Too many already

York Press: Too many already Too many already

WE HAVE recently been informed by some newspapers that a man called Raymond Hull, who has 22 children by different mothers, avoided prison after telling the judge he needed to be at home to look after is latest baby.

He was initially jailed for 18 months for drug dealing, but the sentence was suspended because his latest girlfriend had to go out and work.

How has this come about? Taxpayers are having again having to support this person via child allowance for the upkeep of his children.

We are trying to reduce the population in this country, yet this man is appears not to understand the fundamentals of cutting down child birth. He should have the snip straight away.

Tom Mitchell, Mendip Close, Huntington, York.

Comments (7)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:13am Wed 15 Jan 14

sheps lad says...

With a pair of garden shears!
With a pair of garden shears! sheps lad

10:33am Wed 15 Jan 14

courier46 says...

More idiot judges GIVING the wrong detterent AGAIN!
More idiot judges GIVING the wrong detterent AGAIN! courier46

12:20pm Wed 15 Jan 14

Fat Harry says...

"We are trying to reduce the population in this country"

No we aren't.
"We are trying to reduce the population in this country" No we aren't. Fat Harry

2:24pm Wed 15 Jan 14

bravo whisky says...

The judiciary fail the citizens of Britain yet again in their judgement of a callous drugdealer and thoroughly good for nothing. When are the courts going to come down hard on such scum, the judge needs sacking and the drugdealer needs his bits chopping off and jailing.
The judiciary fail the citizens of Britain yet again in their judgement of a callous drugdealer and thoroughly good for nothing. When are the courts going to come down hard on such scum, the judge needs sacking and the drugdealer needs his bits chopping off and jailing. bravo whisky

3:34pm Wed 15 Jan 14

ColdAsChristmas says...

Fat Harry, we are a very small over populated country, we do not have the capacity to feed ourselves as it is. Add to that we have people from all over the world trying to get here. With decisions like this I'm not surprised.
Another man called Mick was in the news not that long ago, now in jail and but will go on costing the tax payer. These are not responsible people.
There have been a few cases of men like this who say they can't work because of a bad back, indeed. But the women are just as bad and should know better!
Fat Harry, we are a very small over populated country, we do not have the capacity to feed ourselves as it is. Add to that we have people from all over the world trying to get here. With decisions like this I'm not surprised. Another man called Mick was in the news not that long ago, now in jail and but will go on costing the tax payer. These are not responsible people. There have been a few cases of men like this who say they can't work because of a bad back, indeed. But the women are just as bad and should know better! ColdAsChristmas

11:11pm Wed 15 Jan 14

Silver says...

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Fat Harry, we are a very small over populated country, we do not have the capacity to feed ourselves as it is. Add to that we have people from all over the world trying to get here. With decisions like this I'm not surprised.
Another man called Mick was in the news not that long ago, now in jail and but will go on costing the tax payer. These are not responsible people.
There have been a few cases of men like this who say they can't work because of a bad back, indeed. But the women are just as bad and should know better!
Have you heard of the food mountains the EU has? Also how intensive farming is in the UK? technically we do have the option to feed ourselves. But it'd rely on us being less lazy on our options. We have the sea which if we didn't do discards could feed tons of us. Add in the farms technically we could but we as a culture are phenomenally lazy and picky. Add infinitum how we treat farmers politically and feeding the country isn't an issue.
[quote][p][bold]ColdAsChristmas[/bold] wrote: Fat Harry, we are a very small over populated country, we do not have the capacity to feed ourselves as it is. Add to that we have people from all over the world trying to get here. With decisions like this I'm not surprised. Another man called Mick was in the news not that long ago, now in jail and but will go on costing the tax payer. These are not responsible people. There have been a few cases of men like this who say they can't work because of a bad back, indeed. But the women are just as bad and should know better![/p][/quote]Have you heard of the food mountains the EU has? Also how intensive farming is in the UK? technically we do have the option to feed ourselves. But it'd rely on us being less lazy on our options. We have the sea which if we didn't do discards could feed tons of us. Add in the farms technically we could but we as a culture are phenomenally lazy and picky. Add infinitum how we treat farmers politically and feeding the country isn't an issue. Silver

1:14am Thu 16 Jan 14

Magicman! says...

bravo whisky wrote:
The judiciary fail the citizens of Britain yet again in their judgement of a callous drugdealer and thoroughly good for nothing. When are the courts going to come down hard on such scum, the judge needs sacking and the drugdealer needs his bits chopping off and jailing.
It is people like him that give genuine benefit claimants a bad name... there's reporters for The Sun and the Daily Wail circling around like vultures just waiting for a story like this to pop up so they can say "oooh look here's a bloke with 22 kids who is dealing drugs - and YOU'RE paying for his lifestyle, all benefits should be cut to everybody", and then small minded eat it up and agree with it.

I say if you're claiming benefits, you can only claim benefits for the children you had at the date you first started claming - so if he had just 2 kids when he first got benefits, he'd only be able to receive benefits for 2 kids and not the other 20. Look upon it as a passive way of controlling population for those who can't afford to live without state help... yes, help such people to live; but not to breed like rabbits just to bleed every last penny out of the benefits system; but at the same time without there being such a callous population control system as China's in place.
[quote][p][bold]bravo whisky[/bold] wrote: The judiciary fail the citizens of Britain yet again in their judgement of a callous drugdealer and thoroughly good for nothing. When are the courts going to come down hard on such scum, the judge needs sacking and the drugdealer needs his bits chopping off and jailing.[/p][/quote]It is people like him that give genuine benefit claimants a bad name... there's reporters for The Sun and the Daily Wail circling around like vultures just waiting for a story like this to pop up so they can say "oooh look here's a bloke with 22 kids who is dealing drugs - and YOU'RE paying for his lifestyle, all benefits should be cut to everybody", and then small minded eat it up and agree with it. I say if you're claiming benefits, you can only claim benefits for the children you had at the date you first started claming - so if he had just 2 kids when he first got benefits, he'd only be able to receive benefits for 2 kids and not the other 20. Look upon it as a passive way of controlling population for those who can't afford to live without state help... yes, help such people to live; but not to breed like rabbits just to bleed every last penny out of the benefits system; but at the same time without there being such a callous population control system as China's in place. Magicman!

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree