A way to treat louts?

[fittdiva]

Originally posted by Lickszz

Knowsley borough council are planning on treating up to 50 louts to a day out at Alton Towers in an attempt to prevent a repeat of the previous years antics of vandalism on Halloween. The day out will hopefully leave them tired and will ultimately force them to stay in.

 

What do you think of this idea?

 

Here is the link to the story:

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/10/20/nlout20.xml

 

looking forward to a trip to alton towers then are you??

[Lickszz]

Originally posted by Abby

Yes I know the article dates from last year - It's under the link I supplied

 

And it doesn't change the fact most copies of the Telegraph are heavily subsidised, which would have an impact on those 'sales' figures

 

I'll send you the next money-off coupons I receive. 50p for the Saturday paper's an absolute bargain, but I wouldn't pay full price, or pay 20p for it during the week.

 

Yes, your source is 'An unconventional view' Exactly!

[Lickszz]

Originally posted by fittdiva

looking forward to a trip to alton towers then are you??

 

You're too quick off the mark, recap a fuller answer.

[saxon51]

Originally posted by DaBouncer

Maybe it's that a lot of these 'louts' come from problem backgrounds. Abuse by parents guardians, kicked out of home, poverty and social exclusion.

 

 

And what of those louts who don't come from these backgrounds? What's the reason for sending them?

 

Not all kids who come from problem backgrounds are offending, so what rewards are they getting this year? None, simply because they are behaving themselves. Is that fair?

Never mind though, if they use their brains they'll smash up a few cars so they can go next year. Who'd blame them, I wouldn't.

My kids would love to go but I can't afford to send them.

 

Think I'll send them out now to cause havoc!

[Lirean]

Well what can I say. We've had years of political correctness and now all the closet flog hang em brigade are once again putting their heads above the parrapit. Do you know that eightyfive percent of the worlds wealth is owned by fivepercent of its population. Blaming these so called "louts" sounds to me like treating cancer by building more cemetaries.

 

You are all being "had" the minority privilege of these five percent effectively guarantees thier continued exploitation and control of the majority. These "louts" live lives often times in the most barbarous of conditions they are the victims of a generation so affraid to feel its own vulnerability that it is indifferent to the suffering of others. You are being "groomed" by these affluent pinstriped "Neo Conseratives?" into believing that the most vulnerable and disadvantaged in society are a legitimate target for the hostility usually reserved for those in power, who abuse that power. Is it really so very long ago that we have forgotten the rantings of a certain Austrian corporal. Any vulnerable group whom he fealt was marginalised enough was fair game.

 

"At first they came for the communists, and I said nothing"

"Then they came for the Homosexuals, and I said nothing"

"Then they came for the Gypsies and I said nothing"

"Then they came for the jews, and no one was left to speak for me ".

 

When we target the vulnerable because of our own weakness, we unleash the "wolfpack" mentality which guarantees that he who was safe today, is unsafe tommorow. It is the incremental annihilation of justice.

 

"All that is needed for hatred to triumph

is the denial of our own vulnerability."

"Alice Miller"

 

They have socially engineered political correctness, whose height was reached during the Thatcher/ Reagan years (incidentally) to so sicken people with liberal thinking that they could sell us slavery as freedom. Free to be in debt,free to have any kind of sex, so long as it doesn't involve intimacey, free to see the gap between rich and poor at its widest for thirtyfive years,free to see twenty six percent living beneath the poverty line (Rowntree)

free to see the lip service promises of the third way, degenerate into the rhetoric of elitist stratification. The list goes on. So before we knee jerk into Alf garnett mode lets get our heads from up our

A***s and realise that New labour is less about pragmatism and more about blaming the weak for the excesses of the powerful.

[Belle]

Originally posted by Lirean

Well what can I say. We've had years of political correctness and now all the closet flog hang em brigade are once again putting their heads above the parrapit....

 

...So before we knee jerk into Alf garnett mode lets get our heads from up our A***s and realise that New labour is less about pragmatism and more about blaming the weak for the excesses of the powerful.

 

I shant worry about the mixed metaphors in what generally was a fair post, and besides we all do it.

 

But if you think that New Labour is the same thing as the Hang Em and Flog Em Brigade, allow me to be the first to disabuse you. .

 

AFAIK the people on here who would prefer to be tough on the causes of crime and who are not interested in hanging or flogging, would tend to be of the Labour variety, and those who prefer to be tough on the criminal in particular, would tend to be of the Tory variety.

 

I expect I generalise madly, but I think I am broadly representing the picture

[Lirean]

I suppose if you confuse the map for the reality then you would find it difficult to see the difference between cleverly packaged oppression and genuine social justice. "New Labrador" is barely able to see the differencse between the two.

 

Therefore when they propose inserting silicone chips under the skin of peodophiles to monitor them via satelite(a nice little earner for someone) we should all bar our teeth and rattle our chains in support?. We'll ignore all the research which actually validates a therapeutic approach and pander to the mob.

 

Do I think (anyone) should be allowed to hurt the innocent, definately and uneqivicolly not. Do I think that we can assign a lable to another human being which effectivley gives the right to meet one form of inhumanity with another again no. Persecution will solve nothing in the long run. Canada has become a model for this kind of successful treatment so why no pragmatism on this one. Uhm let me think.... Labour being populist under the guise of praxis surely not!.

 

My problem with Labour comes down fundementally to thier hypocracey. They (and by they I mean Tony and his chums)strike me, to have the, "do as I say and not as I do" down to an art form.

Private education for Tonys offspring, the journalistic version of the Bermuda triangle for the story concerning the "alleged" purchase of drugs by jack straws son from a reporter. Property scams, sorry alleged property scams...more?. Rights and RESPONSABILITYS, the erosion of rights and the explosion of resposibiltys.

 

When we have underfunded inner city schools being effectivley forced to falsify league table results. It all smacks of of too much form and not enough content. A bit like my mixed metaphors only being a child of the Socialist seventies I'm more concerned with what I say than with whether or not Ive missed a bit.

 

"Thats my story and Im sticking to it!.

 

To my mind the main difference between New Labour and the Conservative party is that with the Conservatives, you expected to be beaten over the head with the law and order big stick. New Labour beats you over the head with the big stick whilst offering you solice? in the form of some hijacked language from Carl Rogers.

 

"Look... we're not really having you over, we're facilitating your growth. We're levelling the playingfield by widening the gap between the rich and the poor, and fanning the flames of Racism and calling it "Multiculturalism". Because look...o.k we're all different and we should celebrate diversity by covering up all the things that unite us together".

 

Perhaps it was a flash of "persperation" Tony and Cherie had whilst on thier"vision quest" in the Mexican sweatlodge, when the Shaman said "connect with the "cosmic" consciousness Tony misheard and thought he'd said "cosmetic".

 

 

 

 

[