London Riots

[worthing_gooner]

Yeah, right...socialists, do gooders, Guardian, BBC, Independent - have I forgot someone? How much beeter would this country be if we all read Daily Mail, brainwash ourselves with Sun papers and Sky TV?

That's the problem of this society, it's always someone else's fault. It's never us.

Do any of you personaly know any of these so called do-gooders, for which quite few here hold so much contempt? Because if you did and if you knew how much good work these people put into our society, perhaps you wouldn't be spouting mindless right wing propaganda.

So many of you are trigger happy, being so far away from these riots and also completely detached from reality.

I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make here, but I would suggest that these "do gooders" actually haven't got a clue aboutt he situation on the front line.

Don't get me wrong - there are two types of do-gooders. There are those like Damilola Taylor's father who has worked his socks off for the last few years to reduce knife crime in the capital - this type of do-gooder is welcome and I encourage this.

The "do gooder" politicians who know absolutely nothing about what it is actually like to live on one of these estates and feel threatened and unsafe every time you step out of your front door. They don't know a thing about it, they talk from their high perches and cozy jobs and big country houses and they think they know what is best.

They don't listen to the public in the slightest and it shows. It's about time the politicians in this country actually started dishing out what the majority of the public want - tougher sentences and social reform.

Just out of interest, do you live on one of those estates?

Yeah I grew up on an estate in Catford, South London. I moved away four years ago because the place was going down the toilet rapidly. I was mugged at knife point on my way back from a night out in New Cross and the guy was given 30 days community service by Campberwell Court. That's when I decided to leave because I couldn't go out without fearing for my safety and without encountering anti social beahviour on a daily basis. I see it hasn't changed much.

[Cockerill's chin]

I strongly disagree that this is the most crucial time of the child's life. If it is then society has already failed the child.

[QuartzGooner]

I took from your original post Quartz, that the NS should be directed at certain sections of society. I apologise for misreading your intentions.

National Service for everyone means it would not be stigmatized but I cannot see how it would benefit the problems of the last week which are grounded in social inequality. NS cannot address the first eighteen years of a child's life or the years following.

It is not always possible for single mums to continue living in their current accomodation. In these circumstances then the welfare of the newborn and mother should be prioritised. Stories about weed and MTV are anecdotal and we could both go on forever recounting experiences of meeting those who have embraced independence with a maturity and those who have not.

There is a benefits class. The situation has been brewing for too long and social unrest will increase. In my opinion a radical overhaul of social perception and radical policies addressing inequality is the only way to improve life for all.

Point about National Service for all understood.

My thoughts are that the National Service would emphasise how everyone has to live in the same society.
We have heard many people taking about "Disenfranchisement" and "Social Seperation". And it is true.
But if everyone from all four classes was doing National Service together, then boundaries might be broken down in some way?
If a teenager from a sink estate spent six months working alongside a teenager who had been to Eton, then it might open both of their minds, and humanize each other's perceptions of the other instead of demonizing the perceptions?

Yes my story about the teeenage mum and her MTV is anecdotal, but it is something that happened to me and shows just how people can sink into a ghetto mentality, where they feel cut off from the mainstream and so want to champion their own identity. Which is fine, and natural, but only up to the point that the identity is not one where malevelancy is an entrenched part.


Or where the identity is warped by the media and encouraged by the media to manipulate emerging teenage, or younger, mentalities.
Because music does play a part in shaping people's attitudes to others.
I am known on here as a Hip Hop fan, but readily admit that too much Hip Hop/Grime has a negative lyrical content, and the more positive stuff is less well promoted.

How many youths have we heard talking ourselves just in daily life?
I hear plenty of talk about "Badman on road" and "Keep it gangsta".

As if such an attitude is a legitimate badge of identity and a correct way to live, and a sign of being a real man.

But look what has resulted....

[worthing_gooner]

I strongly disagree that this is the most crucial time of the child's life. If it is then society has already failed the child.

Not really. The child should be in compulsory education up to the age of 16/17 and the standard of education and teaching *should* be good enough to ensure the kid stays relatively on the rails.

Half the time these kids don't even go to school. Loads of the people out looting yesterday in Manchester probably bunk of school all the time, then whinge that they cant get a job because they cant read or write or dont have GCSEs.

Society has not failed that child - the tools were there and that child chose not to utilise them, or their parents did not enforce that on their child.

When they get to around 16 they're not a kid anymore and they're about to get the first proper freedom they've ever had, where they go into the big wide world and should (but wont) be looking for work.

A stint doing national service of some kind will teach them to respect the area and people in this world and will teach them some key skills such as discipline, confidence and communication and show them that there is a life outside of their little city ghetto.

[worthing_gooner]

As someone said on here earlier, the best thing this government can possibly do is to make people work for their dole money.

Some kind of work, community work, cleaning the streets, mending things, painting things, whatever!

It will save the government a lot of money in the long run, it will encourage people on the dole to actively find work rather than sitting indoors all day making an easy buck and it will also teach them a bit of self worth and pride.

[Cockerill's chin]

What concretely would you do CC? And how would it be financed?

There are a whole list of services I would re-instate and and a forest worth of policies.

Please don't push me for a thesis or USM will look like a one word wonder.

Financing is perception. The system is not working and deteriorating. How much are we spending on firefighting a broken system?

[Captain Fabregas]

[augie]

As someone said on here earlier, the best thing this government can possibly do is to make people work for their dole money.

Some kind of work, community work, cleaning the streets, mending things, painting things, whatever!

It will save the government a lot of money in the long run, it will encourage people on the dole to actively find work rather than sitting indoors all day making an easy buck and it will also teach them a bit of self worth and pride.

Over here in the celtic tiger boom we had what was classed as full employment (think it is quantified by a set % of the available workforce being gainfully employed) but we still had fcukers sponging off the system refusing to work A few years back we as a country introduced a FAS scheme where some people on the dole had to do community work but lo and behold we then had a flood of "spongers" change from unemployment benefit to disability allowance thus rendering them unable to even do an admin job on the scheme System is fcuked up so it is

[safcftm]

I've posted a few eminently sensible suggestions on this thread already but another thing we need to look to do is (and the human rights lot would really love this) to introduce a breeding licence. There is getting to be more and more useless scummy pieces of shit in our country that are of no use to anyone in particular or society in general and who we wouldn't miss if they were rounded up and shot. About these people there is the constant "you have to blame the parents" comments which are quite true, you do need to apportion some blame to the parents. So, if we accept that there are a lot of scummy people about who shouldnt be breeding, why dont we just say that everyone needs a licence to breed and a scoring matrix could be drawn up to prevent some of these pricks churning out kids. We could also grant a licence for people to have one or two kids but prevent them from blasting out 5 or 6 of them if they blatantly cant support them out of their own pay packets etc. If you want to adopt a child you have to go through all sorts of checks, why do we just let people have their own kids without first assessing their suitability?

[ThomasMitchell]

Wonderful. Made my day.

[ThomasMitchell]

Yeah, right...socialists, do gooders, Guardian, BBC, Independent - have I forgot someone? How much beeter would this country be if we all read Daily Mail, brainwash ourselves with Sun papers and Sky TV?

That's the problem of this society, it's always someone else's fault. It's never us.

Do any of you personaly know any of these so called do-gooders, for which quite few here hold so much contempt? Because if you did and if you knew how much good work these people put into our society, perhaps you wouldn't be spouting mindless right wing propaganda.

So many of you are trigger happy, being so far away from these riots and also completely detached from reality.

Actually I wouldn’t mind betting that the average Daily Mail reader is probably far less likely to commit crime and far more likely to have gone to work and paid their taxes. So if that is the worst thing about a Mail reader, let’s have more of them I say.

It's ironic that you say "that's the problem of this society, it's always someone else's fault. It’s never us". The whole notion of 'society' gives people the excuse to blame others. It encourages the mentality of “why should I do something for myself when the Government can do it for meâ€

[safcftm]

Yeah, right...socialists, do gooders, Guardian, BBC, Independent - have I forgot someone? How much beeter would this country be if we all read Daily Mail, brainwash ourselves with Sun papers and Sky TV?

That's the problem of this society, it's always someone else's fault. It's never us.

Do any of you personaly know any of these so called do-gooders, for which quite few here hold so much contempt? Because if you did and if you knew how much good work these people put into our society, perhaps you wouldn't be spouting mindless right wing propaganda.

So many of you are trigger happy, being so far away from these riots and also completely detached from reality.

The trouble with these do-gooders is that they themselves are often very far removed from the troubled areas and detached from reality. These people who think what we need is to sit down with these kids and hear their side of the story would sharp change their mind if they had some of these pricks drinking cans of lager outside their house at all hours, sitting on their car and, when they go out to say "please, you are causing me some discomfort would you please consider moving elsewhere or perhaps should we discuss the socio-economic factors which have led to you choosing to act in the loud manner in which you do?" being told to fuck off, or threatened, or getting a brick chucked through their window and their car keyed. Some of these *word censored* have no respect for anybody or anything, including themselves, and what they need isnt for everyone to sit and discuss their problems, they need to be taught a proper fucking lesson as they are making thousands of peoples lives a misery night after night, its just that we only hear about it when theres a lot of them in one place and its getting filmed

As mentioned before, respect has to be earned- a lot of these little pricks dont want to listen to anybody, they are beyond help and are just scummy little *word censored* who need to be smacked into shape

[highburyJD]

I have read a lot of valid in-depth reasoning for finding root cause for these problems, but for me the reason why the riot situation went out of control was because:-

1) There was not enough police personnel in the key hotspots.

2) The police action was simply too defensive and not 'robust' enough.

The youths knew this - helped by the counterproductive media exposure, which simply set off a chain reaction. Really dangerous situation this - with all the police preoccupied there is simply not eough cover for other more serious crimes (rape, murder etc).

The police did eventually get more officers on the ground, but where the police completely and utterly failed was how they dealt with the initial problems. I saw footage of riot police holding defensive lines with these hooded youths arrogantly attacking them.... WTF?

finding the 'root cause' is I agree very complicated
but it seems clear to me biglunn is right about the logistical cause
(I disagree on using plastic bullets but thats details)

I'm pretty cynical but after last night in London
(lots of police = no trouble)
and hearing some numbers
Monday 1,400 coppers working, Royal Wedding 5,000
I began to think - the MET stood to face massive cuts, I imagine those will now be politically untenable

with that in mind why would senior police officers WANT to put their men at risk and try and engage with/control rioting...?

a lot of the arrests came through plain clothes police
I wonder if CCTV videos of looting will be released or only cropped pictures of individuals

wouldn't want to reveal any undercover MET boys going stockholm feral would we...?

[ThomasMitchell]

I've posted a few eminently sensible suggestions on this thread already but another thing we need to look to do is (and the human rights lot would really love this) to introduce a breeding licence. There is getting to be more and more useless scummy pieces of shit in our country that are of no use to anyone in particular or society in general and who we wouldn't miss if they were rounded up and shot. About these people there is the constant "you have to blame the parents" comments which are quite true, you do need to apportion some blame to the parents. So, if we accept that there are a lot of scummy people about who shouldnt be breeding, why dont we just say that everyone needs a licence to breed and a scoring matrix could be drawn up to prevent some of these pricks churning out kids. We could also grant a licence for people to have one or two kids but prevent them from blasting out 5 or 6 of them if they blatantly cant support them out of their own pay packets etc. If you want to adopt a child you have to go through all sorts of checks, why do we just let people have their own kids without first assessing their suitability?

A charity in the US actually pays drug addicts to be sterilised in order that they don't bring more of the same into the world. They came to the UK a couple of years ago to introduce the same scheme. Of course there was uproar from the liberal press and commentators (better to have children born to drug addicts, go into care and perpetuate the vicious cycle).

Perhaps we could have a similar state sponsored scheme where people can volunteer for the program.

[highburyJD]

doubt any significant numbers of people would volunteer to be sterilised