BFR I currently have a pal doing a five stretch for what i would call GBH (as did the judge plus affray) the reasons why he did it are irrelevant to this debate but it resulted in someone having half the amount of ears that he started that morning with and serious facial surgery Weapons were used and a attempted murder charged was reduced to wouunding with intent .
Fact of the matter being he has a Ps3 in his cell he has his own key to his cell he can go in and out into the yard area as many times as he wants, He has nice clothes he shags his missus (in a room provided by the prison) for good behaivour. He eats better than most of us goes swimming twice a week he still smokes draw openly in his cell and nothing hasever been done to him. i have gone to see him on 3 occasions with VO's and i am astounded that there are armed robbers and people that have carved open people having the same joys as him.
now i dont read the Mail you can believe it or not i dont care however if you feel that this country can solve its problems with out dealing with these scum and their scummy families in a harsher way than we currently do i would love to know without sounding like a politicion.
[cite]Posted By: LenGlover[/cite]There is a Church and next to that a school a few hundred yards from my house. One Saturday afternoon there were FIVE police officers hiding in the church car park trying to nick speeding motorists! That same afternoon an arsonist burned down part of the school. Plenty of residents had tried without success to get the police to tackle the vandalism occurring in the area. They didn't want to know. Like Medders my garage was once broken into. No attempt to take prints or investigate just a crime number for insurance purposes and a leaflet about victim support.
We are supposed to live in a democracy, and the police are supposed to work for "us", yet a huge majority of people (from all political leanings) seem to feel the same way. They are sick to death of police picking on the wrong people.
We have vending machines robbed and vandalised every day costing us a fortune
we are not allowed to get copies or view the CCTV that would show the persons involved due to ? unless the OB are there the OB only ever give me a crime number but will not vist the outlet in which it has hapend the losses range from £100 to £350 cash and then there is the cost of repairs if that is not worthwhile investigating please someone tell me y
oh yeah i know because they are concentrating on cars and feckless wasters on their 5th asbo for beating up old people
There is no single solution to this and anger should not in my opinion be the driving emotion behind how to change it.
The lock 'em up approach has an obvious attraction in that it appears to immediately get the problem people off of the street. The flip side is that we will need more prisons and lots more money to cater for the massive increase in the prison population. In addition, it then takes 5/10 years (as suggested) out of a person's life for the crime of possessing a weapon, not killing or maiming another person - the perpetrator is highly unlikely to become a valid member of society after such a sentence - would you employ them? What then for them? I imagine a large proportion would make use of the networks they build up inside and enter straight into crime on release.
Now it is easy for me to offer criticism, far harder to offer a viable alternative. Without a massive amount of thought behind it, I wonder if the army could be a solution. I guess that most would agree that people who want to break the law, harm others or not fit into a more peaceful society need to learn respect, discipline and the value of life. We also live in a world that needs international forces to intervene in current wars and their aftermaths. Added to this, given the earthquakes, cyclones, droughts and other natural disasters that go on, instead of government money (our taxes) being given out as international aid to humanitarian organisations/debt relief perhaps it could go in part towards our forces as well.
Expanding the number of troops to include (not yet complete) criminals swells or undermanned forces, the increased "defence" budget would be going to an area that actually needs it and taking away the annual costs it takes to imprison these people and goes towards paying them to do something useful. The army can also use its own disciplinary system to deal with misdemeanour's (ahem). What we hopefully get is armed forces that have the numbers & budget to be effective at defence and one that becomes an effective, organised humanitarian force that can deal with international disasters far more effectively than a lot of charitable organisations might be. I can see as I write this that the political barriers of letting in foreign forces to help with disasters will be a problem in some cases.
I think I am saying that I'd rather 50k of taxes a year went to the army to try a get a productive human being out of a potential criminal than for it to go on paying for food, TV and an easy life (as far as we can tell) in prison only to produce a criminal with connections and few alternatives to being so. It might not work and it won't fix everything/everyone but I'd rather try to work on positive schemes than a "take that problem away" approach - it hasn't worked with landfills or nuclear waste!
What we value in society also needs looking at but how do you do that? Money is the main thing for most now, whether they care to admit it or not. While we see money as the way the to make everything else happen - love, life, friends, families & happiness rather than valuing those things first and foremost and what they mean we will continue to have a weird ultimate purpose (money) driving our lives and ultimately devaluing it.
You make some really excellent and well-thought out points, but your points are often punctuated by silly out-of-date, right-on comments, straight out of the polytechnic world of the seventies and eighties. Whether you like it or not "The Daily Mail" has five times the readership circulation of the Guardian (I expect your choice), which probably tells you a lot about what the silent majority feel. One reason why the prisons are full to bursting is also because the population is shooting up far higher than any other country in Europe due solely to immigration but I guess in your narrow vision, that point now makes me a racist! I actually agree with 80% of your views but your delivery is that of some bitter old left-wing history lecturer.
One problem with sending individuals like those mentioned to the armed forces is that we don't at the moment have the bodies to train the willing recruits at present, that said though a lot of fellas who previously packed in/bought/signed out of the armed forces may be tempted back especially those who have been errrrr fortunate enough to leave after active service and the proposition of a very meaningful role. Saying that again the British army is not the dumping ground it once was for delinquents and the like so the view of the top end would be a very dim one of such an idea especially after 20 years of trying to pull people in who they don't have to teach the alphabet to.
All that said (again!) I think a choice of a minimum nasty prison sentence (rendering that individual unemployable by most) or a 18/36 month compulsory spell in an infantry regiment is my favourable way forward. That would sort men from boys and knock some sense into those who think they are untouchable.
The human rights thing needs binning too though to make that work.
Only my opinion though and I'm not very good at serious opinions
Back in 1815 Wellington described the British Army as the scum of the earth. That was then, this is now.
The last thing the army wants is a load of unwilling recruits with no desire to be soldiers/Saliors/Airman, no discipline or fitness and quite likely drug or drink problems. They already have enough problems with the squaddies they have without having to sort out a load of degenerates.
If you want an elite force, which is what the British armed forces are, then making them take the dregs won't help.
If you want to bring back national service then fine. I'm too old but many of you under 30 can still go and spend two years in the forces, fighting in Iraq and Afganistan or peace keeping in Bosnia or Sierra Leone.
I salute the guys and girls who do it for their guts and commitment. Do they want or deserve to have some hoodie kid (a cliche I know) beside them in the front line?
Very sad news about Rob Knox just as it was about the other young people killed across London in the last few months (not last week MCS but one death is one too many regardless).
I don't have any quick answer. I don't think there is one answer and those that might work will not be quick.
IMHO We need to trust the Police and not see them as the enemy and the Police need to earn that trust by the way they deal with all sectors of society.
Parents need to take responsibility for their children (the 17 deaths have been young people killing young people) and if it can be worked out be punished for the crimes of their off-spring as well.
We need to radically reduce the number of teenage pregnancies not just by better contraception and sex education but by changing the mindset of kids that fathering children when a teen is OK and proves you are a man but has no consequences and that being a mother at 16 is maybe not the best, or even the only, life choice.
We also need to have less tolerance of violence in general. Yes, it has always happened but seeing 15 pints, a curry and a ruck as a "normal" night out is wrong. There has to be a another way.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]Back in 1815 Wellington described the British Army as the scum of the earth. That was then, this is now.
The last thing the army wants is a load of unwilling recruits with no desire to be soldiers/Saliors/Airman, no discipline or fitness and quite likely drug or drink problems. They already have enough problems with the squaddies they have without having to sort out a load of degenerates.
If you want an elite force, which is what the British armed forces are, then making them take the dregs won't help.
If you want to bring back national service then fine. I'm too old but many of you under 30 can still go and spend two years in the forces, fighting in Iraq and Afganistan or peace keeping in Bosnia or Sierra Leone.
I salute the guys and girls who do it for their guts and commitment. Do they want or deserve to have some hoodie kid (a cliche I know) beside them in the front line?
Thats sort of what I was getting at H, surprising what 6 weeks basic training will do to a gob shite though. Totally see your point however
Wouldn't it help if people stopped insisting that a vote for anyone but Labour and Conservative is a 'wasted vote?'
That way everyone who feels so disgruntled at the way British society is going could just choose a party (any party) who they feel give real acceptable policies to be tough on crime, and actually vote for them.
Otherwise the public get the government they deserve, don't they?
Henry I agree with much of that. There have been many good points on all sides and much of what Len has said I find I am in general agreement with. The solutions are not easy but I'd start here:
1. Policing - Our Police should be "for the people and of the people", yet even most of the mildest most law abiding of us find their petty tactics of nicking you for minor traffic offences irksome and it drives a psychological wedge between us and them, making him them figures of ridicule or hate. I would take policing speed limits away from the Police completely and give it to Traffic Wardens. This would allow the Police to concentrate on the things we want them to do like apprehending criminals.
2. Sentencing/Fines - When I was a retailer a few years back a couple of blokes broke into my premises and nicked a load of paving slabs, they also nicked some other stuff on the same night. A friendly neighbour saw them, got their car reg. and phoned the OB who apprehended them. One bloke got off with a slapped wrist, as it was a first offence, the other bloke got fined £50. What is the point of that kind of consequence? In my view they should have been fined more than the value of the goods taken and the fine should have been paid to me for my aggravation. A small insignificant crime but the point is the fine was miniscule and the victim was not compensated.
We need much more restitutive justice arrangements, including making scumbags face up to their victims. Making criminals buy into the hurt they have caused is the key to stopping many of them re-offending. I'd rather that than locking them up for longer in "schools for criminals". Yes violent offenders need to be locked away big time to protect society but really, are there too many who are jailed when some other method of repaying debts to society and their victims can be found?
"Typical wishy-washy liberal", I hear some say. Well I'm for reducing crime and can't help thinking that the record high level of the prison population is due in major part to the failure of the prison system to curb/stop recidivism leading to a higher and higher crime rate. (I don't believe the boll*x that recorded crime is going down)
3. Drugs/Drug Culture - Something has to be done about this and much criminality revolves around obtaining funds to pay for drug habits and the criminal gangs that profit from it.
On the first issue, the country needs to invest heavily in rehabilitation centres which can clean people up, there just ain't enough. Many who are in prison should be offered that route out. As somebody who has been burgled and who disturbed a burglar (crack head) breaking into my neighbours house, I would sleep much sounder each night knowing these people were being cleaned up and removed from the spiral of crime brought by the evil substances they crave.
On the issue of drug gangs well lets see how the Organised Crime Agency gets on over the next few years. What has been set up looks quite good.
As for the drugs themselves such as the Poppy crop grown in Afghanistan, well why doesn’t the West just pay them not to grow such things or pay them big money to grow something else?
4. Adults as Role Models - We wring our hands and blame it all on the "yoof" but are we the best role models for our kids? I know I try to be: I expect my child to show me and other adults respect but do I always show others the respect that I should? The answer is no. We are no longer deferential to authority figures, we are pushy with shopkeepers, rude to other drivers and grumpy with one another and many of us (not me) get seriously lashed up on a fairly regular basis. Many of us have difficult marriages, and a third of us (not me) are on at least our second one. What does that teach our kids about the right values? This doesn't answer all the questions but I do think that kids are picking up bad habits from their parents.
5. Violent Games/Films - There is no doubt in my mind that continuous exposure to these kind of things de-sensitizes kids to some aspects of violence. I don't think that normally adjusted and well brought up kids are overly affected but those on the margins with other problems are not helped by playing/watching these things. Take Grand Theft Auto for example. I have banned my 9 year old from playing the game - I won't have it in the house, yet he has been around friend’s houses and played it. The glorification of crime and violence where the criminals are seen as heroes is morally redundant in my view and parents who regularly allow their kids access to this sort of rubbish view of life are storing up problems for their kids in future years.
6. Culture of Weapons Carrying/Tolerance of Criminality - When Police are seen as the enemy and the threat of being attacked by other groups of "yoof" is high enough, then it's hardly surprising that some young adults will take to carrying weapons to "defend" themselves. Throw in social drugs, women and alcohol and you've a got a lethal cocktail which will inevitably lead to some of cases we've read about recently. I'm not certain that things have really changed much in the last forty years although the areas where violence is common now may well have changed due to social changes in certain areas.
As far as I can see the way forward is a much higher Police presence in known "high risk" areas, with zero tolerance of all types of criminality? That will send the message that criminality of any kind including carrying is likely to lead to you being caught. If this is backed up by very tough sentences for weapons carrying, it will get to the root and cut it out. There is no other way in my view otherwise the fear of being attacked will always outweigh the fear and consequences of being caught.
7. Maternal and Paternal Role in Children’s up-bringing/development - Whilst many, many children are parented well by one parent, it seems to me that the role of two parents is desirable and helps to bring both male and female influences to bear on children to their benefit. Fathers have a vital role to play but I would like to stress the absolutely crucial role played by the primary bond figure in the first year or so of life and that is normally that of the mother.
I have an adopted child who has been left with some serious social and behavioural problems due to trauma he suffered in the first year of his life when he was removed from his birth parents, looked after by more than one foster family and left in a foster home, largely to fend for himself, whilst his foster parents dealt with other children who had more pressing issues such as drug dependencies and foetal alcohol syndrome. The point is that his maternal care was not up to standard and recent scientific breakthroughs in understanding how our brains develop after birth are showing how crucial it is that children get from (in most cases) their mother, the right nurturing during this vital stage of their learning development. It teaches them the very basic building blocks to enable them to socialize appropriately, learn boundaries and behave appropriately.
There is much more to this than can be covered in a post on a Charlton web site but science is learning more and more about how problems can occur at later stages in a child’s development if there has not been the right level of nurturing and/or trauma suffered by children from birth to around aged three.
With the break up of marriages, the need for two incomes in families who stay together where Mums return to work fairly quickly after the birth: what effect is that having on the very young and what long-term impact is it having on kids abilities to function in socially appropriate ways? I have recently read a book by a Danish psychologist who postulates that this may well be the cause of the high levels of delinquency/anti-social behaviour that is seen in Western cultures. It's not conclusive but it does point to failings in the way Western society looks after the very young which is different for many children to what used to happen to say 40, 50 or 60 years ago.
Dan, with the greatest respect, the debate was about "young people" living life "comfortably on the dole. As I understand it, the only benefit they can claim is Jobseekers Allowance IF they are still living at home with their parents. Please advise me what other benefits they can claim but I have just looked at www.direct.gov.uk and can't see anything else that a single person living at home can claim for.
This is the kind of 18-24 year old age group which I would imagine is largely responsible for the most of problems that we have on the streets and, lets be honest, most of them are under 18 anyway and not eligible for ANY benefits whatsoever.
Admittedly, if the unemployed have to pay for their own accomodation and if they have children then there are additional payments available but these still would hardly constitue "living comfortably" in most people's estimation.
As for your comments about having black friends because you were brought up in south London, again with the greatest respect, I recall from a previous post that you attended Colfes, didn't you? I don't think that too many of the brothers from Lewisham get in there do they? If they did I am pretty sure that Eltham College would get a whole bunch of new students enrolling pretty quick.
Good on you for going to such a great school and I am sure your folks worked their nuts off to put you through there and bloody good luck to you (I am about to send my three kids to a private school here in Brisbane) but I don't think that going there would give you a great insight into the Afro-Carribean community! Just lilke my kids won't really understand much about indigenous kids here because they won't go to school with them.
We had a very large black population at our school in London and, sad to say, but the biggest problem for many of the black kids was that they came from single-parent homes where the father had buggered off and left the family to fend for themselves, leaving behind a whole bunch of angry and confused kids.
Many of the black lads simply had no father figure in their house to discipline them and teach them right from wrong and so instead ended up taking their cue from older black kids (siblings, cousins or other kids on their estate) who had grown up the same way and the vicious spiral started all over again.
And where are these British black kids and white kids infact suppose to get jobs. You have schools bursting at the seams due to the open borders with our European Union friends. Education is getting poorer. We have the possibility of Turkey joining the EU and some ex Yugoslav countries and with the combination with the attractive welfare system child bloody credit for all its going to get worse.
We have a government that encourages UK companies to use outsourced foreign remote workers instead of our own. The company I work for bosses met the UKs Ambasedor in Singapore and encourged the deal to go ahead to the loss of 40 jobs in Wales a Labour heartland.
Unless your parents are loaded, provides and pays for a decent education it is becoming hard for normal kids to find jobs so crime will go up.
1st rule of government should be look after your own. And by own I mean ALL UK Subjects.
I'm afraid the only solution is for individuals to take control of their personal situation. I left East London for Bournemouth 8 years ago because, having been burgled more than 10 times in the 10 years before, I'd had enough of being a victim & knowing that the Police were never ever going to catch anybody for it. It was obvious to me then the situation was only going one way without drastic changes in Government policy on law and order, and agree with it or not, immigration. In the next 8 years I saw those same aspects of society creeping in, in what, when I moved down there was a great place to live and work. Unfortunately the downward spiral seems to be speeding up wherever you are in the UK these days hence my next move was out here.
It's a shame I've had to do that to get a better qualty of life but I KNOW that if I left my bag on show in my car around here it would still be there when I got back for example and they chav culture just doesn't seem to exist here. Almost everyone has, and shows, respect for each other. Of course there are places here which are a bit dodgy but they are well know and a rarity and can be avoided if you want. That option just doesn't seem to exit in the UK any more. What the answer is I don't know, probably a mixture of many of the arguments put forward on here. But what I do know is that things are getting worse and worse and somebody, somewhere needs to address these issues before everyone who can afford to quit the country does so.
Anyway lots of very good points on here. I think we are all generally going in the same direction - everyone is worried for the future and hope that it can be sorted. But until the continual breakdown of family can be stopped i can only see it getting worse.
Maybe that's the difference? The French for example are 100% family orientated and have a completely different relationship with their kids from what I can see.
5. Violent Games/Films - There is no doubt in my mind that continuous exposure to these kind of things de-sensitizes kids to some aspects of violence. I don't think that normally adjusted and well brought up kids are overly affected but those on the margins with other problems are not helped by playing/watching these things. Take Grand Theft Auto for example. I have banned my 9 year old from playing the game - I won't have it in the house, yet he has been around friend’s houses and played it. The glorification of crime and violence where the criminals are seen as heroes is morally redundant in my view and parents who regularly allow their kids access to this sort of rubbish view of life are storing up problems for their kids in future years.
I'm lucky enough to work with the offending products, and i totally agree with you that Kids should be nowhere near these sort of things. It's a massive bug bare of the myself and the industry in general that people are up in arms about the content of these games and want us to do something about it. The simple problem is that Parents need to understand that not all videogames; like books, films, websites and boardgames are suitable for Children. They are more strictly rated than films and hold BBFC 18 certification for reason... thats the exactly the same 18 rating that films like Hostel, Silence of the lambs, the Godfather, Nightmare on Elm street carry, no one would allow their 9 year old to watch these films, 18 rated games are illegal to buy by anyone under the age of 18, the advertising is more strictly regulated than our film counterparts... simply it's tantamount to child neglect if you allow your child to play them unrestricted.
Good parenting is what is most important not these products, it's just a shame that good parenting skills that you posess appear to be in the minority
Jimmy just a point fella who was it that said " Tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime" ? maybe people did vote for that and what they got was spin.
There was always been poverty and real poverty at that. 50 years back kids still got rickets caused by total basic diet. Having f**k all shouldnt mean i"m taking urs".
My own feeling it has something to do with comunity. Kids brought up where their comunity is infact violent and gang orientated will belive its normal. If people are within radicialised islamic comunities they will believe what they see within that comunity. It is a fact that people will gravitate to comunities that they feel at ease in. Be that language, faith or race. If this is wrong(i dont think it is) then what would be the alternative ? bus people of differing culture into areas where they have nothing in common withtheir neighbors? We need people working within al comunities to get the anti violence message out. We all bleed we all die.
Ormiston - My Mother-in-Law is the Manager of a dole office in Bristol and whilst I don't have the exact details to hand, she is forever moaning about the amount of money the "kids", as she puts it, are able to claim for a variety of benefits.
These "kids" are just following in their parents footsteps in that they actually see being on "the social" as a viable way to make an income and that they're utterly ingrained with this. There are large numbers of these 18-24 yr olds who are, for the 1st time, 2nd generation doleys who, if they work the system properly can have a living standard equivalent to someone earning £30-35k pa. Obviously this would mean getting married, having kids etc to secure council accommodation, child benefit etc but if they work it right there is little or no motivation to find work......
If, as I imagine, some of these 18yr olds are having kids and getting married just to work the system, then it goes without saying that a large number of these false marriages are not going to last. This could perhaps go someway to explaining why we see so many 1 parent families with various kids from various fathers and the breakdown of family values etc.
I did indeed go to Colfe's and was / am indebted to my parents hard work to put both my sister and I through public / independent education, however Colfe's is no Dulwich College / St Dunstan's. Its based in a predominately working / middle class area and had a heavily subsidised bursary scheme meaning that we had many kids that were from less privileged backgrounds as well as minority kids from well off families. Indeed something like a quarter of my year was of ethnic background.
However schooling only tells half the story as I grew up in the Borough of Lewisham and had black friends from primary school days and latterly from extended circles of friends from outside this oasis of being a middle class British white, that you've wrongly assumed that I grew up in.
I'm am more than aware that many of my childhood black friends didn't have a regular father figure, but this is nothing new to be honest. Many of them talked about this being common practice back in the W.I. and that a man could have 5 different women that he'd fathered children by. He would pay a pittance to help this spread of dependants, but because the matriarchal bonds were so close there was always and Aunt, Grandmother etc to help with emotion / financial support . (Something perhaps that was lost when so many families relocated to the UK.). Mother / Grandmother / Aunt therefore look on both paternal and maternal roles and can be even more fearsome and daunting than any upset Father I've come across. Far from growing up confused and angry the friends I had, and few I still keep in touch with, grew up with the balance of being able to be the "man" of the family whilst also having the softer side that one inherits from one's Mother. (Im not saying this is true across the whole community of course, but just what I have experience of.)
Difference is GH 50 yrs ago when people had less material goods, food, fuel for heating etc they relied more on their extended family and community for support and therefore if a kid stepped out of line he / she would get a thick ear from the local plod, a thick ear from an Aunt / neighbour and then a belt across the backside from Dad....These days the OB cant touch kids, neither can the neighbour / Aunt and the parents will probably blame their kids behavious on someone / thing else and give the Copper a bollocking, before letting the kid run riot again whilst they disappear down the pub / settle down in front Sky+ with a 12 pack of Stella and 40 Mayfair
1. Policing - Our Police should be "for the people and of the people", yet even most of the mildest most law abiding of us find their petty tactics of nicking you for minor traffic offences irksome and it drives a psychological wedge between us and them, making him them figures of ridicule or hate. I would take policing speed limits away from the Police completely and give it to Traffic Wardens. This would allow the Police to concentrate on the things we want them to do like apprehending criminals.
Can I just make the point that speeding is a crime, and potentially can lead to worse things. Weren't people asking the police to prevent rather than solve? surely by stopping speeding will put a stop to worse things that can happen? I'm sure if you had a child knocked over by a car doing 35 in a 30 zone you would encourage the speed police to be out in force. Can we stop downgrading speeding as a lesser crime, as in my eyes, its just the police doing their job. PREVENTING WORSE CRIMES.
Suzi, you are right to say that if we can stop the lesser crimes then that will lead to a reduction in crime overall. In my opinion you could use say burglarly as an example or this, ie catch a burglar before he goes on to robbing banks, but Police are only interested in speeding motorists as it is a cash cow and they are milking it for all they can get. Also I don't think speeding leads to greater crimes, I mean I've been done twice but as yet havn't progressed to murder, GBH, etc and don't intend to either.
Comments
did absolutely jack all about it though
Fact of the matter being he has a Ps3 in his cell he has his own key to his cell he can go in and out into the yard area as many times as he wants, He has nice clothes he shags his missus (in a room provided by the prison) for good behaivour. He eats better than most of us goes swimming twice a week he still smokes draw openly in his cell and nothing hasever been done to him. i have gone to see him on 3 occasions with VO's and i am astounded that there are armed robbers and people that have carved open people having the same joys as him.
now i dont read the Mail you can believe it or not i dont care however if you feel that this country can solve its problems with out dealing with these scum and their scummy families in a harsher way than we currently do i would love to know without sounding like a politicion.
LOL - just goes to prove how a remark can be taken out of context doesn't it!
Exactly what I'm getting at.
Good grief,,,, is that what you have to do these days to get Legal Aid ; )
we are not allowed to get copies or view the CCTV that would show the persons involved due to ? unless the OB are there the OB only ever give me a crime number but will not vist the outlet in which it has hapend the losses range from £100 to £350 cash and then there is the cost of repairs if that is not worthwhile investigating please someone tell me y
oh yeah i know because they are concentrating on cars and feckless wasters on their 5th asbo for beating up old people
The lock 'em up approach has an obvious attraction in that it appears to immediately get the problem people off of the street. The flip side is that we will need more prisons and lots more money to cater for the massive increase in the prison population. In addition, it then takes 5/10 years (as suggested) out of a person's life for the crime of possessing a weapon, not killing or maiming another person - the perpetrator is highly unlikely to become a valid member of society after such a sentence - would you employ them? What then for them? I imagine a large proportion would make use of the networks they build up inside and enter straight into crime on release.
Now it is easy for me to offer criticism, far harder to offer a viable alternative. Without a massive amount of thought behind it, I wonder if the army could be a solution. I guess that most would agree that people who want to break the law, harm others or not fit into a more peaceful society need to learn respect, discipline and the value of life. We also live in a world that needs international forces to intervene in current wars and their aftermaths. Added to this, given the earthquakes, cyclones, droughts and other natural disasters that go on, instead of government money (our taxes) being given out as international aid to humanitarian organisations/debt relief perhaps it could go in part towards our forces as well.
Expanding the number of troops to include (not yet complete) criminals swells or undermanned forces, the increased "defence" budget would be going to an area that actually needs it and taking away the annual costs it takes to imprison these people and goes towards paying them to do something useful. The army can also use its own disciplinary system to deal with misdemeanour's (ahem). What we hopefully get is armed forces that have the numbers & budget to be effective at defence and one that becomes an effective, organised humanitarian force that can deal with international disasters far more effectively than a lot of charitable organisations might be. I can see as I write this that the political barriers of letting in foreign forces to help with disasters will be a problem in some cases.
I think I am saying that I'd rather 50k of taxes a year went to the army to try a get a productive human being out of a potential criminal than for it to go on paying for food, TV and an easy life (as far as we can tell) in prison only to produce a criminal with connections and few alternatives to being so. It might not work and it won't fix everything/everyone but I'd rather try to work on positive schemes than a "take that problem away" approach - it hasn't worked with landfills or nuclear waste!
What we value in society also needs looking at but how do you do that? Money is the main thing for most now, whether they care to admit it or not. While we see money as the way the to make everything else happen - love, life, friends, families & happiness rather than valuing those things first and foremost and what they mean we will continue to have a weird ultimate purpose (money) driving our lives and ultimately devaluing it.
Nice post Sco.
You make some really excellent and well-thought out points, but your points are often punctuated by silly out-of-date, right-on comments, straight out of the polytechnic world of the seventies and eighties. Whether you like it or not "The Daily Mail" has five times the readership circulation of the Guardian (I expect your choice), which probably tells you a lot about what the silent majority feel. One reason why the prisons are full to bursting is also because the population is shooting up far higher than any other country in Europe due solely to immigration but I guess in your narrow vision, that point now makes me a racist! I actually agree with 80% of your views but your delivery is that of some bitter old left-wing history lecturer.
One problem with sending individuals like those mentioned to the armed forces is that we don't at the moment have the bodies to train the willing recruits at present, that said though a lot of fellas who previously packed in/bought/signed out of the armed forces may be tempted back especially those who have been errrrr fortunate enough to leave after active service and the proposition of a very meaningful role. Saying that again the British army is not the dumping ground it once was for delinquents and the like so the view of the top end would be a very dim one of such an idea especially after 20 years of trying to pull people in who they don't have to teach the alphabet to.
All that said (again!) I think a choice of a minimum nasty prison sentence (rendering that individual unemployable by most) or a 18/36 month compulsory spell in an infantry regiment is my favourable way forward. That would sort men from boys and knock some sense into those who think they are untouchable.
The human rights thing needs binning too though to make that work.
Only my opinion though and I'm not very good at serious opinions
The last thing the army wants is a load of unwilling recruits with no desire to be soldiers/Saliors/Airman, no discipline or fitness and quite likely drug or drink problems. They already have enough problems with the squaddies they have without having to sort out a load of degenerates.
If you want an elite force, which is what the British armed forces are, then making them take the dregs won't help.
If you want to bring back national service then fine. I'm too old but many of you under 30 can still go and spend two years in the forces, fighting in Iraq and Afganistan or peace keeping in Bosnia or Sierra Leone.
I salute the guys and girls who do it for their guts and commitment. Do they want or deserve to have some hoodie kid (a cliche I know) beside them in the front line?
I don't have any quick answer. I don't think there is one answer and those that might work will not be quick.
IMHO We need to trust the Police and not see them as the enemy and the Police need to earn that trust by the way they deal with all sectors of society.
Parents need to take responsibility for their children (the 17 deaths have been young people killing young people) and if it can be worked out be punished for the crimes of their off-spring as well.
We need to radically reduce the number of teenage pregnancies not just by better contraception and sex education but by changing the mindset of kids that fathering children when a teen is OK and proves you are a man but has no consequences and that being a mother at 16 is maybe not the best, or even the only, life choice.
We also need to have less tolerance of violence in general. Yes, it has always happened but seeing 15 pints, a curry and a ruck as a "normal" night out is wrong. There has to be a another way.
Thats sort of what I was getting at H, surprising what 6 weeks basic training will do to a gob shite though. Totally see your point however
Wouldn't it help if people stopped insisting that a vote for anyone but Labour and Conservative is a 'wasted vote?'
That way everyone who feels so disgruntled at the way British society is going could just choose a party (any party) who they feel give real acceptable policies to be tough on crime, and actually vote for them.
Otherwise the public get the government they deserve, don't they?
1. Policing - Our Police should be "for the people and of the people", yet even most of the mildest most law abiding of us find their petty tactics of nicking you for minor traffic offences irksome and it drives a psychological wedge between us and them, making him them figures of ridicule or hate. I would take policing speed limits away from the Police completely and give it to Traffic Wardens. This would allow the Police to concentrate on the things we want them to do like apprehending criminals.
2. Sentencing/Fines - When I was a retailer a few years back a couple of blokes broke into my premises and nicked a load of paving slabs, they also nicked some other stuff on the same night. A friendly neighbour saw them, got their car reg. and phoned the OB who apprehended them. One bloke got off with a slapped wrist, as it was a first offence, the other bloke got fined £50. What is the point of that kind of consequence? In my view they should have been fined more than the value of the goods taken and the fine should have been paid to me for my aggravation. A small insignificant crime but the point is the fine was miniscule and the victim was not compensated.
We need much more restitutive justice arrangements, including making scumbags face up to their victims. Making criminals buy into the hurt they have caused is the key to stopping many of them re-offending. I'd rather that than locking them up for longer in "schools for criminals". Yes violent offenders need to be locked away big time to protect society but really, are there too many who are jailed when some other method of repaying debts to society and their victims can be found?
"Typical wishy-washy liberal", I hear some say. Well I'm for reducing crime and can't help thinking that the record high level of the prison population is due in major part to the failure of the prison system to curb/stop recidivism leading to a higher and higher crime rate. (I don't believe the boll*x that recorded crime is going down)
3. Drugs/Drug Culture - Something has to be done about this and much criminality revolves around obtaining funds to pay for drug habits and the criminal gangs that profit from it.
On the first issue, the country needs to invest heavily in rehabilitation centres which can clean people up, there just ain't enough. Many who are in prison should be offered that route out. As somebody who has been burgled and who disturbed a burglar (crack head) breaking into my neighbours house, I would sleep much sounder each night knowing these people were being cleaned up and removed from the spiral of crime brought by the evil substances they crave.
On the issue of drug gangs well lets see how the Organised Crime Agency gets on over the next few years. What has been set up looks quite good.
As for the drugs themselves such as the Poppy crop grown in Afghanistan, well why doesn’t the West just pay them not to grow such things or pay them big money to grow something else?
4. Adults as Role Models - We wring our hands and blame it all on the "yoof" but are we the best role models for our kids? I know I try to be: I expect my child to show me and other adults respect but do I always show others the respect that I should? The answer is no. We are no longer deferential to authority figures, we are pushy with shopkeepers, rude to other drivers and grumpy with one another and many of us (not me) get seriously lashed up on a fairly regular basis. Many of us have difficult marriages, and a third of us (not me) are on at least our second one. What does that teach our kids about the right values? This doesn't answer all the questions but I do think that kids are picking up bad habits from their parents.
5. Violent Games/Films - There is no doubt in my mind that continuous exposure to these kind of things de-sensitizes kids to some aspects of violence. I don't think that normally adjusted and well brought up kids are overly affected but those on the margins with other problems are not helped by playing/watching these things. Take Grand Theft Auto for example. I have banned my 9 year old from playing the game - I won't have it in the house, yet he has been around friend’s houses and played it. The glorification of crime and violence where the criminals are seen as heroes is morally redundant in my view and parents who regularly allow their kids access to this sort of rubbish view of life are storing up problems for their kids in future years.
6. Culture of Weapons Carrying/Tolerance of Criminality - When Police are seen as the enemy and the threat of being attacked by other groups of "yoof" is high enough, then it's hardly surprising that some young adults will take to carrying weapons to "defend" themselves. Throw in social drugs, women and alcohol and you've a got a lethal cocktail which will inevitably lead to some of cases we've read about recently. I'm not certain that things have really changed much in the last forty years although the areas where violence is common now may well have changed due to social changes in certain areas.
As far as I can see the way forward is a much higher Police presence in known "high risk" areas, with zero tolerance of all types of criminality? That will send the message that criminality of any kind including carrying is likely to lead to you being caught. If this is backed up by very tough sentences for weapons carrying, it will get to the root and cut it out. There is no other way in my view otherwise the fear of being attacked will always outweigh the fear and consequences of being caught.
7. Maternal and Paternal Role in Children’s up-bringing/development - Whilst many, many children are parented well by one parent, it seems to me that the role of two parents is desirable and helps to bring both male and female influences to bear on children to their benefit. Fathers have a vital role to play but I would like to stress the absolutely crucial role played by the primary bond figure in the first year or so of life and that is normally that of the mother.
I have an adopted child who has been left with some serious social and behavioural problems due to trauma he suffered in the first year of his life when he was removed from his birth parents, looked after by more than one foster family and left in a foster home, largely to fend for himself, whilst his foster parents dealt with other children who had more pressing issues such as drug dependencies and foetal alcohol syndrome. The point is that his maternal care was not up to standard and recent scientific breakthroughs in understanding how our brains develop after birth are showing how crucial it is that children get from (in most cases) their mother, the right nurturing during this vital stage of their learning development. It teaches them the very basic building blocks to enable them to socialize appropriately, learn boundaries and behave appropriately.
There is much more to this than can be covered in a post on a Charlton web site but science is learning more and more about how problems can occur at later stages in a child’s development if there has not been the right level of nurturing and/or trauma suffered by children from birth to around aged three.
With the break up of marriages, the need for two incomes in families who stay together where Mums return to work fairly quickly after the birth: what effect is that having on the very young and what long-term impact is it having on kids abilities to function in socially appropriate ways? I have recently read a book by a Danish psychologist who postulates that this may well be the cause of the high levels of delinquency/anti-social behaviour that is seen in Western cultures. It's not conclusive but it does point to failings in the way Western society looks after the very young which is different for many children to what used to happen to say 40, 50 or 60 years ago.
Of course growing up in SE London I dont and never had had any black friends myself.......
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dan, with the greatest respect, the debate was about "young people" living life "comfortably on the dole. As I understand it, the only benefit they can claim is Jobseekers Allowance IF they are still living at home with their parents. Please advise me what other benefits they can claim but I have just looked at www.direct.gov.uk and can't see anything else that a single person living at home can claim for.
This is the kind of 18-24 year old age group which I would imagine is largely responsible for the most of problems that we have on the streets and, lets be honest, most of them are under 18 anyway and not eligible for ANY benefits whatsoever.
Admittedly, if the unemployed have to pay for their own accomodation and if they have children then there are additional payments available but these still would hardly constitue "living comfortably" in most people's estimation.
As for your comments about having black friends because you were brought up in south London, again with the greatest respect, I recall from a previous post that you attended Colfes, didn't you? I don't think that too many of the brothers from Lewisham get in there do they? If they did I am pretty sure that Eltham College would get a whole bunch of new students enrolling pretty quick.
Good on you for going to such a great school and I am sure your folks worked their nuts off to put you through there and bloody good luck to you (I am about to send my three kids to a private school here in Brisbane) but I don't think that going there would give you a great insight into the Afro-Carribean community! Just lilke my kids won't really understand much about indigenous kids here because they won't go to school with them.
We had a very large black population at our school in London and, sad to say, but the biggest problem for many of the black kids was that they came from single-parent homes where the father had buggered off and left the family to fend for themselves, leaving behind a whole bunch of angry and confused kids.
Many of the black lads simply had no father figure in their house to discipline them and teach them right from wrong and so instead ended up taking their cue from older black kids (siblings, cousins or other kids on their estate) who had grown up the same way and the vicious spiral started all over again.
We have a government that encourages UK companies to use outsourced foreign remote workers instead of our own. The company I work for bosses met the UKs Ambasedor in Singapore and encourged the deal to go ahead to the loss of 40 jobs in Wales a Labour heartland.
Unless your parents are loaded, provides and pays for a decent education it is becoming hard for normal kids to find jobs so crime will go up.
1st rule of government should be look after your own. And by own I mean ALL UK Subjects.
It's a shame I've had to do that to get a better qualty of life but I KNOW that if I left my bag on show in my car around here it would still be there when I got back for example and they chav culture just doesn't seem to exist here. Almost everyone has, and shows, respect for each other. Of course there are places here which are a bit dodgy but they are well know and a rarity and can be avoided if you want. That option just doesn't seem to exit in the UK any more. What the answer is I don't know, probably a mixture of many of the arguments put forward on here. But what I do know is that things are getting worse and worse and somebody, somewhere needs to address these issues before everyone who can afford to quit the country does so.
Anyway lots of very good points on here. I think we are all generally going in the same direction - everyone is worried for the future and hope that it can be sorted. But until the continual breakdown of family can be stopped i can only see it getting worse.
Maybe that's the difference? The French for example are 100% family orientated and have a completely different relationship with their kids from what I can see.
I'm lucky enough to work with the offending products, and i totally agree with you that Kids should be nowhere near these sort of things. It's a massive bug bare of the myself and the industry in general that people are up in arms about the content of these games and want us to do something about it. The simple problem is that Parents need to understand that not all videogames; like books, films, websites and boardgames are suitable for Children. They are more strictly rated than films and hold BBFC 18 certification for reason... thats the exactly the same 18 rating that films like Hostel, Silence of the lambs, the Godfather, Nightmare on Elm street carry, no one would allow their 9 year old to watch these films, 18 rated games are illegal to buy by anyone under the age of 18, the advertising is more strictly regulated than our film counterparts... simply it's tantamount to child neglect if you allow your child to play them unrestricted.
Good parenting is what is most important not these products, it's just a shame that good parenting skills that you posess appear to be in the minority
There was always been poverty and real poverty at that. 50 years back kids still got rickets caused by total basic diet. Having f**k all shouldnt mean i"m taking urs".
My own feeling it has something to do with comunity. Kids brought up where their comunity is infact violent and gang orientated will belive its normal. If people are within radicialised islamic comunities they will believe what they see within that comunity.
It is a fact that people will gravitate to comunities that they feel at ease in. Be that language, faith or race. If this is wrong(i dont think it is) then what would be the alternative ? bus people of differing culture into areas where they have nothing in common withtheir neighbors? We need people working within al comunities to get the anti violence message out. We all bleed we all die.
These "kids" are just following in their parents footsteps in that they actually see being on "the social" as a viable way to make an income and that they're utterly ingrained with this. There are large numbers of these 18-24 yr olds who are, for the 1st time, 2nd generation doleys who, if they work the system properly can have a living standard equivalent to someone earning £30-35k pa. Obviously this would mean getting married, having kids etc to secure council accommodation, child benefit etc but if they work it right there is little or no motivation to find work......
If, as I imagine, some of these 18yr olds are having kids and getting married just to work the system, then it goes without saying that a large number of these false marriages are not going to last. This could perhaps go someway to explaining why we see so many 1 parent families with various kids from various fathers and the breakdown of family values etc.
I did indeed go to Colfe's and was / am indebted to my parents hard work to put both my sister and I through public / independent education, however Colfe's is no Dulwich College / St Dunstan's. Its based in a predominately working / middle class area and had a heavily subsidised bursary scheme meaning that we had many kids that were from less privileged backgrounds as well as minority kids from well off families. Indeed something like a quarter of my year was of ethnic background.
However schooling only tells half the story as I grew up in the Borough of Lewisham and had black friends from primary school days and latterly from extended circles of friends from outside this oasis of being a middle class British white, that you've wrongly assumed that I grew up in.
I'm am more than aware that many of my childhood black friends didn't have a regular father figure, but this is nothing new to be honest. Many of them talked about this being common practice back in the W.I. and that a man could have 5 different women that he'd fathered children by. He would pay a pittance to help this spread of dependants, but because the matriarchal bonds were so close there was always and Aunt, Grandmother etc to help with emotion / financial support . (Something perhaps that was lost when so many families relocated to the UK.). Mother / Grandmother / Aunt therefore look on both paternal and maternal roles and can be even more fearsome and daunting than any upset Father I've come across. Far from growing up confused and angry the friends I had, and few I still keep in touch with, grew up with the balance of being able to be the "man" of the family whilst also having the softer side that one inherits from one's Mother. (Im not saying this is true across the whole community of course, but just what I have experience of.)
we're all becoming more and more polarised.
Can I just make the point that speeding is a crime, and potentially can lead to worse things. Weren't people asking the police to prevent rather than solve? surely by stopping speeding will put a stop to worse things that can happen? I'm sure if you had a child knocked over by a car doing 35 in a 30 zone you would encourage the speed police to be out in force. Can we stop downgrading speeding as a lesser crime, as in my eyes, its just the police doing their job. PREVENTING WORSE CRIMES.