London and UK riots (started in Tottenham 10:30PM, 6th Aug)

kraggy

kraggy wrote: »

Not sure if this has been posted but...


You know the way they have a new system whereby if 100,000 people sign a petition for a new law/propostion? Well, they have got the required amount of people to sign a petition for those found guilty of rioting to lose their Social Welfare.

Outstanding. So, that means that if the backbenchers in government decide to, it can be debated in the House of Commons.

I think that such a move should extend to anyone who gets a criminal conviction, even outside of the pararmeters of rioting. For serious convictions at least.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Since when did the fascists get to join Boards?

Since when should any ordinary decent person, who pays tax on their hard-earned income, have to pay for the lazy lifestyle of a criminal?

If criminality was punished by a cut or total deletion of entitlements, 2 things would happen real soon:

a. the social welfare bill would decrease
b. crime would decrease


Nothing fascist about it at all. Just common sense and fairness.

steve9859

Happyman42 wrote: »

.
You have just got caught up in a media frenzy for blood.
Your solutions, however titilating they might be to type where redundant 100 years ago. Try standing above the tabloid and thinking for yourself.

That attitude is pretty typical of the lefties on here. Accusing anyone who wants a firm line taken on punishment as being brainwashed by the mail and not able to think for themselves. Pretty insulting actually.

I am perfectly capable of forming my own view that the 'hug a hoody' approach has not worked. That severe punishments need to be handed out and measures taken such as welfare / eligibility for housing being linked to behavior of ones kids.

Eit: Having said that, I have just read David Quinn's column in the Indo sitting in Insomnia, and (having given it considerable thought, Happyman) I have to say that I agree with every word!!

Crazy Horse 6

What we need is people power, adults ... you know, grown-up people, who take control of their own destinies. As it stands, a nation of shallow-thinking whimps, that runs to the politicians every time there is a problem, deserves everything it gets - and a lot more. You want vision? Go to Specsavers. But if this problem is going to be solved, we will have to do it ourselves.

Crazy Horse 6

Kev_ps3 wrote: »

If this board was 50 years ago then you wouldnt get any of that racism BS, its simply because people are sheep, most people get told what to think. They are too scared to stand out from the crowd.

+1

K-9

kraggy wrote: »

Since when should any ordinary decent person, who pays tax on their hard-earned income, have to pay for the lazy lifestyle of a criminal?

If criminality was punished by a cut or total deletion of entitlements, 2 things would happen real soon:

a. the social welfare bill would decrease
b. crime would decrease


Nothing fascist about it at all. Just common sense and fairness.

Crime will probably increase though and when the cameras are gone police numbers and prison spaces will be cut. More riots in 5 years and the right wingers will be saying the same things, as if they've just found the solution.

Wibbs

Card carrying fascist here. Looters? Rigid curfew. Shoot them. Start with tasers and work up to live rounds if they dont get the message. Give practical support to people that are defending their communities, like the Sikhs etc. When the rioting and looting stops then break out the hugs.


That said I've noted in interviews with the black kids one thing that does stand out. Compared to other interviews with other underclass groups anyway. You have more clearly intelligent people involved. Not the usual cross section of mouthbreathers you usually find. People with education behind them and still they feel outside of the society they find themselves in. That tells me that their colour and the larger societies view of them is a large part of the situation they find themselves in.

sensibleken

steve9859 wrote: »

That attitude is pretty typical of the lefties on here. Accusing anyone who wants a firm line taken on punishment as being brainwashed by the mail and not able to think for themselves. Pretty insulting actually.

I am perfectly capable of forming my own view that the 'hug a hoody' approach has not worked. That severe punishments need to be handed out and measures taken such as welfare / eligibility for housing being linked to behavior of ones kids.

Eit: Having said that, I have just read David Quinn's column in the Indo sitting in Insomnia, and (having given it considerable thought, Happyman) I have to say that I agree with every word!!

actually most of the lefties on here are also calling for these scum to be locked up after their police hiding

crubbeens

After reading through the twoing and froing of the previous posts; A few points need to be made.
I grew up and spent the first twenty years of my life on the largest council estate in Brixton, and witnessed the far greater destuction caused by the previous two bouts of rioting.
People are not scum, skangers, mouthbreathers etc, just people with the same needs and urges as everyone and deserve not to be dehumanised by such labeling.
However the right not to be dehumanised also entails a requirement to contribute and conform to the society they expect to protect there rights.

sensibleken

crubbeens wrote: »

After reading through the twoing and froing of the previous posts; A few points need to be made.
I grew up and spent the first twenty years of my life on the largest council estate in Brixton, and witnessed the far greater destuction caused by the previous two bouts of rioting.
People are not scum, skangers, mouthbreathers etc, just people with the same needs and urges as everyone and deserve not to be dehumanised by such labeling.
However the right not to be dehumanised also entails a requirement to contribute and conform to the society they expect to protect there rights.

As you say rights are only automatic if they are accompanied by responsibility. when people expect all of one and exhibit none of the other to the point of burning down their own neighbourhood and killing people. I think its fairly reasonable to dehumanise them and call them scum

And no, they dont have the same urges as me. I dont have the urge to rob fancy trainers, bags of rice or anything else that doesnt belong to me. Even if i could get away with it.

steve9859

Wibbs wrote: »

That said I've noted in interviews with the black kids one thing that does stand out. Compared to other interviews with other underclass groups anyway. You have more clearly intelligent people involved. Not the usual cross section of mouthbreathers you usually find. People with education behind them and still they feel outside of the society they find themselves in. That tells me that their colour and the larger societies view of them is a large part of the situation they find themselves in.

I guess the question is this: has society ostracised them because of their behaviour, or has their behaviour deteriorated because they have been ostracised by society. A real chicken and egg question.

I would argue for the former. That the stripping away of authority from teachers and police over many years, along with throwing money and housing at a whole class of society with no accountability as to whether they attend school etc, has led to a deterioration of behaviour and therefore their exclusion from society.

Others would argue that institutional racism and classism over 20 years or more has led to a backlash. I find this view too apologist.

Monty Burnz

steve9859 wrote: »

I guess the question is this: has society ostracised them because of their behaviour, or has their behaviour deteriorated because they have been ostracised by society. A real chicken and egg question.

There's another question that should be asked, but I'm slow to ask it because it veers dangerously close to eugenics. Are a lot of these people in the underclass in the first place because they have a genetic predisposition to poor impulse control/lack of empathy/inability to think long term/whatever?

jmayo

stovelid wrote: »

I did a quick search for brigade in this thread and there were 41 results.

It looks like we can no longer ignore the pressing need for a more varied palate of imbecilic tabloid terminology.

Wippee you are able to use the search function.
Do you want a medal now ?

For a start just because someone uses a so called tabloid term does not necessarily make them a tabloid reader.

BTW what term would you use to describe the group who appear to spend most of their time reprimanding others for not using so called correct terminology in particular to describe people and groups ?

These "political correct" fundamentalists would often be the same people who have been searching for excuses for the behaviour of the scumbags who have rioting and looting their own communities.
Oh God did I use the word scumbag :eek:
Might that also be a tabloid term that is forbidden in discussions ?

Did you have any other additions to this thread bar this ?

ebixa82 wrote: »

Total fu.ckin cringe. The guy got mugged while he was injured. Worse crimes are committed against much more vulnerable members of society (babies, the elderly) on an hourly basis. Should we set up a pay pal fund for them too?

The kid was from Malaysia over here to study. No doubt minted already.

(Not that I am condoning what the scumbags did or anything!)

AFAIK the guy had a broken jaw and knocked out teeth.
Yeah all foreigners are minted or else parasites looking for handouts, right ? :rolleyes:

ebixa82 wrote: »

So we should look to the English now on how to show caring and compassion to our fellow man?

Well it is no use looking at you.

ebixa82 wrote: »

The old man's barber shop was a run down premises. There was very little to actually damage and hence, very little to repair. He'll probably squander it all on coke and hookers, develop an addiction and end up worse off than before. And who are we to blame then ??!!:eek:

Let me guess he was black so would thus fit that sterotype ? :rolleyes:

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

You gotta love the generalisation. Most of my mates that I frequented the rave scene with are solicitors, accountants, engineers, artists etc

Never seen any of them rob or loot.

You should have followed the solicitors to work, that's where they usually do the robbing.

Happyman42

kraggy wrote: »

Since when should any ordinary decent person, who pays tax on their hard-earned income, have to pay for the lazy lifestyle of a criminal?

If criminality was punished by a cut or total deletion of entitlements, 2 things would happen real soon:

a. the social welfare bill would decrease
b. crime would decrease


Nothing fascist about it at all. Just common sense and fairness.

And has your utopian executive committee thought this through?
Have you considered what happens when you have shanty towns springing up on the outskirts of your cities?
Do you think they are there as a quaint tourist attraction or have you THOUGHT about why they are there?
If you are born into a shanty town and the economic structure that goes with it, IS THAT YOUR FAULT or is it the fault of the greedy selfish people who live in obscene luxury.
Have you looked at other states where draconian policing is coupled with low to no welfare? Have you looked at the crime rates in one of your favoured nations? Do you want to have electric fences around your property and have to teach your children to use a gun?

Your simplistic kneejerk soluition would very quickly usher in variations of the scenario above. Remind me not to vote for you!

There is a PR offensive under way, try and see through it. Fascism is a creeping disease and you must be on your guard for it.

Morlar

Did anyone see the RTE primetime about the riots last evening ?

The reporter segment was essentially a journey into the world of 'oh, the poor rioters, what makes them protest in this manner'. An incredible exercise in Politically Correct convolution, socially liberal politics and excuse making in my view.

Wertz

steve9859 wrote: »

I guess the question is this: has society ostracised them because of their behaviour, or has their behaviour deteriorated because they have been ostracised by society. A real chicken and egg question.

I'd have said it was incremental on both sides over a longer period of time.

steve9859 wrote: »

I would argue for the former. That the stripping away of authority from teachers and police over many years, along with throwing money and housing at a whole class of society with no accountability as to whether they attend school etc, has led to a deterioration of behaviour and therefore their exclusion from society.

The problem with the authority once held by the police force at the very least and perhaps teachers to a lesser extent was that in a lot of cases it was abused...be it through the institutional racism or classism you refer to...or for other reasons; (perceived) police brutality or abuse by teachers given under the guise of corporal punishment.
When you hand over authority to a group and task them with positions of trust over, chiefly young people, then they must be trusted by the communities they police or educate...and when that trust is breached it must be seen to rectified by those in charge of the authority figures.
The overseers couldn't keep control of their charges and hence there were "human rights abuses" and the move to take away the authority of the police and school followed... and then that moved on to parents as well.
Before you hand back that power, you have to make sure it will be wielded fairly or you only seek to ostrcise further and push the problem back into the pressure cooker.
FWIW I happen to agree with the point of corporal punishment and parental physical chastisement and I think the police should have a bit more leeway than they seem to have, especially in situations like the last week's...but with the caveat that when anyone crosses the line there are consequences. Half the problem now is where that line is drawn...

Finding that balance is the hard part...and certainly bringing back more totalitarian measures after a generation or more of the soft touch is going to be even tougher...how do you convince parents for instance that weren't punished in school that their kids should now perhaps be subject to it?
Same goes with those previous generations that saw racism/classism and mistreatment by the police force...building up the level of trust is a huge ball of sh*t to unravel.

paperclip2

Didn't read all the thread and not sure if this is here already but I came across this and thought it was interesting.

AN OPEN LETTER TO DAVID CAMERON'S PARENTS.

Dear Mr and Mrs Cameron,

Why did you never take the time to teach your child basic morality?

As a young man, he was in a gang that regularly smashed up private property. We know that you were absent parents who left your child to be brought up by a school rather than taking responsibility for his behaviour yourselves. The fact that he became a delinquent with no sense of respect for the property of others can only reflect that fact that you are terrible, lazy human beings who failed even in teaching your children the difference between right and wrong. I can only assume that his contempt for the small business owners of Oxford is indicative of his wider values.

Even worse, your neglect led him to fall in with a bad crowd.

There’s Michael Gove, whose wet-lipped rage was palpable on Newsnight last night. This is the Michael Gove who confused one of his houses with another of his houses in order to avail himself of £7,000 of the taxpayers’ money to which he was not entitled (or £13,000, depending on which house you think was which).

Or Hazel Blears, who was interviewed in full bristling peahen mode for almost all of last night. She once forgot which house she lived in, and benefited to the tune of £18,000. At the time she said it would take her reputation years to recover. Unfortunately not.

But, of course, this is different. This is just understandable confusion over the rules of how many houses you are meant to have as an MP. This doesn’t show the naked greed of people stealing plasma tellies.

Unless you’re Gerald Kaufman, who broke parliamentary rules to get £8,000 worth of 40-inch, flat screen, Bang and Olufsen TV out of the taxpayer.

Or Ed Vaizey, who got £2,000 in antique furniture ‘delivered to the wrong address’. Which is fortunate, because had that been the address they were intended for, that would have been fraud.

Or Jeremy Hunt, who broke the rules to the tune of almost £20,000 on one property and £2,000 on another. But it’s all right, because he agreed to pay half of the money back. Not the full amount, it would be absurd to expect him to pay back the entire sum that he took and to which he ws not entitled. No, we’ll settle for half. And, as in any other field, what might have been considered embezzlement of £22,000 is overlooked. We know, after all, that David Cameron likes to give people second
chances.

Fortunately, we have the Met Police to look after us. We’ll ignore the fact that two of its senior officers have had to resign in the last six weeks amid suspicions of widespread corruption within the force.

We’ll ignore Andy Hayman, who went for champagne dinners with those he was meant to be investigating, and then joined the company on leaving the Met.

Of course, Mr and Mrs Cameron, your son is right. There are parts of society that are not just broken, they are sick. Riddled with disease from top to bottom.

Just let me be clear about this (It’s a good phrase, Mr and Mrs Cameron, and one I looted from every sentence your son utters, just as he looted it from Tony Blair), I am not justifying or minimising in any way what has been done by the looters over the last few nights. What I am doing, however, is expressing shock and dismay that your son and his friends feel themselves in any way to be guardians of morality in this country.

Can they really, as 650 people who have shown themselves to be venal pygmies, moral dwarves at every opportunity over the last 20 years, bleat at others about ‘criminality’. Those who decided that when they broke the rules (the rules they themselves set) they, on the whole wouldn’t face the consequences of their actions?

Are they really surprised that this country’s culture is swamped in greed, in the acquisition of material things, in a lust for consumer goods of the most base kind? Really?

Let’s have a think back: cash-for-questions; Bernie Ecclestone; cash-for-access; Mandelson’s mortgage; the Hinduja passports; Blunkett’s alleged insider trading (and, by the way, when someone has had to resign in disgrace twice can we stop having them on television as a commentator, please?); the meetings on the yachts of oligarchs; the drafting of the Digital Economy Act with Lucian Grange; Byers’, Hewitt’s & Hoon’s desperation to prostitute themselves and their positions; the fact that Andrew Lansley (in charge of NHS reforms) has a wife who gives lobbying advice to the very companies hoping to benefit from the NHS reforms. And that list didn’t even take me very long to think of.

Our politicians are for sale and they do not care who knows it.

Oh yes, and then there’s the expenses thing. Widescale abuse of the very systems they designed, almost all of them grasping what they could while they remained MPs, to build their nest egg for the future at the public’s expense. They even now whine on Twitter about having their expenses claims for getting back to Parliament while much of the country is on fire subject to any examination. True public servants.

The last few days have revealed some truths, and some heartening truths. The fact that the riotcleanup crews had organised themselves before David Cameron even made time for a public statement is heartening. The fact that local communities came together to keep their neighbourhoods safe when the police failed is heartening. The fact that there were peace vigils being organised (even as the police tried to dissuade people) is heartening.

There is hope for this country. But we must stop looking upwards for it. The politicians are the ones leading the charge into the gutter.

David Cameron was entirely right when he said: “It is a complete lack of responsibility in parts of our society, people allowed to think that the world owes them something, that their rights outweigh their responsibilities, and that their actions do not have consequences.”

He was more right than he knew.

And I blame the parents.

Yours Sincerely

Winston

Source: http://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/9185894.Twenty_arrested_in_Essex_for_violent_disorder_since_riots_began/?action=complain&cid=9581671

jmayo

Morlar wrote: »

Did anyone see the RTE primetime about the riots last evening ?

The reporter segment was essentially a journey into the world of 'oh, the poor rioters, what makes them protest in this manner'. An incredible exercise in Politically Correct convolution, socially liberal politics and excuse making in my view.

I can't believe they gave a segment to that so called C4 presentor/journalist.
Basically it was broadcasting an excusor for mindless violence.
Sure next time there is gang trouble in Limerick they can interview a gang members mammy so that they can give their excuses.

paperclip2 wrote: »

Didn't read all the thread and not sure if this is here already but I came across this and thought it was interesting.
...

Yeah it's the fault of the politicans that kids and young adults went out and broke into Dixons, Sony Centre and other retailers to steal and loot high end electronics.
Fook it next time I want to show my dissatisfaction with policans I will go and organise a group so we can go and rob the nearest Currys, CarPhone warehouse and set light to the nearest furniture store.

These riots weren't political statements, they were ways for some people to grab material godds they couldn't be bothered working for and a way for some people to indulge in one of favourite pastimes which is gratuitous violnece towards others property and person.

Happyman42

jmayo wrote: »

Yeah it's the fault of the politicans that kids and young adults went out and broke into Dixons, Sony Centre and other retailers to steal and loot high end electronics.

Do you think that social policy of the last 50 years has anything to do with these events?
Do you absolve politics of all blame? Is there any onus on our 'leaders' to create a fair society?

Paparazzo

jmayo wrote: »

I can't believe they gave a segment to that so called C4 presentor/journalist.
Basically it was broadcasting an excusor for mindless violence.
Sure next time there is gang trouble in Limerick they can interview a gang members mammy so that they can give their excuses.



Yeah it's the fault of the politicans that kids and young adults went out and broke into Dixons, Sony Centre and other retailers to steal and loot high end electronics.
Fook it next time I want to show my dissatisfaction with policans I will go and organise a group so we can go and rob the nearest Currys, CarPhone warehouse and set light to the nearest furniture store.

These riots weren't political statements, they were ways for some people to grab material godds they couldn't be bothered working for and a way for some people to indulge in one of favourite pastimes which is gratuitous violnece towards others property and person.

Yeah, I'm sick of scumbags blaming society and the government. Here's an idea. How about taking responsibility for your own actions?

denhaagenite

Monty Burnz wrote: »

There's another question that should be asked, but I'm slow to ask it because it veers dangerously close to eugenics. Are a lot of these people in the underclass in the first place because they have a genetic predisposition to poor impulse control/lack of empathy/inability to think long term/whatever?

I think that's jumping the gun a bit. Obviously some people have more intelligence/ ability than others, but for the most part these people (children) just haven't been given proper direction because Labour were giving money to their parents and trusting them to do this- therefore leaving no money to put into local communities, initiatives etc etc. If the parents were told "If you do not get involved with your local area to improve yours and other childrens lives, and if you do not raise your children with good morals and habits, you will have your basic needs (ie food, shelter, clothing) paid for by someone else but we will not give you any money as you are not responsible enough."

I still stand by my opinion that if you have two children that the state pays for then an Implanon should be mandatory. Social services have far too high a workload and too many children are falling through the cracks, and it is always a last resort to put these kids in group homes. It might also fix the racism/ immigration issues that people have, as population growth would slow down.

sensibleken

paperclip2 wrote: »

Didn't read all the thread and not sure if this is here already but I came across this and thought it was interesting.



Source: http://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/9185894.Twenty_arrested_in_Essex_for_violent_disorder_since_riots_began/?action=complain&cid=9581671

heehee. I'd say something about casting the first stone but would seem to be a pretty poor choice of words

Monty Burnz

K-9 wrote: »

Crime will probably increase though and when the cameras are gone police numbers and prison spaces will be cut. More riots in 5 years and the right wingers will be saying the same things, as if they've just found the solution.

For the last 50 or more years, the solution has been to hand people free healthcare, homes, food and spending money for doing absolutely nothing. How is that solution working out? Has it benefitted those people? Or has it resulted in the creation of a seething underclass?

K-9

Monty Burnz wrote: »

For the last 50 or more years, the solution has been to hand people free healthcare, homes, food and spending money for doing absolutely nothing. How is that solution working out? Has it benefitted those people? Or has it resulted in the creation of a seething underclass?

Plenty have benefited. There's always been a seething underclass, don't know where this idea that it's new comes from? It seems it has to be assumed it's new to blame left wing policies on.

What's your point though? We should remove free healthcare and housing?

3ndahalfof6

and so it starts, a guy who was looking for water went to lidl but the place was wrecked, he took a 6 pack of water and the cops stopped him,
in court he got 3mts prison and he had no previous convictions,

woman with 96 previous convictions stopped with a black binliner, in it was a drill, mobile phone accessories and other stuff, she said she found the bag on the street, suspended sentence. (scotsman)

Monty Burnz

K-9 wrote: »

Plenty have benefited. There's always been a seething underclass, don't know where this idea that it's new comes from?

In the past, we weren't expected to pay a fortune in taxes to keep the underclass in drugs and Blackberrys.

Monty Burnz

3ndahalfof6 wrote: »

woman with 96 previous convictions stopped with a black binliner, in it was a drill, mobile phone accessories and other stuff, she said she found the bag on the street, suspended sentence. (scotsman)

A woman with 96 convictions shouldn't have been free to walk the streets in the first place.

meditraitor

3ndahalfof6 wrote: »

and so it starts, a guy who was looking for water went to lidl but the place was wrecked, he took a 6 pack of water and the cops stopped him,
in court he got 3mts prison and he had no previous convictions,

haha, why didnt he just do what any normal person would have done and go to another shop?

denhaagenite

3ndahalfof6 wrote: »

woman with 96 previous convictions stopped with a black binliner, in it was a drill, mobile phone accessories and other stuff, she said she found the bag on the street, suspended sentence. (scotsman)

There is CCTV everywhere in the UK, she would have been filmed putting stuff in the bag surely? At the very least walking in empty handed and walking out with a bag full of stuff?

K-9

Monty Burnz wrote: »

In the past, we weren't expected to pay a fortune in taxes to keep the underclass in drugs and Blackberrys.

Dole is about £70 in England, yeah that goes a long way.

Most of these gangs are out robbing and taking drugs anyway. The dole isn't paying for it. They probably get away with it 99% of the time and now the Tories want to cut police and prison spaces.

3ndahalfof6

denhaagenite wrote: »

There is CCTV everywhere in the UK, she would have been filmed putting stuff in the bag surely? At the very least walking in empty handed and walking out with a bag full of stuff?

my point is the wide difference of dealing with both cases, showing that we should trust the legal system for a fair outcome,

i fear there will be plenty of this in the months to come.