• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Rioting in Tottenham

work in progress

Well-Known Member
I will be very interested in the demographics of the perpetrators, because all these calls for stopping peoples benefits and kicking them out of social housing is beginning to annoy me.




UK riots: suspected looters, statistics and court cases - Telegraph
Just a thought....will anything be done about the robbers in government who made a bad situation worse with their austerity budgets? No jobs, cuts to benefits for the poor, closing recreation facilities, and everyone seems to be shocked and dismayed when the pressure cooker blows its lid! For any Brits here - your tool of a Prime Minister, and Lord Mayor of London seem to think it's just a crime issue - it was just young people looking to steal and get free stuff. Well, that may be part of it! If you're bombarded by ads and images of products and lifestyles that you know you will never be able to reach, you might be inclined to smash a store window and help yourself to some free stuff. But, if it was just about stealing, why were so many setting fires? Thieves don't usually burn down stores that they have robbed, so I'm assuming there's more to this story than what is usually reported in the news.

A little insight for me comes from one of my heroes - Naomi Klein "Daylight Robbery, Meet Nighttime Robbery"
This is said in all seriousness. As if the massive bank bailouts never happened, followed by the defiant record bonuses. Followed by the emergency G-8 and G-20 meetings, when the leaders decided, collectively, not to do anything to punish the bankers for any of this, nor to do anything serious to prevent a similar crisis from happening again. Instead they would all go home to their respective countries and force sacrifices on the most vulnerable. They would do this by firing public sector workers, scapegoating teachers, closing libraries, upping tuitions, rolling back union contracts, creating rush privatizations of public assets and decreasing pensions—mix the cocktail for where you live. And who is on television lecturing about the need to give up these “entitlements”? The bankers and hedge-fund managers, of course.
Yes, it looks just like Wall Street! If you're a big enough thief, in a three piece tailored suit, you are dictating the terms to the Government, instead of rotting in a jail cell!
At last year’s G-20 “austerity summit” in Toronto, the protests turned into riots and multiple cop cars burned. It was nothing by London 2011 standards, but it was still shocking to us Canadians. The big controversy then was that the government had spent $675 million on summit “security” (yet they still couldn’t seem to put out those fires). At the time, many of us pointed out that the pricey new arsenal that the police had acquired—water cannons, sound cannons, tear gas and rubber bullets—wasn’t just meant for the protesters in the streets. Its long-term use would be to discipline the poor, who in the new era of austerity would have dangerously little to lose.
This is what David Cameron got wrong: you can't cut police budgets at the same time as you cut everything else. Because when you rob people of what little they have, in order to protect the interests of those who have more than anyone deserves, you should expect resistance—whether organized protests or spontaneous looting.
Yep! Here in the Great White North, we discovered that we now lived in a police state, even equipped with secret laws that were created just before the G8/G20 Summit. I'm sure David Cameron is going to change that last part - cutting police budgets, since next year London will be hosting the Olympics, and the venues close to Olympic events will probably have Chinese level security.
 

kai

ragamuffin
From these articles i predict we have to spend thousands upon thousands of pounds dealing with appeals against sentencing:





David Atto, 18, pleaded guilty to the theft of two Burberry T-shirts, worth perhaps £60. He told the police he had found them on the pavement. He pleaded guilty, had no relevant previous convictions, and was sentenced to a day in custody.
Then there was Nicolas Robinson, 23, of Borough, south-east London, who was jailed for six months for burglary. He took a £3.50 case of water from Lidl supermarket. He also pleaded guilty and had no relevant previous convictions.

BBC News - Analysis: Are courts acting out of character?







More than 3,000 people have been arrested in connection with the riots in towns and cities around England last week. According to figures from 10 of the police forces involved, 1,533 of those people have so far been charged. Latest figures from the Ministry of Justice say 1,297 suspects have appeared in court - most of them in London.


BBC News - England riots: What happened to the rioters in court?
 

Alceste

Vagabond
Wow - 3 months in jail for stealing £3.50 worth of water? I hope ordinary Brits are not having to pay for this while they are fighting the sell-off of their libraries and national parks under the guise of "austerity". They might start to get restless.
 

Panda

42?
Premium Member
Wow - 3 months in jail for stealing £3.50 worth of water? I hope ordinary Brits are not having to pay for this while they are fighting the sell-off of their libraries and national parks under the guise of "austerity". They might start to get restless.

The problem is the country is calling for a no tolerance on rioters and want to see anyone involved locked away.
 

Alceste

Vagabond
The problem is the country is calling for a no tolerance on rioters and want to see anyone involved locked away.

Surely the judge could have ordered him to pay the £3.50 and slapped an ASBO on him and still been very stern and disapproving. Wouldn't that have qualified as "zero tolerance"?

They should be fining the looters and ordering them to make restitution, not locking them up.
 

kai

ragamuffin
The problem is the country is calling for a no tolerance on rioters and want to see anyone involved locked away.

Its a knee jerk reaction , with about 100 people a day being sent to already overcrowded prisons. a large majority of these people will be appealing against their sentence and are going to win. This is purely to ease public opinion and by the time they all get reduced sentences the "String em up" mentality will be all died down and will have cost the taxpayer millions.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Surely the judge could have ordered him to pay the £3.50 and slapped an ASBO on him and still been very stern and disapproving. Wouldn't that have qualified as "zero tolerance"?

They should be fining the looters and ordering them to make restitution, not locking them up.
The notion that the punishment for stealing is that the perp must pay full retail & a surcharge if cought doesn't sound like a deterrent though.
 

kai

ragamuffin
Surely the judge could have ordered him to pay the £3.50 and slapped an ASBO on him and still been very stern and disapproving. Wouldn't that have qualified as "zero tolerance"?

They should be fining the looters and ordering them to make restitution, not locking them up.

I totally agree , personally i would have had the sentences suspended for a year or two especially for those with no or very small criminal records. Its stupidity.
 

Alceste

Vagabond
The notion that the punishment for stealing is that the perp must pay full retail & a surcharge if cought doesn't sound like a deterrent though.

Fines are an excellent deterrent, and they raise more revenue than they cost to administer. That revenue could be used to put more police on the ground. Visible police officers are probably the best deterrent of all.

Granted, it wouldn't be punitive enough to satisfy some of the less pragmatic voters in the UK, but last I checked the country was strapped for cash and taking some pretty drastic and wildly unpopular steps to address the problem. Why not continue?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Fines could work for some. But I can see where a quick & stern public statement is needed to quell this massive
increase in violence. Jail time will get more attention. I'm not saying it's right...only that it's reasonable.
 

Panda

42?
Premium Member
Surely the judge could have ordered him to pay the £3.50 and slapped an ASBO on him and still been very stern and disapproving. Wouldn't that have qualified as "zero tolerance"?

They should be fining the looters and ordering them to make restitution, not locking them up.

I wasn't defending the judges action, I was just trying to explain some of the reasons behind it. I think an ASBO, reparations for damages and community service in the area would be suitable for a case like this.

Its a knee jerk reaction , with about 100 people a day being sent to already overcrowded prisons. a large majority of these people will be appealing against their sentence and are going to win. This is purely to ease public opinion and by the time they all get reduced sentences the "String em up" mentality will be all died down and will have cost the taxpayer millions.

Yea that is what I was getting at.
 

Alceste

Vagabond
Fines could work for some. But I can see where a quick & stern public statement is needed to quell this massive
increase in violence. Jail time will get more attention. I'm not saying it's right...only that it's reasonable.

So in this specific circumstance, you feel uncontrolled government spending during a massive deficit is necessary. Interesting. Are there any other circumstances you think should be exempt from fiscal restraint or is it just punishing the baddies?
 

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Fines are an excellent deterrent, and they raise more revenue than they cost to administer. That revenue could be used to put more police on the ground. Visible police officers are probably the best deterrent of all.

Granted, it wouldn't be punitive enough to satisfy some of the less pragmatic voters in the UK, but last I checked the country was strapped for cash and taking some pretty drastic and wildly unpopular steps to address the problem. Why not continue?


The phrase "You can't get blood out of a turnip" springs to mind.

When a person isn't working, and is living on welfare, how will the state collect the fine?

And how does a person who has never even held a job even really grasp the value of a dollar (or in this case a pound)?

I personally like the idea of collecting fines and restitution for non violent petty crimes - as long as there's a condition included that if the restitution and fine are not paid within a short period of time (determined by the court), the person then serves a jail sentence.
 

Alceste

Vagabond
The phrase "You can't get blood out of a turnip" springs to mind.

When a person isn't working, and is living on welfare, how will the state collect the fine?

And how does a person who has never even held a job even really grasp the value of a dollar (or in this case a pound)?

I personally like the idea of collecting fines and restitution for non violent petty crimes - as long as there's a condition included that if the restitution and fine are not paid within a short period of time (determined by the court), the person then serves a jail sentence.


Why do you assume the looters are poor people, living on assistance? Didn't you read about the millionaire's daughter? The schoolteacher? Many of those arrested are employed. Also, even if some are on welfare, it's a temporary situation for most people - something to tide their families over between jobs.

Also, for those who are unemployed, how is going to jail going to improve their job prospects? Meeting potential employers inside? Probably, but not the sort you'd approve of.
 

thaifairshop

New Member
although a man was shot by police, you have no right to burn state property,now for foreigners, England is not a safe country to visit anymore.
 

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Why do you assume the looters are poor people, living on assistance? Didn't you read about the millionaire's daughter? The schoolteacher? Many of those arrested are employed. Also, even if some are on welfare, it's a temporary situation for most people - something to tide their families over between jobs.

Also, for those who are unemployed, how is going to jail going to improve their job prospects? Meeting potential employers inside? Probably, but not the sort you'd approve of.


"The phrase "You can't get blood out of a turnip" springs to mind.

When a person isn't working, and is living on welfare, how will the state collect the fine?

And how does a person who has never even held a job even really grasp the value of a dollar (or in this case a pound)?"


That's what I said. That's not assuming that ALL the looters are poor people. I don't think that many people in this economy have a lot of expendable income, and that includes those who are employed. It may be very difficult to actually collect fines.

My questions about those on welfare, and those who have never held a job are legitimate questions - and fit many of the looters. I didn't say they fit ALL the looters.

As for looters who are unemployed - and your question about how they can find a job when they're in jail - I wouldn't send them to jail to find a job, though they CAN attend vocational classes in many jails in order to learn job skills which will be useful when they leave the jail system.

I said, and I'll repeat -

I personally like the idea of collecting fines and restitution for non violent petty crimes - as long as there's a condition included that if the restitution and fine are not paid within a short period of time (determined by the court), the person then serves a jail sentence."

If I really need to clarify that, I guess I will, though it seems pretty clear cut to me. Non violent petty crimes involving smaller damages should NOT be handled with a jail sentence, unless the perpetrator simply will not pay his or her restitution and fines within a reasonable amount of time.
 
I think some chavs saw the oppurtunity to cause a bit of mayham and went for it. I work with these kind of people and they don't really give a **** about anything or anyone, and now they know that in sufficient numbers they can pretty much do what they like.
 
Top