# Is This Really What We are Bringing into the World?



## Mike.C (27 Jul 2007)

Is this typical of the youngsters today? Is this really what we are bringing into the world.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/arti ... article.do

I cannot imagine how anyone could do it, let alone find it funny.

As if these people are not going through enough, without having to put up with ******** like this.

Bring back the birch. 

Cheers

Mike


----------



## lurker (27 Jul 2007)

I was reading yesterday (times I think) were some kids blocked & stoned an ambulance trying to get a heart attack victim to hospital. Victim died in back of ambulance.

The problem is, these kids know they are untouchable. 

In my day someone would have given me a good hiding and then told my Dad and then I'd get another thrashing.


----------



## Gill (27 Jul 2007)

According to the press conference given by the Chief Constable this lunchtime, there's no truth to the reports that bowsers are being contaminated.

And he's pleased to note that the crime rate for Gloucestershire has fallen dramatically!

Gill


----------



## Benchwayze (27 Jul 2007)

Mike.C":1a7d5pj3 said:


> Is this typical of the youngsters today? Is this really what we are bringing into the world.
> 
> 
> Bring back the birch.
> ...


I don't know about the yobs. That's bad enough, but that dimheaded Army Officer's attitude to it makes me despair. No wonder our boys and girls are getting killed in Iraq.
John :x


----------



## Mike.C (27 Jul 2007)

> lurker,
> 
> In my day someone would have given me a good hiding and then told my Dad and then I'd get another thrashing.



Your right, you would hate the bloke who did it, but by god you wouldn't cross him again.

Cheers

Mike


----------



## Scrit (27 Jul 2007)

Gill":302ajc03 said:


> And he's pleased to note that the crime rate for Gloucestershire has fallen dramatically!


Apparently so has terrorist activity! Tell you what, let's flood London :roll:


----------



## ByronBlack (27 Jul 2007)

The country needs to re-instate all the area of discipline and responcibility that he has slowly eroded away over the last 20 years. It's not the kids that are the problem, they are the by-product of the chavvy parents.

Vigilantism is the way forward! Or a moderate approach like there was in the states a few years ago (Guardian Angels).


----------



## Scrit (27 Jul 2007)

ByronBlack":1gmm1p0j said:


> It's not the kids that are the problem, they are the by-product of the chavvy parents.


And who exactly produced the chavvy parents? Aren't they the by-product of so-called progressive, liberal, middle-class, woolly thinking of the 1960s and later? The same sort of thinking which bans competitive sports in primary schools? 

Scrit


----------



## dennyk (27 Jul 2007)

Mike.C wrote: 


> Is this typical of the youngsters today? Is this really what we are bringing into the world


. 




> Bring back the birch.


Cheers 

Mike 

*[]A question from a 74 year old *

Is this the fruits of the harvest of the seeds sown by the liberalists,and the do-gooders who said "*you must not chastise your children, they should grow up to be free spirits*"


----------



## Mike.C (27 Jul 2007)

> ByronBlack,
> 
> It's not the kids that are the problem, they are the by-product of the chavvy parents.



It's ever so easy to blame the parents, but whats the excuse when two kids are treated exactly the same by the parents, but one turns out bad and the other good, whos to blame then? 
When I was at school you got the cane or the strap for doing the least little thing wrong, and then when you went home you got it off the old man. But today the parent is not even allowed to give them a smack on the bum.

Don't get me wrong I was no angel, but I had respect for my elders.

I am not saying that parents are completely innocent, but I think it goes a hell of a lot further then how the parents treat their children.

Cheers

Mike


----------



## ByronBlack (27 Jul 2007)

Mike, don't get me wrong i'm absolving these kids from responcibility, just saying that they are the product of poor parenting - and also of the factors of my first point - the total removal of any discipline and repurcussions.

For example, parents are not allowed to smack their children anymore. School teachers have a mandate which stops them from being strong with kids.
The police have their hands tied as the laws are weak and the courts often let them down with pathetic sentancing.

If I was a kid, and my parents weren't disciplining me and I got in with the wrong crowd, then there would be nothing stopping me from heading down the path.

It's all a combination of the above and errosion of respect in today's society. Kids are given far too much importance and wrapped in cotton wool. 

I have no idea how it will be reversed, it will take atleast 2 or maybe 3 generations.

We could always do what James Whale suggests - sterilise boys at birth, and make them pass a number of tests/condition before they are given a license to breed. :-0)


----------



## Mike.C (27 Jul 2007)

> dennyk,
> 
> []A question from a 74 year old
> 
> Is this the fruits of the harvest of the seeds sown by the liberalists,and the do-gooders who said "you must not chastise your children, they should grow up to be free spirits"





> lurker,
> 
> I was reading yesterday (times I think) were some kids blocked & stoned an ambulance trying to get a heart attack victim to hospital. Victim died in back of ambulance.



I think the family of the victim would say "Yes"

Cheers

Mike


----------



## Mike.C (27 Jul 2007)

Byron,

I couldn't agree with you and James Whale more :lol: 

Cheers

Mike
[/quote]


----------



## ByronBlack (27 Jul 2007)

I don't know what i'm more shocked by. Finding another person who agrees with J.Whale, or you agreeing with me  But in my logical brain, it does make sense.

You have to a license to drive a car, yet any inbred can give birth - something not quite right about that.


----------



## Mike.C (27 Jul 2007)

> ByronBlack,
> 
> I don't know what i'm more shocked by. Finding another person who agrees with J.Whale, or you agreeing with me But in my logical brain, it does make sense.



Tut Tut, now, now, Byron :roll: , it may surprise you to know that I agree with a lot you have to say, its just every now and again we don't see things in the same light.

Cheers

Mike


----------



## Scrit (27 Jul 2007)

ByronBlack":3a7c07e5 said:


> You have to a license to drive a car, yet any inbred can give birth - something not quite right about that.


Yes, but I've never heard of anyone being beaten to death with a .......

Seriously, though, you're at the beginning of the slope which led to the concept of eugenics. Whilst a certain Mr. Schicklgruber is probably the best known adherent to that philosophy other supporters included Winston Churchill and Alexander Graham Bell. Surely it would be better to have a society in which social values and upstanding behaviour were rewarded and anti-social behaviour punished and where the young were taught civic values as opposed to being left rootless and with no moral or ethical values which appears to be our current system. I feel that any politician trying to introduce such a system of education would find himself out of office in short order

Scrit


----------



## Steve Maskery (27 Jul 2007)

Has anyone read the book Freakonomics by two guys I can't remember?

Good little read if you see it. It's not so much a book as a collection of essays. I think some of them were for various US mags/papers.

There is a very credible explanation of the changing patterns of crime in the US from the '70's to the '90's. Much was made in New York of the Mayor's drive of Zero Tolerance towards petty crime, and finding employment for the poor. Guiliani, I think he was. He presided over a very impressive fall in the crime rate, and took a lot of credit.

The trouble was, a lot of other places, which did not follow the same Zero Tolerance approach, also showed parallel patterns of reduced crime, and in some states the pattern was the same but offset by a few years. 

Curiouser and curiouser, said Alice.

The explanation offered for this is the case of Wade versus Rowe.

Abortion was illegal in many states, but that, of course, didn't mean it didn't happen. But if a nice white middle-class 14-year-old girl has parents with money, she can be dealt with quietly. But it's much more difficult if she is not white, not middle class or her parents do not have money. Children born into such socioeconomic situations are, in turn, much more likely to grow up and commit crimes themselves.

These are not my words, just in case someone is getting upset, I'm trying to precis the argument.

Once abotion became legal, many of these unplanned children simply were not born, therefore 15 or 20 years later they were not around to cause the sort of crime that was upsetting the Mayor of NY. Hence the decline in figures. In some states abortion was legalised before other states, hence the offset in pattern.

It was written as a very plausible argument, I enjoyed the read.

Certainly I'd be happier if some of the teenagers round here didn't exist. But I'd really prefer if they did exist and behaved in a civilised manner.

I must see if I can find the book, maybe it's time for a revisit.


----------



## RogerS (27 Jul 2007)

Scrit":1ku8lnsn said:


> ByronBlack":1ku8lnsn said:
> 
> 
> > It's not the kids that are the problem, they are the by-product of the chavvy parents.
> ...



Yup. Got it in one.


----------



## Gill (27 Jul 2007)

I hope you guy have remembered to take your blood pressure pills today :lol: .

Gill


----------



## devonwoody (27 Jul 2007)

Down in Cornwall, teenage girl helped chuck someone off a viaduct, reported that she stamped on his fingers when the victim, who died, tried to save himself when hanging on. 

Our teenagers down here are real s o d s. :twisted:


----------



## Mike.C (27 Jul 2007)

> lurker,
> 
> I was reading yesterday (times I think) were some kids blocked & stoned an ambulance trying to get a heart attack victim to hospital. Victim died in back of ambulance.





> devonwoody,
> 
> Down in Cornwall, teenage girl helped chuck someone off a viaduct, reported that she stamped on his fingers when the victim, who died, tried to save himself when hanging on.



and I thought contaminating water was bad.

Cheers

Mike


----------



## ByronBlack (27 Jul 2007)

Mike - it might not come across it, but i was just teasing, no hard feelings at my end.


----------



## Mike.C (27 Jul 2007)

> Byron,
> 
> Mike - it might not come across it, but i was just teasing, no hard feelings at my end.



No problem Byron, it did come across, and I knew you were just messing about. There is certainly no hard feelings from this end either. Its all done and dusted as far as I am concerned.


----------



## woodbloke (28 Jul 2007)

Benchwayze wrote -


> that dimheaded Army Officer's attitude to it makes me despair



John - not entirely sure why you take this point of view. Reading the complete para about what he said re logistical problems I tend to agree....it's a _vast_ undertaking to distribute the drinking water to all those who need it and the Army are doing IMO, the best job they can under very difficult conditions - Rob


----------



## SammyQ (31 Jul 2007)

I've been a teacher for 26 years and had major pastoral resposibilities for 10 of them. I'm also the father of three bright and successful teenagers. Without doubt, the issue of yobbish or thuggish behaviour - which started this thread - is a complex one. My experience has taught me that a large part of it is an individual being taught restraint, by a significant elder figure, whether that be parent, relative, religious representative or teacher. 

How the restraint is experienced will differ from person to person; I appreciate that preventative legislation to stop domestic violence is a good thing, the NSPCC has perhas less to do as a result. BUT... somehow, the concept of "conseqences" (of an unpleasant nature) must be brought home to a young person and the younger the better. Who amongst us, as parents, has not experienced "the terrible twos"? If a young person learns that there are no "consequences", they progress, to greater or lesser extents, to 'buck the rules'. I see this daily, and I work in a GOOD school, not one in an inner-city, declining, unemployment 'hotspot'. 

Political correctness _has_ done us no favours over the last two decades. It seems to have been coupled to a total lack of foresight as to how blanket legislation could influence events and create further problems. Don't get me wrong; I have seen enough human misery within families to realise _something_ had to be done to protect the vulnerable, but there is SO much cossetting beyond the necessary that the ungodly have quickly learned to manipulate said restrictive legislation to suit themselves and pander to their own _unrestricted _ hedonism. 

This is going to sound like the Ayatollah speaking, but I for one would like to see a return to a more rigorous society. I too was caned and clipped round the ear as a schoolboy, but I am sure I would not recommend we return to physical torture as a "consequence". Instead, why not 'work experience' of a quite different nature? Drain clearing, rubbish sorting, lavatory cleaning, farm labouring, road digging? And, why on earth should prison be SUCH a cushy number? It costs me as a taxpayer what, 10-100, 000£ per prisoner, per year? Phone cards, central heating, regular meals? Just as soon as EVERY Goverment minister can show me that EVERYchild in Britain can enjoy the same benefits, THEN we can give these perks back to prisoners. I am not Utopian, but I will claim more common sense than the goody-two-shoes, 'social conscience' mutts who are restricting the control of our young and providing endless opportunities to the criminal amongst us. 

Honest politicians? Jack Ashley and perhaps Frank Field. Rest of them are a bunch of vote chasers.


----------



## White House Workshop (31 Jul 2007)

I think the relentless drive for 'equality' has a lot to do with it. Kids think they are equal to adults, new graduates think they are equal to someone who's been in the job for 10 years, people with an IQ of 40 think they are equal to those in Mensa, and so on. It's about time the politicians woke up to the fact that life is not equal, that most people really don't want equality, most of them actually might just want to be BETTER than their neighbours. It's an elusive dream that fosters another liberal-minded utopia that is also ruining society - entitlement. No-one is entitled to anything - you have to earn it, and that includes respect...

Enough ranting. In my own tiny little environment there's nothing much I can do about it - which makes me feel impotent and I get angry about it and then, who knows. As the previous poster said, it's complex...


----------



## newt (1 Aug 2007)

Some interesting statements, I pick out the following: PC has done very little. New Grads often do think they can jump the experience que (apprenticeships did help craft or student). Drugs, folks do stupid things which they may not do if sober, some do not even know they have done anything wrong. I was brought up in the 50/60's but lived in a little village no TV, did not even know there was such a thing as a drug, I am being honest, I only knew that folk that drunk beer ( ok that is a drug) could not walk straight. Teenage years into sport football/car racing, not even much time for girls, to tired. college, study, apprenticeship, job, no real time to mess, although I did scrump apples, and jumped off a water tower with a home made parachute (in the interest of science). My three children who were exposed to TV and probably drugs, followed similar lines to me, lots of study, sport, they had the odd party, they learnt to sail, very close family did everything together. Again brought up in a village/small community 200 people, I dont know if this has any major influence, but when I see some of the tower blocks with nothing for the kids to do, I worry some.


----------



## Newbie_Neil (2 Aug 2007)

Hi all

Please keep politics out of this thread, as you all know the consequences.

Thanks,
Neil


----------



## SammyQ (3 Aug 2007)

Sorry, this issue got under my skin.


----------



## Benchwayze (4 Aug 2007)

devonwoody":1le6yk6s said:


> Down in Cornwall, teenage girl helped chuck someone off a viaduct, reported that she stamped on his fingers when the victim, who died, tried to save himself when hanging on.
> 
> Our teenagers down here are real s o d s. :twisted:



And to think... It's peole like that who call the Police PIGS!

And rubbish like this : (homer) on TV doesn't help either. (Makes Alf Garnet seem like a Choirboy and I wish my daughter would forbid granddaughter to watch it!) 

Right, I've 'ad me rant. Now I am going to read some woodwork books, for some inspiration on how to improve the hovel I call a workshop! 


John :x


----------



## Benchwayze (4 Aug 2007)

woodbloke":21196qt2 said:


> Benchwayze wrote -
> 
> 
> > that dimheaded Army Officer's attitude to it makes me despair
> ...



To be sure they are Rob, but at times they are led by dimwits unfortunately. To say that there isn't a problem when there clearly is, is being dimwitted. 
That officer was either promoted beyond his own level of competence, or he knew the right persons! Can't he understand that urinating in drinking water, and smashing taps on bowsers is criminal damage at the very least.

As for logistics, the Army has a Regiment devoted to it. Should be like rolling of a log to them.
But Ce'st la vie.... 

John


----------



## Alf (4 Aug 2007)

Benchwayze":39bynvy5 said:


> To be sure they are Rob, but at times they are led by dimwits unfortunately. To say that there isn't a problem when there clearly is, is being dimwitted.
> That officer was either promoted beyond his own level of competence, or he knew the right persons! Can't he understand that urinating in drinking water, and smashing taps on bowsers is criminal damage at the very least.


'Course he could tell it like it is and potentially see someone who can't do the job take over simply because they're better at being a brown-nosed git than he is... :roll:

Cheers, Alf


----------



## Anonymous (4 Aug 2007)

(homer) is cool, my son loves it. But maybe I should let him watch repeats of "love thy Neighbour" from the seventies. I know which one is the worst. If you actually look at the values in the Simpsons, I think they are pretty good, tom and jerry did me no harm........ anyway got to go and see my parol officer now, may duff up a granny on the way (thats a joke before I get inundated with PMs)


----------



## Benchwayze (5 Aug 2007)

senior":2vcmrqot said:


> (homer) is cool, my son loves it. But maybe I should let him watch repeats of "love thy Neighbour" from the seventies. I know which one is the worst. If you actually look at the values in the Simpsons, I think they are pretty good, tom and jerry did me no harm........ anyway got to go and see my parol officer now, may duff up a granny on the way (thats a joke before I get inundated with PMs)



You are going back a bit, and attitudes have changed Senior. But if you remember the series, from a certain point of view, then it was Smethurst who always came off second dog.

Remember the episode where Rudolph Walker had him codded into dancing naked around a tree? And the two wives! Did they take the stuffing out of their respective 'ubbies! Besides it was adult entertainment. My kids weren't allowed to watch it. (I'm not sure they were old enough to know what a television set was come to think about it! )

Suffice to say, I saw the moral message rather than the harm in the programme.

John


----------



## Benchwayze (5 Aug 2007)

Alf":2ef7airc said:


> Benchwayze":2ef7airc said:
> 
> 
> > To be sure they are Rob, but at times they are led by dimwits unfortunately. To say that there isn't a problem when there clearly is, is being dimwitted.
> ...



Hi Alf,

I don't think I said he couldn't deliver on the job he had been set. 

I was dismayed at his 'brush it under the carpet' attitude to the sabotage, by saying there were only 'isolated incidents.' I.e. 'We can't do much about it, so let's play it down eh?' 

Tell that to the folk who had no water. 

John


----------

