Violent Protests As Mps Vote To Raise Tuition Fees

[Tweek]

Some people have to be trained. If they prove unable to be trained then they must be chained.

...and if they talk crap - refrained.

[Chinahand]

The issue with Spook's attitude to law and order is how it deals with the fact that significant numbers of 16-24 year old men will, at one time or other in their partying, drinking, hormonal lives, throw a bottle or a glass or recklessly race or throw a punch or two or whatever.

 

Spook would want them all under a life sentence to be recalled at Her Majesty's pleasure. Luckily Her Majesty deals with them on a case by case basis and doesn't attempt to label every reckless youth a problem for life.

[spook]

I wouldn’t want everyone who behaved unsociably to be even prosecuted let alone handed a life term but I would like those who behave in the manner that the thug at the centre of this matter to at least face that possibility.

 

Presently there are a number of problems with the prosecution and punishment of people who break the law in the UK.

 

The first relates to the Crown Prosecution Service and the decisions they make on who will be charged and what they will be charged with. At this time they act as a pre-jury on the question of guilt or innocence but based on the probability of getting a value for money trial. Little chance of a conviction in their opinion and too often no charge brought.

 

The second is the inappropriate use of custodial sentences for what are in essence minor fiscal crimes, and then the regime in prison for those sent there for crimes where real punishment is required.

 

Prison should be not only a place of incarceration. It should also be a place of punishment.

 

A place where people having once been sent experience privation, hardship, and deprivation of all their freedoms, where their human rights are severely limited to little more than those required for the continuance of life, and not places more like a hostel with closed doors.

 

A place where people on release leave with a cold horror at the prospect of ever returning.

 

Where people have been subjected to whatever works to ensure they toe the line in future, and places where criminal recidivists who will not comply with civilised and social behaviour can be stored for very long times if for no other reason than to safeguard the public from ingrained antisocial behaviour and criminality that is a part of some people’s innate character.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

I think your thinking on this matter is very flawed, unless you have a very (what I'd call) draconian and extreme view of what is acceptable.

 

I have no real problem with the matter of enlightening/educating people to what they have done wrong and in some cases forms of 'punishment' where someone undertakes something valuable for the community or the particular victims and that also betters the person by giving CERTAIN people the opportunity to build links with their community where little exists before.

 

But you can't have your cake and eat it. If you truly want a prison system that puts terror into the minds of people in order to deter then those undergoing incarceration are certainly going to find it hard to adjust to life outside. They may be so fearful of returning to prison that they recognise and maybe fear what would happen if they do not break the law (or make sure they don't get caught), but the form of regime you would advocate would be one where it would be incredibly difficult to adjust to life outside. And probably so difficult that day to day is a real struggle. They might have to turn to crime again.

 

I do think this will be case taking account of another matter - social stigma. As a regime of your choosing would come to emcompass the 'masses' moral understanding of what punishments are fitting, so they will come to think that many minor transgressions actually deserve putting people in such terrifying circumstances. Those who are imprisonment will be seen as part of a dark and scary world even further detached from what the public think of the formerly imprisoned today. I think the stigma of imprisonment that would result would make it very hard for such people to get by.

 

Though lastly, the very idea of removing every bit of someone's freedom is despicable, unless they pose a certain risk to others. If you are going to punish someone then at least treat them as humans that have done wrong rather than stripping them of their humanity entirely.

 

And what is this talk of criminality being innate? What's innate?

[spook]

And what is this talk of criminality being innate? What's innate?

 

 

Putting aside your opinions which are based on Socialism rather than the nature of man “innate” used in the way that I intend it in this case is a predisposition that is genetic, an inherited criminal nature.

 

Before you sound off just keep in mind that in the same way that animals of the same breed will develop characteristics that run in a blood line so the same exists in people. There are some people who are criminal by nature, not because of their race but because it is in their “blood”.

 

It’s not a popular fact, it’s probably a thing that would make politically correct socialist numpties squeal in horror, but the existence of “bad blood” in the animal kingdom proves that the same exists in the case of people. I could today identify five “criminal families”, criminal not because of nurture, but by nature and criminal over several generations. It does open an interesting question regarding is antisocialism and criminality in some cases a form of mental impairment, but even if such is the case society needs to be protected from the actions of such people.

 

I have personal knowledge of a case in which a child of one of these antisocial criminal families who was adopted as very young baby, only a matter of days old, and was brought up in a good Christian home alongside natural born siblings of the couple who adopted.

 

The child (note how I will not even reveal the gender) was brought up with no idea that the child was adopted. The child developed into what can only be described as a piece of thieving nasty violent scum, the same as his natural siblings from the child’s birth parents.

 

Nurture can sometimes ameliorate nature, and it does happen in many cases and both ways, but what is born in the blood is usually cast in the bone. That is what “innate” is all about.

[manxy]

 

Putting aside your opinions which are based on Socialism rather than the nature of man “innate” used in the way that I intend it in this case is a predisposition that is genetic, an inherited criminal nature.

 

Before you sound off just keep in mind that in the same way that animals of the same breed will develop characteristics that run in a blood line so the same exists in people. There are some people who are criminal by nature, not because of their race but because it is in their “blood”.

 

It’s not a popular fact, it’s probably a thing that would make politically correct socialist numpties squeal in horror, but the existence of “bad blood” in the animal kingdom proves that the same exists in the case of people. I could today identify five “criminal families”, criminal not because of nurture, but by nature and criminal over several generations. It does open an interesting question regarding is antisocialism and criminality in some cases a form of mental impairment, but even if such is the case society needs to be protected from the actions of such people.

 

I have personal knowledge of a case in which a child of one of these antisocial criminal families who was adopted as very young baby, only a matter of days old, and was brought up in a good Christian home alongside natural born siblings of the couple who adopted.

 

The child (note how I will not even reveal the gender) was brought up with no idea that the child was adopted. The child developed into what can only be described as a piece of thieving nasty violent scum, the same as his natural siblings from the child’s birth parents.

 

Nurture can sometimes ameliorate nature, and it does happen in many cases and both ways, but what is born in the blood is usually cast in the bone. That is what “innate” is all about.

There's so many different talking points and side issues in here Spook, that whatever answer I give, will be questionable and arguable.

 

I would probably start that one person (the boy in question) cannot be regarded as positive proof that the system of removing him from 'problematic' parents, would result in him being trouble free.

You mentioned that he went to a good Christian home and this made me squirm a bit, as how does a person know that they are actually in a good home? Just because they are Christian or any religion for that matter, does not mean that it is a good home. One could even question that being brought up in a certain way, could actually do the opposite of what they want to achieve and the child rebels against something they do not like, or want to do. Certainly I for one, have seen many times in the news, of persons who seem like a good family person, only to find out for example, that they were a rapist, pedophile or that the person hurt their children in some way.

 

I would agree that certain peoples attitudes and behaviour are not conducive to an 'expected civilised society' although that in itself is another issue and I'm sure LDV will pick that one up.

 

If a person is labelled something, whether its a fool, bully, tough, hard etc, then its been said that a person will imitate that role. (Again - another debatable issue)

 

If those households are unruly, where did it all stem from and was it passed down from generation to generation and can their actions be modified to fit into society's expectations? I must admit, I would most definitely not like living next to a person(s) who were problematic.

 

Lots of questions and some of my answers will probably raise other contentious areas, but I'll certainly listen to other peoples viewpoints and read the Google'd replies, but from my unqualified point of view, please take it with a pinch of salt.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Putting aside your opinions which are based on Socialism rather than the nature of man “innate” used in the way that I intend it in this case is a predisposition that is genetic, an inherited criminal nature.

Ok, recognising that you believe there are predispositions to crime, which might be very well the case in instances of specific criminal behaviour, what sort of criminals do you think are genetically predisposed? All of them?

 

Before you sound off just keep in mind that in the same way that animals of the same breed will develop characteristics that run in a blood line so the same exists in people. There are some people who are criminal by nature, not because of their race but because it is in their “blood”.

But what sort of breeds are you talking about here, like dogs? And more interestingly, what sort of characteristics are you talking about? I am trying to tie in your idea with the crimes that actually committed.

It’s not a popular fact, it’s probably a thing that would make politically correct socialist numpties squeal in horror, but the existence of “bad blood” in the animal kingdom proves that the same exists in the case of people.

I am not aware of this matter of 'bad blood'. Any examples?

 

I could today identify five “criminal families”, criminal not because of nurture, but by nature and criminal over several generations. It does open an interesting question regarding is antisocialism and criminality in some cases a form of mental impairment, but even if such is the case society needs to be protected from the actions of such people.

And you believe that their criminal nature must be of an innate cause because it has been seen over generations?

 

I have personal knowledge of a case in which a child of one of these antisocial criminal families who was adopted as very young baby, only a matter of days old, and was brought up in a good Christian home alongside natural born siblings of the couple who adopted.

 

The child (note how I will not even reveal the gender) was brought up with no idea that the child was adopted. The child developed into what can only be described as a piece of thieving nasty violent scum, the same as his natural siblings from the child’s birth parents.

The explanation of this child's background doesn't really offer good evidence of a genetic matter here.

[manxy]

If you truly want a prison system that puts terror into the minds of people in order to deter then those undergoing incarceration are certainly going to find it hard to adjust to life outside. They may be so fearful of returning to prison that they recognise and maybe fear what would happen if they do not break the law (or make sure they don't get caught), but the form of regime you would advocate would be one where it would be incredibly difficult to adjust to life outside. And probably so difficult that day to day is a real struggle. They might have to turn to crime again.

Good point and the way I see this, is if the problem or need still exists, to what efforts would that person go through to make sure that they are not caught again; perhaps even murder if the stakes are big enough?

[La_Dolce_Vita]

I was thinking more of drug reliance which can lead to other antisocial effects. There may be financial issues which may lead to theft and maybe even psychological issues that lead to unsocial or even antisocial behaviour that arise from being in such an unnatural environment as one where almost all freedoms are withdrawn.

[spook]

 

Ok, recognising that you believe there are predispositions to crime, which might be very well the case in instances of specific criminal behaviour, what sort of criminals do you think are genetically predisposed? All of them?

 

Obviously not, some people turn criminal as a result of circumstances, some predisposed to be criminal do not for the same reason or out of fear of being found out. But the emphasis in all cases is on some.

 

I am not aware of this matter of 'bad blood'. Any examples?

 

A man wishing to but a sheepdog willusually look not only at a particular breed, and if he’s any sense he’ll concentrate ona boarder collie, but also at its parents to see the nature of the blood line within the breed.

 

And you believe that their criminal nature must be of an innate cause because it has been seen over generations?

 

In most cases I believe it is nature at work rather than nurture or anything else.

 

The explanation of this child's background doesn't really offer good evidence of a genetic matter here.

 

It illustrates the point and it is one of which I have personal knowledge of the family.

 

Traits, both good and bad, run in species, breeds, and families within breeds. It is just the same with people.

[Evil Goblin]

Some people have to be trained. If they prove unable to be trained then they must be chained.

And who sets the criteria by which behaviours will be judged? Criminal behaviour is what Parliament in statute law says it is, which is not necessarily what a reasonable person would regard as "criminal". The last Labour Government was overly keen on framing many relatively innocuous behaviours as Criminal Offences. Spook - you have a totally simplistic view of the causes of human behaviour, which, I suspect, may bve due to your ignorant religious stance. Human behaviour can and does have complex causes and not recognising that is just silly.

[spook]

And who sets the criteria by which behaviours will be judged? Criminal behaviour is what Parliament in statute law says it is,

 

You have answered your own question.

 

The last Labour Government was overly keen on framing many relatively innocuous behaviours as Criminal Offences. Spook - you have a totally simplistic view of the causes of human behaviour, which, I suspect, may bve due to your ignorant religious stance. Human behaviour can and does have complex causes and not recognising that is just silly.

 

Human behaviour is flawed and usually sinful, it is only by following the will and teaching of The Lord and attempting to follow the ways of Jesus that decent behaviour results.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Obviously not, some people turn criminal as a result of circumstances, some predisposed to be criminal do not for the same reason or out of fear of being found out. But the emphasis in all cases is on some.

but then, if you are talking about some people then what other understandings are bringing into this other than the 'innate'. You mentioned in your earlier post that your outlook was one that recognised the innate nature of criminal behaviour. This must therefore form a small part of your understanding as to why crime occurs.

 

A man wishing to but a sheepdog willusually look not only at a particular breed, and if he’s any sense he’ll concentrate ona boarder collie, but also at its parents to see the nature of the blood line within the breed.

But you're talking about animals which have been bred for many, many generations so that physical (and less so psychological) traits are maintained in those lines. Humans aren't comparable, as there have never been identifiable breeds in the same manner, except if you wish to talk about race.

 

Now I don't reject the possibility that some commit crime because of innate psychological dispositions of a genetic nature. But it has not been determined at present. More importantly, the biggest problem for this argument is how it is determined what such predispositions mean.

Is it the case that they simply predispose so that a person is inclined to do things that are bad? But then, what is considered bad? The laws of a country are not necessarily the moral code of a country, some laws are unjust.

 

In most cases I believe it is nature at work rather than nurture or anything else.

Have you not considered that the traits seen in generations are circumstantial due to such people remaining in the same social strata relative to others and the same economic problems with the all the resulting problems? And the nurture when children grow up accepting forms of criminal behaviour because of their undertaking by their parents?

If people learn off their parents and their society then would you really expect different results were there not to be an innate thing here?

 

It illustrates the point and it is one of which I have personal knowledge of the family.

Traits, both good and bad, run in species, breeds, and families within breeds. It is just the same with people.

It doesn't demonstrate anything to me though. I don't know her circumstances. I don't know whether she was treated somewhat differently because she was adopted vis-a-vis the other adopted children. I don't know whether she was unhappy for some reason and started attention seeking to excessive degree. There are too many variables there to come to a conclusion of there being something innate.

[Evil Goblin]

And who sets the criteria by which behaviours will be judged? Criminal behaviour is what Parliament in statute law says it is,

 

You have answered your own question.

 

So, Parliament is the ultimate determinatant of what is right and what is wrong? I thought you considered the Bible the proper determinant? Or are you saying that the bunch of reprobates in Parliament is appointed by Divine Ordinance?

 

Human behaviour is flawed and usually sinful, it is only by following the will and teaching of The Lord and attempting to follow the ways of Jesus that decent behaviour results.

 

So, every Sunday we should all roll up to Church with a lamb and ceremonially slit its' throat? We should kill all those who follow other Gods?

[spook]

 

 

So, Parliament is the ultimate determinatant of what is right and what is wrong?

 

What I wrote is that Parliament decides on what is criminaI.

 

thought you considered the Bible the proper determinant? Or are you saying that the bunch of reprobates in Parliament is appointed by Divine Ordinance?

 

Where have I ever claimed that secular law is the same as moral God Given law?

 

Human behaviour is flawed and usually sinful, it is only by following the will and teaching of The Lord and attempting to follow the ways of Jesus that decent behaviour results.

 

So, every Sunday we should all roll up to Church with a lamb and ceremonially slit its' throat? We should kill all those who follow other Gods?

 

Is that what Jesus taught?