# How would you stop knife crime?



## woody67 (3 Jul 2008)

No need to go into the details of recent tragic events, but it has certainly raised issues in our household - comprising of me, Mrs W and 2 teenage boys. I say you wil never stop youngsters carrying knives. If they carried out a blanket ban on selling knives tomorrow - in an attempt to reduce violence, young uns would simply resort to raiding our cutlery drawers. Other solutions have been raised-with conflicting views; i.e National Service and peer pressure etc. What do others think will be a realistic solution ?

Mark


----------



## caretaker (3 Jul 2008)

When I was a lad it was the thing to carry flick knifes, the problem is I fain at the site of blood.
Wish I still had that knife for the allotment.


----------



## Anonymous (3 Jul 2008)

Heavy fines. Payable by the parents.


----------



## skipdiver (3 Jul 2008)

I personally feel it is a societal problem.We are all to blame.I read somewhere that a leading psychologist said:-the biggest cause of the breakdown in society is the demise of the kitchen table.Families no longer sit together for an evening meal and thus problems are not caught early leading to youths becoming disenfranchised.Too many parents now spend far too long away from the family unit trying to earn enough money to buy things they feel they should have and kids are left to their own devices.This raises another issue of a consumer lead society but i will stick to the original point.I think that what happens is these kids then look to their peers in the form of gangs to take the parental role.These gangs then get in some kind of fight and it then becomes an honour thing.Can't back down.Someone gets stabbed.

On sunday night,my brother was walking through the local marketplace when 4 youths stopped him and demanded money.He was under no illusion that they would beat him senseless if he didn't act,so he turned and ran.Luckily there was a late bar open and he managed to get to it before they caught him.He is in his forties with a dodgy knee so had a lucky escape.He could be dead now and the thought makes me feel ill.They have absolutely no respect and that has to come from bad parenting.


----------



## StevieB (3 Jul 2008)

First thing to do is ask WHY they are carrying knives in the first place. Is it for the respect of their contempories? To intimidate, to bolster their own ego, to fit in, to protect? Whatever the consequences of it just locking up carriers will not stop it - you need to address the why. Any of the above will not have a quick solution and that in itself is a problem - politicians and law enforcement (due to political targets from both sides) need to be shown to be taking swift and urgent action. Thus for expediency they arrest more people and try and convince us we are all safer because more people have been arrested/charged/fined/jailed etc.

I do think that all politicians must stop the back and forth punch and judy nature of 'this crime rose under such and such a government, it wouldnt have done if we were in power' and sit down together with law enforcement to come up with a best practice plan based on evidence from all sides. This is not a rant at any particular party, they are all guilty of trying to get one over on the other side whether in power or not.

In short tough penalties are a deterrant to only some, trying to tackle the root cause is far more likely to have a bigger effect but over a longer time period.

Steve.


----------



## woodbloke (3 Jul 2008)

I've got some sympathy with Skipd's post in that it has to be a problem for society at large and in particular the demise of the family meal at night. So many parent(s) are away from home trying to provide the where-with-all for youngsters so called necessities :? let alone food and shelter that there's not much contact time with the result that they look to their peers and peer pressure inevitably intervenes.
A very complex problem, but one I think that's rooted in the home...the solution lies there - Rob


----------



## RogerS (3 Jul 2008)

I agree - poor parenting and no responsibility or penalty for the actions of their feral offspring are most certainly one cause. Likewise weak vacillating politicians and a lack of any coherent strategy or funding into youth groups etc etc. coupled with a reduction in adult volunteers as they (understandably) can't be pineappled to fill in yet another CRB check form to go with the other four that they have already filled in (yup..CRB checks are not transferable).

However I would single out one particular group for outright condemnation. These are the folks who have just mandated that the penalty for carrying a knife is punishable by a fine between one and two weeks wages. You know, the amount of money that your average lad drinks his way through at the weekend. Serious deterrent there, I think. 

This is the group who, in their annual progress report make absolutely NO reference to actually trying to deter or punish crime. In fact their website spends more time saying how wonderful they are in producing reports and how diverse they are (diverse as in equal opportunities blah de blah de blah).

So when you come back from Cloud Cuckoo Land, stand up and be counted, boys and girls of the The Sentencing Guidelines Council and your partners in crime The Sentencing Advisory Panel. Go walk down any city centre late at night without a police escort and then stop navel gazing and actually do something sensible to reduce crime. Or resign.

You can read all about them here. I've read quite a few of their reports and a more sycophantic back-slapping self-congratulatory hogwash I have yet to find. Fair ,made me want to stick my fingers down the back of my throat.


----------



## dunbarhamlin (3 Jul 2008)

Give back parents, teachers and police the right _and responsibility_ to discipline these vermin.
Bring back public birching. If the POS is stood in the town square with his pants around his ankles squealing for mummy he isn't going to look such a grand hero to his peers.


----------



## RogerS (3 Jul 2008)

dunbarhamlin":z02ttoim said:


> Give back parents, teachers and police the right _and responsibility_ to discipline these vermin.
> Bring back public birching. If the POS is stood in the town square with his pants around his ankles squealing for mummy he isn't going to look such a grand hero to his peers.



How can you suggest such a thing? Not only is it against his/her human rights it goes against Govt policy.

Sorry.....slipped into b**ls**t-speak for a moment there. Bloody good idea!


----------



## lurker (3 Jul 2008)

MY SOLUTION to all this country's ills, is to ban career politicians. Most of them - even those in their late 50s & 60s are so niave its startling. 

If THEY had to share the streets & public transport with the rest of us things would quickly change.

It gets more like Animal Farm by the day.


----------



## Argee (3 Jul 2008)

woodbloke":3gevrpn3 said:


> A very complex problem, but one I think that's rooted in the home...the solution lies there.


Indeed it is complex, Rob, but the parents who now need to take responsibility are the _*least *_likely to step up, given that their lack of action to date has probably led to the situation, as you say. 

There are already sufficient offences and powers to search on the statute book, but there seems to be a reluctance to enforce and/or sentence if enforced. That's a complete mystery to me, as that seems to be the only deterrent we've got. 

Pleading to the sensibilities of those carrying will - in the vast majority of cases - fall on deaf ears. Trying to convince those who carry for "self-defence" to desist is going to have no effect until those who carry to use are inside (no such defence in law, just possible mitigation). 

The most difficult thing seems to be to get witnesses to tell the truth - is that any wonder when society seems to lie as a way of life? Many of the most popular TV programmes rely on lies for their story lines. There are even shows entirely based on lies. Seems to me that good, honest behaviour and social respect is no longer "cool." 

Ray.


----------



## lurker (3 Jul 2008)

Ray,

Quite true.
Virtually every "self made millionaire" and prosperous company in this country appears to be bending if not breaking the law. It sends out a very negative message.

Knowing ( slightly) your background would you find it offensive if I said that, from what I can see Chief Constables ( via PR machines) are a bunch of liars as well?


----------



## davegw (3 Jul 2008)

I always find it interesting when we are faced with "crises" in society like this.

I don't think Knife crime (or at least people carrying Knives) is new, As a teenager (some 25 years ago) I carried a knife, not to look cool or because I was in a gang, but because I was afraid of a local bully who carried one. Mine was bigger (of course).

I had what I would describe as a very good upbring by caring parents, who didn't flinch from telling me off or even handing out the odd smack. When they found out I carried a Knife I was told off, severly, and grounded (it wasn't called that then but the effect was the same). My mum "clipped me round the ear" to ensure that I understood what was going on 

My Dad then sat me down and explained to me why he was so angry, describing a friend of his, who some 30 years earlier, had been in a similar situation, and had been seriously injured in the ensuing knife fight! That (and not the punishment) made me stop carrying a knife and in fact I joined youth CND as well but we can have the argument for unilateral disarmament another day 

I think there will always be idiots that carry weapons, and the real problem today is lack of respect, for teachers, police, elders. Knife attackes, anti social behaviour etc, etc are all symptons of tha. Unfortunatley we can't reverse 30 years + of a soppy, liberal education system overnight, especially whilst we persist it. I don't believe that we need a return to corporal punishment by the state or the school, I had teachers who could control a class without the threat of violence, and those people need to be encouraged to return. Once you start to build respect into children for adults then all else follows IMHO

Dave


----------



## big soft moose (3 Jul 2008)

davegw":1453wkch said:


> I think there will always be idiots that carry weapons, and the real problem today is lack of respect, for teachers, police, elders. Knife



to paraphrase the song - knives dont kill people - idiots do. The real issue is not why are kids carrying knives but why are so many hanging arround in the town centre getting out of their tree on blue wkd and billy whizz

when i was a lad (which wasnt that long ago) most of my contempories carried pen knives or lock back knives - but we used them for cutting things , rather than for cutting each other.

fights were fought with fists and the occasional boot, knee, elbow, headbutt etc and as we were sober at the time it didnt go too far and no one got badly hurt.


----------



## Argee (3 Jul 2008)

lurker":t6btlhne said:


> .... would you find it offensive if I said that, from what I can see Chief Constables ( via PR machines) are a bunch of liars as well?


Absolutely not - they're politicians first, servants second, with very few exceptions.

Ray.


----------



## bluezephyr (3 Jul 2008)

If knives are banned there will be something else, Ok its only movies but you see Sharp instruments being fashioned out of scrap metal and that in prisons, Thats whatll happen, But for street use!.

The youfs of today who hang about on street crners and outside shops n that are really nasty little scrotes now, We used to hang about when i was about 14 but we didnt cause any trouble and certainly didnt feel the need for carrying knives and weaponry.

Not sure of a solution, I dont think there is one, put all the badduns together in a battle royale type situation.

As far as having something available to protect my home, Thats a different story!


----------



## woody67 (3 Jul 2008)

The feeling of family dynamics is one of which I concur wholeheartedly. We won't allow "TV dinners" but insist we all four sit at the dining table for meals and air the days news/problems/laughs etc,etc. Our 18 and 16 year old boys must make us aware of where they are going, when they are returning, where they are, who they are with etc. May seem a bit overkill, but they now respect and are accustomed to the fact that we care!

Mark


----------



## davegw (3 Jul 2008)

woody67":1up6nat2 said:


> they now respect and are accustomed to the fact that we care!
> 
> Mark



Respect is so key to this I think, and it's not just kids, I am just on the train home, and when the train was about to leave a very respectable chap tried to open the (already locked) door. The Platform staff told him that he was too late and should use the train on the opposite platform that left in 5 minutes time, at which point he subjected HER to the most abhorant tide of verbal abuse I have heard in a long time, especially directed at a woman.

She was just letting him know the situation, she hadn't locked the door, nor was she using an unreasonable tone, she was just doing her Job (quite well).

Why should youngsters show respect to anyone when this is the kind of attitude so called adults take (and don't get me started on Gordon Ramsey and Alan Sugar!)


----------



## MrJay (3 Jul 2008)

Word - as role models go, grown ups are a pretty dismal lot. Also, ban television. There's a curious serendipity about atrophying in front of the gogglebox day in/day out and then moaning about the breakdown of society.



blue":3majjd0k said:


> If knives are banned there will be something else...


As long as it's not my best chisels.


----------



## bluezephyr (3 Jul 2008)

MrJay":1lftoeyy said:


> As long as it's not my best chisels.



Street corner carving and whittling, A New fashion amongst the Asbo's


----------



## PowerTool (3 Jul 2008)

big soft moose":1upc92kx said:


> when i was a lad (which wasnt that long ago) most of my contempories carried pen knives or lock back knives - but we used them for cutting things , rather than for cutting each other.
> 
> fights were fought with fists and the occasional boot, knee, elbow, headbutt etc and as we were sober at the time it didnt go too far and no one got badly hurt.



Same experience here - I still always carry a knife,but that's because I used to work on a farm,and was then a wagon driver;a knife is a necessary part of your toolkit in such professions,not the "fashion accessory" it seems to have now degenerated into :evil: 

Andrew


----------



## mailee (3 Jul 2008)

I just heard recently from a work mate that in his neighbourhood was a young 'lad' who had terrorised the residents especially old ladies with a knife for money. He had also been seen vandalising property and the police just were not interested or more like their hands were tied due to all the red tape. A group of locals who were shall we say, 'bruisers' decided a vigilanty approach was needed. They informed the 'lad' why they were going to assault him to which he gave them vebal abuse threatening to inform the police about them thinking he was above the law himself. He still hasn't informed on the gang of vigilanties even though he is still in hospital with two broken legs and a few cuts and bruises! Although I don't condone this it will come to more and more areas if the powers that be don't allow the police to do their job properly. I have no idea how we are going to deal with the young thugs of today but I am glad I won't be staying here in the UK in my old age. :evil:


----------



## MrJay (3 Jul 2008)

Hray; that'll teach 'em \o/



oh wait


----------



## newt (3 Jul 2008)

When you see the mug shots of these kids why do so many IMO look like crims, sometimes they look fairly normal but not often. Difficult to describe in words, but they look rough, mean, dim looking, often lots of metal in ears nose and throat, staring eyes, shaven head (nothing basically wrong with short hair) they do not look like upright citizens, well of course they are not. This might just be my perception but famous crims the murdering types, have to me a certain appearance, or is this just an association because you know what they have done. My point is does does facial appearance have any influence on behavior. Do they go out of their way to look mean. Bit of a contradiction but many hide their face in hoods.


----------



## Rich (3 Jul 2008)

woody67":1rfkjj31 said:


> The feeling of family dynamics is one of which I concur wholeheartedly. We won't allow "TV dinners" but insist we all four sit at the dining table for meals and air the days news/problems/laughs etc,etc. Our 18 and 16 year old boys must make us aware of where they are going, when they are returning, where they are, who they are with etc. May seem a bit overkill, but they now respect and are accustomed to the fact that we care!
> 
> Mark



I like those sentiments Woody, our dilemma as parents of 2 boys, 16 and 14, is how to indulge them? we live on a council estate which is not too bad by and large, I am in favour of loosening the leash so that they get a bit streetwise, my wife on the otherhand won't hear of it, so we indulge them with computers, tv's, guitars, books, pc games,etc etc.
Like your selves we go out of our way at the weekends to dine together, during the week is impractical,neither of the boys have any malice in them although the youngest is always getting detention, at some stage soon we will have no say in what they want to do other than when they say can I have some money or we can say be in by such and such a time, when that time comes we can only hope they remember what we taught them, but having said that, everyone is allowed to go off the rails once, that's why the rails are there, so that they are easy to get back onto, my mum and dad taught me that simple lesson, and by george, I'm glad they did, because they were there when I went wrong and I got a second chance, loving and caring parents, you can't beat them, they are priceless.

Sorry too be so long,

Regards,
Rich.
.


----------



## p111dom (4 Jul 2008)

The way I see it is that it's all about the image. Kids see movies, mags, music video's and whether we like it or not this creates a sort of moral fashion. It's simply seen as 'cool' to act this way, get 'respect', be harder, stronger than the next person. Weapons are the great leveller or so it is perceived. Big bloke versus little bloke, big bloke wins. Big bloke versus little bloke with knife or gun, little bloke wins. I think it will get worse as well. In the states this sort of attitude is all about the money. Kill, steal, sell drugs to get rich. In the UK the kids don't seem to make the connection. They just copy the actions without the justification. There's very little knife 'him and take his wallet, burgle his house, steal his car'. It's all about the image, look hard, act hard, try and scare people. They just don't get it. Well if it's all about image then that's where I think we should start a remedy. Get caught with a knife and don't lock them up to socialise with more seasoned crims and come out worse. Don't just tag them and send them out to do more of the same. I would make them wear a pink tutu and a tiara for a month to school. Put a big sign on their backs saying 'loser walking' or similar. Embarrass them into changing their attitude. Make working hard and earning money the 'new cool'. Make carrying a knife or a gun the losers choice. If it's not cool to carry one then they won't.


----------



## RogerS (4 Jul 2008)

woody67":bmhpn9ny said:


> The feeling of family dynamics is one of which I concur wholeheartedly. We won't allow "TV dinners" but insist we all four sit at the dining table for meals and air the days news/problems/laughs etc,etc. Our 18 and 16 year old boys must make us aware of where they are going, when they are returning, where they are, who they are with etc. May seem a bit overkill, but they now respect and are accustomed to the fact that we care!
> 
> Mark



No, Mark, it's not overkill. It's what I call decent parenting. If other feral monster breeders took as much care as you and your wife clearly do then we would go a long long way towards a better society.



I did ask the Sentencing Guildelines Council for their response to the media reports vis a vis fines. It would appear, according to the SGC, that the media have been selective in their reporting as this extract states...

_Three categories of seriousness are presented in the guideline and for each a suggested starting point and sentencing range are set:

· For the least serious form of the offence (where the weapon was carried but not used to threaten or cause fear) the starting point is a high level community order and the range for sentencing is from a high level fine up to 12 weeks imprisonment. 

· If the case falls into one of the two more serious categories, a custodial sentence is the starting point. Magistrates’ courts are limited to a maximum custodial sentence of 6 months and the Crown Court to 4 years._

I've skimmed through the Guidelines to Magistrates but can't find the relevant section, though.

What was interesting in the reply was that .....

_You ask how much political influence the Sentencing Advisory Panel and the Sentencing Guidelines Council are subject to. The Panel and the Council are two closely linked bodies that operate independently of Government. The Council has 12 members, 8 members of the judiciary (drawn from every level of court that deals with criminal cases), a very senior police officer, the Director of Public Prosecutions, a defence lawyer and a person with substantial experience of victim issues. 

The Council draws on advice from the Sentencing Advisory Panel which has an even wider membership, anyone can apply to be a member of the Panel._

The last sentence is interesting and means that those of us who belong to the 'bring back the birch' camp should try and get onto the Panel!


----------



## Smudger (4 Jul 2008)

You don't have to go that far. Just talking, caring, being there for kids. Gangs replace the family life kids don't get with their families, peer groups exercise the socialisation function that parents should.

Lord of the flies...


----------



## Losos (4 Jul 2008)

skipdiver":3hln8bw9 said:


> We are all to blame........................................................................They have absolutely no respect and that has to come from bad parenting.



Sorry Steve I just can't accept thatwe are *all* to blame. That *implies me *and how have I contributed to knife crime :?: , or even the demise of civilised society come to that.

But your last sentance *does hit the nail right on the head*.

So reverting to your statement 'we are all to blame' I would suggest that the people who are to blame are the ignorant, criminally minded, evil types of parents of which there are far too many in this world.

And of course the low standards of so many people (especially those comming from some other countries) 

Parents of so many just don't care - It used to be that children misbehaving got a swipe round the ear from Dad (Or MUm even) now the PC goody two shoes are telling us all it's bad to smack kids so just like my dogs they pretty soon learn that they can do anything and *parents can't do a dam thing*.

Is it any wonder there's so much knife crime :?:


----------



## RogerS (4 Jul 2008)

Losos":31mym00h said:


> skipdiver":31mym00h said:
> 
> 
> > We are all to blame........................................................................They have absolutely no respect and that has to come from bad parenting.
> ...



Well...think back to maybe 5 or 6 years ago or sometime in the not so distant past and ask yourself whether or not there was an occasion where you saw some kids mucking about or doing something that they shouldn't and said nothing? If you can honestly say that that has never happened then you make a fair point.

But to be honest, I think that most of us and I include myself in that have abrogated our responsibilities and turned a blind eye/not got involved/its' someone elses responsibility. Just one more reason, I reckon, for the demise of our society.


----------



## ByronBlack (4 Jul 2008)

There's only one way to reverse the current problem. License breeding. Too many dimwitted scumbags are encouraged by our dopey system to pop out as many creatures as possible to bump up their benefits and have a house/home. Invariably the father is either not around, unware the child is his, or unable to have a role in the childs life due to our dopey laws.

There should be an intelligence/moral/financial test to see if a couple meet the criteria for breeding. This would in a single generation ensure that our gene pool and thus society is only of the right kind.

Controversial it might be, radical it definitely is, but its the way we are going to have to go about things soon when the population of this planet gets too large to sustain.


----------



## davegw (4 Jul 2008)

ByronBlack":gz2prj8j said:


> There's only one way to reverse the current problem. License breeding.


:shock: Really how would you stop "unlicensed breeding"? 



ByronBlack":gz2prj8j said:


> Too many dimwitted scumbags are encouraged by our dopey system to pop out as many creatures as possible to bump up their benefits and have a house/home. Invariably the father is either not around, unware the child is his, or unable to have a role in the childs life due to our dopey laws.


 
I'd love to see the Stat's that back that up. I don't believe that many people have children just to bump up benefits, but I have no stats to back that up either. 



ByronBlack":gz2prj8j said:


> There should be an intelligence/moral/financial test to see if a couple meet the criteria for breeding. This would in a single generation ensure that our gene pool and thus society is only of the right kind.


 
I'm afraid genetics have very little to do with any of the traits you describe, possibly something to do with intelligence, but nothing at all to do with morality or financial stability, some of the most immoral people in history have been the richest, and vice versa. 

Eugenics (the science you are suggesting) has been resoundingly discredited by some of the great minds of our time, a notable and vocal one is Richard Dawkins. Of course there have been several attempts to use it in the past to justify "fixes" for society (otherwise known as genocide) two come to mind, one in Germany and another in Australia 



ByronBlack":gz2prj8j said:


> Controversial it might be, radical it definitely is, but its the way we are going to have to go about things soon when the population of this planet gets too large to sustain.


 
We could always (and this is radical I know) try to educate the population of the planet to understand how population increases are putting pressure on our resources? 

I'm not a soggy liberal by any standard but this (and the breaking of legs suggestion) are just more examples of the extreme (and violent) views that are spreading in society. If it's Ok to for the state to break someones leg for carrying a knife - surely it's ok to Stab them for doing it. if it's ok for the State to incarcerate innocents, sterilize a man or woman, or force an abortion (the only way's I can think of enforcing the breeding ban proposed ) then it's ok for me to retaliate? 

Sorry if this reply offends anyone, and it is only my opinion. I know that currently emotions are running high because of the amount of knife crime on the street, but reactionary statements like Byrons really don't help at all.


----------



## mailee (4 Jul 2008)

Oh yeah right on Byron. I couldn't agree more with that statement. Radical yes, but IMHO necessary in todays society. I only have one child who is my stepson, he is Chinese as is my wife and he arrived here in the UK at the start of his Senior School days. Both myself and my wife (also Chinese) were worried about him being in an English School mixing with undesirables as most of them have them nowadays. We needn't have worried as his Teacher made sure he became friends with the better boys in the School who took him under their wing so to speak. He knew very little English when he started and speaks it almost fluently now. He has just left School and is going to Uni to study Accountancy after four years at School without any problems with him at all. All his Teachers praised him stating he was a well liked boy and very polite who studied hard. Dare I say it but we are not really tough on him but firm and teach him right from wrong. Surprisingly he cooks at home, cleans the dishes each evening and even cleans house at the weekend while my wife is working! Not wanting to sound like i am blowing my own trumpet but to me that is down to good parenting and nothing to do with the TV as he often watches movies with violence being a Kung Fu fan. I think this just shows that with the right family influence kids turn out just fine. He like me, is dismayed at the goings on we read or hear of in the news concerning kids doing bad things. He is like any teenager of his age who always want's the latest fashion accessories but would never attack anyone for them. :wink:


----------



## woody67 (4 Jul 2008)

I've read some very emotional and salient points, most of which I agree with entirely. I suppose, as a family, we are lucky living in the backwaters of sleepy Cumbria, but it is with a heavy heart, that I feel the time will soon come when a youngster in our village succumbs to the plague that is knife crime. Nowhere is safe I fear.      

Mark


----------



## Smudger (4 Jul 2008)

I was doing some work with Year 8 history classes this week, looking at deaths in the Putney and Roehampton Health District in 1871.
In that year, not a special one by any means, there were 56 deaths due to violence. Of those, 11 were children under 10, and the greatest number (19) were males under 30. That compares very well to 2008 - ie 2008 is much safer. Much.

This article may be of interest.

In 35 years working with some pretty difficult kids in that area I have dealt with 2 knife wieldings and 1 airgun.

I'm not saying it isn't a problem, it is, but it is also a hyped up sensational story being pursued by the media.


----------



## Digit (4 Jul 2008)

> Really how would you stop "unlicensed breeding"?


Knives do have their uses you know! :lol:

Whether or not it's correct it seems logical that the problem starts and finishes in the home.
At the same time I come from a 'broken home' and I've also carried a pocket knife for 60 years and have yet to stab anyone!

Roy.


----------



## Rich (4 Jul 2008)

I don't really have an answer or solution but being an engineer, by eliminating certain causes, one arrives at the problem, therefore, if we were to introduce national service once again at the age of 17 years this time for 2 years and monitor the situation, I'm not advocating sending the lads to Iraq or Afghanistan at that age, but more of an excersise in learning from a bloody good sergeant, that there are rules in life and bullies and the like don't get very far, it would teach the lads that you can't get through life on your own, that you need your neighbour, and that you need to trust the man behind you who is holding a loaded rifle,
if this excercise did'nt work, at least we could say we have tried, which is more than leftwing, dogood ministers are doing, I have said it before and I will say it again, the Victorians were no fools, and the best known and handed down phrases was, "spare the rod and spoil the child" I expect one or two to disagree, but I can live with that, It's my opinion, you see.

Rich.


----------



## Digit (4 Jul 2008)

I think the argument is valid Rich. The problem, as I see it, is that that is exactly what gang membership promises.

Roy.


----------



## BradNaylor (4 Jul 2008)

One of the first novels I can remember reading as a lad was 'When Eight Bells Toll' by Alistair McLean.

The opening scene is of the hero despatching several 'baddies' with a wood chisel.

This has stuck in my mind for 40 years!

Dan


----------



## woody67 (4 Jul 2008)

Smudger":1x4n3kob said:


> I was doing some work with Year 8 history classes this week, looking at deaths in the Putney and Roehampton Health District in 1871.
> In that year, not a special one by any means, there were 56 deaths due to violence. Of those, 11 were children under 10, and the greatest number (19) were males under 30. That compares very well to 2008 - ie 2008 is much safer. Much.



Very well pointed out Dick - glad you're back at work BTW. I lecture on violence in health care and often relate to society in general. I know for a fact that many murders, stabbings, strangulations, rapes etc, etc happened in our nearest town (a shipping port) in the 19th century, but many people, especially nationally, were not aware due to the fact that the media bandwagon was nigh on absent - newspapers were expensive in 1871, and as for TV,radio and internet....................

Mark


----------



## Digit (4 Jul 2008)

True Mark, for example for many years ago the police officers on the beat wore blue serge uniforms. The reason was that in London's east end during the 19 C they were not infrequently doused with lamp oil a set on fire. The serge tended not to burn too well. 
Equally correct with those figures is that in the early 1950s the total number of reported burglaries for England were less than is current for one London borough. 

Roy.


----------



## Smudger (4 Jul 2008)

Also - the murders took place amongst the working classes (1 middle class death against 55 working class) and were just considered to be natural.

The fuss over Jack the Ripper was really the fear that he would leave the East End and start killing in the West End, not outrage that prostitutes were being killed.

There are no simple (or cheap) answers to these issues. And answers which simply recreate the problem through violence redirected or reduction of liberty simply don't work. 

Listening to young people would be a start.


----------



## davegw (4 Jul 2008)

Smudger":20w0keh6 said:


> Listening to young people would be a start.



Blimey Dick, careful now - all this talk of revolution will scare of the natives!


----------



## Digit (4 Jul 2008)

> Listening to young people would be a start.



I'm willing! Just as soon as they learn to speak English :lol: 

Roy.


----------



## woody67 (4 Jul 2008)

Smudger":1mdwgzp6 said:


> I was doing some work with Year 8 history classes this week, looking at deaths in the Putney and Roehampton Health District in 1871.



*Dick*, where did you get your info? Is it public domain? It's certainly getting me interested to the point I want to quote facts and figures in my lectures.

Mark


----------



## Rich (4 Jul 2008)

Smudger, SURELY The youngsters should be listening to those who know best, ie, their elders, if not their parents, I agree, we must listen to their concerns, but when they start paying the bills, then they can call the shots, and not before, it's called coming of age and realising your responsibilities in life, are you advocating that a 20 year old, for instance should lead the country, of course you are not, but, one must lead by example, children are children, and that is that, being an adult is a state of mind, not merely being 21, some people don't become adult until their 40,s.

Rich.


----------



## Digit (4 Jul 2008)

On Question Time from Glasgow last night it was stated that they virtually zeroed razor slashings overnight in the city with 10 year prison sentences

Roy.


----------



## Smudger (4 Jul 2008)

Rich":1irfnilk said:


> Smudger, SURELY The youngsters should be listening to those who know best, ie, their elders, if not their parents, I agree, we must listen to their concerns, but when they start paying the bills, then they can call the shots, and not before, it's called coming of age and realising your responsibilities in life, are you advocating that a 20 year old, for instance should lead the country, of course you are not, but, one must lead by example, children are children, and that is that, being an adult is a state of mind, not merely being 21, some people don't become adult until their 40,s.
> 
> Rich.



What I'm suggesting, is that instead of a lot of middle aged people with no real experience of the issues coming up with the same old failed ideas we actually ask young people why they behave in that way. And possibly try to help instead of just condemning them.

Don't make up a different version of what I am saying to suit yout own agenda.


----------



## Slim (4 Jul 2008)

Completely agree with you Dick. (do you need to sit down? :lol: )

Brand them criminals and thugs, and that is what they will be.


----------



## Rich (4 Jul 2008)

Dick, if the middle aged people have no idea of the issues, then what hope is there for the young ones, I have NOT tried to change your agenda but merely given, what I thought was a helpful comment, not advice, anyway, see it as you will,.
Rich.


----------



## Smudger (4 Jul 2008)

In fact, most kids carrying knives do so because they are scared of the much smaller number that do...


----------



## Digit (4 Jul 2008)

I was going to make that same point Dick, so you have answered your own point about asking the youths.

Roy.


----------



## Smudger (4 Jul 2008)

Rich - I honestly don't think you do have an idea about the issues here. Your posts illustrate that.

This is a complicated situation, which is different in different places and for kids of different ages. There is no one 'problem'.

It is partially related to gang culture, and I don't think you understand how that operates. 

It is partly related to other behaviour patterns such as video game and film watching. There are crossover issues here in which the grasp on reality can be seriously eroded. 

There are mental health issues, some of which are related to the easy (often subsidised) availability of powerful recreational drugs. Others may be linked to emotional abuse and neglect.

There are serious issues of self-esteem and self-worth, social and educational failure.

There are problems of a society which makes certain assumptions about youths from ethnic minorities.

There are serious failures of parenting. Some of these are cultural, some are due to fractured social networks. Some are simply due to inadequate people becoming parents.

There has been a tendency for policing to back off from many of these issues.

Our society does not intervene in families at anything like the rate it once used to.

Many families in inner cities live in crushing poverty. Unemployment and the concomitant loss of self-esteem is high amongst some groups.

Young people have become demonised, so there is no motivation to listen to them or to try to meet their genuine needs.

I could go on...


----------



## Digit (4 Jul 2008)

And some are just plain nasty!

Roy.


----------



## dennis (4 Jul 2008)

Rich

You say that being an adult is a state of mind not an age which is true but it is only when you get older that you understand this.I for one and I dont doubt that many others on this forum did, thought that I was an adult when I left school and started work at 15 it is only with age that you realise how wrong you were,the same applies to knowing better than your elders, as a youngster you think that you know better and I dont think this will ever change.

Dennis


----------



## Jake (4 Jul 2008)

Smudger":3plbqnuu said:


> This is a complicated situation, which is different in different places and for kids of different ages. There is no one 'problem'....
> 
> snip loads of thoughtful insights



The fascinating, authentic stuff of experience.

Where do you teach?


----------



## Rich (4 Jul 2008)

Smudger, I HONESTLY believe you speak from the heart, and I commend that, but goodwill gestures and feeling sorry for the people commiting these crimes HAS NOT worked, as I said before, I don't know the answer, but being kind to these types does NOT work. I have no problems with my 2 boys. 
Who created the social environment we now live in,? as a married man with 2 kids, I can tell you that we would be better off if we were both out of work and claiming benefits, how can that be right, my 2 lads see a responsible attitude from their parents and will no doubt follow the example, we ask for no help from the government other than fair taxation, as do the majority of middle income families, life is only as hard as you make it, some prefer not to try, how odd that that is where the problems come from.

Rich.


----------



## Digit (4 Jul 2008)

Part of Smudger's argument appears to break down when tested against the the society in this country during the Depression, when unemployment was percentage wise very high, real poverty existed, living conditions considerable worse than current and crime a fraction of today's figures. 

Roy.


----------



## Rich (4 Jul 2008)

Dennis, you're right, I thought I knew it all when I was 15, but I never had thoughts of harming people, I was more interested in the opposite sex.
Rich.


----------



## Finial (4 Jul 2008)

Smudger lists some of the many factors contributing to the problem. Which of them are most relevant and what the ansers are would need a lot of hard research work to unravel. Until that definitive work is done, none of us can do more than betray our prejudices. My pet theory is that we need more of a zero tolerance approach to minor offences. Not harsh punishments, just letting people see from an early age that society has enforced rules of respect to others. If policing, whether by the police themselves or parents or teachers or the public is not enough to curb bad behavior it may become commonplace, then kids have to show aggression to appear tough, ie not a push-over. I would not want kids to be treated as criminals if they carry a knife in self defence or as a fashion accessory, the answer needs to be to stop knives being used as weapons. When i was young i carried a knife at school and so did other kids, but none of us would have dreamt of using them as weapons.

But i don't put this forward as the solution, like i said the work has to be done. The trouble is that some people are convinced that harsh discipline is the answer and not inclined to listen to other possibilities.


----------



## Jake (4 Jul 2008)

There are a lot more things which are crimes these days, there is a lot more enforcement (many more policemen), there is much more reporting of crime (who had insurance and needed a number for a crime which would never be solved in those days? How many women would have dared to report spouse abuse, or rape?). By the same token, the local bobby doesn't these days give a kid a clip a round the ear or a gypsy a good kicking after a quiet word from Mrs Supposedly-Trustworthy next door - he books them and the statistic is recorded. You can't directly compare one set of damned lies taken from one context with another set of damned lies taken from another and draw a correlation that readily.

Even if you ignore that (and no doubt people on all sides of the political persuasions have looked into it and found conclusions which they like) if you look at the section on crime here (the only stats I could readily find covering the 1920s): http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/re ... 99-111.pdf

You could conclude that the rate of change in the number of crimes reported was at it's very worst in the period 1920-1965. The latter date chosen as the turning point into the 'wild' 60s, frequently pointed at as the the 'end of morality and the family'). In the period from 1920 to 1965, reported crime increased pretty much 20-fold - definitely more than 10-fold. There is nothing like that after that (albeit we are missing a few years). The only obvious competitor is the period from 1980 to 1992 or so - which is very steep (but nothing like the same proportionate rate of change). 

Or, you could blame the whole peak on the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act...

The homicide stats are interesting - there is a steady increase but nothing dramatic. Harold Shipman (later) would have skewed them, madly. No chance his equivalent would have been caught in 1920.


----------



## Digit (5 Jul 2008)

Or you could go for selecting parts of statistics, like this 

[/quote] The Scientist, 15 December 2005 

Research published this week in Nature, provides strong evidence that culling badgers -- which can carry the agent that causes bovine TB -- actually exacerbates the problem by raising the incidence of TB in cattle living nearby. The results help to clarify contradictory results on whether culling badgers can control bovine TB, but the Department for Environmental Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) announced today that they are opening the possibility of large-scale cull to public opinion. 

"We found that a single culling policy -- that of widespread and repeated culling of badgers -- yielded both a reduction of 19% in TB incidence in cattle within the culled area and an increase of 29% in TB incidence in cattle in the surrounding area," Christl Donnelly, lead author of the Nature paper, told The Scientist. She is based at the Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, UK.


> The authors of this concluded that culling made the situation worse and that only less than 1% of Badgers were infectious, fine, and that culling dispersed Badgers, fine again. So why does the incident of BTB increase when Badgers disperse to surrounding areas if they don't contribute to BTB?
> Another defeat for logic? Or selectivity again? I pass.
> 
> Roy.


----------



## Smudger (5 Jul 2008)

Jake":1xfm77n9 said:


> Smudger":1xfm77n9 said:
> 
> 
> > This is a complicated situation, which is different in different places and for kids of different ages. There is no one 'problem'....
> ...



Wandsworth.


----------



## Smudger (5 Jul 2008)

Digit":2laqa5fo said:


> Part of Smudger's argument appears to break down when tested against the the society in this country during the Depression, when unemployment was percentage wise very high, real poverty existed, living conditions considerable worse than current and crime a fraction of today's figures.
> 
> Roy.



Please see other posts which explain that finding one small exception to a complex argument does not defeat the entire argument.

And, I believe, that violence (especially domestic violence) was endemic in some areas in the 30s.


----------



## Jake (5 Jul 2008)

Smudger":2kvli1t8 said:


> Wandsworth.



Just being nosey! Is that Wandsworth Cl'arm end or Wandsworth end Putney end?



(I tease - I don't envy - but do admire)


----------



## Digit (5 Jul 2008)

> one small exception



One? I listed several.

Roy.


----------



## Smudger (5 Jul 2008)

Jake":1k3qst5f said:


> Smudger":1k3qst5f said:
> 
> 
> > Wandsworth.
> ...



Putney end - Roehampton, mostly...
But the majority of our kids come from central Wandsworth, Battersea and Clapham (junction area).


----------



## Smudger (5 Jul 2008)

Digit":290ci565 said:


> > one small exception
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Actually you didn't. The one exception you raised was that anti social behaviour and violence is not linked to social deprivation. You gave a glossary of deprivation, not several exceptions. You did not offer any evidence for this assertion, other than a second assertion.


----------



## Digit (5 Jul 2008)

> when unemployment was percentage wise very high, real poverty existed, living conditions considerable worse than current and crime a fraction of today's figures.



So you are stating that social depravation is linked to crime, is that correct?

Roy.


----------



## Smudger (5 Jul 2008)

Yes. Hardly a revelation, I would have thought.


----------



## Digit (5 Jul 2008)

So what prevented the crime figures of the depression from being higher than they were, what factor over rode the social depravation?

Roy.


----------



## RogerS (5 Jul 2008)

ByronBlack":1ilx2sga said:


> There's only one way to reverse the current problem. License breeding. Too many dimwitted scumbags are encouraged by our dopey system to pop out as many creatures as possible to bump up their benefits and have a house/home. Invariably the father is either not around, unware the child is his, or unable to have a role in the childs life due to our dopey laws.
> 
> There should be an intelligence/moral/financial test to see if a couple meet the criteria for breeding. This would in a single generation ensure that our gene pool and thus society is only of the right kind.
> 
> Controversial it might be, radical it definitely is, but its the way we are going to have to go about things soon when the population of this planet gets too large to sustain.



I know it's definitely non-PC but I do find myself agreeing with BB on this. Seem to be surrounded by more and more moronic people but then again daresay I'll be branded a moron by some for supporting BB.

Reminds me of a little poem

"There goes a happy moron
He doesn't give a damn
I wish I was a moron
My God, perhaps I am"


----------



## Anonymous (5 Jul 2008)

ByronBlack":oo2oiaz8 said:


> There should be an* intelligence/moral*/financial test to see if a couple meet the criteria for breeding.



I'd suggest that you would fail on at least two counts BB

I cant believe that comments like this have passed with so few reactions. What's the view like from the moral high ground?


----------



## brianhabby (5 Jul 2008)

PowerTool":2pl1ch2l said:


> when i was a lad (which wasnt that long ago) most of my contempories carried pen knives or lock back knives - but we used them for cutting things , rather than for cutting each other.





big soft moose":2pl1ch2l said:


> Same experience here - I still always carry a knife





Digit":2pl1ch2l said:


> I've also carried a pocket knife for 60 years and have yet to stab anyone!





RogerS":2pl1ch2l said:


> _Three categories of seriousness are presented in the guideline and for each a suggested starting point and sentencing range are set:
> 
> · For the least serious form of the offence (where the weapon was carried but not used to threaten or cause fear) the starting point is a high level community order and the range for sentencing is from a high level fine up to 12 weeks imprisonment.
> _


_

So PowerTool, big soft moose, & Digit, given the comments in the last quote above, how can you justify carrying a knife? I don't ask as a criticism as I also carry a pocket knife but a colleague at work has stopped doing so because of the worry of being 'found out' and I must admit it's something I've been thinking about lately.

regards

Brian_


----------



## Steve Maskery (5 Jul 2008)

The Saint":24zvc13w said:


> I cant believe that comments like this have passed with so few reactions.



Perhaps folk are still digesting it and haven't yet come up with an intelligent response that wouldn't raise the already bread-baking temperature.

FWIW it seems to me that it's impossible to measure financial suitability. I once had a well-paid job, now I'm destitute. If I'd had kids when I was affluent what would you do to me now?

Secondly who defines morality? It's easy to agree on murder and rape, I dare say, but after that? We can see in Zimbabwe today how morals have changed. A significant percentage of the population think it's OK to take by force land which for several generations has been owned by white farmers. They can justify their actions as redressing a great wrong, whilst many others regard it as very immoral, plain criminal theft.

As for intelligence, well I think I'll keep my thoughts to myself

To move sideways slightly...

Has anyone read the book Freakonomics by Stephen Dubner and Steven Levitt? It's not so much a book as such, more a collection of essays. Some of the themes are repeated, but it's still a good read, whether or not you agree with the arguments proposed.

One area discussed is Guiliani's tenure of office as Mayor of New York. He had a Zero Tolerance approach to petty crime (although personally I don't think that any crime is petty, certainly not to the victims). Crime dropped significantly, saving the public purse lots of money and Guiliani was a hero.

One small snag.

Other places which also adopted the zero-tol approach did not experience the same positive outcomes and even more damning, places which did NOT adopt such a policy DID see the same fall in crime. ALso some states saw the same effects but translated in time by a year or two!

Their argument was all to do with Wade vs Roe, the act that legalized abortion. Abortions have always taken place, even when they were illegal, but done clandestinely in backstreets for those who could afford it. So if 16-year-old Tiffany gets pregnant, banker daddy can get it sorted at a price. It's not the same story for the poor.

With Wade vs Roe the number of abortions rose significantly and poor people could get the same as the rich. 

The fall in crime was 20 years after Wade vs Roe.

Some states legalized abortion before WvR and they were the ones where crime dropped earlier.

The conclusion they draw was that many of the criminals of the 90's (young, poor and any other categories you may wish to include) simply were not born.

It's a good read, even if you think they are talking nonsense.

Cheers
Steve


----------



## Digit (5 Jul 2008)

> What's the view like from the moral high ground?


 
Where is it? 
Different societies have held different views on what _is_ moral. 
Thugee, religious prostitution, wife burning after the death of the husband, burning at the stake, all in defense of the moral hight ground. 

Roy.


----------



## Anonymous (5 Jul 2008)

Digit":3360fkd4 said:


> > What's the view like from the moral high ground?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



In the same place where it always is Roy, a place where people believe that their systems for judgment are superior to others and correct, almost beyond question, whether it be burning widows or judging other peoples right to have children.

rgds


----------



## Jake (5 Jul 2008)

Digit":1vqakcla said:


> > What's the view like from the moral high ground?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I hope you weren't, by those examples, trying to suggest that thugee, religious prostitution, wife burning after the death of the husband, and burning at the stake are somehow wrong?


----------



## Digit (5 Jul 2008)

Absolutely Saint.
Very much so Jake, from the viewpoint of the victims I should think. :lol: 

Roy.


----------



## Jake (5 Jul 2008)

Each to their own I guess - who are we to judge?


----------



## Steve Maskery (5 Jul 2008)

Jake":2kn477dz said:


> Each to their own I guess - who are we to judge?



Ah yes but doesn't this lead to another question? If we accept that other socoetal system are just as valid as our own, even if they appear abhorrent to us, then where does that leave the victims of such a societal system? Does there come a point at which strong, developed societies step in and say Enough? Or do we turn a blind eye and say that it is fine for this individual to suffer in this way because that's what everyone else around them thinks? Female mutilation would be such an example. Abhorrent to us, but accepted by some societies as not only acceptable but desirable, and that is violence carried out on women (well, girls and babies usually) BY women.

No easy answers eh?
S


----------



## Jake (5 Jul 2008)

In fact, from that perspective maybe the thread title is a bit judgmental - who are we to judge these youths? Why have a criminal justice system at all? Why have laws? All shackles on our rights to exercise our our own personal relativist mores as we wish.


----------



## Steve Maskery (5 Jul 2008)

But I would argue that it is NOT the case that all societal systems are equally valid. At not unless you abandon the notion of right and wrong, and say that murder is not wrong it's just alternatively morally valid. 
S


----------



## Jake (5 Jul 2008)

Umm, me too, Steve. 

I'm playing a little game of reductio ad absurdum with Roy (as I think he knows very well!)


----------



## Digit (5 Jul 2008)

Quite Jake, but for one minor point. Nowhere have I suggested that one moral code is superior to another, that one is wrong, that one is right.
I have instead attempted to demonstrate that 'right and wrong' are not absolutes. They have varied with time and culture.
As you said, not judgemental.
I think Saint made it very clear here,

[/quote]In the same place where it always is Roy, a place where people believe that their systems for judgment are superior to others and correct, almost beyond question, whether it be burning widows or judging other peoples right to have children.


> Roy.


----------



## Jake (5 Jul 2008)

Digit":3i3zizt0 said:


> Quite Jake, but for one minor point. Nowhere have I suggested that one moral code is superior to another, that one is wrong, that one is right.



I'm well aware that your position appears to be the polar opposite - i.e. relativism.



> I have instead attempted to demonstrate that 'right and wrong' are not absolutes. They have varied with time and culture.
> As you said, not judgemental.



Clearly, what is perceived as right and wrong vary with time and culture - otherwise the Holocaust and myriad other atrocities (which I hope we all can agree were 'wrong') would not have been perceived as the right thing to do by the participants.

Does that mean that the Nazi's perception of right and wrong are to be regarded as being as good a perception of right and wrong as any? Not shared by us in our time, but perfectly valid and above criticism for them in theirs?


----------



## Smudger (5 Jul 2008)




----------



## skipdiver (5 Jul 2008)

They're ginger,kill them.


----------



## brianhabby (5 Jul 2008)

Beautiful picture Dick.

regards

Brian


----------



## Digit (5 Jul 2008)

> Does that mean that the Nazi's perception of right and wrong are to be regarded as being as good a perception of right and wrong as any? Not shared by us in our time, but perfectly valid and above criticism for them in theirs?


 
In my view, no, neither would I personally condone human sacrifice etc. 
So you answer me a question, is abortion on demand right or wrong? 
And how would you justify which either side of the debate you choose? 

Roy.


----------



## Jake (5 Jul 2008)

_Abortion on whim with no restrictions, up to the age of birth, is moral.

Abortion is immoral, and should be denied under all circumstances, even if the foetus is the deeply handicapped progeny of a rapist and the birth is going to kill the mother._

I'd argue that both of the above statements are incorrect, in an absolute sense.

There's obviously a big grey area in between, because of the competing moral imperatives at stake, where inevitably judgments will differ from person to person. That's the arena in which people have to make their own calculations. 

That doesn't mean there are no rights and wrongs except in a relative sense. Back to the top.


----------



## Digit (5 Jul 2008)

> That doesn't mean there are no rights and wrongs except in a relative sense.


Well quote me absolute right, one that could be applied to all circumstances.


[/quote]I'd argue that both of the above statements are incorrect, in an absolute sense.


> I'd say that was ducking myself.
> 
> Roy.


----------



## Jake (5 Jul 2008)

Digit":3gxsvien said:


> Well quote me absolute right, one that could be applied to all circumstances.



The right not to be subjected to random extermination by the state.



> I'd say that was ducking myself.



The question was overly simplistic and therefore had no answer.


----------



## Digit (5 Jul 2008)

The word random puzzles me. It infers that a non random extermination would be ok.
That simplistic question is one that is faced daily by doctors, I doubt they find it simplistic.
Often the choice between right and wrong _is_ that simplistic.
To steal or not to steal, to kill or not to kill. The choices couldn't come much more simplistic than that surely?

Roy.


----------



## Jake (5 Jul 2008)

Digit":of5xhbs3 said:


> The word random puzzles me. It infers that a non random extermination would be ok.



You did not ask for the one single all-encompassing absolute wrong. There are others. I narrowed it to randomness, because it is more clear. 

Non-random extermination would lead to many more variables and exceptions (terrorist with his finger on the trigger of a bomb which will kill hundreds, etc), none of which are relevant to establishing whether there is at least one example of an absolute right.


----------



## Jake (5 Jul 2008)

Digit":35nhn29o said:


> That simplistic question is one that is faced daily by doctors, I doubt they find it simplistic.



They do not face that question - they face a much more complex one, with nuances, context and specificity. 

Back to the two extremes again - both of those could be encompassed within your overly-simplified question - so there cannot be a single answer to your question - it is too vague to be answerable.


----------



## Smudger (5 Jul 2008)

brianhabby":1dqlubg5 said:


> Beautiful picture Dick.
> 
> regards
> 
> Brian




I tried...

(not my pic, btw)


----------



## Jake (5 Jul 2008)

This isn't heated - it's just a discussion - I think.


----------



## Digit (5 Jul 2008)

Who suggested it was heated Jake? Personally I love the cut and thrust of debate, if you were to agree with me I'd be bloody disappointed. I'd feel robbed of the entertainment. 
But as someone seems to think one of us is getting snotty I'll now withdraw and return to cutting those sodding hinge recesses. 
Bye Jake, I've enjoyed it. 

Roy.


----------



## newt (5 Jul 2008)

I assume knife crime is an urban problem (I could be wrong) when I was a teenager, my apprenticship, sport and opposite sex were in that order of priority. I never carried a knife and neither did any of my mates. I did however live in a small village in Wiltshire.


----------



## Jake (5 Jul 2008)

It is even narrower than that - the current wave is predominantly a London thing.


----------



## Digit (5 Jul 2008)

According to Question Time on Thursday Jake you are more than twice as likely to be stabbed in Glasgow than London.


----------



## Jake (5 Jul 2008)

Digit":oun5ew18 said:


> According to Question Time on Thursday Jake you are more than twice as likely to be stabbed in Glasgow than London.



Fair enough - it isn't as reported, though. I'll make that - in the South of England, it is overwhelmingly a London problem.


----------



## Digit (5 Jul 2008)

I think it's probably due to reporting based on reader consumption Jake. Scottish papers report Scotland and English papers, England.
It was news to me as well.

Roy.


----------



## Wood3434 (29 Jul 2008)

I would make the law so tough that people who use knifes would think twice about doing so. I would make the law if anyone carries a knife and is caught doing so then they get a hand or finger chopped off. If a person is caught stabbing someone to death then it is instant death (life for a life).
Ofcourse if this horrible crime is caught on CCTV then there is no excuse to avoid the punishment of the crime, there is no more proof than through the lense of a camera. Common Government see sence and get tough. The government is a joke these days when crime is involved.

Darren


----------



## Digit (29 Jul 2008)

You're one brave man Darren, get your tin hat on and duck!

Roy


----------



## Rich (29 Jul 2008)

I think a better heading for this thread would have been:

"How would you PREVENT knife crime?" this would probably invoke a different set of answers and mindset, as a maintainence engineer of many years standing I can state with authority that preventative maintenance is far cheaper and more cost effective in the long term than curative/reactive maitenance.
I have no solid idea of the answers to the problem, but starting from ante knife crime as opposed to post knife crime will, I am sure produce an answer in some way, even though the decisions may be harsh, I think we would all agree, tough action is definitely needed.

Regards,
Rich.


----------



## big soft moose (29 Jul 2008)

brianhabby":3bcjcqns said:


> PowerTool":3bcjcqns said:
> 
> 
> > when i was a lad (which wasnt that long ago) most of my contempories carried pen knives or lock back knives - but we used them for cutting things , rather than for cutting each other.
> ...


_

i cant speak for the others but in my case I only carry a knife during the day at work , not if i go for a drink in the eving or anything like that (Btw you have the quotes the wrong way round mine was the top one) and given that the contents of my truck also feature axe handles, crowbars, billhooks chainsaws, and other far more lethal implements i very much doubt that the bizzies are going to think that a lockback knife with a 2" blade is the number one concern.

Also if i did get into a fight - ie if i was attacked - i would not use the knife in self defence as this would be just asking for trouble. Though being a double blackbelt (Tae Kwon Do and Wing Chun) i could probably do far more damage with my hands and feet anyway._


----------



## ronhayles (30 Jul 2008)

having followed this thread through from the beginning it strikes me that if just a few guys like you cannot agree, what hope is there that a whole Parliament can come up with a concensus for dealing with this issue. My only imput is to say that if you dont belong to a gang, go drinking or indulge in drugs, be out late at night on your own , dont carry a knife then you have a very fair change of never being a victim or a perpetrator.


----------



## Digit (30 Jul 2008)

I wish someone had told me that earlier, I've twice been attacked by drunks.

Roy.


----------



## davegw (31 Jul 2008)

Digit":19k7u5ew said:


> I wish someone had told me that earlier, I've twice been attacked by drunks.
> 
> Roy.



Drunks with Knives Roy? just curious, I know (from personal experience) that being attacked is bad enough on it's own.

Dave


----------



## RogerS (31 Jul 2008)

big soft moose":l54sxqds said:


> ..........
> 
> Also if i did get into a fight - ie if i was attacked - i would not use the knife in self defence as this would be just asking for trouble. Though being a double blackbelt (Tae Kwon Do and Wing Chun) i could probably do far more damage with my hands and feet anyway.



:lol: 

Reminds me of a work colleague. Also a black belt in a marshal art. Also very very bald. 

Happened he'd had a bad day from the time he got up, rowed with the missus, trains cancelled, stroppy work colleagues, bad time with one of the partners, difficult clients, late working...all in all the proverbial 'day in Hell'. Gets off the late train home and starts walking home. Towards him on the other side of the road is a crowd of drunk ferals. They start shouting at him..usual stuff 'Kojak' etc. Like you, he knows that he cannot stirke the first blow.....

....so they keep walking towards him and taunting him, then they cross the road and walk towards him on the same pavement. Secretly he is wishing 'Oh please....oh please....hit me...give me the excuse'. As he said to me afterwards, he'd never felt so frustrated in his life as, through their drunken stupor and crock bravado, a glimmer of realisation prevailed that this guy in front of them was showing no signs of fear or backing down or giving way...and so they slunk off..much to his great disappointment.


----------



## Digit (31 Jul 2008)

How do I justify carrying knife Rog! Easy! I find it a very useful tool to have to hand.
Not drunks with knives Dave, no. The one guy who stabbed me used a woodworking chisel.
One of the drunks, I discovered later was a Karate instructor, and as he found out alcohol can even overcome karate training, I flattened him!

Roy.


----------



## ronhayles (31 Jul 2008)

nobody told you, digit!!! or was it case of teenittus where you couldn't or wouldn't hear. My parents told me that if I went looking for trouble I would find it and if I bumped into it to turn and walk away. During my seventy plus years I have not been in one single fight, been assaulted or even punched and that included an extended three year national service. Mind you..my missus says I go out looking like a down and out so maybe that is the secret.


----------



## Digit (31 Jul 2008)

Never had to look for trouble in my life Ron, it's always managed to find me without any help at all! :lol: 

Roy.


----------



## ronhayles (31 Jul 2008)

I know what you mean...I have a brother who has a magnet for trouble and he thrives on it. I just like a simple uncomplicated life. Physical conflict never settled an argument It invariably leads to ongoing conflict in my experience. It is beyond me the sort of anger that drives anyone to stick a knife into another human being simply because they are different in some way or have a different opinion. I would never offer an opinion on how to solve knife crime for that reason.


----------



## Digit (31 Jul 2008)

> I just like a simple uncomplicated life.



I'd love it!
Just to give you an idea, I've been married for 38 years. The photographer buggered the pics at the wedding, when a first child was born I'd done some practice runs to the hospital just to make sure that I knew the route.
Got lost on the night.
At three months the doc described her as having a head cold, pneumonia!
I was made redundant three times.
Been burgled twice.
Had a drug dealer move in next door.
Been threatened with court action for non-payment of rates which had been paid.
Had 11 cars hit, including two write offs, every one 'tother drivers fault.
Had bailiffs around for non-payment of income tax, the tax office had lost the paper work.
Had debt collectors around over money owed to a pop music club, and I hate pop music and had no account with them.
In addition not one single dealing with HP companies Police, Council or Government agency has been anything but long winded and time consuming.
I sent a driving licence off to the DVLA to change my address, took three years to get the damn thing back, apparently I didn't exist!
Even the consultant who was to operate on me for Prostate cancer died before he could operate!
I'd LOVE an uncomplicated life, mind you the boredom would probably finish me!

Roy.


----------



## big soft moose (31 Jul 2008)

ronhayles":1l7n31ix said:


> and if I bumped into it to turn and walk away..



these days that would probably get you a knife in the back ....  I've never gone looking for trouble in my life but if it finds me my inclination is to put it on its back asap where it cant do me any damage.

(most recently last october 4 little scrotes whacked up on blue wkd and lighter gas who tried to mug me in a tescos carpark - it took me all of 30 seconds to trash all four of them, which hopefully taught them a thing or two  )


----------



## Digit (31 Jul 2008)

And you weren't arrested? Sounds like an outbreak of common sense locally.

Roy.


----------



## RogerS (31 Jul 2008)

Digit":1qk62gmm said:


> Never had to look for trouble in my life Ron, it's always managed to find me without any help at all! :lol:
> 
> Roy.



That's because your Welsh? 

Sorry ....couldn't resist it :wink:


----------



## RogerS (31 Jul 2008)

big soft moose":2eq41nvl said:


> ronhayles":2eq41nvl said:
> 
> 
> > and if I bumped into it to turn and walk away..
> ...



You're a man after my own heart! Way to go.

Is that a 'tsk tsk' I hear from the Trilbies?


----------



## Digit (31 Jul 2008)

ENGLISH! :lol: :lol: :lol: 

Roy.


----------



## Digit (31 Jul 2008)

> Is that a 'tsk tsk' I hear from the Trilbies?



No! Gasps of horror! :lol: 

Roy.


----------



## Wood3434 (31 Jul 2008)

Interesting topic I must say. Reading the Daily Record each day there is a stabbing story nearly every day now. There were 4 people dead just last weekend including a samurai sword attack in Glasgow. personally I'd never go for a night out in Glasgow as there have been too many stories of innocent people being murdered just for walking up the wrong street in Glasgow. The government needs to act quickly as there are far too many young lives being taken away due to the great increase in knife crime. So far the government have come up with the ideas of knife amnesty,increased jail sentences for people carrying knives and taking victims to the offenders to show what damage they have done.Now they have come up with instant jail sentences for knife carriers. They might aswell give everyone in the country a new knife in the post. There has to be harsh new laws brought in place for knife carriers to think twice. Capital punishment would be a good start.


----------



## ronhayles (1 Aug 2008)

digit...sounds like the devil has you top of its list. This...it was always the other drivers fault.... for how many accidents??? It would take a sleepy old judge to swallow that one. I'm grateful I didn,t have your parents!!! I've sixty odd years of driving without one single accident. Must be my motto of always looking forward, never backwards. Hope you're the forgiving type or St. Peter will black list you. Can't have accident prone saints in heaven. Do the Welsh go to heaven???


----------



## Digit (1 Aug 2008)

The other driver's insurances have paid out in every case Ron and I have a clean licence from 40yrs of driving. You haven't seen the local drivers!
One of the write offs was thus.
I was approaching a T junction and I was about 10 yds from its end when a very large tractor and trailer turned off the main road on my side.
Despite braking and trying to reverse the tractor passed clean over the bonnet.
He then drove off!
I kid you not!
I parked in front of the local Post Office and a chap backed into the slot in front of me, rammed me and just sat there.
I parked in a car par of at least one acre in size that was totally devoid of other vehicles, half an hour later the front bumper was on the deck.
My son reckons I should paint a target on my car.
I told him the locals manage well enough without one!

Roy.


----------



## ronhayles (1 Aug 2008)

if you are such a disaster with a car..what about your cabinet making...does the hinges fall off. I would have gotten out of your locality and emigrated, but having seen the drivers in New Zealand..perhaps it wouldn't be any better there. There has to be an explanation for your bad luck. any offers anyone!!!


----------



## RogerS (1 Aug 2008)

ronhayles":iykce2qq said:


> if you are such a disaster with a car..what about your cabinet making...does the hinges fall off. I would have gotten out of your locality and emigrated, but having seen the drivers in New Zealand..perhaps it wouldn't be any better there. There has to be an explanation for your bad luck. any offers anyone!!!



Well, I have a theory. Roy lives in Wales but he is English. Maybe the large St George's flag fluttering from the car aerial might have something to do with it? Just a guess, you understand..... :wink:


----------



## Digit (1 Aug 2008)

I know the reason al right.
Other drivers!
This morning I was faced with the driver of a 20cwt sleeper reversing down the main road towards me. Just up the road from me a new roundabout is being constructed, triple car pile up there yesterday. 
One 93 old lady killed walking across the road in broad daylight without looking in the next village.
16 teenagers killed locally thus far this year, three motorcyclists killed and two seriously injured.
The only length of dual carriageway for miles has had a T junction sealed off with a temporary barrier to cut the death toll, locals claim the junction is 'dangerous' the police chief says it's the drivers. The barrier was pranged again yesterday.
A pond along the road from me has recently had a barrier fitted around it to keep the cars out.
The local breakers changed hand a couple of years back for a seven figure sum.
I have driven all over this country and never seen such poor driving standards as locally. Much of the cause is the fact that it is a popular retirement area with lousy public transport.
A local driving instructor says one of the biggest dangers is elderly ladies, their husbands have died and without public transport they decide to to drive and even after having been driven for so long they don't even know what to do with the pedals.
Cars not infrequently pass my home at well under 20mph with a terrified driver crouched over the wheel and leading a stream of irate drivers.
And they can't park either!
One lady driver passed my house last year on two wheel rims, when the police pulled her over she claimed she hadn't noticed anything wrong.
The local east European drivers also have a shocking record and seem to think that insurance is optional.
When I moved here the local courts opened one day per week, now it's three.
Anybody want to move here? :lol: 
We have two paramedic ambulances station at local black spots permanently during daylight.

Roy.


----------



## Digit (1 Aug 2008)

And no Ron, the hinges haven't fallen off,... yet! :lol: 

Roy.


----------



## Digit (1 Aug 2008)

Up date.
Had to go into town this afternoon for a pipe fitting as I'm updating my extractor system.
As I left the industrial estate I approached a T junction, and parked right up against the main road was a car. The lady driver was out and busy adjusting the child seat in the rear.
To pass her and turn either left or right required moving onto the wrong side of the road, thus blind siding any driver attempting to turn left onto the estate.
She was also blocking the entrance to the builder's yard.
Having left the town and joined the dual carriage way the car in front of me suddenly turned right across vehicles overtaking us and attempted to perform a U turn!
The first impact I had was leaving town one day I had to pass a parked vehicle illegally parked on my left. As I passed it a taxi that had been picking up a fare suddenly pulled across in front of me to turn into the supermarket car park.
As he did so I had a lovely view of the of the back of his head as he wasn't even looking in my direction.
After the impact I got out and approached his vehicle, whereupon he promptly wound the window up and locked the doors and grabbed his phone.
Some seconds later his boss rolled up, 'Do you accept responsibility!' There's his cab at 90 degrees to the kerb and all traffic stopped.
'No I bloody well don't!'
So he called the police.
Out come? His driver lost his license as he was apparently legally blind!!!!
Then he tried to blame me for damage to the other side of his car as well!!
Watch this space folks!!


Roy.


----------



## big soft moose (5 Aug 2008)

Digit":1lhnhxs9 said:


> And you weren't arrested? Sounds like an outbreak of common sense locally.
> Roy.



i definitely had an out break of common sense - i didnt bother calling the polis ! and didnt hang about to see if anyone else did 

I doubt is boz, moz, tos, and foz reported it, and i didnt damage them badly anyway - just incapacitated them without causing lasting damage.


----------



## Digit (5 Aug 2008)

> without causing lasting damage.



Pity! :lol: 

Roy.


----------

