Why I hate not living in a United Ireland

[waterproofbob]

Leaving aside the on going argument I really do agree that something has to be done about the way the justice system in this country works. Often criminals appear to have more rights than innocent men. There are people in prison who in no way seek to leave due to improved quality of life they have once in prison. I don't condone the death penalty and don't think that it is an effective deterent. In the same way I don't think arming the police is a solution either as the day the police have pistols is the day gangs drop their knives and get SMGs.

The police and law enforcement in the UK are too soft. In the same way that child act stops teaching staff being able to properly discipline a child if they mis behave the justice system is unable to effectively prevent people from commiting crimes as the punishments are far too soft and the force that should be on the streets as a deterent to help and serve the community are unable to do that.

Punishments can no longer be seen as humiliating as it detracts from the rights of the person. I say let them be humiliated. In school the most effective punishments were not the detentions or gating (like being grounded but in a boarding house) it was the stupid tedious things that were boring, time consuming and sometimes a little embarassing.

There is no real deterrent to these criminals and because situations like this occur where criminals are feeding small time crooks to the police they avoid police and are allowed to terrorise the neighbourhood they live in.

It deeply saddens me that this is the attitude these days where the criminal has more rights than the victim, innocent people should not be scared of walking around where they live because the police are unable to police effectively due to the massive restrictions place on them.

 

[Nanor]

Um, okay? As is rather clearly stated;

<This is from that>

I'm talking about you're original post, you ninny.

See:

Is it the loss of the death penalty that irates you? Because it demonstrably has no great effect on crime rates, iirc. Otherwise, please specify (it IS the soap box, you know )

hugs and kisses.

No sources in there! Yes you posted citations in your next post but I'm not talking about those ones! You're original post where we only have your word.

Well, regarding this particular subjects you haven't made any arguments, other than the pigs&sky one and the Ad Hominem one in the post thereafter.

I'm not arguing about death rates. I'm arguing you didn't cite sources when you stated it.

The police and law enforcement in the UK are too soft. In the same way that child act stops teaching staff being able to properly discipline a child if they mis behave the justice system is unable to effectively prevent people from commiting crimes as the punishments are far too soft and the force that should be on the streets as a deterent to help and serve the community are unable to do that.

The law enforcement are far to soft. Not to mention the leniency of the judicial system. It's simply appalling that these people are allowed to do these things and I guarantee you, once they are charged, they'll get 12 years or so and serve about 10.

The laws are FUBAR'd too. Take for example a few years back a man came home to find his house being robbed. Naturally he beat the man into a pulp and sent him on his way. A few days later the police knocked at the door to inform him the robber wasn't pressing charges. It's completely obscene and things don't seem to be changing.

 

[Bradstreet]

I find the number of isolated examples being cited here suspicious. No-one is offering any evidence (other than their gut feelings) as to consistent patterns of leniency, large numbers of crime-lords romping through the streets and shoving horse's heads through our letterboxes, or hardened criminals being offered manicures and massages in their luxurious boutique prison cells. In other words, sure there are always going to be occasional cases in which the police get it wrong (and I'm not their biggest fan, but from a much more left-wing view than most stated here) but to claim it's systemic from a small handful of isolated events is just ridiculous. And as for Thatbloke's (rather old) example: Tony Martin shot two young guys who were running away from him in the back -- he deserved everything he got and more.

 

[DocBot]

I'm not arguing about death rates. I'm arguing you didn't cite sources when you stated it.

Well, considering you said that after I'd cited sources... plus, it was also an Ad Hominem one.

 

[Nanor]

It was a riposte to your

perhaps you should then either a) take up mnemonics or b) read up.

which was an Ad Hominem comment.


There was a bombscare here last night. That fairly got the police out of their holes. I'm eagerly awaiting seeing what the charges against these men are.

 

[Taffy]

I don't really blame the police for this lack of law & order; its the governments fault for wrapping the police up to their eyeballs in red tape. And did you see on the news that the Home Secretary was reducing the amount of paperwork police had to fill out in knifecrime hotspots, and how proud of herself she was for taking such a measure? I find it ridiculous that police have to fill out a form just for stopping and searching someone!

 

[BiG D]

Why shouldn't they have to? They are granted authority that regular citizens don't have. When they are using said authority, I think they should be documenting what they did and why.

 

[Taffy]

Why shouldn't they have to? They are granted authority that regular citizens don't have. When they are using said authority, I think they should be documenting what they did and why.

Absolutely. But having to fill out a questionnaire EVERY time they stop and search someone? The police spend far too much time doing paperwork when they should be out there doing their job. Sure, there needs to be some monitoring to ensure the police aren't bullying, but theres so much monitoring that their capacity to effectively enforce the law is being drastically reduced. Which is as bad, if not worse, as having completely unregulated police.

 

[BiG D]

But having to fill out a questionnaire EVERY time they stop and search someone?

This is completely reasonable. Police can't legally (at least not around here...) just walk around searching people. There are rules they need to follow, and the burden should be on them to prove it was necessary.

You do not want an 'unregulated' police force.

 

[DocBot]

but theres so much monitoring that their capacity to effectively enforce the law is being drastically reduced.

I'm guessing this is your (uneducated?) opinion? Otherwise, please present the facts

On a similar note, we have lots of paperwork to do in the healthcare business, too. I think it has gone to far in the US, where a lot of it is made to avoid getting sued, but in most other countries it's there to protect the citizens. In more ways than one.

Which is as bad, if not worse, as having completely unregulated police.

Oh, my. I suggest you think through what having a completely unregulated police force entails.

 

[Taffy]

I'm guessing this is your (uneducated?) opinion? Otherwise, please present the facts

It's a well-known fact that the British police force are wrapped up in red tape like pigs in blankets. I haven't got the time or energy to go find some statistics on it.

Oh, my. I suggest you think through what having a completely unregulated police force entails.

I meant unregulated insofar as having very little paperwork to do. Not having an entirely unregulated force thats given the free reins to do whatever they please. Clearly that would be worse.

All I'm saying is that the police are stopped from doing their main duties because they spend large amounts of time sitting behind a desk ticking boxes.

 

[DocBot]

It's a well-known fact

Not by me, that's why I asked. Also, red tape is everywhere. That it actually lessens the british police's capacity is only hearsay, I'm guessing.

 

[waterproofbob]

I feel this article says it pretty well.

Yes it is biased it being the Torigraph but it says it pretty well. There is currently a massive incentive from the government to reduce the amount of paper work police have to do as it is undeniable that it has reduced how effective they can be.

More articles

 

[Bradstreet]

Wow, that article is astonishing. From people getting stabbed to a culture of 'moral neutrality' to the 'flinging around' of accusations of racism and sexism *even* within our totally non-racist, never-sexist police force to 'risk aversion' in four breathtaking leaps. And then somehow this is all because the police have to fill in forms.

All the article demonstrates is that if you can string together a handful of disconnected right-wing talking points you can get a job working for the Torygraph.

 

[waterproofbob]

The bbc's take covering the same issue

I said the torygraph was biased, was just one of the articles as I said puts the point across that there is an issue.

Another

And another

What is your paper or news source of choice as I reckon even the sun have probably covered this major issue at some point even if it is under the headline:
"Police unavailable for nude shoot due to redtape and paper work- Angry pervs revolt".

I'm trying and failing to find the interview with Gordon Brown from earlier this year which is him admitting this is a major problem and that they are going to try and address it.

 

[Taffy]

All the article demonstrates is that if you can string together a handful of disconnected right-wing talking points you can get a job working for the Torygraph.

Find me a better paper and I'll read it! (And I don't want any of that left-wing garbage The Guardian spews)

 

[Bradstreet]

It's true... I'm a grauniad reader (though it's a lot less left-wing than it used to be). But what about the windypendent, if you want one that at least tries to be less biased?

 

[Traxata]

I just mostly stick with the BBC news, and occasionally read the Mail (as thats the paper that's been in my house for years).

 

[Taffy]

It's true... I'm a grauniad reader (though it's a lot less left-wing than it used to be). But what about the windypendent, if you want one that at least tries to be less biased?

ld read that if I could afford a broadsheet every day. As it is, I'm usually stuck reading the free Times that my school provides. Which on the whole isn't too bad.

 

[waterproofbob]

I read either the Times or the indie normally. I do occasionally pick up a copy of the Grauniad, more so since my sister started working there. I normally pick up what is cheap out side the union. Or I did at least maybe now I'll have to actually pick a paper of choice. Probably the Times, I like their Sudoku.