The police state is nearly here - Guardian

[Dhimmi]

I'm just surprised he did not announce that all babies born to "criminal" families are to be handcuffed on birth by state midwives/baby prison officers.......

What a ridiculous suggestion... everyone knows there's not enough midwives.

 

[fela fan]

Probably the same as you are doing about the situation where you live.

I'm not living in a police state. I'm living in a place that is moving towards democracy, not away from it.

 

[Azrael]

There's no automatic conflict between democracy and draconian police powers. In recent opinion polls the majority supported tyrannical policies (abolition of jury trial, week-long interrogation without a lawyer present, control orders). 80 per cent supported control orders. Since democracy is simply the process of enacting the majority opinion it's a morally neutral concept. Treating liberty and democracy as synonymous is foolish and dangerous.

The government has decieved people into thinking that stripping away ancient procedural safeguards is the only way to be safe again. Liberals are complicit by talking like civil liberties (now rebranded as "human rights") are all about coddling and excusing wicked men. In a sense they're correct: civil liberties and human rights are very, very different things. Civil liberties regulate how freedoms are removed; human rights state that they cannot be.

Useful for criminals; disastrous for everyone else.

 

[Luther Blissett]

PM given Home Office split plans:

Mr Reid has made clear he wants to turn the Home Office into a new ministry of security, with responsibility for police and counter-terrorism, while hiving off prisons and probation to a ministry of justice based on the Department for Constitutional Affairs.

The BBC reported that reorganisation would see counter-terrorism policy co-ordinated by elected officials with a national security council holding monthly meetings chaired by the Prime Minister.

The Home Office would concentrate on counter-terrorism, policing, crime, border controls, immigration, ID cards and passports.

Sentencing policy, prisons and probation will go to the ministry of justice.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uklatest/story/0,,-6516229,00.html

 

[Azrael]

The Home Office began as exactly that, an office concerned with domestic policy. This split is only continuing a centuries-long process of erosion that chipped away its functions to leave only law and order (more or less, a few bizarre anomalies like regulating daylight saving time remain).

That said, the thought of a Ministry of Security run separately from a Ministry of Justice is truly disturbing; however, I fear it is also perfectly accurate.

 

[Darios]

return the focus to the feral thugs which blight our lives far more frequently than exploding fanatics.

AMEN to that.

I meet too many socialists, anarchists and others who may consider themselves "progressive" who appear to be soft touches when it concerns the kind of crime that regularly blights people's lives - and usually the people whom they claim to stand up for - the 'working' and 'under' classes.

I always thought that it was logical to consider organised or career criminals who use coercion, exploitation and force (or threat of force) against people as natural enemies of the anarchists - just as natural an enemy as the state. Why do so many anarchists in my experience not appear to hold this view?

What is more, it opens up a fruitful arena for direct action. Instead of parachuting into a working class area and preaching to the great unwashed masses about how they "shoudn't" vote BNP or they "should" oppose the war in Iraq, or [insert issue], perhaps people who consider themselves "progressive" could grow some balls and direct some of their angst, actions and ingenuity away from the police and the state and towards people who are seen to *directly* impinge on the lives of others.

 

[Luther Blissett]

Read this: George Orwell: Second Thoughts on James Burnham

 

[Azrael]

I always thought that it was logical to consider organised or career criminals who use coercion, exploitation and force (or threat of force) against people as natural enemies of the anarchists - just as natural an enemy as the state. Why do so many anarchists in my experience not appear to hold this view?

I couldn't speak for anarchists, baby eating or otherwise (I'm a conservative), but the sloppier liberal wing of the Left tends to view criminals as victims of circumstances engineered by a corrupt system. Therefore they commit crime for reasons beyond their control and can't be truly bad. (Not that the Zoe Williams of the world want to call anyone "bad". Unless they buy non-Fairtrade goods or some other equally heinous act.)

Criminals, funnily enough, love this thinking and routinely exploit it for all its worth.

A dislike of moral absolutes, a worldview rooted in idealism, and bizarrely, a knee-jerk desire to empathize with the most hated "minorities" seem to play their parts.

While I wouldn't be up for a spot of community vigilantism, I think the alienation of the people from their law is a very dangerous thing. It's called the common law, it's supposed to belong to us all. The draconian response people suffer when they attempt to defend themselves, or impose a citizen's arrest, speaks of a state desperate to have a complete monopoly on violence. Law abiding people increasingly see the police as agents of a state working against their interests. The CPS charging bureaucracy and the gutting of our penal system only bear this out.

Personally I find the view that poverty causes, or lays the foundations of, crime to be without evidence and downright insulting to the vast majority of poor people who don't use material hardship as an excuse to commit felonies. It suggests that only the rich can afford a conscience. How patronizing! That thinking directly underpins this latest bout of totalitarianism.

 

[Luther Blissett]

What is more, it opens up a fruitful arena for direct action. Instead of parachuting into a working class area and preaching to the great unwashed masses about how they "shoudn't" vote BNP or they "should" oppose the war in Iraq, or [insert issue], perhaps people who consider themselves "progressive" could grow some balls and direct some of their angst, actions and ingenuity away from the police and the state and towards people who are seen to *directly* impinge on the lives of others.

Directing actions towards community is one way forward. Those 'feral kids' need somewhere to go.

Try talking to them. Ask them what they would rather be doing instead of hanging outside. They aim to be able to meet their friends outside of their parents' environment. Wouldn't you all rather be indoors right now, in a youth club? But there aren't any - indoors would be nicer. Yes, we'd love a pool table, but one wouldn't be enough, cos we'd get bored waiting for it. Will it cost a quid a go? We can't afford that. 20p? Maybe. 10p? Definitely. What else would you like? Somewhere we can watch videos. A video library? Yes, cos we can't afford shop prices. You could watch them there, no borrowing, but we could use subs to buy a new video once a week(no pirates, mind you - ok, they say, looking at each other). Would you be willing to pay a one off membership? How much would it be? A few quid - £3 quid? Sounds ok. What do we get? Well, you get a membership pack(tries not to smile), and there'll be the coach trips in the holidays which will cost a few quid for petrol. Where to? How does fossil hunting near Scarborough sound? Sounds great! What else do you want? Shouldn't you be doing your homework in the evening (they look at the ground). You need some help with that? Would you like a homework lab with someone who can help out? Maybe a few computers. We don't have one at home. Will it have internet? Yes. No-one's ever asked us what we wanted before. Can we play music too? Yes, why not. We'd have to have some ground rules though, but you'd all be involved in making them, else it'd fall apart, would you be up for that?

These kids certainly don't bite when approached, and they need to be involved in any plans that the state plots from it's Ivory Towers for their futures.

 

[TeeJay]

Is it a joking or deluded matter that the country is on the verge of entering police statedom?

I know the british are good at humour, especially in rough times, but this police state thing is just about upon you.

Are the police any good at solving crimes that involve the people as victims, eg burglary, rape, murder; or are they no more than puppets of the government, themselves puppets of others not so openly in power?

If the british press wonders if the country is nearly a police state, then i'd say that it has already become one.

What you all gonna do about it??

It makes me laugh to hear you going on about this in the UK after you seemed to be supporting the military coup out in Thialand, from what I can remember of your posts - or maybe you were just saying that 'it wasn't too bad' and it was nothing to worry about etc.

You always seem to be very alarmed at the way things are going in the UK, despite seeming to have an exaggerated impression about how things are. The UK is not a police state or military dictatorship and is nowhere near being one IMO. On the other hand you seem veruy blazé about what has happened in Thailand - somewhere with an - at times - murderous police force and somewhere that has had a military coup recently.

 

[Azrael]

No-one's ever asked us what we wanted before.

I rather thought the social work brigade had made a career of it.

This stuff about "feral kids" is a straw man. The lack of a youth centre might explain their hanging around the streets. (Although youth centres have a habit of going up in flames on sink estates.) It utterly fails to explain the common thuggery, the bullying, the intimidation, the loutish attitude, the violence and muggings, the incessant theft, the contempt for society, the amusement at suffering, and general shitty behaviour towards anyone trying to go about their business. Those are all deliberate moral choices, and if a youth centre is needed to bribe the people making them to be good, it speaks damningly of these individuals' self-restraint, goodness, and ability to function in society.

I'm baffled and disturbed that anyone's first response to violent criminals is to pander to their wants instead of imposing punishment and demanding they atone for their wrongdoing.

Personally I don't buy the "feral children" bullshit. All I see are thugs surrounded by hangers-on, who routinely terrorise vulnerable people of all ages and classes for fun. They do not need understanding because they're not hard to understand: they're immature louts whom have gained the impression of being untouchable from a weak, remote and bureaucracy-ridden justice system. Some structure and discipline in their lives, backed with a healthy respect for authority and fear of punishment, would work wonders. But no, let's instead blame society at large and wage a ceaseless and pointless war looking for some mythical "root cause" that probably doesn't even exist.

Meanwhile liberty is down the police station, having its DNA swabbed.

 

[Jografer]

A police state announced in a newspaper... right.... no contradiction there then...

 

[TAE]

I'm not living in a police state. I'm living in a place that is moving towards democracy, not away from it.

Sure.

 

[Luther Blissett]

ID Cards:

Blunkett is given job at identity card firm
US company is in the running to run controversial scheme in Britain

Gaby Hinsliff, political editor
Sunday March 25, 2007
The Observer

David Blunkett has taken a job advising a company interested in bidding to run Britain's controversial identity cards programme, a policy he was the architect of and championed in government.
The former Home Secretary took up the post for the Texas-based security firm Entrust, which specialises in securing digital information and combating identity theft, earlier this month. The firm already provides software for the Spanish national ID card system and has formally registered an interest in the British project.Blunkett is bound by a two-year ban on lobbying British ministers and officials from the date he resigned as Work and Pensions Secretary in November 2005. That does not expire until this November. His spokeswoman insisted yesterday that he would not be working in Britain for the company and would only advise on overseas work.
However, David Davis, the shadow Home secretary, last night attacked the decision, saying: 'David Blunkett was a staunch champion of ID cards and involved right at the heart of the project. The British public will be rightly sceptical about his involvement with a company that could benefit lucratively from this £20bn scheme.

Clarke on defensive as MPs criticise ID cards as illiberal and ineffective
In reality most of the alleged benefits, from tackling benefit and bank fraud to combating crime and terrorism, could be more effectively addressed by other means which would also be cheaper, Mr Davis said.

"Today, the party that in 1945 promised that generation welfare from cradle to grave is about to give this generation surveillance from cradle to grave," Mr Davis said. Labour critics such as Glenda Jackson and David Winnick agreed with Mr Davis's concerns that the proposed register could be accessed for illegal purposes.
A competent maths undergraduate could hack into the system and the police had admitted that a disabling virus could be installed, said Mr Davis. A "disgruntled minister or civil servant" would also be able to obtain personal infor mation to smear an opponent, he claimed.

SURVEILLANCE:

Warning on spread of state surveillance
Richard Norton-Taylor
Thursday April 21, 2005
The Guardian

Governments are building a "global registration and surveillance infrastructure" in the US-led "war on terror", civil liberty groups warned yesterday. The aim is to monitor the movements and activities of entire populations in what campaigners call "an unprecedented project of social control". The warning came from the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group, including the American Civil Liberties Union, and Statewatch, a UK-based bulletin which tracks developments in the EU.[...]

To achieve their ends, they say, governments have suspended judicial oversight over law enforcement agents and public officials, concentrated unprecedented power in the hands of the executive arm of government, and rolled back criminal law and due process protections that balance the rights of individuals against the power of the state.

These initiatives, say the civil liberty groups, are not effective in identifying terrorists.

And this message from America:

Earlier this year, thousands of peaceful protestors in New York were fingerprinted by the NYPD, resulting in a neat little record of "dissidents" exercising their American rights...

Blair's world may have had its roots in 2001 when a terrorist attack in the United States triggered off new homeland security policies. But the surveillance systems originally designed to “look for terrorist behavior” were expanded to "look for deviant behavior.”

And this is where the apathetic crowd, the ones who say, “Who cares? As long as you’re not doing anything wrong, why should you fret?” reveal how one-dimensional their argument is. Were the men under Taliban rule doing something wrong when they didn’t grow their beards a specific length? Were Jewish families wrong for being Jewish under Nazi rule? Or perhaps the pro-democracy students at Tianamen Square? Or witches under Torqamada’s administration?

In our own age, we have seen a White House administration which equates dissent with being a terrorist. We’ve heard George H. Bush state that he didn’t think atheists should be considered American citizens – an opinion so laughably absurd it makes me wonder if either of the Bushes bothered reading the Constitution they both swore to defend, preserve, and protect.
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=22430

 

[The Black Hand]

Blair's corporate buddies are selling the State as much 'security' crap as they can before he leaves office. My guess is if we asked police if these gadgets will help them solve crime, or prevent crime, or solve the plight of disaffected youth, they'll say 'NO'.

You're right - they need watching carefully.
Blair could have lifted this from a 60s Fabian pamphlett
and http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tony_Blair

Already part of the MOD has been split up, following 'the American Model' - first an agency is formed, then it is sold off to (usually) American corporations. Part of the UK's Military Research & Development has been sold to the US Carlyle Group since Blair took power: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QinetiQ

The American Model won't affect SIS though (Security Services MI5, MI6) - instead, private corporations that offer terrorism risk assessment, hostage negotiation, and surveillance are gaining ground in the UK and gaining more business on the back of 7/7 (Inkerman Group).

Instead of using our existing police force, private security firms are now popular in corporate circles. They've been used recently by two companies who are riding roughshod over political processes and the rule of law (npower, agrexco).

Basically, this looks to be the way the Govt. is heading: breaking up state-run institutions - the Military, the Prisons, the Psychiatric Hospitals, as well as Hospitals, Clinics and Supermarket-style General Practioners (eg. ASDA)

Further worries are that if we allow the State to implement high-tech consumer solutions, derived from obscure think-tankers who have quiet links to various corporations, when the reality that the problems are mainly sociological and can only be solved by people working with and caring for other people, then the State is wasting the taxes given to it by it's citizens and acting as a sales conduit for coroporate business, rather than administering to it's citizens' needs.

We don't need expensive thinktanks or high-tech gadgets to solve our social problems - we need the Govt to work for us - instead of syphoning our taxes away to multinational corporations.

What about pumping billions into community centres and involving those communities in their creation from the word go - getting onto the streets and asking those 'feral' kids what they'd rather be doing?

Attica - we could construct a questionnaire, and get urbanites across the country to get onto the streets in the evening and ask those kids questions about what they want, where they'd rather be - indoors playing pool or outdoors, or watching a movie from a community video library, rather than hanging on the streets, being moved on by twitchy neighbours and disgruntled cops.

The Govt. spend tens of thousands on crap think tanks, and always come up with more and more 'controls', more gadgets, and more laws, never thinking to involve The Citizens how they'd like to see their taxes are invested. The current processes are a sham.

I can't disagree - there is certainly a big action research project for us here. We'll discuss this more on Tuesday?

 

[The Black Hand]

I'm not living in a police state. I'm living in a place that is moving towards democracy, not away from it.

Hahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahha

 

[The Black Hand]

A police state announced in a newspaper... right.... no contradiction there then...

You haven't even read the thread never mind the link.

 

[The Black Hand]

I couldn't speak for anarchists, baby eating or otherwise (I'm a conservative), but the sloppier liberal wing of the Left tends to view criminals as victims of circumstances engineered by a corrupt system. Therefore they commit crime for reasons beyond their control and can't be truly bad. (Not that the Zoe Williams of the world want to call anyone "bad". Unless they buy non-Fairtrade goods or some other equally heinous act.)

Criminals, funnily enough, love this thinking and routinely exploit it for all its worth.

A dislike of moral absolutes, a worldview rooted in idealism, and bizarrely, a knee-jerk desire to empathize with the most hated "minorities" seem to play their parts.

While I wouldn't be up for a spot of community vigilantism, I think the alienation of the people from their law is a very dangerous thing. It's called the common law, it's supposed to belong to us all. The draconian response people suffer when they attempt to defend themselves, or impose a citizen's arrest, speaks of a state desperate to have a complete monopoly on violence. Law abiding people increasingly see the police as agents of a state working against their interests. The CPS charging bureaucracy and the gutting of our penal system only bear this out.

Personally I find the view that poverty causes, or lays the foundations of, crime to be without evidence and downright insulting to the vast majority of poor people who don't use material hardship as an excuse to commit felonies. It suggests that only the rich can afford a conscience. How patronizing! That thinking directly underpins this latest bout of totalitarianism.

COugh - Bullshit.

 

[Luther Blissett]

Ere, when did Blair officially resign?

bound by a two-year ban on lobbying British ministers and officials from the date he resigned as [INSERT JOB TITLE HERE] in [INSERT DATE HERE]. That does not expire until this [INSERT EXPIRY DATE]

Lawyers, eh!

 

[The Black Hand]

There's no automatic conflict between democracy and draconian police powers. In recent opinion polls the majority supported tyrannical policies (abolition of jury trial, week-long interrogation without a lawyer present, control orders). 80 per cent supported control orders. Since democracy is simply the process of enacting the majority opinion it's a morally neutral concept. Treating liberty and democracy as synonymous is foolish and dangerous.

The government has decieved people into thinking that stripping away ancient procedural safeguards is the only way to be safe again. Liberals are complicit by talking like civil liberties (now rebranded as "human rights") are all about coddling and excusing wicked men. In a sense they're correct: civil liberties and human rights are very, very different things. Civil liberties regulate how freedoms are removed; human rights state that they cannot be.

Useful for criminals; disastrous for everyone else.

Its bullshit to blame the 'liberals' - historically innacurate. The rule of law in Britain was built by capitalists and the aristocracy. And there is a serious and fatal contradiction between 'democracy' and 'draconian police powers'... and this is if you accept that the police are neutral in the first place [which they are clearly not e.g. in any crisis situation in history]. Azzhol is a vicious and silly right winger....

 

[Luther Blissett]

Even the police are upset. They seem to distrust Mr. Reid's plans for them.
They also don't seem happy with the idea of expensive gadgets to 'detect crime' (that means more surveillance and pre-crime crap)
http://www.gopetition.co.uk/petitions/real-policing-in-britain.html

 

[detective-boy]

Oh well if the liberal intelligensia like the Guardian say a Police State is around the corner then it must be true.

Or a Police Squad anyway ...

 

[detective-boy]

I'm not living in a police state. I'm living in a place that is moving towards democracy, not away from it.

Yeah. Right.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6442331.stm

 

[The Black Hand]

Personally I don't buy the "feral children" bullshit. All I see are thugs surrounded by hangers-on, who routinely terrorise vulnerable people of all ages and classes for fun. They do not need understanding because they're not hard to understand: they're immature louts whom have gained the impression of being untouchable from a weak, remote and bureaucracy-ridden justice system. Some structure and discipline in their lives, backed with a healthy respect for authority and fear of punishment, would work wonders. But no, let's instead blame society at large and wage a ceaseless and pointless war looking for some mythical "root cause" that probably doesn't even exist.

Meanwhile liberty is down the police station, having its DNA swabbed.

CouGh CoUgH Bullshit.

 

[guinnessdrinker]

I'm not living in a police state. I'm living in a place that is moving towards democracy, not away from it.

but britain may be evolving toward a democratic and police state. only the police under their elected political masters have ever greater powers to subjugate people for the political will of our so called "representatives" and our perceived wishes, as interpreted by their think tanks for their own undisclosed purposes.

 

[Darios]

Directing actions towards community is one way forward. Those 'feral kids' need somewhere to go.

Try talking to them.

It wasn't "feral kids" I had in mind. At least directly. And yes I have "tried talking to them". Normally when they're setting about stoving someone's head in. Apparently they can do what they want because they "is gangsta innit" and I don't show them "respec'" and if they're non-white then apparently I'm "racist" for interfering.

What I had more in mind - as I stated - were the organised and career criminals. Those who, on a regular basis, set about stealing from, intimidating, hurting, sometimes even murdering people for no good reason other than that they're vulnerable and easy targets. I'm talking career burglars, gangs who extort through violence and fear of violence, daytripping muggers, doorstep 'officials' who batter and steal from pensioners who let them in and so on. In many cases these people's identities are well known and they often target the community (or a neighboring community) that they live in.

What do you suggest in these cases Luther? "Talking to them"?

And Attica, do you have any more breathtakingly rational critiques of Azreal other than "cough cough bullshit"?

 

[The Black Hand]

It wasn't "feral kids" I had in mind. At least directly. And yes I have "tried talking to them". Normally when they're setting about stoving someone's head in. Apparently they can do what they want because they "is gangsta innit" and I don't show them "respec'" and if they're non-white then apparently I'm "racist" for interfering.

What I had more in mind - as I stated - were the organised and career criminals. Those who, on a regular basis, set about stealing from, intimidating, hurting, sometimes even murdering people for no good reason other than that they're vulnerable and easy targets. I'm talking career burglars, gangs who extort through violence and fear of violence, daytripping muggers, doorstep 'officials' who batter and steal from pensioners who let them in and so on. In many cases these people's identities are well known and they often target the community (or a neighboring community) that they live in.

What do you suggest in these cases Luther? "Talking to them"?

And Attica, do you have any more breathtakingly rational critiques of Azreal other than "cough cough bullshit"?

If all that you say is so blindingly obvious there are enough laws to convict and enough police to arrest already. You are just hyping something up with no basis in reality - no actual real events... Not gonna waste my time on Azzhol, i really have better things to do

 

[Luther Blissett]

About a week after I'd had a little chat about what the kids on the corner wanted, I noticed a blue car pull up down the side of the bakery factory. 19+ smokin spliffs. The kids gathered round - the door open, attracted by the glamour of the music and someone with a fag to blag. The car stereo on - and ominous blue smoke spirallling outta the driver's side.

My next chat with them felt more urgent. I tried to hide the fear of knowing what little hope they could imagine for their own futures could be sucked outta them thru getting hooked on yorkshire soap at the tender age of 13-15. Already the local school turned a blind eye to the playground drugs problem - teachers were all temps - they were difficult to keep.

These kids weren't criminalised when I spoke to them, but a week after, they were easy prey to dealer-twats on speed trying to sell them formula weed.

They weren't 'feral' yet - they all had homes to go to - just ordinary kids hanging out on street corners and behind terraced houses, in the loading bays of urban retail parks on skateboards, in the toddler-playground after dark, concealed in bushy dens at the edge of the park.

If we, who in their eyes, represent 'society', don't show some care for their present and future security and comfort, if we don't bear some responsiblity for facilitating and running community spaces that they feel involved in, then we may as well shove a ketamine laced solvent spliff in their hand and hit them over the head with a brick until they truly believe they've got no future.

 

[Darios]

If all that you say is so blindingly obvious there are enough laws to convict and enough police to arrest already.

Given the topic of discussion and what I have said already, that's definitely a non-sequitur. Azreal sees a solution primarily in the form of restructuring the current justice and policing system I see a solution primarily in a change of attitudes amongst the public and the empowering of individuals and communities to act in their own interests instead of waiting for "someone" to "do something about it".

You are just hyping something up with no basis in reality - no actual real events...

That's right. "Everyone" knows that there are no communities anywhere in the country who are blighted by crime, usually from within the community. Everyone's safe and happy. No such thing as protection rackets or career criminals or people who are vicious enough to constantly target the most vulnerable members of their communities. Obviously you don't need to look
for any evidence because you a priori know that these things don't happen right?

All those hundreds of times I've seen, with my own beady peepers, people get a beating must have been daydreams. I'm wondering what has been put in the water because, as I don't do drugs, I'd like to know what process led the police to believe my hallucinations had any basis in reality when they collected statements from me and checked camera footage in the area.

There's also the numerous cases where I have witnessed the police failing to intervene at all. Such as two years ago when myself and four colleagues attempted to defend a young white couple from a racist attack from a large group of black lads - I didn't really have the chance to count, it was approximately twenty of them. A police cruiser was sat nearby (within 100m). They watched the fight play out. While between us we managed to drop quite a few of these cunts, we were definitely losing the fight. It was only when this became clear that the police cruiser rolled up and stuck the lights and sirens on at which point our opponents scattered and ran. The police made no attempt to pursue or detain any of them.

There was also a more recent situation where a known murderer and his "associates" turned up at the club and we turned them away. They stood posturing and threatening outside the venue. A police wagon was sat opposite at the time. One of my colleagues went over to point out that several of the individuals were under curfews (which they had broken) and that at least one of them were very likely carrying firearms. The officer just shrugged.

Not gonna waste my time on Azzhol, i really have better things to do

Great. That tells me that I'm probably wasting my time responding to you too. If all you can do is throw ad hominem at Azreal and not engage his/her points then perhaps you really should find those "better things to do".

I have little doubt I'll shortly get the same treatment from you.

 

[Darios]

These kids weren't criminalised when I spoke to them, but a week after, they were easy prey to dealer-twats on speed trying to sell them formula weed.

(snip)

If we, who in their eyes, represent 'society', don't show some care for their present and future security and comfort, if we don't bear some responsiblity for facilitating and running community spaces that they feel involved in, then we may as well shove a ketamine laced solvent spliff in their hand and hit them over the head with a brick until they truly believe they've got no future.

Luther I'm sympathetic to your points. However my target would be the "dealer-twats on speed trying to sell them formula weed" going after easy prey. My question to you is, how do you propose dealing with them?