primetime anti-social behaviour-what's to be done

JimmySmith

Deleted User wrote:

Dealing with the causes > Institutionalising 10 year olds

Maybe but Protecting the Elderly from yobbism > Institutionalising 10 year olds

RedPlanet

Waiting for the gardia or the government to do something is not going to produce results. At most they will pass more laws giving the government more powers but this will result in feck all change on the ground.

If people are serious about anti-social behavior then we already know what to do about it. It's been done already in NI, it's called "people power", or "Vigilantes" depending upon your political persuasion and what papers you read.

Like pushing the dealers out back in the 80's. in Dublin.
Communties can organise their own volutary street patrols (this has been done in many cities around the world) in order to "take back the streets";
alternatively communties can wait until SF does this for them, and they will.
And they will probably benefit politically for it.

Uncle F

give the army the same power as the cops and leave them patrol the areas. there doing **** all else in the barracks anyway only scratching their arses.

also leave them set up boot camps in the Curragh for young offenders.

there was a debate on again on tuesday night on Q&A or Primetime (cant remember which 1 it was) and i thought your man john halligan was very critical of waterford city council but he was right in what he said

pete

pete wrote:

Because it worked so well at industrial / borstal / reform schools in the past?

What? Just because it didn't work in the past, that with advances in psychology and human understanding it couldn't work now?

Such camps for troubled kids ARE working around the world. This would just be a larger scale.

Deleted User wrote:

Dealing with the causes > Institutionalising 10 year olds

Your only objection is that its institutionalising 10 year olds? Hmmm... so target kids from 13-17 years old. That would still remove a huge % of those involved in these issues. Better than doing nothing, and watch our society slowly tear itself apart.

FTA69

What do you suggest i do, hit them? Umlike you, i believe the police do care, but their hands are indeed tied.

Why should the police care? As I said already none of them are from the areas afflicted, none of them have any interest in actually coming to an area when an incident happens, which is proved by the time disparity between their calls to upper class areas and those afflicted with anti-social behaviour. To reiterate myself, the legislation is already in place to deal with such issues, councils also have the power to inact bye-laws on the issues. Why bring in some gimmick that will simply criminalise people for not breaking any registered law?

Why would SF want to destroy the IRA rectuiting grounds and bring some law into an area that provides enough underage bodies to do their dirty work for them. God forbid these 'Kids' get arrested and are no longer able to help the cause.

Eh? What do we have to gain from delinquints running our areas into the ground?

They send out the ****s to cause trouble and then the SF prats go around and tell people to vote for them and they'll clean the place up.

Of course, the dastardly soundrels! You obviously take working-class people for fools do you? Because they must be prize idiots to make sure that our councillors top the poll in most of these areas. To be honest, you've demonstrated your lack of understanding of this issue with the nonsense conspiracies you've been spouting. Anyway, I've debated the merits of my party on this forum hundreds of times before and I've no real desire to do so again.

It looks like the only part of my post you didnt address was the the part about doing something for the old women living in terror besides talking

I said that ASB can only be addressed through far-reaching and radical reforms of policing and the approach taken to miscreants, as well as ensuring that these areas aren't wracked with the poverty that is ultimately responsible for this behaviour. It's a complex issue which can't be simplified by the "they're scum, lock em' all up" mantra which has failed utterly in every country it has been tried eg the USA.

Earthman,

know if my Dad (God be good to him RIP) ever caught me at what these rogues are at, he would have tanned my backside

They probably do get "tanned" with frequency, I'd imagine their mothers do as well. Domestic violence is often a large factor in causing this type of behaviour.

growler

oscarBravo wrote:

What's considered a breach of an ASBO? I'm not that au fait with the concept.

failure to comply (sounds like Robocop that) with the terms of the ASBO, i.e, breaking a curfew, being found in a group of X or more, found on a street where they are prescribed from being etc.

A strange one I saw cited on BBC recently was a young fella of 15 ish being found in breach of the terms of his asbo because he was playing football, the ASBO prevented him being in a group of 5 or more !

JimmySmith

FTA69 wrote:

Why should the police care? As I said already none of them are from the areas afflicted, none of them have any interest in actually coming to an area when an incident happens, which is proved by the time disparity between their calls to upper class areas and those afflicted with anti-social behaviour. To reiterate myself, the legislation is already in place to deal with such issues, councils also have the power to inact bye-laws on the issues. Why bring in some gimmick that will simply criminalise people for not breaking any registered law?

Oh yeah, i forgot SFs attitude to policing. Im fact the police do care. They are very helpful, but powerless. They call up and the scummers are still standing around. They cant arrest them. When they leave they are at it again.

FTA69 wrote:

Eh? What do we have to gain from delinquints running our areas into the ground?

Votes man, votes. As if you didnt know? The votes of the little prats, when they get older of course, that hero worship the SFers and the votes of the poor victims of their twisted strategy.

FTA69 wrote:

Of course, the dastardly soundrels! You obviously take working-class people for fools do you? Because they must be prize idiots to make sure that our councillors top the poll in most of these areas. To be honest, you've demonstrated your lack of understanding of this issue with the nonsense conspiracies you've been spouting. Anyway, I've debated the merits of my party on this forum hundreds of times before and I've no real desire to do so again.

No conspiracies here. I know what i'm talking about and my only aim here is to make people understand that their are victims being terrorised while we debate the root causes for years.

FTA69 wrote:

I said that ASB can only be addressed through far-reaching and radical reforms of policing and the approach taken to miscreants, as well as ensuring that these areas aren't wracked with the poverty that is ultimately responsible for this behaviour. It's a complex issue which can't be simplified by the "they're scum, lock em' all up" mantra which has failed utterly in every country it has been tried eg the USA.

Meanwhile we wont do anything about people who live in misery and fear. Good one.

FTA69 wrote:

They probably do get "tanned" with frequency, I'd imagine their mothers do as well. Domestic violence is often a large factor in causing this type of behaviour.

The only sensible thing you've said so far, but it still doesnt help the victims who are shaking with fear as soon as it gets dark every night.

I know people who used to look forward to a warm sunny day. Now they pray for it to be cold, windy and raining, so the scumbags stay in, while we debate the root causes.
Why not do somthing about it that stops them in their tracks and then we can debate the finer points. And maybe some old folk and children can get a nights sleep while we debate.

oscarBravo

growler wrote:

failure to comply (sounds like Robocop that) with the terms of the ASBO, i.e, breaking a curfew, being found in a group of X or more, found on a street where they are prescribed from being etc.

Right. I tend to walk a middle ground on these things. For example, I'd assume that, in the main, recipients of ASBOs are people who have been involved in behaviour that could be described as anti-social. If that's the case, then it's not unreasonable to insist that they curtail their behaviour. If that means not breaking a curfew until such time as guilt or innocence has been established, then so be it.

Let me explain what I mean. Let's suppose that, through a case of mistaken identity or whatever, I received an ASBO preventing me from being on a particular street. Until such time as I had established my innocence, I wouldn't go on that street. Does that make sense?

growler wrote:

A strange one I saw cited on BBC recently was a young fella of 15 ish being found in breach of the terms of his asbo because he was playing football, the ASBO prevented him being in a group of 5 or more !

That's pretty silly. It doesn't necessarily mean that ASBOs are a bad idea, however; simply that they need to be applied in a sensible manner.

JimmySmith

oscarBravo wrote:

Right. I tend to walk a middle ground on these things. For example, I'd assume that, in the main, recipients of ASBOs are people who have been involved in behaviour that could be described as anti-social. If that's the case, then it's not unreasonable to insist that they curtail their behaviour. If that means not breaking a curfew until such time as guilt or innocence has been established, then so be it.

Now that sounds like a plan to me.

growler wrote:

A strange one I saw cited on BBC recently was a young fella of 15 ish being found in breach of the terms of his asbo because he was playing football, the ASBO prevented him being in a group of 5 or more !

As with all laws etc there are little loop-holes and the like that havent been covered specifically. While its possible that technically a football match would be in breach of an ASBO, was there really any consequences to it or was it just the media spotting this and making a play on it for a story. I doubt very much that the guy was punished for just playing a football match though.

growler

oscarBravo wrote:

Right. I tend to walk a middle ground on these things. For example, I'd assume that, in the main, recipients of ASBOs are people who have been involved in behaviour that could be described as anti-social. If that's the case, then it's not unreasonable to insist that they curtail their behaviour. If that means not breaking a curfew until such time as guilt or innocence has been established, then so be it.

QUOTE]

I don't think they work like that in the UK at least, mostly because the recipients / targets of ASBOs are (a) too young to prosecute (b) being anti-social isn't a crime per se ,i.e. bunch of 15 year olds hanging around a bus stop, getting pissed, smoking dope, shouting abuse, starting fires, doing grafitti and generally making a nuisance of themselves could find themselves subject to an ASBO which specified that they could not congregate together in that street, after 7pm, in groups of 4 or more. Rather than this being punishment for a specific crime it is designed to discourage a potential crime and protect other locals from having to put up with their high jinks! Obviously the problem here is that you are punishing someone for something that they haven't yet done. An ASBO is not supposed to be a punishment, it is an attempt to impose boundaries on an individual's behaviour - the punishment only comes in if the ASBO is breached. It's as much designed to shame parents into knocking some sense into little Johnny as anything else, the problem is that most of these thugs learnt their behaviour from their own loving families.