Topic: Riots in north London

[saddad]

looney left human rights cretins.

Hi, I think I might be one of them.

I might have to join you LY2 looks ready to join my ignore list... which has only one person on it so far...
no prizes for guessing who...  :-X

[carbonel11]

I did note today that the woman who got jailed for 6 months for recieving a pair of stolen shorts has successfully appealed the sentence which has been commuted to 75hours community service. She wasn't actually part of the riots so I can see why she might be given a break.

[Jeannine]

mmm, thread is getting a bit uncomfortable now.

XX Jeannine

[ceres]

No.  It's not.

Anyone who doesn't like the topic doesn't have to read the thread.

Anyone who finds a particular poster winds them up, hit the Ignore button.

Debate is fine provided it doesn't descend into personal attack or break the forum rules.

[Jeannine]

It is uncomforable  for me, but  we sometimes  need this in our lives .

All debates can become uncomfortable, it is not a critisism purely an observation that people feel very strongly about what they are saying..that is passion and passion is good .

Without passion nothing changes in the world and debates about change can be uncomfortable,

XX Jeannine

[SamLouise]

I was really quite shocked when I read about the lady who was jailed for receiving a pair of stolen shorts.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm very much a part of the 'jail them, fine them, stick them in orange jumpsuits and send them off to clear up the mess and let everybody know what they've done, take it out of their benefits' brigade but ... come on, common sense has to come in to it somewhere??

As far as the evictions go ... well, it's sort of a situation, isn't it? On the one hand it's true that they obviously think nothing of their neighbourhood to do what they did so therefore what's the issue with making them leave it but on the other hand ... it's a family home.  Again, common sense.  An entire family out on the street because of one person?  A family who will then have to go into private housing and cost the taxpayer even more due to such high rents that will be claimed via benefits? I don't feel that's a sensible solution. I understand perfectly why the councils feel the way they do but it's not really feasible. 

[Jeannine]

Sam, when I was working in the UK I was involved with several families facing eviction for family members with anti social behaviour. I went to court with 4 of them who did in fact get put out, but before it came to that they had been helped by  many  many organisations for years to turn themselves around, in all 4 situations it was  really bad, unbelievable almost what had happened, so I know first hand that it is not a situation taking even remotely lightly.

Before it came to eviction they had had a couple of year long probation tenancies, financial help to get kids to school who ran off, a brand new Mercedes people carrier was given to one family because Dad was repeatedly called to school. free family holidays..other stuff that would blow your mind.

I am not on the side of eviction or not  but do know it is the very last thing that happens and of course when they become homeless someone has to rehouse them.

In all the cases I was involved with their were countless acts of theft, vandalism, ASBO's and hundreds of validated neighbours complaints so I think there has to be much more to this than we are seeing.

XX Jeannine

[OllieC]

A business I have links to has a number of tenants who have been evicted by the local authority or housing association. I agree that, on the whole, there has been a long history of problems before people are evicted. It is up to organisation like ours (barely profit making, not taking deposits and constantly getting our stuff smashed up or stolen) to house these people. There are less landlords prepared to take this type of tenant, and since the coalition has decided to massively cut the rent for under 35's, the situation is going to get much worse.

Jeannine, I'm afraid you're wrong - Wandsworth's motives are political. They have said that the eviction proceedings are due to involvement in the riots, and no article I can find, even in The Daily Mail, has mentioned a history of problems.

[Digeroo]

The other problem is that in some cases they are simply shifting poor tenants onto the private sector who simply do not have the facilities to cope with them.  If they do not pay the rent and trash the premises there is not much redress since they have no money. 

I do not think it is right to punish one person for something someone else has done.   It is no joke if you have a family running wild on a regular basis round a neighbourhood.   Maybe the timing is politically motovated.  But I expect that this is just the last straw in some cases.

I have personal experiience of one such family and the entire neighbourhood was gunning for them.  They could have produced a very sweet pic of several seemingly charming children who in reality were a total nighmare.  When they left their let there was excrement shoulder high on the walls, every bit of furniture had been trashed, most of the door pulled off their hinges and every wall needed repainting after only 9 months.  They claimed housing benefit but did not pay the rent after the initial six months.  Knowing of them I certainly will not shed any crocodile tears.

Interestingly I have seen little news about cases involving the more extreme behaviour.
While we are hearing about one pair of shorts or a bottle of water, the stock of whole shops disappeared. 



 

[lincsyokel2]

I do not think it is right to punish one person for something someone else has done.   It is no joke if you have a family running wild on a regular basis round a neighbourhood.   Maybe the timing is politically motovated.  But I expect that this is just the last straw in some cases.

If its your kids then you are responsible. I tire of fat ignorant uneducated  f*g-smoking single female white trash standing on the doorstep of there council house saying they cant control there kids and so its not there fault the kids are uncontrollable, because thats the crux of the problem, the abdication of personal responsibilty, encouraged by the human rights brigade and the political correct agenda of Harriet Harmans looney left brigade, intent on the destruction of our society so they can introduce some sort of cultural marxist paradise.

The whole problem has been the relentless push of 'rights', but without accompanying them with 'responsibility' or 'obligation'. You must have all three, and  the riots are the result of teaching our kids for 15 years that you can have the first one without the other two.

Anyone who gets prosecuted for causing damage or stealing, or gets thrown out there house because there kids  or there partner or there relative was a thief and a rioter has only themselves to blame, its time people were made to take personal respoinsibility for ther own actions, and to care what there friends or relatives are up to.  Society has to work together as a team to work at all, otherwise it everyone for themselves and the survival of the fittest.  And we have to disapprove and deal with rioters and thieves as a society, not just leave them to the courts.

[betula]

I know a lot of people who live in council houses and they are decent hard working people..........ignorant.

[tonybloke]

to LY2
have a listen to this parent talking about her wayward teenager
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b013f7h1#synopsis

hardly fits your description does it?

[Jeannine]

I worked at a school in England right in the middle of a very deprived estate where there was lots of trouble and lots of folks not working, the vast majority tried very hard to get jobs which just where not out there. My job took me into the homes of these folks.

MOST WERE DECENT PEOPLE CAUGHT UP IN A BAD SITIUATION, THEY WERE RESPECTABLE GOOD PARENTS..

However even with all the best parenting there were families that had troubled kids.. I taught parenting classes, did tons of home visits, had willing loving parents and still some kids got into trouble.

YOU CANNOT BLAME PARENtS FOR EVERYTHING..YOU CANNOT..AS BETULA SAID IT IS IGNORANT  TO SAY THAT.

XX Jeannine

[Hector]

I work in the public sector, with some of the most deprived families...and also with   the so called middle and upper classes.

Some people do a cracking job of parenting...irrespective of their background, marital status and financial situation. Some of the worst, foul mouthed, aggressive youngsters I've encountered are from privileged/middle of the road backgrounds. Others are from less well off families.

 Of these aggressive kids, some you can see a link to parenting...others the family approaches and other siblings are fab.......so who are we to say it is always nurture not nature???

I do get very frustrated that their are families who are given every support and opportunity who don't give a d**n about their kids and what they may do...some even comment on " its your job to support us"

Others try their best but drug dealers/peer pressure gets to their kids.

So I have mixed feelings re sanctions that affect the whole family...but strongly feel it should apply to some and not others.

Personally I don't think that makes me a liberal lefty whatever...just that accountability should be based on evidence and not sweeping generalisation/categories according to where you live/what you look like/who you sleep with and if they are married to you or not.

To those who are found to be persistent/lax...I'd throw strong accountability at them.

I also think buying stolen goods should carry heavy sanctions...not linked to value. Theft is theft. Receiving shorts is theft, Its not the case of stealing to feed yourself. If people didn't buy stuff that dropped off the back of a lorry then there would be less theft.

[ceres]

Good post Hector.

However, I'm getting pretty weary of this thread.  If anyone else FEELS THE NEED TO YELL or to argue the person rather than the point, the thread is going to the virtual recycling plant in cyberspace where the bits and bytes will get chewed up and spat out to be re-used on happier subjects.