News from London

[Mike the Pike]

I read about that Diallo case when it happened. It seems he had it coming, brandishing a wallet in such a threatening manner and all.

[Mike the Pike]

BTW I wonder if any of these scum managed to nick 30,000 pounds worth of stuff. This guy did...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliot_Morley

[Spevna]

BTW I wonder if any of these scum managed to nick 30,000 pounds worth of stuff. This guy did...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliot_Morley

People like that are even worse than the looters. They get on their soapboxes and preach about the woes of society, all the while making out like the bandits they are. Scum.

Like you Pikey, I very much grew up in a middle class suburb of London. That was from the age of 5 though as before that I lived in a particularly lovely part of London called Newham (tongue planted firmly in cheek).

The only reason we were able to move was because of my parents putting in the hard yards, working their socks off, and aiming for something better in life.

Every single member of my parent's families were born and raised on proper shit hole council estates. They all however got out under there own steam. Of the lot of them, only one or two cousins went rotten and ended up doing time.

The real issue, like Prim says, is lack of a fear of reprisals from both parents and the police.

As for Pat Condell, he did grow up in very much the same environment as those that took part in the riots. I think he can relate to them and understand them a bit better than anyone from a middle class suburb could.

[The Underdweller]

Thanks Underdweller. I saw this interview and I thought it was a very good insight into where we are at. I don't think this has been shown on the BBC since it was aired has it.
One thing he hits upon really well is the lack of respect people have for each other, including the BBC with their interview techniques these days. I feel a lot of their coverage is very ghoulish.

Yeah! Well, the BBC gave him a somewhate lukewarm apology later on:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blo ... _blog.html

[Colonel Voss]

I'll just say, what was imparted to me in an urban economics course. Economically, (micro-economics) apparently when judging the behavior of criminals, it is not effective to increase penalties. Often criminals don't see dangers and punishment the same way as other people (people who don't see crimes as viable or morally right), so when punishment increases they don't respond by stopping their such behavior. Nor does rehabilitation or counseling programs seem to work all that well.
Instead, criminals seem to respond to the fear of being caught. If the likelihood of being caught is high, the criminals tend to stop at committing a crime. The proper response according to this rationale is that greater enforcement of law (more officers, more patrols, etc.) is the best way to deter criminal activity.

Most career criminals see it as just that a career and part of that career is doing time. As it is a career, they don't see any point or need to rehabilitate or counsel. And as punishments go up (such as the three strikes laws) they just fight all the harder to stay out of jail in court and clogging the courts up with appeals and what not rather than taking a plea that would get them out in a few years as they use to do.

Of course these are the career criminals. A lot of teenagers (and here it seems 20 somethings) take up criminal activity usually following behind those who will become career criminals (yes, some career criminals can be spotted as young as 5). These people will then get out of crime when it becomes a social liability. The studies I read back in 2003 put this as end of high school through college as the exit date (i.e. the numbers drop through this period at a steady rate) of criminal behavior, usually when they start becoming serious about work.

But looking at what has happened in London, it really does appear that the thought of committing a crime is not considered a social liability anymore for the 20 somethings. I remember a retired parole officer I got the chance to talk to. He started in the late 1940s and he said that at that time, the kid would get a warning that he would go to juvey (US term for juvenile hall or prison) and if he did get in trouble, then he would be in juvey so fast his head would still be spinning. And many wouldn't be back for a second trip. By the 70's, the kids would get three or four warnings before finally going to juvey and by then it was too late and they just kept coming back. Cameron's idea of hug a hoodie goes completely against all scientific research into delinquency prevention. A complete and total farce.