Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

knife violence and murders among youth

but it would be a stretch to link much of the day to day violence to drugs. I think drugs related violence implies something directly related to the trade, rather than kid who mugged someone might buy an eighth if you see what I mean.
Cannabis isn't a major driver of petty crime. Heroin and cocaine are.
 
when I was at a PRU it did seem that most of the knife carrying kids seemed to have had them under the impression that there are already knives out there so you had to carry them or you would be defenceless and that it would act as a deterrent.

it seems a vicious cycle. I need a knife because everyone has knifes leading to lots of people actually carrying knives to knife normalcy.
This. And probably why you don’t get it so much in cities like Leeds? I feel so much for parents of teenage lads in London. It must be absolutely terrifying every time they’re out.
 
The idea this is drug related is wrong too... It's always been like this in London. In fact looking at the stats (pdf) it was worse in the 90s. I remember growing up as a boy violence was basically endemic. I lived in a nice house in Camden, but everywhere you went you looked over your shoulder. Mugging happened all the time, down any side street you care to chose. I can't definitely say what their motives were; boredom, attempt to get some sense of power. Drugs trade is just an arena for that violence and disaffection to play in.
I was mugged on queen's crescent in 93, no knives used tho
 
Thank god there are still some working class heroes that we can all look up to. :rolleyes:

I have not read that many of your posts so please excuse me if I have got the wrong impression but you do come across as a bit of a know-all twat. :thumbs:

You’ve clearly read enough for them to irk you, but not enough to form a coherent counter argument.
 
Twitter and FB is full of people thinking that a permanent Section 60 stop and search policy is the way to fix things.

I appreciate where you are coming from on this, and an upsurge in 'stop and search' is probably not the answer, do you have an answer?
 
I appreciate where you are coming from on this, and an upsurge in 'stop and search' is probably not the answer, do you have an answer?

Well, you're Scottish - there has been a lot of success in reducing knife crime in Scotland.
Some of the things done there may work, but some of the differences compared with the situation in London might mean some differences in approach.

And like has been said, even if done right it's going to take a long time.
 
Well, you're Scottish - there has been a lot of success in reducing knife crime in Scotland.
Some of the things done there may work, but some of the differences compared with the situation in London might mean some differences in approach.

And like has been said, even if done right it's going to take a long time.

We do still have knife crime, but only a fraction of that in London, thankfully.
 
Well, you're Scottish - there has been a lot of success in reducing knife crime in Scotland.
Some of the things done there may work, but some of the differences compared with the situation in London might mean some differences in approach.

And like has been said, even if done right it's going to take a long time.

Really interesting about the approach taken in Scotland. This is from The Guardian:

"The Scottish approach was quite conventional at first. “The police played a central role in the beginning,” explains Christine Goodall, who along with two other surgeons founded Medics Against Violence in 2008, a campaign group which works with health professionals, law enforcement, social services and other bodies to thwart violent behaviour. “They campaigned really hard to get the legislation around knife crime changed so people would be more likely to get a mandatory sentence. There was also, at the outset, a lot of stop and search.”

The average sentence for carrying a knife in Scotland has tripled, from four months in 2005-06 to an average of 13 months in 2014-15.

The issues, says Goodall, were concentrated in certain areas, particularly around Glasgow. Using intelligence from police operations, the VRU identified those people most likely to offend and asked them to voluntarily attend the sheriff’s court. “They didn’t have to come but they were encouraged to by community police, teachers and social workers and a lot of them did come,” says Goodall.

“The police had mapped all the gangs and when people got there they saw their own pictures up in the court. The session started off with a warning: ‘We know who you are and if you carry on with this lifestyle we’re going to come down on you really hard. We’re going to arrest you and we’ll arrest the rest of the gang. You will be going to prison if this carries on.’”

But at that point the intervention at the court took a more creative and holistic approach.

“We spoke about the injuries we see as a result of the violence and had a mum talk about losing her son. That really hit home,” explains Goodall. Finally, they were offered a way out. “There was help with housing, relocation, employment and training. They were given a number to call if they wanted to take the offer up. Huge numbers of them did so, were put into the programme, and are no longer in the gang lifestyle.”

The decision to treat knife crime as a public health issue – rather than simply a police matter – appears to have underpinned both the direction and support."
 
Really interesting about the approach taken in Scotland. This is from The Guardian:

"The Scottish approach was quite conventional at first. “The police played a central role in the beginning,” explains Christine Goodall, who along with two other surgeons founded Medics Against Violence in 2008, a campaign group which works with health professionals, law enforcement, social services and other bodies to thwart violent behaviour. “They campaigned really hard to get the legislation around knife crime changed so people would be more likely to get a mandatory sentence. There was also, at the outset, a lot of stop and search.”

The average sentence for carrying a knife in Scotland has tripled, from four months in 2005-06 to an average of 13 months in 2014-15.

The issues, says Goodall, were concentrated in certain areas, particularly around Glasgow. Using intelligence from police operations, the VRU identified those people most likely to offend and asked them to voluntarily attend the sheriff’s court. “They didn’t have to come but they were encouraged to by community police, teachers and social workers and a lot of them did come,” says Goodall.

“The police had mapped all the gangs and when people got there they saw their own pictures up in the court. The session started off with a warning: ‘We know who you are and if you carry on with this lifestyle we’re going to come down on you really hard. We’re going to arrest you and we’ll arrest the rest of the gang. You will be going to prison if this carries on.’”

But at that point the intervention at the court took a more creative and holistic approach.

“We spoke about the injuries we see as a result of the violence and had a mum talk about losing her son. That really hit home,” explains Goodall. Finally, they were offered a way out. “There was help with housing, relocation, employment and training. They were given a number to call if they wanted to take the offer up. Huge numbers of them did so, were put into the programme, and are no longer in the gang lifestyle.”

The decision to treat knife crime as a public health issue – rather than simply a police matter – appears to have underpinned both the direction and support."
Absolutely the right approach. Intensive, a lot of ups and downs, but a clear message underpinning everything that their lives and future have value.
 
So coming down hard on knife crime, with lots of stop and search and heavy penalties, coupled with practical support with housing, employment, etc. seems to have worked. Why can't we have something similar in London?
 
So coming down hard on knife crime, with lots of stop and search and heavy penalties, coupled with practical support with housing, employment, etc. seems to have worked. Why can't we have something similar in London?

In that article, some of the obstacles to doing it in *quite* the same way are outlined.
 
So coming down hard on knife crime, with lots of stop and search and heavy penalties, coupled with practical support with housing, employment, etc. seems to have worked. Why can't we have something similar in London?

London is about 15 times the size of Glasgow. The cost of such programs is quite high, but of course, if they save one person from getting their guts spilled onto the pavement, then the saving from that is huge.

A serious knife injury can easily top £50k to treat. ICU is about £2k a day on its own.
 
Really interesting about the approach taken in Scotland. This is from The Guardian:

"The Scottish approach was quite conventional at first. “The police played a central role in the beginning,” explains Christine Goodall, who along with two other surgeons founded Medics Against Violence in 2008, a campaign group which works with health professionals, law enforcement, social services and other bodies to thwart violent behaviour. “They campaigned really hard to get the legislation around knife crime changed so people would be more likely to get a mandatory sentence. There was also, at the outset, a lot of stop and search.”

The average sentence for carrying a knife in Scotland has tripled, from four months in 2005-06 to an average of 13 months in 2014-15.

The issues, says Goodall, were concentrated in certain areas, particularly around Glasgow. Using intelligence from police operations, the VRU identified those people most likely to offend and asked them to voluntarily attend the sheriff’s court. “They didn’t have to come but they were encouraged to by community police, teachers and social workers and a lot of them did come,” says Goodall.

“The police had mapped all the gangs and when people got there they saw their own pictures up in the court. The session started off with a warning: ‘We know who you are and if you carry on with this lifestyle we’re going to come down on you really hard. We’re going to arrest you and we’ll arrest the rest of the gang. You will be going to prison if this carries on.’”

But at that point the intervention at the court took a more creative and holistic approach.

“We spoke about the injuries we see as a result of the violence and had a mum talk about losing her son. That really hit home,” explains Goodall. Finally, they were offered a way out. “There was help with housing, relocation, employment and training. They were given a number to call if they wanted to take the offer up. Huge numbers of them did so, were put into the programme, and are no longer in the gang lifestyle.”

The decision to treat knife crime as a public health issue – rather than simply a police matter – appears to have underpinned both the direction and support."
what we get in London is the stop and search without this bit
“There was help with housing, relocation, employment and training. They were given a number to call if they wanted to take the offer up. Huge numbers of them did so, were put into the programme, and are no longer in the gang lifestyle.”
and without it, the stick bit is counterproductive
 
what we get in London is the stop and search without this bit
“There was help with housing, relocation, employment and training. They were given a number to call if they wanted to take the offer up. Huge numbers of them did so, were put into the programme, and are no longer in the gang lifestyle.”
and without it, the stick bit is counterproductive
And tbh I would suspect that with this bit but without the stick, there would still have been similar results. Tougher sentencing, etc, does well to swell prisons, but I'm not sure how effective it is at anything else, and it risks entrenching the problem rather than solving it.

In New York, violent crime has continued to fall since courts ruled its aggressive stop and search policy unconstitutional. Like London, its measures had appalling racial bias. And like London, I suspect it just made the problem even worse. It just identifies the police as the enemy for whole sections of society, criminal or not.

New York City cops stopped and frisked nearly 700,000 people, mostly young black and Latino men, in 2011. These numbers dropped to less than 46,000 in 2014, after a federal court ruled the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk procedures unconstitutional. In 2016, NYPD officers stopped roughly 12,400 people.

“Like many conservatives, I had grave concerns about curtailing the New York City police department’s controversial tactic of stopping and frisking potential suspects for weapons,” writes Kyle Smith, a critic of Mayor Bill de Blasio, in a National Review article, “We Were Wrong About Stop and Frisk.” “Crime is literally off the charts – the low end of the charts. To compare today’s crime rate to even that of ten years ago is to observe a breathtaking decline.”

Why New York crime has plunged to record lows
 
what we get in London is the stop and search without this bit
“There was help with housing, relocation, employment and training. They were given a number to call if they wanted to take the offer up. Huge numbers of them did so, were put into the programme, and are no longer in the gang lifestyle.”
and without it, the stick bit is counterproductive

Elements of the "stick" bit are also more difficult; relatively speaking, in Scotland there was a lot less distrust of the police in minority communities, which meant the initial increases in stop-and-search had more consent.
 
what we get in London is the stop and search without this bit
“There was help with housing, relocation, employment and training. They were given a number to call if they wanted to take the offer up. Huge numbers of them did so, were put into the programme, and are no longer in the gang lifestyle.”
and without it, the stick bit is counterproductive
Police enforcement, operations and prosecutions are only ever a sticking plaster ( really no pun intended) . Old bill actions can buy a temporary respite or move a problem from somewhere to somewhere else. Any sane system would use the police to create a space that other agencies and communities could then work in to address the more systematic issues.

This is almost never what happens.
 
Police enforcement, operations and prosecutions are only ever a sticking plaster ( really no pun intended) . Old bill actions can buy a temporary respite or move a problem from somewhere to somewhere else. Any sane system would use the police to create a space that other agencies and communities could then work in to address the more systematic issues.

This is almost never what happens.

We know this but presently we have a Govt that has cut services to the bone. I’d argue for a change of system than Govt (obvs) but in the meantime what can be done with what we’ve got?
Just as social resources are moved away from working class communities so are policing ones. Surely it isn’t such an anti-radical move to demand that the police start doing what we pay them to do? This wouldn’t happen in the leafy avenues of Chelsea or Kensington so why is it acceptable anywhere else?
 
We know this but presently we have a Govt that has cut services to the bone. I’d argue for a change of system than Govt (obvs) but in the meantime what can be done with what we’ve got?
Just as social resources are moved away from working class communities so are policing ones. Surely it isn’t such an anti-radical move to demand that the police start doing what we pay them to do? This wouldn’t happen in the leafy avenues of Chelsea or Kensington so why is it acceptable anywhere else?
The poor are massively over policed as it is. The reason* you don’t get multiple stabbings there isn’t that the TSG are out doing section 60 operations on the leafy avenues of Kensington and Chelsea.

* Obvs there are multiple reasons, but my train’s getting in.
 
Back
Top Bottom