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

reign in? rein in!

As an aside...is it a general impression that 'liberal' equates to 'wanting to ignore crime'?

This seems strange to me. If you look around the sorts of people who are actively doing something about disorder and youth crime - probation officers, teachers, social workers, youth workers, community workers, etc. etc. etc., one can - broadly - as a totally wild generalisation - characterise them as 'liberal'. You know the type: Grauniad-reading do-gooders. They're often doing tough jobs in nasty surroundings with some not very nice people. But...surely we have to recognise that they do actually want to do something about the situation.

Now, one might think that they are going about it the wrong way. But consider: might they not have built up a bit of experience along the way about the problems and social conditions they are working with? Might they not have a fair idea of what works?

And might we not want to recognise this and back them up - not only with credit but the extra resources they sorely need?

Or are you - yes, you and you and you - going to re-train as school enforcers and prison guards?




This social worker is walking down the road. She comes across a man lying in the gutter, bruised and bleeding, pockets turned inside out having been robbed. She kneels down and says,
"My god! The person who did this to you really needs some help!"

My point about the schoolgirl case was that it went all the way to the House of Lords for a common sense decision. Previously they would not have had the opportunity to use the courts and papers to advertise their extremism, but under the auspices of the HRA they had an opportunity.

Similarly with the prisoners - previously loss of remision and additional time were at a governors perogative - suddenly these two characters - both of whom have a long history of violent behavior and disciplinery problems in prison, can take their case to Strasbourg - and they received £17,500 each - its a waste of time and money.

I found these two cases in 15 minutes, and there were others - a horrendous one about doctors being charged with murder because they took the decision to operate on Siamese twins, knowing it meant the death of one, but that it would save the life of the other. There is case after case that should never have arisen, and a long list of millionaire solicitors attached.

Moving on to the Rhys Jones tragedy - and I see no connection between the two things we're talking about -

It's easy to label today's youth, but as the father of some of them, I resent that, and I feel that my children are an addition to society. I could talk about break down of communities, parents not knowing where their children are all day whilst they're at work, broken homes, and many other things that Iain Duncan Smith has highlighted.

However I don't need the abuse.

So instead, I'll ask what posters in this thread are doing about - personally. Everyone of us seems to have ideas about what should be done, but how many of us are putting this into action ?

I give my time as a school governor, this gives me the oppotunity to both enforce discipline, and provide support to struggling pupils.

Its no good excluding Jonny for being late, improperly dressed, not doing his homework, and falling asleep in lessons, when you know his parents have split up, the house has been repossessed and he's living with his mother and 3 siblings in his older sister's house. However - neither can you ignore it, because others will then not do their homework, or come late.

You have to use your knowledge to drive your actions, getting the mother in touch with social services because she's virtually illiterate, giving Jonny detention and keeping him in school to do his homework and providing him with the tools he need to do that homework.

People not policies solve problems, and more problems are solved with hearts and hands than big sticks.

Sadly sometimes you need the big stick. We won't tolerate violence to other pupils or to staff, or drugs or theft.

If every person in this thread took the time to involve themselves with their local community in some manner, than maybe - just maybe - we could come on here and pontificate with a clear heart.

Edward, Thanks for the correction to my post about Rhys Jones. I apologise to all for using the wrong surname.

To the questions more immediately to hand on gangs ,yobs etc.....

I think that we would all probably agree that the inclusive approach that you advocate is indeed more likely to work than the "stick" approach, which probably will cause more alienation.

Having said that , there can surely be no doubt left, that the gang culture , whether as a substitute family or not, is now getting seriously out of hand. Fourteen youth murders this year, and young Rhys among them. This indicates, at least to me, that we generally, and our politicians particularly have ignored the calls for better policing, and/or a return to more discipline in schools over recent year.

Whatever Acts govern the abilities of parents and teachers to control their kids are clearly too much in favour of the kids than any form of authority over them. In the majority of cases I accept your approach is likely to help, BUT we now have an increasingly serious situation which is touching everwidening circles of society, and we must deal with it.

I was tempted to post yesterday on behalf of a zero tolerance approach, now see that D C has given up "Hug a Hoodie" - so I am bound to be wrong! However, I strongly urge that we take this approach ASAP. We have to decapitate the gangs, remove the most violent and most alienated before more poor kids get dragged into the mire.

I believe this will only be done by more 'on beat' policing. It is no use having a couple of patrol cars on a drive by principle every couple of hours. We need visible police, on BMX Bikes , if necessary, regularly patrolling and hopefully identifying potential gang kids and helping to get them on 'programmes' to steer them away from crime. Numerous TV programmes reveal huge sums of police funds spent on car chases, helicopters etc, which usually result in 'little' punishment.

I advocate that Chief Constables are instructed by the Home Office to stop this sort of pursuit and target the funds into putting copppers on the streets. If we ignore the current situation it will get more out of hand , and a great deal worse.

Novo

Actually, novo...I wasn't (conciously) correcting you.

Yes, you have a point on the visibility of police. But what do we expect the police to do? What about the visibility of, say, youth clubs and similar community schemes? Or drug rehabilitation projects? Etc. etc.

McKay - you've hit the nail on the head when you sau it's about community involvement. I applaud your contribution.

Of course, one issue is that we don't contribute enough in the way of resources to the (not your words) lily-livered PC liberal schemes that we know will make the difference. Instead we bitch and moan about the tax we have to pay. I myself would argue strongly for redistributive taxation, but that reflects my political leanings.

As for what I do - this will either amuse or horrify readers - I contribute my time by sitting as a member of Children's Panels. Since you don't have these in England and Wales, this explains what they are:
http://www.childrens-hearings.co.uk/background.asp
In my view, it's a remarkably sane and - dare I say - liberal system whereby issues of offending and welfare are dealt with as one and the same.

Jaysus! Who died and left me in charge?

Edward,

I was neither horrified ,nor amused when I read the link - actually I was impressed. It seems acommendable system to me, and ione which should be rapidly adopted south of the border.

It also throws light onto the 'thinking' behind your posts. I applaud you.

To go back briefly to visible policing..... isn't exactly the lack of it which allows groups of youngsters to get together, collect members, become a bit of a nuisance, and on continuing to get away with it, become bolder and a bigger nuisance, until something unpleasant creeps in?

We actually have 2 local bobbies who cycle as a pair on a black ( stealth ?) BMX type bikes , ie 'off roaders '' if necessary. I would expect them to deter by presence. I would prefer they talked to the kids if appropriate. However their powers could be useful in situations where us doddery OAP's are told to "F off, you can't touch me"

Novo

Well...realistically, how many police are we talking about?

I can see that a visible police presence within communities is a good idea. But police are never going to be able to everywhere, at all times. The idea of community policing seems sensible, though - having a recognised presence with ears close to the ground. The aim is not so much to be able to crack down hard, but to see trouble brewing before it starts. To put it another way...to identify where *some form* of intervention might be needed to prevent future crimes. As to what the interventions might be...well, the lily-livered PC liberal ones seem to work best.

They're cheaper, too.

One more thing...

I used to live in a bit of a problem community. Amongst other things, there were some multi-cultural issues.

I got to know the community police officers quite well. They did a very good job and seemed to have a remarkably sensible and down-to-earth approach. The tried to work pretty much 'hands-off', knowing that going in with size 10s would only lead to escalating trouble. But they had ways of talking to the right people and getting the community to keep a lid on things. For example, there was a major problem with fireworks around Guy Fawkes and Eid (We're talking massive shoulder-launched Roman candles. It could be like a bad night in Baghdad). Yes, this was stopped partly by good old-fashioned beat pounding...but also with a few quiet words.

Sorry to paste and run but I've just read this article from Domninc Lawson in yesterday's Independent. The first constructive all be it painful making of benefits dependent on work introduced by Bill Clinton.

http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnists_a_l/dominic_lawson/article2900978.ece

Welll....unemploymemt isn't quite the same as crime and disorder. Are there jobs for untrained, shambling alcoholics? What will be the impact on their children if their benefita are withdrawn? I'm not fundamentally against the idea of Keynsian job creation of this type, but I suggest that other welfare measureas are also needed.



Still banging on about MCKay's objection to the HRA. 'Common sense' would have worked, eh? But presumably the girl in question and her family had a different view as to what was sensible than the school did. So who should arbitrate? My suggestion is that this is precisely why we have a judiciary. What the HRA added to the process wa a clear, publically agreed framework on which to base their decision.

Let's assume the courts weren't involved. At what point do you imagine the girl would have caved in to common sense?

Scuse the typing in the first para above.

As an example of the other welfare measures I mean: Think back to St Jamie of Oliver's Fifteen venture. Remember how some of the prospective staff pulled out because their lives were too disordered for them to respond to training?