This is what I think.
The problem with the deployment of Stop and Search in the past was that it was indiscriminate, directed at young blacks, used as a general means of hassling black youth, widely seen as racist, carried out with unnecessary disrespect and rudeness and did not have the consent of the community.
Times have changed.
We now have increased knife-crime and gun-crime in a growing gang culture. Something has to happen.
The attitudes of communities have changed. They want action to stop their children falling prey to the drug/gang culture.
So what is the reason for this increase in gun/knife culture? Like all things there are many reasons:
The draconian cuts to the police force have played a part. You cannot cut the Police budget in London by £1 Billion without it impacting. Violent crime, which had been on the decline for decades, has risen right across the country.
On top of this 40% cuts to Youth Services have also had a big impact. The Youth Services provided a second home to many young people. They received care, advice and help from people they regarded as substitute parents. Now those young people are on their own, out on the streets with nothing to do, prey to drugs, crime and the gangs.
The ending of Stop and Search meant that gangs went unchallenged.
Austerity means that there are not the jobs for kids to aspire to. They see graduates working flipping burgers or belting around delivering pizzas and packages on minimum wage. Why work yourself silly when there’s easy big money to be had dealing?
So what is the answer to this upsurge in murders?
As with all things, there is no easy answer. I would suggest that ending austerity would be a major factor. These kids need to have a future that they can buy into. That would entail proper jobs that have a clear career progression with decent money.
The cuts to the Youth Services was a big mistake. These need to be put back in to provide that guidance and take the kids off the street.
We need to reverse the cuts to the Police so that all crime can be followed up. They need the manpower and resources. Stop the small stuff and it doesn’t develop into big stuff.
And yes – reinstate Stop and Search. As long as it is carried out sensitively, with the consent of the community – as long as it is targeted and intelligence led and not used arrogantly as an extension of prejudice.
I think that the police also need more efficient training
Good point! I think that is essential.
You think that most of those communities would agree to “Stop and Search”? Everything these days when someone is Black and arrested or not even that, the cry goes out “its because I’m Black, Racist”. I don’t hear all those white and I say English/Chinese/Polish/Italian etc etc that live here do you see them on the streets shooting and stabbing people. What about all those from the Indian Community I don’t hear of them committing crimes. There are those young Black people who have come from good homes, they don’t do it. What you do not admit to is the lack of discipline in the Home, thats where it starts. The majority of those shootings/stabbings I bet come from single mothers, where they have siblings all with different fathers, they are not brought up they are dragged up. When discipline was stopped in the Schools that was wrong, I remember a time when every Teacher was addressed as Sir or Miss, it taught respect and there is little or no respect these days. I was shocked when I heard years ago Teachers addressed by their Christian names, its not an outing, its School, its manners. I don’t expect you to agree. Before I get accused of not being fair, there are enough white scum on the streets committing crimes, dealing drugs. Down here by the Sea where I live, nice small Town yet it has its Drug dealers, the Traffickers come down from London and their morons here deal the drugs. We have had stabbings, not yet a shooting (least I don’t think there has been one). We need most certainly “Stop and Search” and let the Police do their jobs, don’t expect them to be so nice and polite to the shooters, stabbers “do you mind if I search you”, that is no doubt what the lefties would want. We need Rough Justice. I do agree strongly that when they (local authorities) took away/closed down youth centres, clubs for the kids somewhere for them, that was a factor to what we see today.
Talking and talking as Khan loves to do and other Politicians, so called experts never gets anything done. Its Action that is needed. If not the figures will just continue to rise.
Anna – of course you have white, Chinese, Polish, Turkish, Asian and Black gangs. There have been a lot of new Eastern European gangs operating in Britain. All of the estates have a gang. Most of them are white.
You see, you generalise far too much. Single parents are a big factor but not the only one. A lot of these parents do care. They can hardly cage up their kids. You are a single parent. If your boys wanted to go out how would you stop them?
As I said – it’s complicated. Drugs is a big part of it. The young kids have nowhere to go and get sucked up by the gangs. There is the macho element, peer pressure, fear, and gang feuds. They see other kids driving around in expensive cars and getting all the girls. Why work?
Schools are much more disciplined than they were in our days. You’re out of touch. They are very calm, pleasant places. They do call their teachers Sir and Madam. I don’t know where you get these ideas from. In my school we hardly had any violence or racism. It was a friendly community. Our students had great manners and were exceptionally polite. The school I grew up in was a rough, violent place full of rudeness and bullying. It’s so much better now.
We don’t need rough justice. That was the problem with the SUS laws. That creates more problems than it solves. We saw the saw in Ireland. We need polite, firm and fair.
Opher, I tend to side with Anna, especially the single parent – missing father factor.
I don’t agree that it’s only a generalisation, as this carries some weight.
I too saw the macho element in my day, the peer pressure of drugs, girls. But I made a choice. They have a choice and by not exercising that choice is not good enough excuse as you have intimated.
Opher, it’s “Miss” not “Madam”.
School children should not be encouraged to use that term “Madam” as it is presumptuous that the woman is married.
Yes you are right. It was Miss.
This subject really pisses me off a lot. Have we acted like a bunch of namby-pamby patsies or what? So what that a lot of people took exception to bringing themselves to the attention of Police and got a shakedown. Too bad that so many naive liberal types heard Lynton Kwesi Johnson’s poem-song “Inglan Is A Bitch” and took it as literal. I can remember when black youth culture was a major anti-social problem and I never met anybody who wasn’t directly involved – that being those with their kids in gangs – that had any problem at all with the Police having a closer inspection of some people. The only people with any problems with SUS were those being SUS’d.
Back in the 1970’s, Police and the conservative (small c) public were getting upset with the sight of congregating groups of black youths and clouds of marijuana smoke. The Police pulled an ancient tool out from their bag of legal tricks and inflicted with full force Section 4 of the Vagrancy Act 1824. This empowers the right to stop and search (aka SUS) anybody in a public place considered to be with intent to commit a crime. It should be pointed out that this included all persons, any colour, creed or culture. Naturally the black community stood out as perceived targets if intercepted by Police in a predominantly black residential area, such as Brixton in south London.
Unfortunately, as the facts prove, a number of black youths were predisposed to carry a weapon like a knife. The claims of racism were always from the black community themselves not wishing their youths being marched off to detention, conveniently forgetting the numbers of their youths involved in illegal activity.
There’s a huge dose of wool being pulled by so-called spokespersons from certain action groups for justice this and that, where they simply fail to admit that some of these kids were bad little nasty bastards. Period.
Late 1970’s, I was living in Notting Hill Gate, with a multitude of Afro-Caribbean people and never witnessed them being targeted by Police anymore than the next person. If you were walking about smoking a spliff and spotted by Police, you could pretty much expect a shakedown. Many did and many were. I was probably carrying more dope on my possession than most of them, but never daft enough to spark up a spliff in front of Plod.
There were too many instances of take-a chance-theft by lots of youths in their little gangs around the Portobello market area and they would get searched if caught. Again unfortunately knives would often be found. Too many of these kids thought they had a point to prove by poncing around busy street corners giving people the eye and acting hard and when pulled up about it are also the first to cry out claims of racist intimidation. They might not have that knife that they own on them – it’s stashed behind a nearby wall, ready.
Following several horrendous riots in England, the SUS law was considered a contributory factor and repealed under Thatcher in 1981. That’s nearly forty years ago.
That’s a long time to being doing virtually nothing and because of this naive liberalism towards gang culture we stand where we are today with youths with guns murdering each other.
So do we start banning youtube so they can’t get these ideas of gangster hoodyism, ban iPhones to prevent big meets for gang fights, close down all potentially anti-social mdeia? Employ more agencies to behave all nicey-nicey towards them and try and coax them into being better persons or hire loads more Police and come down hard like a ton of bricks on them?
As stated above, now that communities who used to be the objectors have come to realise (eventually the penny dropped for them) that serious action is required if there is to be a solution to the folly of their youths. Funny how it always takes longer to further educate people who are not educated in the first place. Society in general was stupid to take on board with any earnest seriousness a lot of that complaint coming from these people back in the day. The Police should have been allowed to do their job properly.
The kind of complaints raised against the Police back then compared to what happens today when stopped for any reason or travelling through an airport these days, makes them look rather trivial.
I’m not entirely certain that flipping burgers or delivering pizzas has any relevance to the problem. Not every kid is equipped for “proper jobs and clear career progression”, and would hasten to add – and thankfully add – that not everybody aspires to be part of the machine.
The only answer that I can come up with is National Service. 18 months in a boot camp would sort a lot of these kids out. Make that 36 months.
Well thanks for that view.
The single parent problem is obviously a factor.
So what is your solution?
There isn’t one!, at least readily attainable. It boils down again to cultural and social education.
The eradication of this lifestyle choice could perhaps only be done with what we term as Fascist right-wing ideology – the banning of multiple births by one mother from different partners and pulling them in for mastectomy’s etc.
It’s a difficult subject.
I really dont think that policies such as those you suggest are the only way. What about more interactions between classes, a much better education system, a more effective benefits system, police training, drug education, politicization and more effective schemes to help those at risk and to help them get out of the destructive relationships and vicious cycles that they’re in.
Commonwealth – I agree with all you say there. It means putting more funds in and reversing the damaging cuts. Austerity and government policy have created the problem.
Well I would agree with social and cultural education.
I think you mean hysterectomy don’t you? While I think the problems of one parent families can be big, not all single parent families have problems and I wouldn’t go so far as to do anything so draconian.
commonwealth: I would suggest that what you have listed is in fact otherwise known collectively as social and cultural education.
You obviously mean drug education for children.
We should also stop treating drug addicts like criminals and legalise drugs. This would make a massive difference almost instantly.
Yes, a hysto, not a masto. I believe there’s a subtle difference.
I was referring (thought it was obvious) to these crazy women that spend their lives continuously pregnant with kids from multiple casual partners. Quite what is in any way “draconian” about dealing with them I don’t know.
X – I can see the problem with those women who are churning out babies like that. I just don’t have a ready answer. I would be in favour of some kind of taxation on children rather than rewarding with benefits. But I’m not sure how you can do that without hitting the kids.
X- I would also advocate legalising drugs and treating them as a health issue rather than a criminal issue.
I don’t bide on your side of the pond, Opher, but I agree with everything you said!
Thanks Cheryl.
At the risk of upsetting the commenters of the Right, I’d like to support your ideas, Opher. As I watch what’s happening across the pond from me, I wonder how PM May can end austerity when facing the humongous bill that Brexit has imposed on the U.K. Besides, it would be political suicide for her as she would upset her political base who say they care about law and order and the well-being of the youth, yet they support the tax cuts that make austerity necessary. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
I quite agree John. If you don’t have money from taxation you cannot provide quality Education, Social Services or Policing.
Yes, and the problem also exists because of the spending priorities of the government – not to mention the insanity of Brexit. Sigh.
I agree with you John. Governments decide where to focus the money. This lot give it to the rich and take it from the poor, disabled and public services.
John: What exactly do you mean by “the insanity of Brexit”?
You’ve obviously never been near Calais.
With exception of the few countries that were in the original EU, known as the Common Market in the 1970’s, since then what is the first thing every other new member country has done upon joining the EU and receiving a massive cash handout?
I’d be interested to learn whether you actually know the answer to that question.
No, I don’t pretend to know either. I’m a firm believer in free trade. History teaches us that high trade tariffs cause economic suffocation – for everyone. That is insanity. The cost of getting out of the EU is insanity. That’s my meaning.
John: Well yes there is a cost, no doubt about that and it’s looking quite expensive but the latest figure (I think) was 35 billion, which is less than the original projected 55 billion.
UK is a big buyer and it’s doubtful the EU would want to make it difficult to buy from them by imposing prohibitive tariffs. UK is already the biggest buyer of German cars, but we don’t know these details as yet.
Another factor that nobody seems to pay much attention to – and this is always a balloon buster for Remainers – is that the world market trades at 8% cheaper than the EU. The EU props itself up with a greedy false economy making the rich getting richer and it’s leadership have become something that they should never be, that of judge and jury and they have made life hell for several countries. The wealth piling into Germany, Austria and Switzerland is disgusting, but again nobody complains about that, at least the Remainers don’t over here and pretend it isn’t happening.
My point regarding new member states, all from the former Soviet bloc, the first thing each and every one of them did after receiving huge EU cash injections intended for development was to create a false economy with mass importation of luxury goods for their elite classes, which further stretches the class divisions and definitely was not creating new business that created jobs for their people. Only their main cities benefits and the outlands remain a backward desert. One visit to Romania would confirm this. Too many of these states operate an anti-inflation policy, suffer cultural wariness of native companies being bought up by foreigners and two-thirds of their economy is EU. There’s too many failures to implement economic reforms due to inappropriate financing. They should never have been allowed to join so soon without a sensible period of independence and practiced governance and throwing money at them only exacerbates their inherent corruption.
X&Y – the real cost is not just the £35 Billion divorce bill. That’s just the start of it. We are already employing an army of solicitors, negotiators, customs people and bureaucrats. That will get worse and we’ll all pick up the bill.
I really do not know how you can suggest that free trade between countries works out 8% more expensive than other world trade arrangements. How does that work?
It makes sense to me that the EU works to bring all member states up to the same standard and working in unison.
Yes there is corruption in the EU that needs sorting out – same as that in the British politics. But do you really think that the whole thrust of the Tory government isn’t to funnel wealth to the wealthy and away from the rest?
Opher, no that is not accurate. These professions are already employed in situ and involved in one way or another and are simply being used in their given capacities. The EU employs thousands of people and these are just some of them. And so what anyway? This is how we run things and this is how it goes. You will find that similar amounts of people are currently employed with the application of Turkey, and will be for the next five years. Are we have also been paying for that, too.
I can think of far more expensive wastes of money. Entering into an endless war for years on a whim of bad information would be one of them. The costs were so serious that I don’t want to know these costs as it’s too depressing to imagine where that money could have been better used.
You ask how does that 8% work out? It’s common knowledge. Surely you can’t be under the impression that the EU manufactures everything that it feeds itself with and uses as commodities? This is one of the fundamental problems that exists with this whole issue – ignorance of world trade markets and corresponding tariffs, import taxes and trade levies. Every commodity coming into the EU for sale is taxed and that money goes to the German Bundesbank – the bank that funds the EU – and that money is never seen again. It’s called “Economic Protectionism”.
Basically, we are being ‘economically protected’ by the EU at a cost to ourselves of around 8% over the price of goods that we could buy elsewhere, but are unable to buy elsewhere because of the economic constraints of the EU. Etc, etc.
We’ve all just got too used to it and for the last forty years hearing EU this, EU that, and have basically been programmed to not even begin to think out of that box.
It’s a prime example of mass disorientation and some people have become almost hysterical with the idea of non-membership. Some of those too young to remember life pre-1974, really have no idea why they even think what they think.
It’s exactly like the premise of religion rammed down the throats of children and the Nazi propaganda, when Goebbels said “when you say it enough times… etc”.
This is where we’ve got to and it’s bloody pathetic.
Yes, the EU is a fully paid up corrupt dinosaur. It’s being going now for some forty plus years and those in charge today are not going to disappear in any hurry. The UK asked for their consideration on matters that appeared to conflict with UK interests on no less than on 72 occasions just during Cameron’s tenancy and each and every one of them was rejected. This situation gave cause to consider withdrawal.
No, I don’t think that is what the Tories are about. If they were the country would be run as if under martial law as there would have been a social revolution a long time ago – it clearly isn’t. They have to give tax cuts to the highest earning businesses in order to encourage further growth investment. This is 1st year basic economics and it’s not too difficult to figure out what could happen were this system not in place.
The alternative is nationalisation and we don’t have to look back too far to understand just how corrupt and unjust that system was. Nobody was accountable, nobody carried the can, unions dictated for the sake of dictating and the last thing on many people’s mind was doing the job to their best ability. When businesses compete in a free market enterprise, they work better, and are accountable for their actions and results. It’s a heck of a lot more competitive and objectively influenced by new ideas and spearheaded by injections of cash into new developments. You get none of that with nationalised industries and worse still, they’re success is determined all too often by people who are not exactly the best qualified to do that job. That doesn’t happen in free market enterprise. With every success, comes a cost. Consider the cost of that success in tax breaks.
X – have you not read about the number of extra civil servants already employed to deal with Brexit? Have you not read of the border arrangements? Extra buildings, customs officers and bureaucrats? Have you not read about the number of solicitors picking over the details? Have you not seen the duplication of all the agencies as we have to disentangle? Have you not seen the numbers of tax inspectors to sort the tariffs. You live in dreamland. The costs are enormous. All those are extra costs and ongoing and they are huge.
As for the Tories – well you are blinkered. They are robbing us blind in front of your own eyes!
Opher, I see you’re a man for factual accuracy and given examples.
I’m awarding you full marks for hysterical exaggeration.
The facts are that to date 3,000 extra people have been hired and possibly another 2,000 will be also engaged this year – all of which is short-term contract. Thereafter, they are no longer required.
There’s been too much hysterical press and also grossly outrageously misleading and downright false news reporting by TV, and it’s a complete and utter nonsense of a projected tally of some 30,000 extra civil servants being required.
Nota bene the term “being required”, as in perhaps, possibly, potentially etc.
The fact is – to date just 3,000 have been taken on board.
What you have written is a prime example of the sort of misleading and misinformed conjecture that too frequently gets press time and some sorry few have a tendency to believe it. There is really no need for this and undoubtedly you may find yourself in discussion with others who may not tolerate it quite so easily.
Blinkered not and you must be jesting. I’ve only got one major complaint really and that’s about the types of vampiric morons that get themselves jobs in the public sector such as county councils and relentlessly fuck everything up and remain protected, or at least up until the shit really hits the fan – but it has to get to that stage to remove them.
These cretins wouldn’t last ten minutes in the private sector. These are the very people that are indeed robbing us blind.
X – you must be reading totally different stuff to me then. That is nowhere near the numbers I’ve been reading. Not even on the same page.
I suppose you think everything is just going to flow through ports without any checks, that there won’t be the slightest bit of extra bureaucracy or customs depots? So there won’t be any need for all those extra customs officers or bureaucrats pushing forms? So there will be no duplication of all the various institutions? Nothing at all? Border controls will all happen by magic?
Dream on.
Honestly man, you are making the most ill-informed statements. Where do you get this from? And why the hell do you believe it? They’re taking the piss out of you.
There have been so far 3,000 extra hands pulled into circulation. End of story.
For your information – many of them are civil servants that were on long term sabbatical and if you didn’t know – and I don’t think you did – administrative civil servants can go on sabbatical for up to five years, do something else and come back at exactly the same pay grade as they were upon leaving. Because this new venture is generally much more interesting that the usual run of the mill stuff, many have opted to return for duty earlier than anticipated. So, many have not been specially brought in as they already existed.
You must have been reading rubbish and I did intimate this to be the case. Which to most extent is confirmed by your seeming lack of ability to furnish this page with any of these figures. What numbers have you been reading and where from exactly?
What are you talking about with customs checks? EVERYTHING already coming through ports from the EU is checked already! Lol. Did you think it wasn’t? Or did you just mean cars coming off the Calais to Dover ferry with some fags and wine? The cars already drive through detectors, so what’s the big deal?
It’s obvious you haven’t been involved in any customs checks, for instance leaving USA and entering Canada. These Canadian border cops take parts of cars apart just as routine checks. We won’t have any of that unless the sniffer dogs flag it up. It will be business as usual looking for drugs, cash, firearms, foodstuffs, animal trophy’s etc.
And so what if there’s some extra border controls – the fines imposed for import defaults pay for themselves. Have you any idea how much money is already collected from fines from EU flights coming into Heathrow and Gatwick? Are you aware of the growth in scale of these operations at these airports over the last few years? Have you seen the scale of the postal checking operation? It’s a bloody massive and nothing like it existed before the threat of “terrorism” and all it’s guises.
Seriously, you’re making something of nothing. It will be business as usual, just more of it. You’re clutching for imaginary straws.
Do you not understand how the European Free Market works? Free movement between EU countries. No need for paperwork or customs checks. No tariffs.
When we leave all that changes. Do you think that is free, trouble free, tariff free??
Are you kidding me?
I’m sorry, but you are entirely incorrect with this.
Presently, every single commercial transport vehicle entering UK from the EU is checked upon entry. They are checked for people smuggling, checked for certification, weight of vehicle, correct goods as per papers, correct storage, then there’s the checks on the vehicle itself, exhaust emissions, tyres, etc. If not done in Calais in the lorry waiting parks before boarding, they’re done in or around Dover upon arrival. You must have seen these check stations somewhere, sometime? If not, well then you really do have a problem and I suspect that to be the issue at play at this juncture. I don’t think you are switched on to what exactly happens in due process of this everyday activity.
You have completely misinterpreted the understanding of “free movement”. In short, technically there is no such thing, it’s a figure of speech. Everything is certification controlled, passport controlled, ID papers controlled. The “free movement” is based on the proviso that one does comply with imposed controls and if so has free passage to continue. Let’s get that part crystal clear. Because if they can’t and the checking control people aren’t happy, then they go no further. This happens both ends and not just here. Haven’t you heard about all the complaints from eastern European truck drivers who can travel from say Poland all the way to Calais, come off the ferry at Dover and sit for hours waiting to be checked? This is ALREADY in force and ALWAYS has been.
The same process is enforced for all imported containers coming off haulage shipping.
Seriously, did you honestly think that all these thousands of lorries coming into UK every week had a free passage with no checks, no nothing? No, that’s not the case at all.
As for passengers flying to Europe, there will be no changes with extra bag checks etc as they don’t need to – the technology is already doing that job. It will be just like flying into USA or Australia, they might random check you, they might not. They already do random checks in EU airports anyway.
At this precise moment in time, neither of us have any idea what provisions or tariffs will be in place. Therefore, there’s nothing to kid you on about.
X+Y – it is totally different! There is free movement of goods at present. They are merely checking for terrorists, guns, dope and immigrants. Wait until everything has to be paid for and you are in a total different ball game. When the tariffs hit the red tape multiplies exponentially!