Monday, 15 August 2011

Sympathy for the devils.

The first test case of eviction of a council tenant is under way. Initially I was supportive of the mother in this case because -

a) her son is 18 and therefore she is not responsible for his actions, he is;
b) he was arrested and charged but not yet convicted, so eviction proceedings are premature;
c) this is a selective punishment that cannot be applied to all who were involved because they aren't all in council housing and
d) it's also collective punishment, going after family members who were not involved in any crime.

However, she lost sympathy points by ignoring all those reasons and going straight to 'human rights'. Then she claimed her son was the victim in all this, and now she is claiming 'police brutality' and that her son's human rights are being violated.

All my sympathy has evaporated.

'The police have made mistakes. They have beaten two children up.’

Either her son is an adult and she is not responsible for his actions, or he is a child and she is. The doublethink option is not available.

The son has not yet been to trial. It is possible that he is not guilty but just happened to be in the area, but even if that is true it will be extremely hard to prove. There weren't too many casual sightseers around that night.

All this talk of 'human rights' is frankly ridiculous. Because of the actions of those yobs now screaming 'It's me rights innit?' we are all going to be subject to collective punishments for their actions - and many Mail commenters are delighted to bring that down on themselves.

In the event of anything happening that the Government doesn't like, they want to be able to shut down social media sites, effectively shutting down the internet, until they feel comfortable enough to let us talk to each other again. The drones believe this will only apply to riots and not to any future protest they might want to make.

The Government want to refuse anyone the right to wear any kind of face covering (pay attention, Muslims, because yes, this means you too) and to give police the power to demand they be removed. Who honestly believes the police, who stood by and watched the riots, are going to apply this to rioters in the course of their business? Who is going to be shocked and appalled next Halloween when their costumed ten-year-old is arrested? The drones believe, the drones will be shocked, but then it'll be too late.

Now the Cameroid wants some form of 'national service' for all sixteen-year-olds. All. Not just the bad ones. All of them. Every last one. Yes, Mr. Mail reader with the studious well-mannered children, yours too. Their crime is not rioting, their crime is being sixteen. They will be punished whether they are feral or not. So where is their incentive to be good citizens when they are going to be punished for looting anyway? So far it's 'voluntary'. Ha ha ha.

Indiscriminate punishment applied to all for the actions of a few. This is what the Cameroid perceives as 'justice'. So if your neighbour routinely gets drunk and smashes up cars in the street, how would you feel about an alcohol ban and a 9 pm curfew enforced by fines and prison? Not just for him. For you and everyone else too. A good idea? The drones are easily convinced to say 'yes'.

I still think evicting families over the actions of one member of that family is wrong. The one who did the crime should face the consequences. Otherwise they grow up believing they can still do as they please because although there are consequences, someone else will have to face them. The idiot woman, however, can deal with her case on her own. Once you claim that those involved - whether actively or not - are the victims in all this, then I wash my hands of you. The victims are those who were killed and injured, whose property was trashed or stolen, and ultimately everyone in the entire country whose 'human rights' are about to be curtailed even further as a result of the looting and burning.

There's more

Under the rules on gangs being drawn up by Mr Duncan Smith, the police will be told to work with the tax authorities and the DVLA to hound gang bosses – while trying to save boys from being dragged into the gang culture.

Officers will trawl through bank accounts in search of even minor infringements to cause criminals ‘constant annoyance’.

Are bank accounts now standard among the youth? Do those involved in guns and drugs really accept cheques? So whose bank accounts are to be open to scrutiny? Well... everyone's. Except the drug gangs. Because they don't have bank accounts.

In an interview yesterday, the Work and Pensions Secretary said: ‘You need to get a message across at moment number one that the police are going to make their life hell.
‘They are going to use every device they can to get after them, whether it is crossing the street at the wrong place, any kind of misdemeanour.
‘They are going to check your parking tickets, everything. They are going to be on their case.’

'Da Yoof' already complain that the police are harassing them all the time. This is really going to improve that perception, isn't it? Crossing the street in the wrong place? When did that become a UK crime? Parking tickets? At sixteen?

So any kid - or anyone - caught nipping across a crossing while the light is red (even when there's no traffic) will then be the subject of police harassment. Or does anyone believe that this will be only applied to actual gang members? Looking at past application of such rules, does anyone believe this will apply to Ferals at all?

What will happen is that once you are on a police database, whether for a parking ticket, taking a photo, wearing a mask, having a Twitter account or looking at someone in a funny way, they can then harass you whenever they feel like it. The gangs? Well, those people can be dangerous so it'll be far easier to rack up targets using the meek and the mild. Won't happen? Sure it won't, because it's never happened before.

You can bet the penalties will be onerous too. There is no connection between the offence and the sentence any more. Torch a building and get a few weeks in jail. Irritate a judge and get six months without trial. It's not some tinfoil-hat theory. It is happening now.

Our Government is about to make it much, much worse. For us, not for the criminals.


Mark Wadsworth said...

Most of this is knee-jerk nonsense.

But I have been saying for a long time, in the interests of the 95% of council house tenants who are perfectly well behaved and whose lives are made a misery by the 5% hardcore idiots, that we ought to sift out the 5% idiots and decant them to a large council estate in the middle of nowhere (a former army camp or something) and just leave them to fend for themselves.

That'll improve the quality of life of the law abiding decent majority in council housing no end.

Mr Ecks said...

Have faith LI--economic disaster looms. That might not seem so good but it will smash the states power. They won't be able to pay plod and there will be so many ruined and enraged people with nothing to lose the plods that are left will be the ones to get their heads kicked in if they so much as look sideways at someone.

bollixed said...

Mr Ecks is right. I, personally, think this has been manipulated to pave the way for when the real trouble kicks off due to the economic crash.

Smoking Hot said...

These politicians simply have no idea of what goes on in real life. They think of what will be the most terrible thing that could happen to someone ... but unfortunately they relate that to themselves and their life. They'd hate anyone going through their bank accounts and being hounded for parking tickets etc.

Except as LI says ... gangs dont have bank accounts, they dont have credit cards ... they dont need them! Parking tickets? ffs! ... l'm sure that'd scare them.

Now l'm sure gangs were involved in the looting but l doubt they were stealing trainers. We dont seem to be hearing much about all the ATM's that were hit, do we?

Nevermind, l'm sure the police will spot these large deposits being made in the gang members bank accounts ... ha ha ha

You'd think the police would already have something in place to try and get these gangs cash? Oh, l forgot, they've got PACE ... brought in for exactly that!

Jeez, what a set of morons we have in government!

Anonymous said...

I also read that the mother was around £1,800 in rent arrears so not such a perfect citizen.

Anonymous said...

Do you need a bank account to receive benefits? Maybe this is where they are coming from. But for once Miliband is right - it is a kneejerk response.

Smoking Hot said...

Anon 23.03 ... no you dont need a bank account. lt is a giro that can be cashed at post offices. This amounts to around 50 quid per week for 19-24 yr olds or thereabouts. 50 quid a week is chump change for gang members.

Woodsy42 said...

"work with the tax authorities and the DVLA to hound gang bosses –"

Well it will make a change from their hounding of the ordinary law abiding. Or perhaps not?

English Pensioner said...

Evict her son, and offer her a one room flat.

John Pickworth said...

The law works perfectly well as it is.... Ooops! Sorry, I meant to say the current laws could be made to work as they should without introducing a whole new raft of 'initiatives'.

Reprising a line of argument I made today over at Snowolf's place:

A few weeks ago the Government and Police got all excited over the 96 hour Police Bail rules - you know, the one the Police had been misapplying for 25 years - and yet look now at the daily queue of Group4 prison vans outside our courts.

The rioters/looters don't give a shit whether a sentence might be 6 months or 18 months but they do care about being caught. Currently, hundreds of hooligans are discovering (maybe for the first time in their lives) that there are direct consequences for their actions. It hardly matters if they're getting a slapped wrist or sharing a cell with the 'sisters' at HMP BuggerTheNewKid. What matters most to those who live 'for the now' is instant, swift justice. No time to recount their daring tales of highway robbery to their adoring fan club on Facebook, no time to instant message some hot chicks on their new iPad or to cash in their 'yours for just £50' still in a box pair of £130 trainers on eBay.

This is how justice should be dispensed - quickly. Frankly, if the have a suspect, some CCTV and have found multiple large screen TVs hidden in a 15 year old's wardrobe then get him in court - today. If you cannot do that within 4 days then we need some proper coppers. Yeah sure, its not just the police but the CPS, the courts and the whole bloody justice bureaucracy... for relatively simple cases none of this should be needed. Ken Clarke was onto something with his idea for discounting for guilty pleas but as per usual, the liberal hand wringers, ranting media and legal industry thought they know best.

So, a lesson here for us all. Once the looters have been dispensed with, lets see if we can make the current system more efficient (in both cost and time)? We don't need new laws, we need to make those we have work properly.

Smoking Hot said...

Yes John Pickworth ... and the basic one is innocent until proven guilty.

banned said...

For your reasons a), C) and D) I agree that people should not be dehoused for unrelated behaviour but, as Mark Wadsworth points out, bad tenants should be, a.s.a.p. but then we have heard it all before.
As for young Daniel: "his 18-year-old girlfriend, J-Niel Starkei" WTF ?

The Police incidentally alredy can and do make life hell for anybody that they really want to, it's just a matter of motivation.

Work & Pensions Seketry "whether it is crossing the street at the wrong place, any kind of misdemeanour" Obviously been watching too many US Police Dramas, C. Hill Street Blues.

Anonymous said...

I see this proposed “eviction as punishment” scheme as a direct knock-on from the smoking ban, in that the smoking ban was the first piece of legislation which – effectively – punishes one person (a landlord) for a crime committed by another person (a smoker). Of course, it isn’t couched in those terms in the Health Act but we all know that that’s how it works in practice, don’t we? And, having got that rather scary departure from the historic principle of English law - that “if you do the crime, you do the time” – accepted by a general public who couldn’t see further than “I don’t like smoky pubs” or “I do like smoky pubs,” it was pretty much only a matter of time before the same principle was applied elsewhere.

I have no doubt that these riots, like terrorist attacks and various other crises which befall our country from time to time, will be seized upon by politicians as a very handy opportunity of increasing the amount of intrusion which they permit themselves into our lives and of cutting off yet another slice of the freedom salami. Love him or loathe him, the great conspiracy theorist David Icke has a perfect description of this mechanism. He calls it “problem/reaction/solution” – a problem either occurs or is manufactured (it can be either), the public reacts in the expected way with cries of “something must be done,” and then, under the cover of these “public demands,” the government of the day brings in some kind of legislation which they’ve wanted all along, but which, without the aforementioned “problem” would have brought howls of protest from the very same public who are now demanding action. I have to say that Icke may have some odd ideas on many things, but when it comes to the underlying machinations of governments of all persuasions he’s spot on every time.

Leg-iron said...

Mark W - JuliaM has often highlighted stories of Ferals who have been evicted from one place, only to be rehoused in another.

What's needed is, as you say, the 'dump estate' which is the only option left to those who persist in being pains in the backside.

Two strikes, and the third and final relocation is to Chavland.

Might make a few reconsider their attitudes.

Leg-iron said...

Smoking Hot - they still have giros? I'd have thought making their way to the post office every week was against their human rights.

Leg-iron said...

John P - our loony government (I include all colours of rosette because there is no difference) like making new laws. We have a law against using a mobile phone while driving, which was already covered by 'careless driving' and 'driving without due care and attention' but we have to have a specific one for phones.

And another specific one for drinking Coke, one for eating a sandwich and one for fellating a hamster. All of which were already covered...

... and none of which are enforced.

Leg-iron said...

banned - that's why they want an American chief constable. He's used to the difference between 'misdemeanour' (local UK crime) and 'federal crime' (EU crime).

He's used to 'jaywalking' too.

Leg-iron said...

Anon - if David Icke hadn't got into the whole reptilian/messiah thing, he could have actually made a difference, I think.

Most of his stuff makes sense but it's always lost among the 'reptiles' stuff.

JuliaM said...

"Now the Cameroid wants some form of 'national service' for all sixteen-year-olds."

Did no-one point out that this is far, far too late in the day to have any effect? What, no Jesuits in the cabinet?

Lord T said...

The more the persecute the innocent and turn them into criminals the bigger the criminal element gets and the faster the fall.

I bet most of the recent rioters don't go without some face covering. They adapt, unlike Politicians, because they don't like the repercussions if they don't.

Wait till Plod are totally alienated from the public. There will be a lot more trouble then.

I thought they wanted to slow the disintegration but it appears they want it to go faster. Cameron really is useless.

smokervoter said...

Ah yes, Sympathy for the Devil, the quintessential Rolling Stones song. From the bongos at the introduction to the tinny, high-pitched lead solo at the end it doesn't get much better. And listen to the ultra-complicated bass line throughout. Bill Wyman is the bomb.

Antipholus Papps said...

David Icke... Most of his stuff makes sense but it's always lost among the 'reptiles' stuff.

That's why I think he still works for the BBC!


opinions powered by