h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hi Eddie

As you say the HRA was aimed at limiting governments, and I can see where the HRA would be useful against a government that would ban Habeus Corpus, detain without trial or allow its foreign partners the right to rendition. However, in practice it has become about demanding personal rights, often in a very petty way and involving the lawyers.

An honourable person considers his responsibilities to others, a fool demands his rights.

Sorry about the curmudgeon remark I was just beginning a migraine at the time and I was a bit grrr....

Blessings,
Matholwch .

>>, in practice it has become about demanding personal rights, often in a very petty way and involving the lawyers.

I'm really going to have to insist on some examples.

'the HRA ... yada yada... and involving the lawyers.'

Who the f**k should be involved in interpreting the f**king law? Ice-cream men? Surgeons? Painters and f**king decorators?

Math, the quality (and aim) of your rants has declined quite a bit recently. Hope the migraine clears soon.

Hi Pedro

"Who the f**k should be involved in interpreting the f**king law?"

The Judiciary.

Not the lawyers, solicitors, barristers etc., who are engaged to put forward their clients' claims by any means possible.

Ever seen advert for Injury Lawyers 4U?

Blessings,
Matholwch .

The Mosquito Device Eddie. Look it up. Apparently it impinges on these poor yobs Human Rights to be driven away from places where they can intimidate the elderly...

Well...firstly I'd have to ask whether we're talking about 'Some said...' - as opposed to an actual legal case. Also, it is my understanding that these devices are being used by individuals, rather than (eg) local authorities.

Mind you - I'm perfectly willing to speak against the dreadful things, in an individual capacity, and I suppose the principles of 'No punishment without law' and 'Right to lawful assembly' are a decent starting point.

Pedro will know Glasgow's Royal Exchange Square. The steps up to Borders bookshop used to be a popular gathering place for young people of the gothic tendency. I always used to have a good laugh as I passed by - but I never once saw any trouble. A few months ago, they started positioning a security guard there to drive them away. I personally feel the city is slightly poorer for their absence - but even if I didn't...what f***ing right should I have to decide where they can or cannot gather? Surely there's a case to be made against the guards or their employers for intimidation? Or against the deployers of the mosquito devices for ABH?

When was is it that we decided that young people were A Menace To Society? If we can't get over our irrational fear of young people eating chips, should we:
a) Hurt their ears?
b) Adjust our attitudes?

Yes, I know that *some* young people cause trouble - but then all men are potential rapists and all motorists potential killers.

Plus as far as I'm aware...nobody has taken any action against Mosquitos. Unfortunately.

But Liberty are on the case.
http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/issues/young-peoples-rights/stamp-out-the-mosquito.shtml

Excellent!

Hi Eddie

Shami Chakrabarti, Liberty's Director, said:
“What type of society uses a low-level sonic weapon on its children?
Imagine the outcry if a device was introduced that caused blanket discomfort to people of one race or gender, rather than to our kids.
The Mosquito has no place in a country that values its children and seeks to instill them with dignity and respect.”

A society where no other action is being taken to deal with young people who are essentially out of control. The devices are a reaction, maybe an over-reaction, by shopkeepers who see gangs of youths outside their shops intimidating their customers, drinking and smoking at all hours and even thieving.

Drinking?! Smoking?! We never did those in my day!

I dunno, Math. I'd have thought that you'd have been in favour of instilling as sense of duty and responsibility in young people. Consider this: Why would they feel a duty towards a society that makes it clear to them that they are excluded from it? This is not to say that lawlessness should be tolerated, simply that the solution is to support children, not to label them en masse as 'The Enemy'. Even in terms of self-interest, this is stupid: one day they'll be in charge.

Jaysus! It's a good job my local Child Protectiona and Youth Justice system is overseen by pinkos and not by reactionary Druid-y types.

Hi Eddie

"Jaysus! It's a good job my local Child Protectiona and Youth Justice system is overseen by pinkos and not by reactionary Druid-y types. "

Let us move from your middle class 'pinko' estate to reality for a minute shall we? Try living on a large council estate like myself.

I agree that we should be teaching these kids respect and responsibility from the very beginning. We should be supporting their young minds and egos with out of school activities etc. Teaching them critical thinking and philosophy on the Scottish model.

However...

That is to come. How do we deal with the ten years of yobs in between?

I can completely understand the shopkeepers' stance. Though I would point out to them that they don't have to invest thousands on a sonic weapon. Simply playing classical music has proven effective in moving bored teenagers on.

I am a burly ex-serviceman, judo first dan and former hockey goalkeeper. I am also rapidly approaching fifty and have crippled knees, and I can tell you that I feel apprehensive when walking towards a group of our fine youth who have been drinking. I can't imagine how a pensioner must feel.

Blessings,
Matholwch .

>>Let us move from your middle class 'pinko' estate to reality for a minute shall we? Try living on a large council estate like myself.

Is this the classic 'I'm from the school of hard knocks, me' argument? I'm afraid it only works if you actually know anything about my experience and background.

But let's go with your premise anyway - that it is reasonable to inflict pain or discomfort on all youths in a given area, whether or not they are the ones commiting offences. How far do you want to take it, then? Should we go up to every child we see and poke them with a sharp stick, just in case?

(We have something in common, btw. I was a hockey goalkeeper.)

"Simply playing classical music has proven effective in moving bored teenagers on."

Yes they probably have much too good taste to hang around where tinny light classical music was being played. Me too.

It never worked for Alex in 'A Clockwork Orange'.

I'm with Ed here.

I am on principle against pre-emptive attacks; on countries, on people, on minorities (including youth). Pretty much anything except perhaps sobriety at a long wedding. That's a case where anticipating and preparing for the inevitable makes some sense.

I'm for pre-emptive strikes on bad art, and models of churches, as portrayed in 'The Magic Christian'

Hi Eddie

My pinko comment was just a poke for a poke m'lad.

Why didn't you address this question?
"That is to come. How do we deal with the ten years of yobs in between?"

I'm never impressed with those who throw stones at any measure they don't like, and haven't got a clue themselves what to do (especially when their battle cry is the poor little darling's human rights.

So do you have a practical proposition on what to do with the ten years of yobs in between?

Blessings,
Matholwch .

>>"That is to come. How do we deal with the ten years of yobs in between?"

Well - the solutions would not be simple, so I don't necessarily think this would be a useful forum to enumerate them. (A 'What's wrong with Britain' thread?). My modest proposal here was that any solution shouldn't create add to the problem or create new ones. But even leaving aside the civil liberties issues - have a wee think about what Mosquitos might actually achieve. So - they drive a malevolent teenage drinking gang away from the Spar car park to...where? A darkened underpass? A stairwell? Are we going to have to put the things *everywhere*? Madness! Only the manufacturers - whose free publicity is currently being lapped up by the gullible - will benefit.


Actually...I can't resist starting the discussion here (but *please* - a different thread?). Due to recent news events from your country, Math, I've been thinking a lot about the concept of 'anomie'. I'll give you a little hint. Which of the following causes most deaths:
a) Road accidents
b) Crime
c) Suicide
?

And can we at least admit that the HRA was a red herring here? Remember - you did raise the topic as an example of the HRA gone mad. I think I'm still entitled to ask for a *valid* one.

Hi Eddie ,

Probably road accidents, because they are pretty obvious, whereas a significant number of suicides are difficult to categorize successfully as such (and it is difficult to interview 'successful' suicides)

I can see where you may have got the interest in that word though, given the present press hysteria over the suicide cluster in Bridgend. I must admit that I've not read Durkheim's work so I may be at a disadvantage over his interpretation of Guyau's word.

With regard to our aimless youth though, something seriously needs to be done before they drift too far from the societal norm. The increase in unnecessary teenage deaths through suicide, drugs, violence and reckless accidents over the last few years has been both heartrending and a warning that we can no longer ignore.

What is your take on this?

Blessings,
Matholwch .