Originally Posted by Westcountryman:
Tough action also needs to be taken against the parents of unruly youths.

For the parents of 12 year olds probably true. What about the 15 year olds +, do you honestly think there going to do what their parents say? I was well behaved compared to the feral youths of today, but even back in 1957 when I was 15, I certainly didn't do what my parents told me to do, if I didn't want to.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by kernow:
For the parents of 12 year olds probably true. What about the 15 year olds +, do you honestly think there going to do what their parents say? I was well behaved compared to the feral youths of today, but even back in 1957 when I was 15, I certainly didn't do what my parents told me to do, if I didn't want to.

No, if they're above the age of criminal responsibility then they can have the book thrown at them. I was more referring to those under the age of criminal responsibility - such as youngsters (even under 10) who are caught smoking and drinking, or generally making a nuisance of themselves.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Westcountryman:
No, if they're above the age of criminal responsibility then they can have the book thrown at them. I was more referring to those under the age of criminal responsibility - such as youngsters (even under 10) who are caught smoking and drinking, or generally making a nuisance of themselves.

Then I agree with you, parents should be responsible for the very young, but what is the age of criminal responsibility?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by kernow:
Then I agree with you, parents should be responsible for the very young, but what is the age of criminal responsibility?

Probably the same age they're taught sex education in schools. What's that? Four?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by kernow:
Then I agree with you, parents should be responsible for the very young, but what is the age of criminal responsibility?

10 or 14, depending on the circumstances.

See here: Youth Information Age of criminal responsibility
[Rep]

The Home secetary is so detatched from the people on the streets if it wasnt for the fact kids are dying it would be laughable,The knife crime escalation IS out of control making carriers of knives visit hospitals is the most ridiculas surgestion this incompetant government has come up with to date.Lock them up,no excuses if your out carrying a knife you go to prison, end of.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by ranter:
The Home secetary is so detatched from the people on the streets if it wasnt for the fact kids are dying it would be laughable,The knife crime escalation IS out of control making carriers of knives visit hospitals is the most ridiculas surgestion this incompetant government has come up with to date.Lock them up,no excuses if your out carrying a knife you go to prison, end of.

This will surprise you:-) I agree 100%!
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Westcountryman:
David Cameron stole the 'broken society' theme from Liam Fox MP (readers will remember that Liam Fox ran his leadership campaign on the 'broken society' agenda).

Any government seeking to tackle the 'broken society' will need to take tough decisions regarding welfare reform (namely dealing with the scroungers) and sink estates (ie. stop building or drastically reduce the amount of social housing.)

Tough action also needs to be taken against the parents of unruly youths.

The good majority (And I'm talking over 95%) of the problems caused in our village are caused by youths from the local council estate. I expect this situation is replicated throughout the country.

What about those people who need social housing - an increasing proportion of the population seeing as buying your own home is becoming more and more out of reach for even moderately well-off people due to mass immigration forcing the prices up? Should we just throw these people to the wolves as Thatcherites and David Cameron would wish?



I find it laughable that the Tories of all parties are moaning about the 'broken society' - a society they helped to break by closing-down British industry through their mad economic policies of the early 1980's.


Yes, of course any government should deal with the scroungers but don't for one moment think that EVERYONE who has been unemployed a longtime is a scrounger as the Tories think. Many of these people have severe barriers infront of them in order to obtain work and the government can do a great deal more to help these people retrain ect and to give incentives to employers to take these people on. The Tories are so stupid in believing that employment is just a one-way process when it actually is a two-way one.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by kernow:
I hear that the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is going to get tough on Knife crime! Making knife carriers visit Hospitals to see where knife crime victims are treated! I have a better idea, let them see one of the convicted knife murderers hanging on the end of a rope! I know which idea would have the most lasting effect!

I agree. Unfortunately, our liberal-left political 'elite' are addressing this problem from the wrong angle. Stupidly, they think the problem is with the weapon rather than those who use it. If they ban knives then why not ban baseball bats and cricket bats too seeing as they can be used to kill a person too!
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Independence Now!:
What about those people who need social housing - an increasing proportion of the population seeing as buying your own home is becoming more and more out of reach for even moderately well-off people due to mass immigration forcing the prices up? Should we just throw these people to the wolves as Thatcherites and David Cameron would wish?

If you can't afford to buy a house then don't buy one - I don't see why I should have to pay full price for my house and then subsidise someone elses. You can always rent instead and start saving for a deposit.

As for the 'need' for social housing, this is rubbish. Let the people find private housing to live in and then claim the benefits they're entitled (a word I use very loosely) to.

The scroungers will soon learn when they can't find somewhere to live because they've ****** off too many landlords or neighbours.

Originally Posted by Independence Now!:
I find it laughable that the Tories of all parties are moaning about the 'broken society' - a society they helped to break by closing-down British industry through their mad economic policies of the early 1980's.

No, what was mad was subsidising inefficient, wasteful industry. You might remember that Britain under Labour had to take its begging bowl to the IMF.

Thatcher saved Britain from economic ruin. We went from being the sick man in Europe to a leading world economy.

Originally Posted by Independence Now!:
Yes, of course any government should deal with the scroungers but don't for one moment think that EVERYONE who has been unemployed a longtime is a scrounger as the Tories think.

Depends on the circumstances, there are many people who could easily work but just don't bother. The Tory policy to make people (who are able to) work for their benefits is a great idea.

Originally Posted by Independence Now!:
Many of these people have severe barriers infront of them in order to obtain work

Such as?

Originally Posted by Independence Now!:
and the government can do a great deal more to help these people retrain ect and to give incentives to employers to take these people on.

If I was an employer I wouldn't want to take on undesirables, and I don't see why employers should be forced to or even given 'incentives'. Fact is, you either prove to your empolyer you're able to do the job or you don't. A trial can often help in this regard.

Originally Posted by Independence Now!:
The Tories are so stupid in believing that employment is just a one-way process when it actually is a two-way one.

It's a mutually beneficial relationship and should be treated as such. Socialists are often stupid in believing that they somehow have the God-given right to work, or worse, free money from the State.
[Rep]