Re: Riots
 

AS is always the case the stupid minority give the vast majority a bad name nothing new there really. I am all for evicting anyone found guilty of looting if they are the tenant and having their benefits stopped as whilst it might not be perfect tbut hey have to be shown in as many ways as possible that we are not going to accept that sort of behaviour.

Evicting parents because little jimmy\gemma were out and about taking part in it all though is going a little far as far as i am concerned. For years now parents have had their hands tied more and more in terms of what they can do to keep their kids in line with so many external factors working against them and sorry to say in our town some of the "right on" teachers at the local secondary school has been a big part of the problem.

As a nation we took our eye off the ball in terms of kids we took away many of the sticks replacing them with carrots and rights and never countered it in any real way. We have a couple of generations of people in this country now who have grown up thinking they have a right to this and that and expecting it to be provided for them we have lost that spirit of working for what you want in many communities.

Re: Riots
 

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/im...ons/icon14.gif
Totaly agree with all of your comments

Re: Riots
 

And what percentage of the total of MPs there are, are fraudsters and cheats?

If Dave comes out with any more rubbish I think I'm going to rebel myself :D

Re: Riots
 

Just playing devil's advocate and looking at parental responsibility -

What happens to parents who have totally lost control of their children? Should they be responsible too? Let as assume that they bought their kids up as best as they could in their circumstances, and the kid still turns out to be a 'wrong un'. What then?

Does the media, school, neighbourhood have a part to play in how a child is 'bought up'?

Cany you simply assume that it's the parents fault and then how much blame can you actual put on them?

Re: Riots
 

What we need is well thought out actions and not kneejerk political soundbites all the time and why cannot all parties get together on this.

Re: Riots
 

Because the causes and remedies of social disorder go to the very heart of the differing political philosophies at play in Britain. The fact that Dave and the Giant Millipede have differing views on this issue is a sign that we have a healthy democracy with a range of views in play.

Re: Riots
 

wow the Government and Judges are going in hard :D

Re: Riots
 

Yes its great that we have a healthy democracy but a bit more cooperation on some important issues would be nice instead of parties playing political football sometimes when it would be more beneficial to work together.

Re: Riots
 

You mean less of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LpPy...eature=feedf ?

Re: Riots
 

[QUOTE=Saaf_laandon_mo;35288852]Just playing devil's advocate and looking at parental responsibility -

What happens to parents who have totally lost control of their children? Should they be responsible too? Let as assume that they bought their kids up as best as they could in their circumstances, and the kid still turns out to be a 'wrong un'. What then?

Does the media, school, neighbourhood have a part to play in how a child is 'bought up'?

Cany you simply assume that it's the parents fault and then how much blame can you actual put on them?[/QUOTE]


No you can't always blame them .It is still however the parents responsibility if they are under age .There are plenty of parents who try really hard but the kids still go off the rails and that does not negate their responsibility

Re: Riots
 

Yep, and soon the media will be comparing the sentences to people who got less for assault/drink driving/putting someone in a coma/fiddling expenses and stealing thousands of pounds.

Re: Riots
 

The government should be totally ashamed of this whole business, ok the riots started over a killing in Tottenham, then everything blows up.

What happens with the government, they remain on holiday, and come back slagging off the police for the way they dealt with, Then they come back and start saying that they will bring in troops, all it would have taken was one call from that puppet Cameron, and that would have the troops in, BUT, the police were dealing with it.

The police brought in all the usual officers, BUT, there again the government have cut everything, trainers the lot, there are a lot less officers now than a year ago.

He has this nice bright idea of bringing in this American guy, what can he do, American gangs are much tougher and carry guns, that they will use.

He forgets, in America he increased police NOT cut the numbers, and even today Theresa May is still going ahead with more cuts in the police - the police cannot win, its about time Cameron and Clegg got off there soapbox and started to come back to reality. To me they should both resign and let someone else do a better job - ME.

Re: Riots
 

l hearby elect you as Prime Minister then Arthur.;)

Re: Riots
 

Why? Was Cameron and Clegg out there nicking themselves a new plasma telly?

Oh really?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12296893

Less than a two percent drop. Hardly catastrophic.

Errr the gangs already do use guns. Do you really think if the Police were armed your common or garden chav or ned would magic up a lorry load of glocks?

:shocked:

Re: Riots
 

The first thing l would do would be, Anyone goes before the courts - 12 months - not suspended or community service, that's a total waste of time.

Serious crime such as Arson - 5 years, murder (such as that poor guy in Ealing) LIFE - 30 years.

Any money they earn in prison goes towards the victim family or goes into a fund which is run by a charity - NOT government run.

I would increase policing on the streets of London by double this amount. London used to be the safest place to live, it isn't anymore.

People are scared to walk the streets in safety.

I would insist that companies in the UK get contracts to create jobs - such as Bombardier - there would be no foreign companies involved unless it was a joint venture that secured jobs for the British worker, l would get the British economy working before foreign input.

If foriegn workers wanted to find work, they would have to prove that they had a job in the UK before entry, so that the british ecomomy was getting secure.

Its true what a resident said in Tottenham last week, there is no work in Tottenham so when they have the chance of looting they took it.