Vandals destroy Charity Boat

[carlt]

The Swinging sixties certainly has a lot to answer to. Free love and no rules!!! Fine at the time and now we are paying the cost. Todays parents don't know how to 'parent' and kids believe that everything should come handed to them on a plate. The goverment should help to put more 'structure' back into the family through education. The education system pre 60's may have some of the answers.

Maybe if we stopped listening to 'The European Court of Human Rights' and got back to some good English values then that might be half way to the solution. We can't expect the goverment to put it all right, because after all its our fault. Stop all the nambi pambi ideas and get down to the job at hand. The country is in a mess and we need to sort it out NOW!!!

So there was no crime before the 60s?

The easiest thing to do is blame liberals, human rights and being nice to people.

 

Is the answer, to stop kids being horrible, really to start being horrible adults? How very sad!

[blackelle123]

I don't think that Adults were neccessarily 'horrible' back then, but surely you have to agree that strict parenting and schooling had its benefits.

Why we can't bring forward the lessons learnt then, together with the knowledge we now have. I certainly don't advocate turning into a horrible adult would stop kids being horrible. I just want to find a way to bring back respect for your elders, betters and authority. Good manners are absolutely FREE!

[carlt]

I don't think that Adults were neccessarily 'horrible' back then, but surely you have to agree that strict parenting and schooling had its benefits.

Why we can't bring forward the lessons learnt then, together with the knowledge we now have. I certainly don't advocate turning into a horrible adult would stop kids being horrible. I just want to find a way to bring back respect for your elders, betters and authority. Good manners are absolutely FREE!

No, if you mean sadistic corporal punishment meant no youth crime, then you are deluding yourself that there was no youth crime then.

[blackelle123]

No, if you mean sadistic corporal punishment meant no youth crime, then you are deluding yourself that there was no youth crime then.

Yes, there was crime and yes, there were elements to the systems that could be classed as sadistic. But I am suggesting that there were good parts about it too and their the lessons we should be bringing into today.

Crime is at a point now where we're having to send 10 year olds to adult style prisons, pensioners are getting beaten up for pennys and children can't play in the street for fear of abduction.

Having the odd whack from a flying board rubber might just put a few things into perspective, especially for some of the new up and coming crims that we are harbouring in our poorly managed classrooms.

[Dominic M]

I don't think that Adults were neccessarily 'horrible' back then, but surely you have to agree that strict parenting and schooling had its benefits.

Why we can't bring forward the lessons learnt then, together with the knowledge we now have. I certainly don't advocate turning into a horrible adult would stop kids being horrible. I just want to find a way to bring back respect for your elders, betters and authority. Good manners are absolutely FREE!

This seems hugely contradictory. If pre the 1960s were halcyon days of proper parenting, excellent education, decent values etc, then how come the 60s (which you regard as the beginnings of a descent into moral turpitude) happened in the way they did? Presumably poor parenting and education in the 1940s and 50s then.

 

As for respect, I think the cliche respect where respect is due is right, not an unquestioning deference to elders and authority. Were the anti-Vietnam draft dodgers and protesters in the USA wrong to question authority? I don't think so. They objected to a pointless genocidal war that "elders, betters and authority" decided to prosecute.

 

To lay the blame for today's societal ills at the door of a decade of social change and flowering of great creativity is easy to do, but has no foundation.

[NB Alnwick]

So there was no crime before the 60s?

The easiest thing to do is blame liberals, human rights and being nice to people.

 

Is the answer, to stop kids being horrible, really to start being horrible adults? How very sad!

 

Not at all but people here are missing an important point.

 

As law abiding citizens who have earned the right to retire and live on our meager (private) pension, we must be entitled to our own human rights. These include the right to enjoy our hobby or lifestyle on the canals without the fear of being assaulted, spat at, robbed, injured or murdered by hooligans - whatever their age.

 

In the short time that we have lived aboard 'Alnwick' we have had intruders in our boat - they were disturbed by a neighbour on the boat moored next to us and he was assaulted while stopping them from stealing our new generator. They still got away with credit cards and other personal possessions which were of value to us.

 

Is anyone here suggesting that such behaviour ought to be tolerated?

 

Some people seem to think that it was just as bad in days past - I remember the 1950s and 1960s very well and from my own experience the public behaviour of a large sector of the community has gradually worsened. An area that is particularly noticeable is the total lack of respect that people today have for almost anything but especially common decency, authority and seniority.

 

Whatever is being done about it is simply not working. It is time to find a new solution.

Edited March 19, 2008 by NB Alnwick

[Dominic M]

Not at all but people here are missing an important point.

 

As law abiding citizens who have earned the right to retire and live on our meager (private) pension, we must be entitled to our own human rights. These include the right to enjoy our hobby or lifestyle on the canals without the fear of being assaulted, spat at, robbed, injured or murdered by hooligans - whatever their age.

 

In the short time that we have lived aboard 'Alnwick' we have had intruders in our boat - they were disturbed by a neighbour on the boat moored next to us and he was assaulted while stopping them from stealing our new generator. They still got away with credit cards and other personal possessions which were of value to us.

 

Is anyone here suggesting that such behaviour ought to be tolerated?

 

Some people seem to think that it was just as bad in days past - I remember the 1950s and 1960s very well and from my own experience the public behaviour of a large sector of the community has gradually worsened. An area that is particularly noticeable is the total lack of respect that people today have for almost anything but especially common decency, authority and seniority.

 

Whatever is being done about it is simply not working. It is time to find a new solution.

 

I couldn't agree more. I think there is a complete lack of ideas as to how to deal with these problems amongst our politicians, and elsewhere. The angry knee jerk reaction of hang 'em and flog 'em I am wholly unconvinced would work and is just a base human desire for revenge. This is why I wrote earlier that perhaps a far greater emphasis on parental responsibility including accountability in law for their offsprings' actions should be looked at. And I do feel there is an imbalance when it comes to the rights of the victims.

[Chris Pink]

Crime is at a point now where we're having to send 10 year olds to adult style prisons, pensioners are getting beaten up for pennys and children can't play in the street for fear of abduction.

 

Makes I laugh when you hear the ill-informed rubbish taken straight from a few newspapers spouted as if it the gospel truth.

 

We don't have to send 10 year olds to adult prisons (except if we would like to extend their criminal training), pensioners are not (in general) getting beaten up for pennies and children are not (in general) getting abducted every time they play in the streets. With regard to this last I think if you look at the reality (rather than your spoon-fed rubbish) you'll find it is mostly people known to the children who commit most of the crimes against children.

 

The reality, if you care to open your eyes and look around is that you (yes, you) are privileged to live in one of the safest and most affluent times and places ever in human history. You might want to give thanks to wet liberals, human rights activists, 1960s social thinkers and such like for this rather than whingeing about what are, in the run of everyday life, very rare events.

[blackelle123]

I don't pretend to know what was the trigger for it all going wrong, or do I know exactly what will put it right. But I do know that as I have grown up through the 60's, raised my family in the 80's, I have seen society put under an awful pressure. Kids don't know how to be kids and adults are fumbling around looking for direction. There are some real issues that need to be addressed before this country implodes. As for a decade of social change and flowering of great creativity, if thats what you call it. Then I would rather sit with my old fashioned morals and values in a world where you pay respect to those who deserve it, open doors for your elders and your kids don't call you by your first name.

 

Call me old fashioned!!!

[Dominic M]

As for a decade of social change and flowering of great creativity, if thats what you call it.

Call me old fashioned!!!

Of course it was a period of great creativity. Des O'Connor and Ken Dodd both topped the charts for weeks on end.

[Ron]

We live in era in which few people are prepared to take the risk of intervening to stop antisocial behavior, single parenting is becomming more common and it is increasingly common for both parents to have to work full time to pay the mortgage etc...

We also find violence and general bad behavior glorified by games, films and at times the media.

 

If we want to come to terms with the problems we need to consider our own responces to antisocial behavior and consider how we can make some sort of stand without putting ourselves at risk.

 

The country also needs to look at parenting - somone needs to be there when the kids get home from school and in the holidays, which I think most parents would agree with, but economics don't always allow.

 

I suspect we also need to do something about our empty streets in the day time. A lack of witnesses provides the opportunity for crime.

 

Encouraging a few more parents to stay at home and look after the kids, by perhaps creating roles that generally support the community might help. Our communities have lost a lot of social structure, people are too mobile and live to work rather than work to live. A few more people walking or cycling would be beneficial apart from health and environmental issues.

 

Respect is learnt and taught, just nodding or smiling to the children in your community can somtimes make a huge difference.

 

... and you can almost guarantee that some of the brats that wrecked the boat will one day become politicians.

 

They are still obnoxious buggers who need to face the consequences of their actions. In these PC times I am tempted to suggest a pedal powered power station where they are sentenced to generate so many MW for their crimes whilst listening to "improving lectures" .

 

This would be healthy, environmentally sound and contribute some energy to perhaps some worthy causes.

[chris w]

. Perhaps zero tolerance in the example quoted by Chris W would work but there would need to be irrefutable evidence and with so many people afraid to give evidence in court (for fear of reprisals) these days - that might make it even more difficult to get convictions.

 

As Stalin said when once asked about his purges, "Sure, you end up shooting a few innocent ones, but you get all the guilty ones".

 

Chris

[Ron]

As Stalin said when once asked about his purges, "Sure, you end up shooting a few innocent ones, but you get all the guilty ones".

 

Chris

 

Imagine the responce on this Forum if various offences on the waterways were treated that way.

[NB Alnwick]

We live in era in which few people are prepared to take the risk of intervening to stop antisocial behavior, single parenting is becomming more common and it is increasingly common for both parents to have to work full time to pay the mortgage etc...

 

This is also a 'modern' problem. Why do both parents have to "work full time to pay the mortgage etc..." ?

 

They either have planned it this way or they have over-extended themselves - either way it wasn't an accident or something that society has forced them into.

 

When I was a child my mother stayed at home, managed the houshold budget, kept us well fed on substantial home cooked food - she even made sweets. It was the way things were. Jane's parents were the same - they didn't even have a TV until they were sure they had saved enough money to afford one. As children we were loved and cared for and the lack of new clothes or expensive toys did not make us feel deprived in any way. So why is it so different today?

[grahoom]

This is also a 'modern' problem. Why do both parents have to "work full time to pay the mortgage etc..." ?

 

They either have planned it this way or they have over-extended themselves - either way it wasn't an accident or something that society has forced them into.

 

or the fact that house prices are so high that it requires two people to work full time to be able to afford a family house.

[Dominic M]

This is also a 'modern' problem. Why do both parents have to "work full time to pay the mortgage etc..." ?

 

They either have planned it this way or they have over-extended themselves - either way it wasn't an accident or something that society has forced them into.

 

When I was a child my mother stayed at home, managed the houshold budget, kept us well fed on substantial home cooked food - she even made sweets. It was the way things were. Jane's parents were the same - they didn't even have a TV until they were sure they had saved enough money to afford one. As children we were loved and cared for and the lack of new clothes or expensive toys did not make us feel deprived in any way. So why is it so different today?

The price of housing renders it impossible for most couples to get on the property ladder unless both are working and that has to be a major factor, and of course the perfectly reasonable desire of many women to pursue professional careers. I don't believe that because both parents work means that children turn into hooligans for one moment though - the vast majority of professional couples turn out perfectly well balanced children.

 

Furthermore house values have permitted a good number of the post war generation to retire in relative comfort once they have paid off any mortgage and cashed in the bricks and mortar for many many times what they paid for it, or "downsized".

 

The economy is fuelled by credit. When there is a downturn in retail sales it is heralded as the harbinger of a recession. The current doom and gloom about the economic horizon at the moment is not called a "credit crunch" without good reason. If credit dries up, both the manufacturing and service sectors suffer, creating bankruptcy and unemployment in its wake.

 

I am not saying that extensive borrowings are a good thing by any means, although the biggest single borrowing most of us may have ever made will have been a property mortgage, and for those who did so 25-30 years ago, that borrowing has been a highly profitable chunk of debt.

 

But is credit related to miscreant behaviour? I can't make the correlation.

[Chris Pink]

When I was a child my mother stayed at home, managed the houshold budget, kept us well fed on substantial home cooked food - she even made sweets. It was the way things were. Jane's parents were the same - they didn't even have a TV until they were sure they had saved enough money to afford one. As children we were loved and cared for and the lack of new clothes or expensive toys did not make us feel deprived in any way. So why is it so different today?

 

And look what happened, you grew up without any apparent ability to feel empathy with other human beings.

 

or maybe that was the beatings?

[NB Alnwick]

or the fact that house prices are so high that it requires two people to work full time to be able to afford a family house.

 

House prices would not be so high if people couldn't afford to buy them. At the end of the day it is only what people are prepared to pay that sets the sale price.

 

And if they can't afford to pay - why do they proceed with a purchase that will burdon themselves with a debt that forces them to spend the rest of their lives working it off?

[grahoom]

House prices would not be so high if people couldn't afford to buy them. At the end of the day it is only what people are prepared to pay that sets the sale price.

 

And if they can't afford to pay - why do they proceed with a purchase that will burdon themselves with a debt that forces them to spend the rest of their lives working it off?

 

but people can afford them when they COMBINE two wages.

[Dominic M]

House prices would not be so high if people couldn't afford to buy them. At the end of the day it is only what people are prepared to pay that sets the sale price.

 

And if they can't afford to pay - why do they proceed with a purchase that will burdon themselves with a debt that forces them to spend the rest of their lives working it off?

 

They proceed because for the last 4-5 decades the early years of struggling to finance the mortgage repayments have then been offset many times over by massive rises in property values. Of course, there is no guarantee that it will always be so, but the present perception is that if you want a tidy lump sum later in life, the pain of the early years is worth it.

Edited March 19, 2008 by Dominic M

[Jon]

This has turned into quite an interesting topic with a real mixed bag of views coming out - thanks for your contributions.

 

At present, there does not appear to be any evidence to link youths to this crime. This sort of behaviour, no matter who is behind it is totally unacceptable and many of the arguments above can be applied no matter who is responsible.

 

If I were in charge of the youth justice scheme I would be much tougher from the start, and would make sure that repeat time offenders were given much harsher sentences. I believe that everyone should be able to make one mistake - after all we learn from our mistakes, so I would still keep the existing reprimand for minor youth offences and make it clear that further offences will have much higher consequences.

 

 

On a second offence, I would then make the following offer:

 

If found guilty, a person under 16 must either participate in a relevant community project for a prescribed period of time (at least one year in lenght around school hours) to teach dicipline, team work, hard work, but on a successful completion, the criminal record is non-disclosable to employees so as maximising chances of getting into gainful employement and less likely to end up on benifit etc. Regular school attendance would be essential, as work progression to best of ability within school. Failure to complete will result in custodial sentence at YOI

 

If found guilty, a person over 16 must either enter the military service for a mimimum period of 2 years, or go directly to jail. Military service will have all the ususal benifits including pay, commaradery, prospects etc. Failure to complete 2 years will result in jail term being completed.

 

This is not national service as it is a voluntary decision by each participant. It also does not punish the well behaved either.

[NB Alnwick]

They proceed because for the last 4-5 decades the early years of struggling to finance the mortgage repayments have then been offset many times over by massive rises in property values. Of course, there is no guarantee that it will always be so, but the present perception is that if you want a tidy lump sum later in life, the pain of the early years is worth it.

 

That is true - we did something similar and bought our boat on the proceeds of the 'profit' we had made when we sold our house and 'downsized' to a cheaper one. But the risks that we took were after the children had left home to live independent lives.

[Chris Pink]

That is true - we did something similar and bought our boat on the proceeds of the 'profit' we had made when we sold our house and 'downsized' to a cheaper one. But the risks that we took were after the children had left home to live independent lives.

 

Any cursory examination of such a proposition will show that it is only feasible if property prices continue to rise at the rate they have over the last few decades, and by definition, this is unsustainable.

 

Like imperialism, this philosophy can only succeed by creating winners and losers.

 

and what happens to the losers? Perhaps, just perhaps, they may end up feeling a little disenfranchised and indulge in what the winners (and observers) consider to be anti-social behaviour.

[carlt]

and what happens to the losers?

They are beaten regularly, enlisted and generally subjugated and oppressed. Then we'll live in the crime free society that existed in the minds of the middle-aged, middle classes who never saw every other kid in his council estate street go to prison.

[RLWP]

A narrow boat that was kept at the Ruskin Centre on the Stourbridge Town Arm .... has been .... set on fire

 

Is there any further information on this minor aspect of this topic?

 

Richard