Newsnight, riots

[spooky3]

You know what they needed actually-Jeremy clarkson:hihi:

 

Maybe so, maybe so... I've started re-watching House from series 1 last week, and Jezza is but a cute ikkle kitten in comparison.

 

 

*** I missed the last comments, I turned off to read something interesting instead. I'm not going to cry for career criminals or accept their excuses. Two wrongs don't make a right!

 

 

The other thing I wondered was, would they be so bold in their statements if their identities weren't hidden?

[llamatron]

Maybe so, maybe so... I've started re-watching House from series 1 last week, and Jezza is but a cute ikkle kitten in comparison.

 

 

*** I missed the last comments, I turned off to read something interesting instead. I'm not going to cry for career criminals or accept their excuses. Two wrongs don't make a right!

 

 

The other thing I wondered was, would they be so bold in their statements if their identities weren't hidden?

 

I meant the last comment in the post I was quoting:

 

"the fact that we are "harrassing" repeat offenders means we are doing our job right" - or something like that.

[spooky3]

wish someone would release a list of names and addresses, i'd like to send each a little chissie pressie...

[Murphy Jnr]

wish someone would release a list of names and addresses, i'd like to send each a little chissie pressie...

 

What to give someone that has everything though

[Anna B]

Higher education isn't out of reach because by the time they have any money to pay they can afford it. It’s one thing about the fees that I disagree with, someone that doesn’t have the aptitude to go to uni gets their course paid for and they won’t have to pay it back because they will never earn enough money.

 

Applications to Uni have dropped by 15% so far.

I promise you there will be a lot of talent there.

 

To say that only those who shouldn't apply anyway will be put off, is not correct. I already know of very capable youngsters who are saying that University education is out of reach for them. £50,000 is a daunting amount to them, especially when there is no guarentee of a job.

 

I attended University as a mature student, and there is no way I would have put the family finances at risk if I was expected to pay that much.

[MrSmith]

Applications to Uni have dropped by 15% so far.

I promise you there will be a lot of talent there.

 

To say that only those who shouldn't apply anyway will be put off, is not correct. I already know of very capable youngsters who are saying that University education is out of reach for them. £50,000 is a daunting amount to them, especially when there is no guarantee of a job.

 

I attended University as a mature student, and there is no way I would have put the family finances at risk if I was expected to pay that much.

 

If they don't have the intelligence to understand that they don't pay until they can afford to pay then maybe they shouldn't be going anyway, and a drop in applications is a good thing, it will save the tax payer some money.

[Resident]

Why, what possible reason is there to deny them travel?

 

In the case of the person mentioned above my post. He claimed he couldn't find a job. It's reasonable to infer from that, that he is claiming Job Seeker's allowance. Going on an international holiday is making him, in the words of the job centre, unavailable for work therefore no longer entitled to JSA.

 

That would have scuppered my chances of regaining employment some years ago, when I had to travel overseas for a job interview (even though I was not 'technically' on benefits, since I did not qualify for any, despite being unemployed).

 

Point aptly addressed by LeMaquis' anecdote as well.

 

And I got the job at the time, btw.

 

A fair point to which I will concede and revise.

 

People on benefits should have their international travel suspended UNTIL they can prove that they have an interview/job offer that requires such travel.

 

Does that make my point any better?

[scentral]

I used to rate Newsnight when Paxman is on, but last night's was a disgrace. The Euro crisis was pushed back so that all these 'experts' could trot out the usual cobblers.

 

The ones they interviewed, yeah, they sounded like they would be fit for university. Not.

 

Good to see the usual catch-all excuse was trotted out. 'It's cos the police disrespected us. Innit?'

[ElasticMan]

[quote=spooky3;8344271

 

Other things, the survey the BBC had done had interviewed disproportionately people who hadn't got any previous, whereas the facts are that the mass majority of those charged had already got previous... What were they thinking?

 

 

That's because its far easier for the police to identify and charge people who are already known to them.

 

Most of those involved have not been charged - and that's because they were, and remain, unknown to the police.

 

Its far more valuable to find out who these people who are and why they became involved than finding out about those the police already know about.

[ElasticMan]

I used to rate Newsnight when Paxman is on, but last night's was a disgrace. The Euro crisis was pushed back so that all these 'experts' could trot out the usual cobblers.

 

The ones they interviewed, yeah, they sounded like they would be fit for university. Not.

 

Good to see the usual catch-all excuse was trotted out. 'It's cos the police disrespected us. Innit?'

 

Understanding the reasons why people became involved is not that same as excusing it. That's exactly the kind of blinkered thinking that will only ensure that these riots happen again and again.