TV and Radio   permalink

Why are the vulnerable law abiding public never the topic?

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 4 of 4
  • Message 1. 

    Posted by WENDY (U14913621) on Sunday, 19th June 2011

    It makes me fell sick to hear people debating the rights of prisoners when I feel fear leaving my mother in her home alone. We are all vulnerable to crime, and I am sick if hearing from people wanting to cheat me out of money through ciminal fraud, and here you are discussing criminal rights again.

    Surely when people commit crimes against societyy (us) they are excluding themselves from society and thefore forefitting thier rights?

    This country does not protects the general public - it protects crimminals and they KNOW IT

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by BBC-account-holder (U14761700) on Sunday, 19th June 2011

    Like yourself Wendy and almost every other law abiding person who can't afford personal bodyguards and private security, I am concerned about the violent, criminal and disorderly behaviour of a large part of the population.

    However, I feel you and all those like you need to realise what the problem really is instead of just demanding further draconian punishments.

    The problem is we've created a society which is excluding millions of men, especially young ones.

    Before the 1970s and Mrs Thatcher who destroyed most of British industry including all the mining communities, young men used to grow up believing they were going to have *a life*.

    i.e. they grew up believing they were going to get a job - a trade or profession, or at worst a job in a factory or for the local council - and then they were going to get married and have a family, buy or rent their own home, and be a respected member of society.

    Inside all but the most criminal or offenders that is still the agenda of almost every young male if you bother to watch programs like Jeremy Kyle and actually listen to what they say, which nobody hardly ever does.

    This problem of out of control youth goes on, not because the punishments aren't adequate, but because the government doesn't care about them, i.e. see to it that there are adequate jobs in their area and that there is enough housing (including "social housing") so they can have a home of their own.

    That latter part is very important, because without a home of one's own, it is very hard to feel one has anything to protect and thus have a motivation to be law abiding.

    There are it appears around half a million people who are currently officially homeless for example, almost all men, and those people in themselves would be enough to cause all the crime.

    The main reason courts don't send more youths to prison is because there are not enough prisons to hold them. Prisons are incredibly expensive, and it would in fact be much cheaper to pay the young offenders £20k a year not to commit crime (paid work is obviously the saner solution).

    For example, one neighbourhood was being terrorised by young men stealing cars and driving them at high speed around the streets causing havoc.

    A scheme however was started up in which a small racing circuit was provided and a few cars, and a mechanic who gave his time to teaching the young people car mechanics and maintenance.

    All the car stealing stopped. The young idle hands and minds found something to do, and no longer upset the local community or stole anybody's car.

    Why didn't this scheme spread?

    Because the government doesn't care about crime, it doesn't care about the young people who create it, because it is simply not willing to spend the money.

    The governments and the respectable people like yourself have to understand that the lower class men have a right to a proper life, or they are going to cause havoc.

    Blame Mrs Thatcher and the feminists for this situation, who together it appears conspired to take away most of the lower class mens' jobs in industry and mining in as little as a decade.

    There are parts of Wales for example, where young men are joining up to be soldiers, and probably sooner or later going to die in a war zone, simply because it is the only job they can get.

    When polite and successful society stops caring about lower class young and working men, they stop caring about it, and either self-destruct with drugs or turn to crime. That's what's been happening ever more since the 1960s began, and why you have now got the fears and worries that you've got.

    It really is that simple. Think about it.

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by ronaharmony (U14830516) on Thursday, 23rd June 2011

    You hit the nail on the head. The idea that we are not animals and can be moulded into unnatural lifestyles has seriously back-fired.
    Young males have been metaphorically 'caged' into unemployment or unsuitable, low paid jobs like check-out assistant.
    Caged animals can be very unpredictable and dangerous.

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by jackntland (U5421248) on Thursday, 23rd June 2011

    Like yourself Wendy and almost every other law abiding person who can't afford personal bodyguards and private security, I am concerned about the violent, criminal and disorderly behaviour of a large part of the population.

    However, I feel you and all those like you need to realise what the problem really is instead of just demanding further draconian punishments.

    The problem is we've created a society which is excluding millions of men, especially young ones.

    Before the 1970s and Mrs Thatcher who destroyed most of British industry including all the mining communities, young men used to grow up believing they were going to have *a life*.

    i.e. they grew up believing they were going to get a job - a trade or profession, or at worst a job in a factory or for the local council - and then they were going to get married and have a family, buy or rent their own home, and be a respected member of society.

    Inside all but the most criminal or offenders that is still the agenda of almost every young male if you bother to watch programs like Jeremy Kyle and actually listen to what they say, which nobody hardly ever does.

    This problem of out of control youth goes on, not because the punishments aren't adequate, but because the government doesn't care about them, i.e. see to it that there are adequate jobs in their area and that there is enough housing (including "social housing") so they can have a home of their own.

    That latter part is very important, because without a home of one's own, it is very hard to feel one has anything to protect and thus have a motivation to be law abiding.

    There are it appears around half a million people who are currently officially homeless for example, almost all men, and those people in themselves would be enough to cause all the crime.

    The main reason courts don't send more youths to prison is because there are not enough prisons to hold them. Prisons are incredibly expensive, and it would in fact be much cheaper to pay the young offenders £20k a year not to commit crime (paid work is obviously the saner solution).

    For example, one neighbourhood was being terrorised by young men stealing cars and driving them at high speed around the streets causing havoc.

    A scheme however was started up in which a small racing circuit was provided and a few cars, and a mechanic who gave his time to teaching the young people car mechanics and maintenance.

    All the car stealing stopped. The young idle hands and minds found something to do, and no longer upset the local community or stole anybody's car.

    Why didn't this scheme spread?

    Because the government doesn't care about crime, it doesn't care about the young people who create it, because it is simply not willing to spend the money.

    The governments and the respectable people like yourself have to understand that the lower class men have a right to a proper life, or they are going to cause havoc.

    Blame Mrs Thatcher and the feminists for this situation, who together it appears conspired to take away most of the lower class mens' jobs in industry and mining in as little as a decade.

    There are parts of Wales for example, where young men are joining up to be soldiers, and probably sooner or later going to die in a war zone, simply because it is the only job they can get.

    When polite and successful society stops caring about lower class young and working men, they stop caring about it, and either self-destruct with drugs or turn to crime. That's what's been happening ever more since the 1960s began, and why you have now got the fears and worries that you've got.

    It really is that simple. Think about it. 
    While there are some elements of truth to your post BBC AH its only one view I for example would argue that the invention of, over indulgence of and near worship of the teenager along with the absence of moral authority and guidance from older folk have also contributed to the shocking attitude we often see from the young.

    Further the principle of effective discipline have removed from schools and streets, e.g. if I clip someone round the ear for setting fire to my hedge I get into trouble (or stabbed) instead of the Police booting the little torags backside and sending him on his way or why is tht our teachers are afraid of their pupils?

    The breakdown of family values and the lack of and undermining of positive male role models among our young also plays its role I feel.

    You are right about their being no right of passage anymore to adulthood but it is within our power to recreate this e.g. National Service, A citizenship ceremony where you formally take on the responsibilities of citizens etc. it doesnt take that much

    But our liberal elite scorn such things mostly because they often live their life as perpetual teenagers, infantalised and also very often refusing to takeresponsibility for their own actionsm their wealth sheilding them from any direct consequences mostly.

    Also the young dont automatically have to respect the old but the default shoud be that they do I feel.

    I feel you really miss what I feel is maybe the point of Wendy's question.

    What Wendy actually asked was why it is that for many those who suffer most as the result of the bad behaviour, (what ever its cause) rarely feature in the concerns of the professional meedja and other liberal elements within society?
    They being seemingly more concerned with ensuring the wrong doers human rights while in prison are looked after rather than trying to guarantee that we live in society where we dont need to be afraid of our own young.

    And Wendy doesnt call for Draconian punishments she simply makes what for me a is a fair point, Why shouldnt it be just the norm that if you break the laws of the land you have effectively forfiet some of your human rights?

    Wendy doesnt call for folk to flogged etc (I would) does she? If conditions in prison mean you have to urinate in bucket, tough should be our response, instead our society compensates folk who had too. How does this make anykind of sense?

    All your fine words BBC AH dont answer Wendy's question they may partly explain how we formed a disaffected underclass, but they dont expalin why the state should not assume law breakers have forfiet some rights.

    How to reverse the creation and perpetuation of the so called underclass has little to do with criminal justice I feel and more to do with creating or recreating the opportuntities you rightly describe as providing a clearer more certain future for particuarly working class young people.

    Interestingly you seem to rule out the military which has traditionally offered a route to educational and social opportunties (especially these days). We need a miltiary and it will just by virtue of demographic be drawn from the working class so why close down this route to personal advancement?

    We probably cannot recreate old industries but we should be looking to create new ones around which we can build more stable communities. Mass recycling could be one for example or more manual work on the land (but of course folk dont want to do that these days apparently hence why our fields are full of immigrant labour?).

    Your answer is eloquent and in places accurate but its way to simplistic,

    We for example shouldnt be afraid to tell people if they dont stick in in school and give themself the chance of further education vocational or otherwise then guess what? Picking crops in a field may be what you have to do and taking up crime as an alternative will not be excused in any way.

    Fact society largely gets what we toleratee and we tolerate way to much for me at least.

    Report message4

Back to top

About this Board

The BBC Religion and ethics message boards are now closed.

They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available.

Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.

We will be introducing a new blog later in the year. Aaqil Ahmed, Commissioning Editor Religion and Head of Religion & Ethics, has a blog with more details.

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

Opening times:
No longer applicable

This messageboard is post-moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.