I live in rural Kent, in a large village of approximately 5000 and 18 miles from the nearest town. There is a group of "chavs" that do all the petty crime in the place and they range from 18 down to about 6. Although the younger ones are learning from their peers they are definitely the worst of a bad bunch and there is no way that they do not know what they are doing.
LOWER THE AGE! Then make them break rocks or something.
What idiots write these 'Reports' someone who has obviously never been robbed no doubt. Things like this just wind me up. Bring back the Electric chair for any chavs caught robbing :-)
The report, which is a collection of essays from academics and campaigners, claimed there needs to be an urgent review in the approach to "children in trouble".
So tell us what the new approaches are that are being suggested not just pick one headline grabbing "raise age to 18" quote and use it with no context or justification.
Looking at it another way, surely raising the age barrier would lower the amount of criminals in later life? Kids wouldn't have the criminal background, hence they would find it easier to gain respectable jobs.
Sod this "Bring back the cane, we need to get tougher approach". Certain age groups think they're all bleeding angels.
Compulsuary national service for all those aged between 16 and 19 who are not in either full time education or in full time employment.
If nothing else it would dramatically improve the quality of pub fight.
Imagine that sense of national pride you would feel as laying prostrate you see your face reflecting in an immaculately shined boot as it arcs towards your face.
[cite]Posted By: Carter[/cite]Compulsuary national service for all those aged between 16 and 19 who are not in either full time education or in full time employment.
If nothing else it would dramatically improve the quality of pub fight.
Imagine that sense of national pride you would feel as laying prostrate you see your face reflecting in an immaculately shined boot as it arcs towards your face.
No, compulsory National service for everyone under 35. It would make a man of you Carter. Tour of duty in Seirra leone and then Iraq.
Without reading the report I can kind of understand. I have worked in the past (quite a few years ago now) with some young offenders and to be honest what they didn't need was tougher punishment. Many of them are victims of circumstance. Kids are for the most part easily led, either by their peers or their parents. the key thing is to lead them up the right path. I know I sound like some beardy liberal, but I don't really care. I worry about a society where a majority think it's reasonable or sensible to lock children up.
Problem with the "bring back national service" is that those in the armed forces are professional soldiers, they don't want to have to mix with these pond life who think they're hard because they can roam round in groups and beat up individuals on their own. Without boring people with this, the problem does not start when these kids turn 13 or whenever, it starts out with their awful, awful parents who could not give a stuff about their kids and just turn them loose. I think its about time that the parents of those u-16's committing serious offences also faced legal action for failing to supervise their child properly. It should be a three strikes and you're out policy for the parents, they get two chances to drag the kid back into line or the pair of them pay the penalty by a nice stint at HMP.
Draughtsmen, comms guys, mechanics, sparks, chippies, engineers, IT specialists are options.
You don't have to be a grunt, I just think things have got to a point of zero respect for authority in this country now that something compulsory like this is the only way forward. Schemes only work for those who want to change.
but we have the highest prison population in Europe and have run out of space as we are locking so many people up.
Maybe we could learn something from what is done in Holland or Germany and maybe not but that article gives no clues as to what they do differently or why they having a higher age works for them, if it does.
I agree with everything said about parents not giving a monkeys about what theri little angels are up to and how the punishment should be aimed at the parents but does anyone think that would solve anything?
Short sharp shock. It's what used to happen, if a juvenile appeared one time too many in front of a JP or judge they would be given a choice. Clink or a spell in the forces. I don't know about any of you but even time spent in an infantry regiment would be preferable to spending 23 hours a day locked up developing a drug habit with some real nice men to spend time with.
'Highest prison population in Europe'....meaningless statistic. We have far higher rates of crime than almost anywhere else in Europe and imprison far fewer people in relation than almost anyone else. The end result is that criminality pays off better here than elsewhere.
I agree with Henry, very tabliod style of reporting, however someone somewhere obviously suggested 18. So they can get married, smoke, drive a car and join the army - though probably not all at once - but they don't know wrong from right? Pull the other one.
The age should be determined by the time they ask for their first item of designer clothing, if they know the difference between Adidas and Primark, then they know right from wrong...
The age should be determined by the time they ask for their first item of designer clothing, if they know the difference between Adidas and Primark, then they know right from wrong...
No, they should be offered a normal cotton shirt or a nylon replica shirt. When they choose the first they know right from wrong. ; - )
Comments
LOWER THE AGE! Then make them break rocks or something.
The report, which is a collection of essays from academics and campaigners, claimed there needs to be an urgent review in the approach to "children in trouble".
So tell us what the new approaches are that are being suggested not just pick one headline grabbing "raise age to 18" quote and use it with no context or justification.
Serious gang culture has always been an inner city thing. Now its reaching out to Woolwich, Bromley etc, and spreading wider fast....
i heard briefly that some kid got stabbed in south east london in a rival gang fight, anyone no where it was?
Beckenham
Sod this "Bring back the cane, we need to get tougher approach". Certain age groups think they're all bleeding angels.
If nothing else it would dramatically improve the quality of pub fight.
Imagine that sense of national pride you would feel as laying prostrate you see your face reflecting in an immaculately shined boot as it arcs towards your face.
No, compulsory National service for everyone under 35. It would make a man of you Carter. Tour of duty in Seirra leone and then Iraq.
Not so sure I fancy Iraq though. Belize is nice, as are the Balkans. I defy anyone not to enjoy themselves whilst learning within those environments
Without boring people with this, the problem does not start when these kids turn 13 or whenever, it starts out with their awful, awful parents who could not give a stuff about their kids and just turn them loose.
I think its about time that the parents of those u-16's committing serious offences also faced legal action for failing to supervise their child properly.
It should be a three strikes and you're out policy for the parents, they get two chances to drag the kid back into line or the pair of them pay the penalty by a nice stint at HMP.
You don't have to be a grunt, I just think things have got to a point of zero respect for authority in this country now that something compulsory like this is the only way forward. Schemes only work for those who want to change.
Maybe we could learn something from what is done in Holland or Germany and maybe not but that article gives no clues as to what they do differently or why they having a higher age works for them, if it does.
Short sharp shock. It's what used to happen, if a juvenile appeared one time too many in front of a JP or judge they would be given a choice. Clink or a spell in the forces. I don't know about any of you but even time spent in an infantry regiment would be preferable to spending 23 hours a day locked up developing a drug habit with some real nice men to spend time with.
The age should be determined by the time they ask for their first item of designer clothing, if they know the difference between Adidas and Primark, then they know right from wrong...
No, they should be offered a normal cotton shirt or a nylon replica shirt. When they choose the first they know right from wrong. ; - )