Breaking Rocks for yobs

Originally Posted by Incognitas

Let's remember that 90% of young people are not thugs,bullies,criminals,vandals or any other kind of misfit.Let's rejoice that so many of them are respectable members of society.:
)

Yes Although you have to remember that some of that 90% are like me

[BBKing]

Oh great, let's demonise our children by ignoring the facts and going along with the Daily Mail's view of the world, that'll make them grow up to respect us and our laws.

I'd be interested in this if I could be assured that, say, directors of companies who fleece people of millions in pension mis-sellings or politicians who take bribes (or Jeffrey Archer) would be sweeping the street outside in a lurid pink suit with **** on the back. Somehow I doubt they would (and they are the ones who tend to end up in rather comfortable open prisons rather than the rather small number of persistent yobs who cause trouble).

As for making them do useful jobs around the place, this isn't the 1950s. One major argument against, say, national service is that the job of Average Squaddie today is far removed from what it was in the 1950s - there are far more specialised roles, equipment, training with other NATO forces, IT etc. and it's likely the Army wouldn't be particularly happy to be diverted from its primary task (being a highly-skilled but rather small rapid response force) to become a large, low-skilled place to put bored youth for a year.

Likewise, building, plumbing, electrical work etc. is a trade that these days requires a degree of skill and of course a large amount of certificates etc. Not many people would want to live in a house or work in a hospital wired by a mugger or graffiti artist who was doing it as a punishment in a pink suit. By all means offer to *teach* them a trade* as part of their punishment and rehabilitation, but leave plumbing to people who want to be plumbers.

If you're looking for a place for low skilled workers, try hospital cleaners or any other job primarily done by recent immigrants. MRSA, anyone?

* After all, expertise in daylight robbery is a plus in, say, a builder or plumber

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Chimaera

I've searched around for single parent statistics but couldn't find anything meaningful. But not all single parents raise hoodie wearing drug peddling lawbreakers!

Oh I'm not saying they do.............just that if the govt thinks that the key is for the parents to sit down with the kids at mealtimes they may find that it's a target too far

Originally Posted by Escapee

Bright pink, green and yellow costumes with a tall yellow pointy hat for clothes as far as I'm concerned. Why not humilate them for ther crimes!

You do *not* make someone part of a community or even make them *want* to be part of a community by *excluding* them from it!

What do they expect? For the person excluded to break down and go "oh no, I'm sorry, please let me come back and be part of the community again"? More likely they'll go "well sod you, I don't want to be part of your damn community anyway!" and this will just lead to more problems in future.
__________________

Originally Posted by Russ D

Why?

See above.

I reckon their punishment should be to continuously walk up and down Swansea's Oxford Street wearing a T-shirt saying "Yes I have had an accident or injury in the last 3 years - come and get me".

Err what???
__________________

Originally Posted by TigaSefi

According to Sky News, Human rights group find this "idea" is degrading to the criminals.

Yes, because that is exactly what it is.

It says "You are different", "You are being made an example of", "You are excluded from *our* society", "You are not one of Us".

As I said above, this is *not* going to make them want to rejoin a group or society or community that treats them in this way, it's going to make them say "screw you, then, I'll go my own way. Oh and I may just try to make *your* society a bit worse out of revenge".

Not a good idea.
__________________

Originally Posted by Chimaera

wait until they (or their family members) get burgled/mugged/happy slapped or whatever and I'm sure their opinions would differ slightly!

Ah, "everyone who supports human rights is, deep down, actually just a sanctimonious hypocrite who, as soon as they experience the troubles the *rest* (note the exclusion concept again!) of us have suffered will immediately change their tune and join those of us who know the only solution is to string them all up!!!"

(And putting a winking smiley at the end of your comment *does not* somehow make it acceptable or "just a joke")

[Paul K]

Originally Posted by Graham

You do *not* make someone part of a community or even make them *want* to be part of a community by *excluding* them from it!

What do they expect? For the person excluded to break down and go "oh no, I'm sorry, please let me come back and be part of the community again"? More likely they'll go "well sod you, I don't want to be part of your damn community anyway!" and this will just lead to more problems in future.
__________________

See above.

Err what???
__________________

Yes, because that is exactly what it is.

It says "You are different", "You are being made an example of", "You are excluded from *our* society", "You are not one of Us".

As I said above, this is *not* going to make them want to rejoin a group or society or community that treats them in this way, it's going to make them say "screw you, then, I'll go my own way. Oh and I may just try to make *your* society a bit worse out of revenge".

Not a good idea.

Well now that you have disagreed with most people who have posted, what is your idea for a proper deterrent that would help reduce the amount of youngsters out there that think it's ok to commit crimes, be abusive to people, damage property and generally behave in such a way that ASBOs have to be put in place etc?

[Chimaera]

Originally Posted by Graham

Ah, "everyone who supports human rights is, deep down, actually just a sanctimonious hypocrite who, as soon as they experience the troubles the *rest* (note the exclusion concept again!) of us have suffered will immediately change their tune and join those of us who know the only solution is to string them all up!!!"

(And putting a winking smiley at the end of your comment *does not* somehow make it acceptable or "just a joke")

I wasn't trying to make it 'acceptable' or a 'joke', I was just making a statement, which I believe we are all entitled to do, even if it doesn't conform to your way of thinking.
Apologies if I have caused offence.
I never said I wanted to 'string anyone up' as you put it, indeed I would be interested to see what your solution would be, as all you have done is picked this thread apart. And as a single parent I have a vested interest - as certain parts of society would blame 'my sort' for the problem in the first place.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Graham

It says "You are different", "You are being made an example of", "You are excluded from *our* society", "You are not one of Us".

As I said above, this is *not* going to make them want to rejoin a group or society or community that treats them in this way, it's going to make them say "screw you, then, I'll go my own way. Oh and I may just try to make *your* society a bit worse out of revenge".

Not a good idea.

Making an example of a few of them might just make any protoscrotes out there stop and think twice before making the rest of our lives a misery.
As for the fully formed scrotes out there, they should be shown that if they **** with society society ***** them back................it's probably the only language that they understand.

[BBKing]

How about:

1) Anyone in the media who deliberately distorts facts about crime rates for a lurid headline should be liable to be pelted in the stocks by professors of journalism using wet sponges
2) Any politician who panders to people's perceptions rather than making policy sensibly on the basis of facts should be held upside-down in a vat of warm marmalade
3) The basic tenets of our judicial system should be taught in schools and made familiar to all. In the interim it should be made a sticky on CF's Current Affairs forum
4) All parties should accept that zero crime is only achievable in a state with zero freedom. If you want freedom, you have to accept a level of crime
5) Inequality creates crime. Therefore all parties should accept that reducing inequality is necessary to reduce crime. If this means moving back from the slavish devotion to 'competition' and 'market forces' then tough.

Any more for any more?
Edit: I forgot one
6) Anyone who holds up the example of the US judicial system as in any way a suitable case study from which we can learn positive lessons should be bound and gagged with suitable equipment from Graham's emporium of the exotic.

[Ramrod]

I agree with 1, 2 & 3...........as for 4--zero crime isn't possible even in a totalitarian state--but that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for zero crime.

5-'inequality creates crime'--that's such a load of bull!--are you a communist? Criminals create crime and a lack of 'proper' upbringing creates criminals. There will always be inequality- deal with it

6--Just 'cos the US judicial system isn't perfect doesn't mean that we should dismiss it out of hand.......you can draw lessons from everything.


or was that post tongue in cheek?

Originally Posted by Paul

Well now that you have disagreed with most people who have posted, what is your idea for a proper deterrent that would help reduce the amount of youngsters out there that think it's ok to commit crimes, be abusive to people, damage property and generally behave in such a way that ASBOs have to be put in place etc?

How many times do I have to explain that just because I object to something I *DON'T* have to be able to solve the world's problems as the "price" of that objection???

Oh, and, if you actually bothered to *READ* what I'd written, you'd note that it was the *UNIFORMS* that I was objecting to, not the community service.

It *is* possible for many (but not necessarily all) offenders to be rehabilitated by community service and it's better than putting them in prisons where they are only likely to become better (or more prolific) criminals.

However if you *discriminate* against offenders by forcing them to wear clothing that clearly says "criminal" or "excluded", you are doing *nobody* any favours.

[...]SOVAâ₠¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢S PHILSOPHY, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
The Community
SOVA believes that the community has an important role to play in the care and resettlement of offenders and young people at risk. We seek to involve volunteers in the work of the statutory and voluntary agencies in the Criminal Justice system because we believe that:

Successful rehabilitation and diversion requires continuing support through the involvement of local people.

Offenders should not be assisted in isolation from their communities on projects where the only interaction is between paid staff and offenders.

Service for offenders can be improved if statutory and voluntary organisations co-operate more closely,

Public participation in the care of offenders can reduce fear of crimeand translate stereotypes and prejudice into concern and understanding.

http://beehive.thisisderbyshire.co.u...9&PageID=56631

[...]The Guidance Programme is a pre-Court diversionary programme for first-time juvenile offenders who have committed minor offences such as shoplifting. These juveniles would be let off with a police caution instead of being charged in Court for the offences committed. The Guidance Programme was launched in October 1997 and is administered by MCYS. This unique initiative steers the juvenile away from the Court system, recognising the viability of providing an alternative opportunity for the juvenile to make amends and resolve against re-offending in the future.

http://app.mcys.gov.sg/web/indv_rebuily.asp

When an individual engages in criminal activity, it is to the advantage of all Albertans that the individual be held accountable and encouraged to become a law-abiding member of society. While the onus for change rests with the individual, it is believed that change can be facilitated by providing offenders with assistance and opportunities that promote positive and productive behaviour.

[...]

In 2002/03, the percentage of successful completion of young offender probation dispositions was 60 per cent. This is down from 62 per cent in 2001/02, but achieved the 60 per cent target.

http://www.justice.gov.ab.ca/publica...ders.htm<br />

"Can Rehabilitation Succeed and Reentry be Successful"

[...]

Rehabilitation is alive and well in the basic structure of Ohioââ‚ ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s adult felony corrections system. DRCââ‚Âà ‚¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢s treatment and programming menus are extensive. Our agency missionââ‚à ‚¬Ã¢â‚¬ÂÂÂ�simply putââ‚Âà ‚¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚ÂÂ�is to ensure public safety though good supervision and to prepare offenders to reenter society as productive and contributing citizens.

[...]

It is indisputable that incarceration affects more than just the prisoner. It impacts the offenderââ‚à ƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢s family and his community. Studies have shown time and time again that minority males are affected more than others by incarceration.

[...]

The effects on offendersâ₠¬â„¢ families are also evident by examining the stigma attached to incarceration. For example, it is often difficult for the offender to find meaningful and gainful employment. Further, we must be mindful that this stigma is not just directed at the offender returning home, but oftentimes transfers to the entire family. Non-criminal neighbors and associates tend to be wary and suspicious of the offender and even their family members, making community acceptance very difficult. Children in particular feel shamed when they are stigmatized from others for the actions of a parent.

http://www.drc.state.oh.us/web/Articles/article92.htm

__________________

Originally Posted by Chimaera

I wasn't trying to make it 'acceptable' or a 'joke', I was just making a statement, which I believe we are all entitled to do, even if it doesn't conform to your way of thinking.
Apologies if I have caused offence.

Well I'm sorry, but I did find that offensive because it implies that *I* (being someone who supports human rights, would be so shallow as to change what I thought just because it was *me* who was affected, rather than someone else.

I would be interested to see what your solution would be, as all you have done is picked this thread apart.

See above.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Graham

See above.

But it would be nice if you could offer some solution if you've criticised everyone's opinion?

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Making an example of a few of them might just make any protoscrotes out there stop and think twice before making the rest of our lives a misery.

Chopping their hands off or putting them up against a wall or just giving them longer jail sentences would also "make an example" of them.

Curiously enough, that's what politicians have been doing by being "tough on crime" etc etc over the past decade or two, yet somehow it doesn't seem to have brought the crime figures down.

As for the fully formed scrotes out there, they should be shown that if they fu*k with society society fu*ks them back................it's probably the only language that they understand.

Copyright the Daily Mail editorial (although in slightly different words)...
__________________

Originally Posted by BBKing

How about:

I've already green repped you in this thread, I can't do it again!

Edit: I forgot one
6) Anyone who holds up the example of the US judicial system as in any way a suitable case study from which we can learn positive lessons should be bound and gagged with suitable equipment from Graham's emporium of the exotic.

KerCHIINNNGG!!!

(Although *certain* parts of the US system actually have a more enlightened view, see the links I posted above)
__________________

Originally Posted by Ramrod

5-'inequality creates crime'--that's such a load of bull!--are you a communist?

Damn commies!

Criminals create crime and a lack of 'proper' upbringing creates criminals. There will always be inequality- deal with it

Yes, there is certainly an element of lack of "proper" upbringing, but to claim that that is the *only* cause and that inequality doesn't pay a part is simply glib and unhelpful.

Some crimes are committed through greed, others, however, are committed through desperation and that *can* happen where there is massive inequality if people want to survive.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by AndrewJames

I would force them through traning in building demolition etc while in Jail then send them out on a pitince wage and make them build us hospitals schools etc for a fraction of the price.

You wanna gave Chavs and convicted criminals access, to and training in the use of, Explosives?



Only joking, I don't think you actually meant that.

Originally Posted by Shaun

Just 'cos its not breaking rocks or building stuff doesn't mean that it's not hard work, and if it saves the council money on buying them in then I think its a great idea.

It's ironic that our local council cannot afford to light all the roads in our town (there are two roads from our local station. One is lit and the other has absolutely no lighting apart from a single bulb at one end despite the fact that most of the passengers use it), yet have enough money to maintain hanging baskets on most of the streetlamps.

Actually, back on topic. I personally have no objection to people doing community service being required to wear a uniform. I certainly don't think it would be more humiliating than wearing a uniform for a job.

Originally Posted by Graham

Ah, "everyone who supports human rights is, deep down, actually just a sanctimonious hypocrite who, as soon as they experience the troubles the *rest* (note the exclusion concept again!) of us have suffered will immediately change their tune and join those of us who know the only solution is to string them all up!!!"

(And putting a winking smiley at the end of your comment *does not* somehow make it acceptable or "just a joke")

You appear to have made several assumptions there. First that Chimaera was referring to everyone who supports human rights (she never said that, and I don't think she was), and second, that Chimaera was in the "String 'em up" group that seems to be present on this forum. I have met her on several occasions, and have spent many hours talking to her (on and off line). While we have never discussed it, I am sure she is not in the "string 'em up" brigade

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by Graham

So you want a bunch of *criminals* to be searching through paperwork that people may have thrown away that could contain bank account, credit card or other sensitive information...???

Why not, what's the percentage of the population with a photographic memory?

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Shaun

Why not, what's the percentage of the population with a photographic memory?

The problem is that no matter how thoroughly you search them, if they are determined enough, they will always find a way to hide a reciept or bank statement.