just got a phone call my 15 year old was beaten up and mugged in Bournemouth just for a phone on my way down there now and if I get hold of the runts god help em
What I don't understand is why we as a nation have not proactively done anything to show the government (whatever government) that we are no longer going to do nothing, whilst in the main our children, continue to attack and murder each other. Why has no one organised national peace protests or a national minutes silence or something to show the government that tough action needs to be taken now? We'll do it about the price of petrol for god's sake.
The Mercury or Newshopper for instance could start a campaign, get The National press involved. The Daily Express love a campaign. This is not a political comment, just a plea for common sense and suggesting someone do something.
Good point CE - we need to reclaim the streets. The government have now started to talk about harrassing the scum on our streets; too little too late?
As usual it turns out this was just some nice, quiet, peaceful lad celebrating his birthday. It really is sickening. Fast forward to the predictable outcome - perpetrator in court pleads guilty to 'manslaughter' and receives stiff sentence of 4 years (meaning with time already in custody and overcrowded prisons requiring early release - he is out in a year). And we wonder why it keeps happening?
From the look of the school uniform, the kid who died was a St Thomas More (Eltham) pupil. That's three year 11 kids they've lost in 5 months - 2 of the girls from the New Years Eve/Day crash with the bendybus were STM pupils too...
[quote][cite]Posted By: nth london addick[/cite]i thank cherie blair and her shit out husband 4 most of it[/quote]
No, I blame a violent thug.
Since Labour were elected in May 1997 the prison population has boomed, and sentencing has been tougher.
The real reasons are to be found in society, it isn't just the responsibility of the government - we accept violence far more readily, have a society that worships wealth as a status symbol and not education. There are too many broken families and an all round poverty of aspiration. That makes crime, even violent crime a far more acceptable career choice.
is it just me or has anyone seen a description of this scumbag that did it yet?
I've just read a report on the BBC website that says "police are looking for a middle aged white man who witnessed the attack"
what about looking for the fecker that did it?
this has really got my blood boiling as someone who lives in lee I said to the other half yesterday that I feel like every day I manage to get home alive I've done well
The copper who gave the press conference said they'd had a load of descriptions of the guy who did it, but weren't willing to release details at the moment!
Mate i get in shut the door and forget about it until i go pick my wife up from work (every night).
There have always been gangs, and gang murders. Fagins were about 300 years ago. We have had Teddy Boys, thats where the law against offencive weapon was brought in (flick knives etc). Skin Heads. Mods, Rockers and Punks and now "ethnic gangs".All at one time were the beasts from hell.
The OB can use section 60 against football herberts but not violent street gangs ?The OB will charge you (regardless of them winning the case) if you defend yourself to vigourously ?. Remember the Labour Cabinet minister who suggested "YOU JUMP UP AND DOWN" rather than go and help someone in trouble. law after law has been passed in the last 10 years which has given all scum bags the feeling that they cant be hurt or caught. If they get caught some idiot who dont live 50 miles from an inner city area will give them "anger management" or send them on a holiday.
There is one thing that the OB HATE more than a criminal its the vigilante !
We are told kids today in inner citys " have a lack of opertunity" noooooooo its lack of control and respect for society. They want the easy money they hear about from the gangsta records.
We have many more OB on the streets than we did 10 years back. They have many many new laws and much more power. So why is it our streets aint safer ? Its easier to catch the speeding motorist and the tax disc dodger than it is the burglar and the mugger. These yoof and scum bags know the OB will only make a token effort.
mate . when i had my car nicked (they burgled the house) the OB had a go at me for having a baseball bat on the wall in the hall !!!! i said " what the fu*k has that got to do with my burglary or my missing car ?" he said (100% true) "if i see you on the street with that your nicked " so i told him to piss ooff out of my house straight away, opened the door and repeated it !
Why the hell aint OB releasing the discription straight away ? that stinks. I tell you they are thinking peope will go looking for this guy and its back to vigilante thing which they totaly hate.
I know , his brother was with him and there were shop staff as well so that's at least three people that saw this idiot so why aint they saying anything?
The problem being that every other EU country accept the EU laws, then give's it bollocks when asked to apply them (ie, smoking bans). We accept every law dished upon us from them twats, and hold it, to the rule. Furthermore, we have too many left wing wankers jumping out there pram when a bit of punishment is returned to these bastards. P.S. The cider went down well this afternoon.
The human rights lawyers in this country Cherie included are so for looking after the maggots and scum of this country that her spineless toss bag of a husband couldnt have changed laws even if he wanted.
More jails tough ones not pontins, more OB, longer sentances problem solved if any of the ferrel bstds in this country knew they were getting 6 year stretch for carrying a knife and knew they were going to spend 6 years in a tough nick thet wouldnt do it
Unbelievable. A kid gets knifed and who gets the blame: Cherie Blair (who has never held any political office) and the EU which has no power over our sentencing laws.
Still, I am sure it will all get sorted out once the old Etonians take over again, won't it?
Proberly not Orm and i aint blaming her killing the kid but the threat of jail beacuse of no good do gooders like her is a non deterent in this country
Ormiston the yng lad was hit with a glass tray. Cherie Blair is a leading Human Rights lawyer. The Human Rights bill is EU Law.
An example of this bollox is that fattwat Bob Crow when asked if his union would enter a no strike agreement. His reply "its an infringment of our Human Rights to not be able to strike".
Maybe when someone (like an Old Etonian) takes on ,first a Human Rights Lawyer after the scum bag that they got released kills yet another and sues the arse out of them. Them takes on HM Gov for leting this shit happen and doing f**kall.
Firstly, if you are going to rubbish "Human Rights" and somehow blame the supporters of Human Rights legislation for violent crime in the UK then you need to be clear on what you are talking about.
The Human Rights Act 1998 is legislation passed by the UK Parliament NOT the EU. The legislation merely ratifies the European Convention on Human Rights which the UK has complied with for the last 50 years.
Cherie Blair is a leading Human Rights lawyer? No, she is a barrister at law who spends the bulk of her time on criminal cases and some of her pro-bono time on campaigning for human rights.
As for Bob Crow, he is correct. It IS a violation of the Human Rights Act to prevent workers from taking industrial action. Do you want to know where workers DON'T have the right to strike? China and North Korea. Want to be like them, do you?
As for your comments about David Cameron "taking on a Human Rights lawyer" - I suppose you mean him repealing the Human Rights Act? Oh, that would be a really proud moment for the country, wouldn't it? He would not have the balls to do it, it would be a disastrous signal for him to send.
This idea that the government of the day must be held totally responsible for all crimes committed during its period in charge is spurious, my old man got held up by robbers with shotguns at his shop TWICE in the 1980's under the so-called hardline Thatcher regime - can I blame her government for that?
There are lots of reasons for crime taking place but the main one can be summed up in two words: personal responsibility. If people took responsibility for themselves and their actions, and particularly their actions in bringing children into the world, then there would be less youth crime.
There are way too many people out there who let their young kids wander round the streets at all hours getting into mischief which leads into more serious crime. There are also way too many people who don't take truancy seriously and let their kids skip school, become drop-outs and fall into crime.
I personally believe that there should be a curfew in place for under 16's and that there should be heavy financial penalties for people whose kids play truant.
Ormy, you are right that there should be a curfew for under 16's. A lot of parents don't know where there kids are half the time and are just glad to get them out of their hair. Then, if they do something wrong, they don't care. I'm really do dispair of this country and sadly I can't see it getting any better until someone, and of what political persuasion I don't mind, realises that we need to :
a) build a couple more prisons
b) hand out appropriate sentances and stick to them
c) life means life, not five years
d) make prison life what it should be, a punishment
then, and only then, might we in time see a reduction in crime.
Large: I DID move abroad and we have the same crime problem here, especially violent crime amongst young people. We had a young lad KICKED to death in a street just down the road from our all-white middle-class suburb just the other week....
I think your comment: "A lot of parents don't know where there kids are half the time and are just glad to get them out of their hair" hits the nail BANG on the head - all this talk about "human rights" and "do-gooders" is just such a load of old shit, it really is.
All criminals have had parents at some stage who have shaped their lives and given them (or not) discipline and taught them how to live their lives the right way.
I think parental neglect goes right across class and income lines as well. There are plenty of middle-class parents who see their kids as a burden too and don't take the trouble to monitor their lives as they should.
Incidentally, Large, the Yanks have tried the tougher sentencing and build more prisons approach and they are having huge problems with it so its not a solution on its own.
You might remember that Bill Clinton introduced the "three strikes and you're out" legislation in the US in 1994? Well, that was supported by everybody at the time because it sounded like a good idea theoretically. The base premise of the "three strikes" rule was that your third violent criminal offence meant you had struck out and you were sentenced to LIFE (meaning the end of your natural life) imprisonment.
Well, the law sounds great in theory, but the practical realities are proving horrendous. The bigger states (where most crimes are committed and where most felons live) are now having massive problems housing the burgeoning population of "lifers" and some prisons in California are so overcrowded that they are even housing inmates in the prison gymnasium. They simply cannot build prisons fast enough to meet demand.
In addition, it is costing the Yanks an absolute fortune to keep these people locked up for life because life prisoners are much more expensive to maintain (they need many more guards because they have no chance of parole so have no reason to behave well).
Violent, dangerous criminals SHOULD be in jail but the US experience shows us we need to be careful or it will be an extremely expensive exercise.
What I mean by this is that you need to be careful about WHO you lock-up for life. Some people in the US have been sentenced for life for being "accesories" to violent crime (like being the getaway driver in a hold-up) which means that many people who are not neccesarily violent or dangerous are going away for life at huge expense to the taxpayers when they could probably be rehabiliated at a much lower cost.
Comments
Come on Boris, set up some death squads.
Why has no one organised national peace protests or a national minutes silence or something to show the government that tough action needs to be taken now?
We'll do it about the price of petrol for god's sake.
The Mercury or Newshopper for instance could start a campaign, get The National press involved. The Daily Express love a campaign. This is not a political comment, just a plea for common sense and suggesting someone do something.
As usual it turns out this was just some nice, quiet, peaceful lad celebrating his birthday. It really is sickening. Fast forward to the predictable outcome - perpetrator in court pleads guilty to 'manslaughter' and receives stiff sentence of 4 years (meaning with time already in custody and overcrowded prisons requiring early release - he is out in a year). And we wonder why it keeps happening?
Guru has it right - really does make you despair.
No, I blame a violent thug.
Since Labour were elected in May 1997 the prison population has boomed, and sentencing has been tougher.
The real reasons are to be found in society, it isn't just the responsibility of the government - we accept violence far more readily, have a society that worships wealth as a status symbol and not education. There are too many broken families and an all round poverty of aspiration. That makes crime, even violent crime a far more acceptable career choice.
mate of mine did time in pentonville and said it was like being back at school
I've just read a report on the BBC website that says "police are looking for a middle aged white man who witnessed the attack"
what about looking for the fecker that did it?
this has really got my blood boiling as someone who lives in lee I said to the other half yesterday that I feel like every day I manage to get home alive I've done well
If he wants to come forward and pop round to mine in lee and offer me out then he can feel more than welcome , effin coward
There have always been gangs, and gang murders. Fagins were about 300 years ago. We have had Teddy Boys, thats where the law against offencive weapon was brought in (flick knives etc). Skin Heads. Mods, Rockers and Punks and now "ethnic gangs".All at one time were the beasts from hell.
The OB can use section 60 against football herberts but not violent street gangs ?The OB will charge you (regardless of them winning the case) if you defend yourself to vigourously ?. Remember the Labour Cabinet minister who suggested "YOU JUMP UP AND DOWN" rather than go and help someone in trouble. law after law has been passed in the last 10 years which has given all scum bags the feeling that they cant be hurt or caught. If they get caught some idiot who dont live 50 miles from an inner city area will give them "anger management" or send them on a holiday.
There is one thing that the OB HATE more than a criminal its the vigilante !
We are told kids today in inner citys " have a lack of opertunity" noooooooo its lack of control and respect for society. They want the easy money they hear about from the gangsta records.
We have many more OB on the streets than we did 10 years back. They have many many new laws and much more power. So why is it our streets aint safer ? Its easier to catch the speeding motorist and the tax disc dodger than it is the burglar and the mugger. These yoof and scum bags know the OB will only make a token effort.
Why the hell aint OB releasing the discription straight away ? that stinks. I tell you they are thinking peope will go looking for this guy and its back to vigilante thing which they totaly hate.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt, there must be a good reason.
Furthermore, we have too many left wing wankers jumping out there pram when a bit of punishment is returned to these bastards.
P.S. The cider went down well this afternoon.
More jails tough ones not pontins, more OB, longer sentances problem solved if any of the ferrel bstds in this country knew they were getting 6 year stretch for carrying a knife and knew they were going to spend 6 years in a tough nick thet wouldnt do it
Still, I am sure it will all get sorted out once the old Etonians take over again, won't it?
An example of this bollox is that fattwat Bob Crow when asked if his union would enter a no strike agreement. His reply "its an infringment of our Human Rights to not be able to strike".
Maybe when someone (like an Old Etonian) takes on ,first a Human Rights Lawyer after the scum bag that they got released kills yet another and sues the arse out of them. Them takes on HM Gov for leting this shit happen and doing f**kall.
The Human Rights Act 1998 is legislation passed by the UK Parliament NOT the EU. The legislation merely ratifies the European Convention on Human Rights which the UK has complied with for the last 50 years.
Cherie Blair is a leading Human Rights lawyer? No, she is a barrister at law who spends the bulk of her time on criminal cases and some of her pro-bono time on campaigning for human rights.
As for Bob Crow, he is correct. It IS a violation of the Human Rights Act to prevent workers from taking industrial action. Do you want to know where workers DON'T have the right to strike? China and North Korea. Want to be like them, do you?
As for your comments about David Cameron "taking on a Human Rights lawyer" - I suppose you mean him repealing the Human Rights Act? Oh, that would be a really proud moment for the country, wouldn't it? He would not have the balls to do it, it would be a disastrous signal for him to send.
This idea that the government of the day must be held totally responsible for all crimes committed during its period in charge is spurious, my old man got held up by robbers with shotguns at his shop TWICE in the 1980's under the so-called hardline Thatcher regime - can I blame her government for that?
There are lots of reasons for crime taking place but the main one can be summed up in two words: personal responsibility. If people took responsibility for themselves and their actions, and particularly their actions in bringing children into the world, then there would be less youth crime.
There are way too many people out there who let their young kids wander round the streets at all hours getting into mischief which leads into more serious crime. There are also way too many people who don't take truancy seriously and let their kids skip school, become drop-outs and fall into crime.
I personally believe that there should be a curfew in place for under 16's and that there should be heavy financial penalties for people whose kids play truant.
a) build a couple more prisons
b) hand out appropriate sentances and stick to them
c) life means life, not five years
d) make prison life what it should be, a punishment
then, and only then, might we in time see a reduction in crime.
If that fails, move abroad.
I think your comment: "A lot of parents don't know where there kids are half the time and are just glad to get them out of their hair" hits the nail BANG on the head - all this talk about "human rights" and "do-gooders" is just such a load of old shit, it really is.
All criminals have had parents at some stage who have shaped their lives and given them (or not) discipline and taught them how to live their lives the right way.
I think parental neglect goes right across class and income lines as well. There are plenty of middle-class parents who see their kids as a burden too and don't take the trouble to monitor their lives as they should.
You might remember that Bill Clinton introduced the "three strikes and you're out" legislation in the US in 1994? Well, that was supported by everybody at the time because it sounded like a good idea theoretically. The base premise of the "three strikes" rule was that your third violent criminal offence meant you had struck out and you were sentenced to LIFE (meaning the end of your natural life) imprisonment.
Well, the law sounds great in theory, but the practical realities are proving horrendous. The bigger states (where most crimes are committed and where most felons live) are now having massive problems housing the burgeoning population of "lifers" and some prisons in California are so overcrowded that they are even housing inmates in the prison gymnasium. They simply cannot build prisons fast enough to meet demand.
In addition, it is costing the Yanks an absolute fortune to keep these people locked up for life because life prisoners are much more expensive to maintain (they need many more guards because they have no chance of parole so have no reason to behave well).
Violent, dangerous criminals SHOULD be in jail but the US experience shows us we need to be careful or it will be an extremely expensive exercise.
What I mean by this is that you need to be careful about WHO you lock-up for life. Some people in the US have been sentenced for life for being "accesories" to violent crime (like being the getaway driver in a hold-up) which means that many people who are not neccesarily violent or dangerous are going away for life at huge expense to the taxpayers when they could probably be rehabiliated at a much lower cost.