Isn't it a shame.

[missunderstood]

Steph is at least speaking from the heart, and certainly not regurgitating words and sentiments written by the political editors of The Sun and the rest of the gutter press.

 

Whether we like it or not, someone will eventually need to enter into a meaningful dialogue with representatives of the rioters, otherwise our streets will never be safe, and a large proportion of a generation will be wasted forever.

[Eastside Urchin]

Utter bollox although I would expect you to take stephs stance being a crazed up psycho labour supporter.

Why on earth should anyone pamper to the scums needs and talk to them.Strong policing,tough sentencing is the only solution.

Harsh sentencing does more to deter the majority of people than pampering to the riff raffs needs and those that do still commit crime are just blatantly stupid.

This "befriend a chav" mentality that labour seemed so keen to adopt is exactly the reason this country is in such a fckng mess,all that stance seemed to do was make every little scumbag think that they were just lovable little rogues when many go on to become harden criminals who still believe that they are loveable rogues

[missunderstood]

What on earth makes you think a socialist is a "crazed up psycho labour supporter Rob?, and to suggest that we should never talk to them is just crazy. After, and often during, almost every war or dispute this country has ever been involved in we have entered into dialogue with the other side, because its the sensible thing to do. Most of our former enemies become valued friends, and some even become respectable members of parliament. The house of lords is filled with enough crooks and nutters to fill Wembley Stadium.

 

As abhorrent as the rioters are, they didn't come close to doing the amount of damage to this country that Thatcher did.

[Eastside Urchin]

I think your last sentence says alot as to why I think you are a labour man Alan.

There is taking to them and then there's the strategy you seem to want to adopt,which is almost putting them up on a pedestal as a political group with spokespersons which is ridiculous.They are nothing more than stupid youths,I could tell you straight away what's wrong with 95% of them,they believe they are above the law and even when they do get caught and slung inside,the punishments are so soft and the prisons so cushty that there is no real deterant,it's actually a badge of honour to most.For this,various governments must take the blame,not just this one but the few before it.And now that we seem to be handing out harsher sentences,the wishy washy liberal idiots are claiming it's too harsh for the little darlings........oh do fck off lol

[Steph]

U

 

At the time of the Gordon Riots there was the death sentence for stealing a loaf of bread. Transportation for various misdemenours and you could spend time in the Pillory or stocks for drunkeness. There was still rioting, drunkeness and petty thieving. Your remedies of tough sentences has been proven not to work yet, along with the mob, you just keep repeating them as it saves you the bother of thinking.

 

No offence intended of course. BTW positing at quarter past four in the morning suggests you are not getting enough sleep.

[missunderstood]

Disagree with Stephs analysis on tough sentences, because while I accept they don't work in every case, its the best deterrent available at the present time to stop this kind of thing happening again. There's obviously a serious social problem out there and we all suffer because of it, and likewise we will all benefit if we eradicate the problem and educate the people responsible to lead useful and productive lives. It seems to me that just like Iraq, not much thought has been given to the residual problems that need to be faced after the battles have ended.

 

Good luck to the Townies for the coming season, although I obviously hope you finish at least one place behind Romford, and second would do nicely.

[Eastside Urchin]

Lol the days of my 4am drunken ramblings are long gone.Last night I had just got in from an evening delivering and picking up the good folk of upminster & Hornchurch to and from the capitals airports.

 

While I can see why you use the Gordon riots as an example,the two situations are vastly different.

 

1) don't get into the thinking that the majority of people who participated in last weeks riots are poverty stricken,I would of thought around 2% of those who took part are anywhere near the poverty line.

 

2) the Gordon riots were partly religious,obviously fuelled by poverty.These riots were initially caused by a well known armed gangster being shot,then everyone who rioted claimed it was a stance against the government/banks etc etc in fact it seems anyone who does well for themselves is the horrible big brother

 

3/these were not race riots but simple oportunist looting by many,if they really had a problem with the way the country is going and poverty then why not protest before now instead of waiting for a gangster to be shot dead???

 

4/ also going back to poverty.in the 18th century it is widely accepted that the majority of inhabitants in our major cities were way below the poverty line,no benefits or handouts in those days unless wealthy individuals took pity on the poor,life expectancy of those in the vast swaithes of the slums was probably no more than 30 as disease was rife,unemployment would probably be over 50%.the two situations are vastly different and I doubt that many who rioted would actually of been too bothered about being locked up or even hung,what with the cruel hand that was dealt to them back in those days.To compare poverty now when many of those who claim poverty,drink,smoke,have fancy trainers,cars,benefits,I phones is completely different to those who had cholera,dissentry,tubberclerocis etc etc (sorry about the spelling of such diseases but due to the healthcare we receive nowadays we don't have too much call for these words)

Edited August 19, 2011 by Eastside Urchin

[Steph]

I was always taught never speak from ignorance. My post was to demonstrate that harsh punishments will not solve the problems of rioting and this has been demonstrated time and again.

 

To correct your viewpoint I would point you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Riots and in particular the paragraph,

 

"After the first march to parliament, further riots occurred involving groups whose grievances were nationalistic, economic and political rather than religious. Aside from the issue of Catholic emancipation, it has also been suggested that the driving force of the riots was the poor economic situation Britain found itself in: the loss of trade during the war had led to falling wages, rising prices and periodic unemployment" (There are no references for this paragraph) It could even have been written after last weekend couldn't it?

 

Your estimates of life expectancy relate to the population as a whole when one considers the labouring classes the average life expectancy in Liverpool in the middle of the 19th century was 21. http://www.bl.uk/learning/images/makeanimpact/publichealth/large12729.html

 

In more recent times as recent as 30 years ago in the Black Report by Profesor Townsend the difference in life expectancy between the rich and poor is to be deplored in a modern Western civilisation. The divide has become wider under successive governments (See The Black Report, 1980 - ScotPHO) but you can continue to live in your self satisfied environment and believe that you have achieved your elevated position through your own efforts.

 

I, like you, was brought up in a council house but I had to say to my parents around 25 years ago that if they had wanted a council house in the situation they were in in 1950 they would not have got one. There was in the 1980's and the situation is worse now very little access to council housing for workiing people.

 

The result is that council housing have become ghettos for the poor where people, like you and me, are referred to as "scum" by people, like you and me.

 

There is now 20% unemployment amongst youngsters between 17 and 24 and in the ghettos I consider that this probably rises to over 50% yet you offer no solution except to lock em up.

 

Perhaps you should refer to http://www.newint.org/blog/2011/08/11/london-riots-social-deprivation-infographic-english-rioting/ to have a better understanding of the places where the rioters came from and try to grasp why they broke out of their ghettos to come on to our streets to air their grievances.

 

The thing that depresses me is that your viewpoint offers no hope but merely continue as we are. I am reminded of Scooge when asked for chariity replied. "Are there no workhouses, are there no prisons?" What lessons does A Christmas Carol teach us and the ghost of Christmas yet to come?

Edited August 20, 2011 by Steph

[Steph]

If you dont want to read the above post - it is kind of long.

 

Try this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/18/england-rioters-young-poor-unemployed

[Eastside Urchin]

Bromley,Ealing,Croydon,clapham,Enfield these are not areas of high deprevation,they may well be areas of reasonably high youth unemployment but they are on the whole nowhere near being anywhere near the poorest areas around.

 

As for the council estates.Many people in them are hard working individuals who do work hard but there are way too many who just sit on their laurels and when an opportunity arises for a riot they jump on the bandwagon and claim everything is against them.It's not of course,there will always be rich and always be those poorer than others but everyone has a chance of escaping poverty or to get richer (although of course not everyone will)

what I do find strange is that those with no money turn their noses up at those with money but many spend thousands over their lifetime on scratchcards,lottery tickets,bookmakers,pools in the hope of being as rich as those they turn their noses up at,when they win lifes big prizes they suddenly forget where they come from.

As for why people riot,the causes and how to stop it,I firmly believe that sentances until now have been far too weak,the youth and in fact many older people know they can commit crime and pretty much get away Scott free.It really is as simple as that from where I was standing.If the rioters and looters knew beforehand that they would be banged up for a year if caught even stealing one item,it's my view that 95% of them simply wouldn't of done it,that in itself is a deterrent

[missunderstood]

Because of the seriousness of what happened most people would agree that toughs sentences are appropriate, and hopefully act as a deterrent, as no sensible person want to see it ever happen again. Prison are expensive though, and not very good at rehabilitation, so we need to find the root cause and act on it.

 

To suggest that everyone has a chance to escape poverty is ridiculous, the education system generally lets down kids from poorer areas and I doubt that will ever change as long as the rich and powerful can have their offspring educated at public schools, (that quite laughable have charitable status), or send them to the better state schools. Its also unlikely that many of the people that took part in the riots have parents who have enough money to set their kids up in business.

Edited August 20, 2011 by missunderstood

[Eastside Urchin]

It's not ridiculous to say that everyone has a chance,it's the truth.At any one time their is opportunities for the poorest person to escape poverty.Whether it be a lottery win,inheriting some money,a lucky bet but I agree that on the whole it is unlikely and won't happen to many