailed as a
victory for common sense, for the government, for the opposition, a
vindication of the years of hard work and borderline legality of militant
anti-crime pressure groups, and with an alarming frequency it has been
called the brainchild of Fatty Gelatty, the unabashed self-publicist. Most
importantly chicks dig it.
Critics are calling the scheme "Heartfelt and convincing... quite charming."
The public have welcomed it into their communal heart like a rusty scalpel;
the private are equally vociferous in their screams of praise. One rogue
element (antimony) has dared challenge the collective world mood in claiming
that this initiative is tantamount to decriminalising the criminals; he was
quickly jumped upon, stamped mercilessly, kicked, bitten, satirised, had
petrol poured on him and offered a last cigarette. Many people were
understandably moved by the tears and the rents of and in this dissenter,
but their dissatisfied whispers were quickly quelled by a masked spokesman.
"Shut up," he said, and then proceeded to explain why they should shut up.
"This initiative is not, as our dying friend claimed, tantamount to
decriminalising the criminals. If we decriminalised the criminals then they
would cease to be criminals. We would then be decriminalising non-criminals,
which is, as I'm sure you will agree, extraneous. I have been made aware by
our crack legal team [there would have been a head there, but hi Jack] that
in many instances this constitutes a violation of these non-criminals' human
rights." And like parents with crying children, they bought it.
The primary aim is to remove the emotional rape that is felt by victims of
crime; finally a government has come to its senses in realising that it
can't prevent emotionless rape and other crimes, without creating a fair and
equitable society for all, and that's not going to happen because it might
cost money. In practical terms all crimes other than theft are ignored, but
don't say anything about it ok? They're trying. The naughty stealy
downtrodden mass who wants something for nothing breaks into a house
creating as little damage as possible; he (because women don't exist) then
opens a meaningful dialogue with whoever he finds in there about what and
what not is to be stolen. Items of sentimental value aren't stolen, items of
no value aren't stolen, people can feel safe that they won't be murdered in
their beds by burglars trying to climb the ladder of criminality, burglars
can break into houses safe that caps, asses and busting won't be going on.
And chicks still dig it.
Previously this tolerated burglary would have invalidated insurance
policies, and rendered the whole scheme mooter than a mooter scotor, but
thanks to last minute wrangling by two mutually attracted people, the
government cut the insurers of this great nation (whichever it might be) a
deal: they get to recoup their money from people who can't do anything about
it. Oh sure, they can try and complain all they want, but no-one will
listen, and, more importantly than chicks digging it, they can't do anything
about it. It's a perfect scheme: burglars get free stuff, people get
insurance, insurers get money from people who are sufficiently socially
impotent that they can't do anything about it, the government is re-elected,
and you can't do anything about it.