Author Topic: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?  (Read 4005 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Muggins

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2860
Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« on: August 03, 2010, 04:07:25 pm »
Discuss:

For 35 years,  (Our street raised it's first petition in 1977) this community and the others around our green space had tried to get action about the perisitent illegal motorcycles.  It was only the introduction of ASBO's and the PCSO's that eventually reduced this menace to acceptable levels. 

For over ten years there were terrible problems caused by a few to those who lived around our shops and it wasn't the redevelopment there that stopped it, it was our Neighbourhood Police Team with the cooperation of the wider community and the help of a few hardier folk who stuck theri heads above the parapet to the benefit of their neighbours.
Every now and then a bit of trouble bobs up again.

For those who think the kids are pleased to receive the badge of an ASBO, be assured that the smile is soon wiped off their faces when the threat is there of losing the family home.

All of this was happening all over the country, much consultation was done to bring about the best way of dealing with it.  Along side that once a youth was given an Acceptable Behaviour Contract, they and their family were on an escalator of  support to enable them to change their behaviour before it went further to the ASBO.  Sometimes it took two years to get to the stage of eviction.  Mainly the problem then was a disbelief by them that they actually could get evicted, so entrenched was it in their mentality that  they were 'untouchable'. 

It's not so bad now - word has got around. 

All we need now is for the new government to take that away - idiots.



Lifes not always fair. Sometimes you can get a splinter even sliding down a rainbow. - Cherralea Morgen

Offline Bobby Bingo

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 944
  • Gender: Male
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #1 on: August 03, 2010, 06:03:21 pm »
Thank you Muggins for your explicit description of what an ASBO should mean and hopefully in lots of cases does mean.
What is with this Lib/Con coalition. They are not only changing things for the better in some areas, I cannot yet name them, but they are also destroying some of the best things that the previous government put in.
I bloody give up!!


Bobby

Offline Chav

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1697
  • Gender: Female
  • INNIT!
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #2 on: August 03, 2010, 06:48:36 pm »
So if they get rid of the ASBO then - what are they going to replace it with ?
Arresting the perpetrators under section 5 of the public order act ???? (Mr W knows all about section 5 and I am sure he will enlighten us)

Trouble is with that- you have to have independent witnesses and then its up to the CPS if they wish to press charges or not !
It will be a bloody nightmare !
"Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects." -- Lester B. Pearson.

Offline Bogomil

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 399
  • Hello !
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #3 on: August 04, 2010, 12:06:15 am »
All we need now is for the new government to take that away - idiots.

A lot has been publicised by the press about Abolishment of ASBO’s and quite rightly it’s scaring the hell out of a lot of residents who see these as the way of controlling the bad behaviour of kids as well as adults. But with over 50% of ASBO’s being breached is it not right to ask “Are they working?”

It is also right to review the way in which they are applied across the country.

Here in Swindon it can take ages, not just months but years, to get an ASBO in place whilst in other parts of the country it can be done in a few weeks. Surely this alone indicated a marked difference in the consistency of application and process.

I fully support the need for ASBO’s as an end measure, but IMHO I believe the measures BEFORE you get to an ASBO order should be more about restorative justice based on community priorities. Doing community service (and I don’t just mean the piddley 80 or 100 hours that are currently handed out by the courts at present, but real 200 or 400 hour orders) in the very community that you cause the problems in is more effective.

IMHO there’s nothing more humiliating (or more likely to knock some of the toughness out of some of these unruly individuals) than having to clear up rubbish and other crap in front of the very people they like to act the “Big I Am” in front of.  I well remember having to scrub a flagstone floor with a toothbrush as a punishment and how that made me feel in front on my mates. No “Badge of Honour” there.

What worries me most is the news that over 50% of ASBO’s are being breached. I know from personal experience here that breaches are not dealt with fully and it takes several serious breaches before anything effective is done. There’s a couple in my area now who repeatedly breach the one they’re on and yet within hours are back in the streets. It’s a big joke for them but not for local residents who know they have an ASBO and are tearing their hair out that these brothers are still free to cause mayhem.

Is there a better way? I don’t know but at least lets have the discussion without just saying the government are idiots to want to review the process.

Maybe we will end up with a better system and maybe we won’t. Hopefully whatever does happen we will see more consistency in whatever follows.

Offline Muggins

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2860
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #4 on: August 04, 2010, 08:05:58 am »
I think that fact that it took so long for Swindon to get it's act together and  so long for the ASBOs youth to get it into their brains that they were at last, not untouchable, needs consideration now.   i.e. whilst there might be a better way..........and I don't know that a community order is the best way?, then until the new government have thought this all out AND consulted, especially with those who have lived through it, they should jolly well keep their mouths shut. 

As to 50% breaking their ASBO's, I would think any or all of them would give it a try, especially when they first came out and word had not got around.  Perhaps it should even be expected that they would.  It does not surprise me!

When Bogo says that she/he cleaned a floor with a toothbrush, that was no doubt in the forces (sounds like when my brother had to whitewash stones etc) it's a bit different and Bogo's mentality would have been different and would have been receiving pay (however little) for her/his time and behaviour.

The ASBO youth have no boundaries, mostly have no shame and no consideration and in most cases neither have their families and will take advantage of any opportunity the government might hand them.



 
Lifes not always fair. Sometimes you can get a splinter even sliding down a rainbow. - Cherralea Morgen

Offline Bogomil

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 399
  • Hello !
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #5 on: August 04, 2010, 09:27:10 am »
When Bogo says that she/he cleaned a floor with a toothbrush, that was no doubt in the forces (sounds like when my brother had to whitewash stones etc) it's a bit different and Bogo's mentality would have been different and would have been receiving pay (however little) for her/his time and behaviour.
Actually 13 years old and in a children’s home, put there for my protection because, as a rebellious child, my strict father had more than once hospitalised me when he knocked 7 bells of s##t out of me. The beatings didn’t work but the humiliation of such punishments for breaking the children’s home rules did.

Offline Tobes

  • Charter Member
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2169
  • Prehistoric bones in fields of russets and rust
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #6 on: August 04, 2010, 09:52:03 am »
I think both of you have put into a nutshell the reasons why our modern society is so frequently described as 'broken'. It isn't - but the rules have been buckled to the point where they've become irrelevant to both those they're supposed to protect AND those they're supposed to control.

Quote
The ASBO youth have no boundaries, mostly have no shame and no consideration and in most cases neither have their families and will take advantage of any opportunity the government might hand them.

Totally agree.

Here's a question though: I'm a 15 year old riding around without a helmet. I'm uninsured, I have no driving licence, the bike probably doesn't have an MOT, I'm not the registered keeper and whilst I'm driving, I'm probably drunk or stoned and breaking the rules of the road... Why aren't the police and the judiciary using all of the existing laws to convict and punish? Why resort to the ASBO? There's enough there to see a hefty fine and/or gaol - things with REAL and meaningful consequences for our chav generation and their irresponsible famailies.
I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it - Voltaire 'Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessita

Offline Muggins

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2860
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #7 on: August 04, 2010, 11:06:56 am »
Maybe as the biker you are also involved in numberous other ASB's?   As I said at least the Police have been successful in curtailing this particular menace.  We've had a couple of years of relative peace after (and I repeat) 35 years of this sooooo intrusive nuisance.   

When the youth are old enough I think they do indeed get treated like an adult breaking the law. So often they are/were not old enough.

There are reasons why this menace became entrenched in youth culture, I can almost certainly date it back to a particular carnival event here and it just shows how a lax attitude can lead to years and years of abuse, when a firm nipping in the bud could have saved time and energy.  Anyway, the solution is there at present and apparently working- but if the government fiddles with it and talks it down, cuts police numbers and the borough cuts their safety team, for how much longer will that be available to us?

Frankly I don't think I can take another 35 years of fighting it. Whoops forgot, probably haven't got another 35 years!

Lifes not always fair. Sometimes you can get a splinter even sliding down a rainbow. - Cherralea Morgen

Offline sweetcheeks

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Gender: Female
  • Posh Bird from the West !
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #8 on: August 04, 2010, 03:00:02 pm »
If something works, why tamper with it  :-\
"A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." George Bernard Shaw

Offline Bogomil

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 399
  • Hello !
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #9 on: August 05, 2010, 01:14:13 am »
If something works, why tamper with it  :-\

The fact that over 50% are breached IMHO shows they are not working.
At the moment they may be the best thing we have short of prison or the old style borstals for offenders, but lets see what gets proposed before saying that the government are idiots.

Offline Muggins

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2860
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #10 on: August 05, 2010, 09:21:59 am »
Like I said before I would like to see the solid proof that 50% haven't worked and how far these were taken before they were given up on,  how the ASB was tackled after the failed ASBO, because surely some other action was taken.     Could it be that successive ASBO were given reaching an ultimate threat punishment.

What we can do without is the government throwing out the 50% that did succeed befoer they have some other 'better' idea in place. I feel that what they want to do, cut them now so they can also cut the number of police and PCSO's and safety teams.  One things for sure, they have a funny idea about 'sink' estates and on more than one occasion we have been made to feel its our fault we are victims for living here.

David Cameron shows a real and scary lack of understanding now he is promising that if you get a council home it's not forever.  It should only not be forever/your lifetime if the privilidge is abused - like your kids being involved in ASB and not paying the rent.  Already it's getting like the dark ages.  Middle aged and old folk will be expected to move from their family home etc. etc.  Does the silly man think that people would not buy their way out if they could?

Next they'll be announcing a compulsory purchase back from those that's bought them! 
Lifes not always fair. Sometimes you can get a splinter even sliding down a rainbow. - Cherralea Morgen

Offline Bogomil

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 399
  • Hello !
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #11 on: August 05, 2010, 11:08:07 am »
David Cameron shows a real and scary lack of understanding now he is promising that if you get a council home it's not forever.  It should only not be forever/your lifetime if the privilidge is abused - like your kids being involved in ASB and not paying the rent.  Already it's getting like the dark ages.  Middle aged and old folk will be expected to move from their family home etc. etc.  Does the silly man think that people would not buy their way out if they could?

Next they'll be announcing a compulsory purchase back from those that's bought them!

Muggins, You should know better than to just jump on the media bandwagon. Cameron hasn’t said that at all but has opened up a debate that IMHO is long overdue.

Without wanting to pre-empt the admin team I think this item will end up in a new thread.

Actually Muggins this is an issue that does need a lot of thinking about and not just a gut reaction that this it is not right to change secure tenancies into fixed term tenancies.
What after all is the purpose of Government Social Housing? It is to provide affordable housing to meet the needs of those who could not afford to privately purchase or rent somewhere to live.

Under successive governments we have seen a decline in building Government Social Housing to the point that we have a real housing crisis in this country and not least here in Swindon.

Firstly there is already legislation which allows the landlord to apply for a demoted tenancy for tenant who cause or allow their property to allow their property for ASB or improper purposes. The fact that Swindon doesn’t use this legislation enough is the councils fault not the governments.

Secondly landlords don’t need fix term tenancies to evict people who do not pay their rent as they are in breach of their tenancy agreement. Too often people CHOOSE not to pay their rent but are quite happy to squander their meek incomes on other less important things (and here I don’t just mean drugs or booze). Too often the WANTS of people take over as they’ll get the latest Iphone, other electronic gadgets or over priced designer label shoes or clothes where perfectly adequate (and cheaper) items are available. Too many are just living above their means. Yes there will be people in dire financial difficulties but it’s a hard fact of life that you pay for somewhere to live (Unless you qualify for a 100% rent rebate) and the first rule is you keep a roof over your head.

Right now back to the principle or secure or fixed term tenancies.

It’s is quite right that people should be able to live peacefully in their properties (be it a house or flat) and should feel secure for as long as they NEED that property. But is it the duty or responsibility of Government Social Housing to continue provide a property to live in that far EXCEEDS the NEEDS of the person just because they took occupancy of the property when they justly had the need for it. The biggest issue in my mind is that there are far too many Government Social Housing properties under occupied, particularly 2 or 3 bed houses with only 1 person.

I know it will become a great matter for debate, but is it social justice for a single person to remain in a property designed for a family of 6 or 7 just because they have a secure tenancy and can not be forced to move whilst we have families of 4 or more living in 2 bed flats.

There are also great issues surrounding the social mix of areas where people who have lived in a larger property for many years become disengaged with a younger generation moving in around them. They often see the behaviour of the young tenants or their children as ASB. An example of this is when a young couple move into a family sized council house in an area of similar sized social housing. During a warm summer evening they have friends or family come round. They chat and laugh in the garden with a few (and I do mean a few) cans of larger but because they are doing so past 10pm at night the elderly neighbour complains that the new tenants are guilty of ASB.

Muggins, you re a great champion of green issues, and I’ll always praise your knowledge and dedication to this issue. But ask yourself. How many less properties would we need to build IF people in Government Social Housing were in properties to suit their NEEDS and not just because they’ve lived in a property for many years and therefore have the right to keep the property. Don’t you feel that it’s crazy that we are having to build more and more social housing for the quarter of a million families living in overcrowded accommodation, while more than 400,000 homes are larger than the peoples needs.

You’ll no doubt notice I have veered away referring to the properties as homes. I know and understand that people get very emotive about where they live, all the memories that they feel they’ll lose if they move somewhere else, and as people get older this becomes an even more emotive issue.
People move all the time, and often many times throughout their lifetime. Maybe the principle needs to be re-established that Government Social Housing is about providing for the NEEDS of those who can not afford housing in another way rather than about providing a single secure tenancy for LIFE.

Personally and IMHO, I would rather see a change that provides for the security of a tenancy without that security of tenancy being aligned to a particular property. Social Housing to suit your needs and not just what you’ve got.

Offline Tobes

  • Charter Member
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2169
  • Prehistoric bones in fields of russets and rust
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #12 on: August 05, 2010, 11:39:17 am »
TBH, I'm finding myself agreeing with Bogomil's take on both these issues (how is Hungary, btw?)

Muggsy - ASBOs were introduced because the existing laws and sentences weren't being enforced. They may be better than inaction, but perhaps it would be more effective to revamp the existing legal process? A little scrote riding an illegal bike would unlikely have done it with impunity 40 years ago - so what changed? It wasn't the law - it was societies willingness to deal with the issue.

...And the idea of social housing is, as Bogo said, to provide emergency accommodation for those who can't otherwise afford it. It was supposed to be a safety net as and when required - not a cradle to grave 'right' simply because someone was born into a particular socio economic class. If you can afford to buy or rent your own private property, why should the tax payer continue to subsidise you? Plenty of people DO sit on their arse-ends in their council housing, when they could (if they chose) afford to live elsewhere. Strange how so many plead poverty, yet have absolutely no trouble affording to pay for Sky with all the trimmings, smoke fags and ganja like chimneys, have a beemer or VW parked outside and spend every night down the boozer. I know that's not everyone - but there are PLENTY of examples if you take a tour through any of the 'P's. Ironically, its disproportionately their feral offspring tearing round on the mini-motos, innit?

I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it - Voltaire 'Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessita

Offline Chav

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1697
  • Gender: Female
  • INNIT!
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #13 on: August 05, 2010, 11:57:43 am »
I recently came across this :

By Tony Blair
Published: 12:01AM BST 28 Apr 2007
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3639522/Ive-been-tough-on-crime-now-we-have-to-nip-it-in-the-bud.html

Quote
About 15 years ago, I more or less made my name on changing Labour's traditional stance on law and order. I sought to get away from what I regarded as an unnecessary polarity: the Right would argue for tougher penalties; the Left for tackling social conditions. The choice was false. The reality was: you need both, a combination of personal and social responsibility.
Over these 10 years of government, crime has fallen. This is in fact the first post-war government to buck the rising trend. There has been a huge investment in regeneration, schools, youth facilities. The prison population has risen by more than 20,000. Sentences have got longer.But for many people, it simply doesn't feel like that. This is because our feelings of safety or security can't be measured by statistics alone. If there is an air of intimidation in a community or discourtesy in the way people are treated, then that creates a feeling of fear, discomfort, unease.
Fifteen years ago I recognised this happening and recognised, too, that it couldn't just be ascribed to lack of jobs or poverty. There was something deeper going on, to do with society changing, an absence of mutual respect and a failure to take responsibility for the way we behave to each other.
In government, this became known as the "Respect" agenda. We introduced the first anti-social behaviour laws, much criticised, but also undoubtedly much used.
However, there is one big difference between what I think now and what I thought 15 years ago. Then I analysed this issue as a breakdown in society. The "tough on the causes of crime" bit was all about social investment. I regarded this an issue about the nature of society as a whole, curable by Sure Start and the New Deal on jobs, better and improved schooling and so on. The rising tide would lift all ships, including those families in a hopeless and often helpless situation, bringing up feckless and irresponsible children.
I was reminded of this by reading David Cameron's recent speech on "Civility". Though coming at this from a different perspective - wanting to show how society, and not the state, was the answer to disrespect - he had a very similar analysis to mine of 15 years ago. He argued that there was a breakdown in society, a "culture that was becoming decivilised". He went on to say: "There are two ways you can try to make those kids behave better.
You can put a policeman on every bus, an Asbo on every teenager and a parenting order on every parent. Costly, bureaucratic, short-term, superficial and in the end, counter-productive - because it takes responsibility away from people and puts it in the hands of the state. Alternatively, you can build a society where those kids know how to behave in public, because that's how they've been brought up and that's what society expects."
He, too, sees this, as I did in 1997, about society as a whole. However, after 10 years of experience immersing myself in this issue, I no longer agree either with the Blair of 1992 or the Cameron of 2007 in one very central part of the analysis. I don't believe this is an issue to do with society as a whole.
Obviously it impacts on society as a whole. But it is not part of a general breakdown in society, a tearing of our social fabric or a descent into a "decivilised" culture.
Investment in the public realm has helped a transformation in city centres and improvements in public services, but I no longer think that social investment - essential though it is - is the complete solution.
I realised this most strongly when I was in Moss Side in Manchester a few months ago. Moss Side was a byword for guns and gangs and deprivation. Ten years ago, its school results were terrible; its housing poor; unemployment was high.
Ten years on, Moss Side has radically improved in schools, housing, employment. Its residents want to live there. All those I spoke to acknowledged the progress. But a small minority of "out of control" children and families still caused a huge problem, leeching into drugs and gangs. In short, the rising tide had not lifted all ships.
The problem with David Cameron's words is the same. There is no earthly need to "give every teenager an Asbo" or "every parent a parenting order" because not every teenager or parent deserves one. In fact, the vast majority don't, even in the toughest neighbourhoods. But a tiny minority do.
In other words, what we both identified as a generalised breakdown is no such thing. The overwhelming proportion of young people I meet today are law-abiding, respectful and caring - in many ways much more so than the generation of which I was part in the 1970s. Most parents find it a real struggle today to bring up children. But most parents manage. Most are proud of their children. Most children respect their parents.
The reality is that we are dealing with a very small number of highly dysfunctional families and children whose defining characteristic is that they do not represent society as a whole. They are the exception, not the rule. They do not respond to more investment. They do not conform to social norms.
A couple of days ago, there was a lot of publicity about a 10-year-old given an Asbo, with his father given a parenting order. Of course it's shocking that a 10-year-old was causing such mayhem. But the answer, I'm afraid, is neither to give his father more benefit or for society to explain why such behaviour is wrong.
And go and ask the community if they would prefer the Asbo not to exist.
What I have learnt over these 10 years is that the original analysis I had was incomplete and therefore misguided, ie, guiding us to the wrong policy conclusion, not in the sense that investment in poorer neighbourhoods and regeneration was wrong - it has been absolutely right - but in the sense that it will not deal with this small and unrepresentative minority.
Likewise, when David Cameron argues that ASB laws are "counter-productive" because we all have to take responsibility, that is also misguided. Repealing ASB laws is the last thing we need. And it's not the state that is using them. It is local communities; and, where used, they make a real difference.
The true point is that they are not enough. I now think that the proper answer is to add to the ASB laws measures that target failing and dysfunctional families early, and place those families within a proper, structured, disciplined framework of help and insistence on proper behaviour.
I know this is difficult and controversial, because it involves intervening before the child is committing criminal offences, at least serious ones, and when the families have not yet become a menace. But talk to any teacher in a primary school, social worker or local police officer and they can identify those families easily.
Instead of years with social services trying and failing to persuade them to change, those families, usually dependent on benefit and often in social housing, need to be made to change. Visit the Dundee Family Project for an idea about how it can be done.
It is very tough. It is intrusive. Naturally, people will complain about the "nanny state", but, for some of these families and their children, a nanny state is what they need - for their sake as much as for ours.
Forget the general sociology. Concentrate on the facts. The right analysis will bring a better answer.
"Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects." -- Lester B. Pearson.

Offline Bogomil

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 399
  • Hello !
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #14 on: August 05, 2010, 01:00:18 pm »
TBH, I'm finding myself agreeing with Bogomil's take on both these issues (how is Hungary, btw?)
Wouldn’t know these days as I was born here and never been there but a good bit of investigative work on the origins of the name. Being a pseudonym its more the work of fiction  ;)

Quote
A little scrote riding an illegal bike would unlikely have done it with impunity 40 years ago - so what changed? It wasn't the law - it was societies willingness to deal with the issue.

Sorry to slightly disagree with you on this Tobes, but actually the law as well as society has changed.

Well within my living memory some of these little scrotes would have been taught the error of their ways behind the bike sheds or down the nearest dark alley.

Years ago many of these young thugs would be dealt with by strict parents mortified that their children were causing so many problems. This including a good does of the belt if necessary and real “grounding” without the benefits of every mod con going in their bedrooms let alone the rest of the house.

I got caught nicking money when I was young, punishment besides a good wallop was being grounded for 6 months (not just a few days/weeks like it is these days) Each night I’d come home from school, have my tea, do my chores, then off to my bedroom for homework and a very early night. Sheer hell when you can hear your mates out playing in the streets.

These days too many families are no longer mortified let alone ashamed of the antics of their offspring (society) and parents are too frightened to use corporal punishment on their children even when rightly deserved for fear of being prosecuted (Law).

Speaking as someone who had more than their fair share of corporal punishment (and to pre-empt the out cries of the anti smacking brigade) Corporal punishment, or the fear of it, is one hell of a strong weapon in maintaining discipline and standards, that IMHO is why our schools suffer so much. An unruly child mightn’t mind being grounded or losing out on other things but an appropriate smack on the backside hurts like hell and is a strong motivator. No I m not advocating that parents should not be able to beat the s@@t out of their kids, and that is about self control of the parent, but neither should they be prevented from administering appropriate punishment. The rule of thumb I always used was to never hit out in anger. 

Offline Tobes

  • Charter Member
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2169
  • Prehistoric bones in fields of russets and rust
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #15 on: August 05, 2010, 04:28:39 pm »
Quote
Sorry to slightly disagree with you on this Tobes, but actually the law as well as society has changed.

Actually, I think you've slightly misunderstood me

Quote
These days too many families are no longer mortified let alone ashamed of the antics of their offspring (society) and parents are too frightened to use corporal punishment on their children even when rightly deserved for fear of being prosecuted (Law).

Thats actually what I was driving at. Society has castrated itself by using its supposed servant (the law) to prevent it from using its own (and more effective) means of self regulating the behaviour of those who've been failed by their parents.

Its an ironic and contradictory world wherein the state removes the right of an adult to reasonably chastise a child, and yet in which its elected representatives are seriously proposing equipping ordinary citizens with speed cameras so they can issue speeding tickets.

Cognitive dissonance at work again, huh?  ;)
I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it - Voltaire 'Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessita

Offline Chav

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1697
  • Gender: Female
  • INNIT!
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #16 on: August 05, 2010, 04:32:47 pm »
Times have changed, society and attitudes have changed , so therefore if we went back to the old ways of dealing with things
the way we/our parents/neighbours/local bobby/teachers used to back in 'the day' - would they really work ?

I personally think that the way things are going , it wont be long before we end up like a mini America if things go on as they are!
Its ok have rules/laws for this policies/Acts for this that and the other, however they are all as useless as the paper they are written on unless they can be ENFORCED !
I don't know about everyone else but I come across this word 'Enforce(d)' time and time again !

What is the point of having rules if they cannot be enforced ? When I hear that word, I want to know WHY they cannot be enforced, not a load of old drivel !

What do other countries do ?

Lets take Switzerland for instance - Anyone been there ?
How do they tackle ASB ?

I am going to do a bit of surfing later to see what I can find out , before I move on to the next country and make comparisons.



"Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects." -- Lester B. Pearson.

Offline Chav

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1697
  • Gender: Female
  • INNIT!
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #17 on: August 05, 2010, 05:55:10 pm »
Here we go :
Quote
Quality of life in Switzerland

If, by quality of life, you mean physical security, beautiful landscapes everywhere, good urban planning, no pollution, the highest per capita income in the world, punctual and efficient services, low taxes, and good travel connections, then Switzerland is one of the very best places in the world you can chose to live in.

 

Security and crime

There is almost no violent crime in Switzerland, especially against foreigners. The only violent crime that occurs against foreigners is in refugees centers, where some people continue the war they left at home. Theft is also an importation; we have the occasional Eastern European gang come to our country to commit burglaries. But by any standard, Switzerland is one of the safest countries to live in anywhere in the world, especially when compared to the US. If you asked us to name a place in Switzerland where you should not go out alone at night, we could not even give one. That's security.

In 1993, there were less murders in Geneva in one year than in New York in one day.
http://www.isyours.com/E/GE/life.htm

Hmm still looking for the everyday quality of life for Swiss neighbours, although I think I saw they rank quite high (2nd) for quality of life.

What I want to know is how ?
What do they do differently to us ?
How do they deal with ASB-related crime ?
"Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects." -- Lester B. Pearson.

Offline Muggins

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2860
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #18 on: August 05, 2010, 06:53:14 pm »
I'm not against having a good look and evaluation of any thing that been goign on for a while, what I am against is making bald statements which give the wrong impression, which could lead to an immediate turn around in behaviour.

As to the housing situation Tobes, I think you have that wrong, council housing, well the sort here, was built to take familes from London and other areas. Most of the families were living in very substandard accommodation after the war.  Whilst benefits were set up to be a safety net, I think you will find that council housing was not, it was to provide homes for those who could not get a mortgage, to get them into housing with a toilet, bathroom and a garden - and believe me even up until the 80's many of us could not raise a mortgage, even working full time.  Some houses at that time were built to sell with £25 deposit, even the last of those laid empty until they had to change them back to councill housing.
I think people forget the poverty that was about at that time.

We had some luck around that time and were able to purchase our HOME and I emhasise the word HOME.  If we had not had that luck we could not have done so, and would still be paying rent.  I remember the solicitor we used at the time questioning why we would want to buy it.,,,.council estate and all that, we had to point out that it was this house or no house, we could not have raised the funds for the more expensive houses, either in deposit or the mortgage repayments. 

Do you think it's right then to turn someone out of their HOME?  Do you think it right that old ladies/gents should be bullied out of the houses they have considered their home for decades before they are ready to leave? 


Frankly I think this government and our council don't want the bother of it. They'll be selling off the stock to housing assocations ASAP. 


 

Lifes not always fair. Sometimes you can get a splinter even sliding down a rainbow. - Cherralea Morgen

Offline Provocateur

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
  • Atchya like a ninja cat!
Re: Time to 'move beyond' Asbos?
« Reply #19 on: August 05, 2010, 09:53:41 pm »
Hmmm - in the late 1940s when our Grandparents were setting up the welfare state, despite the parlous condition of the ecconomy of the time, we still had a good chunk of an empire. Now and then is comparing apples with oranges. There are very few council houses left. NOW they should go to the most deserving and those unable to pay mortages or rent rather than those unwilling. The houses don't belong to the tennants (unless they bought them), they belong to the state. If you can afford to smoke, drive a stupid boy racer car, father/mother five kids, run Sky with a load of packages,  and drink industrial quantities of slag juice or fighting lager in the centre of town every other night, then YES, you should be on notice (especially is your feral brood are in trouble with the law): Its not your HOME, its a temporary gift from the state, from you and me and all the other people who've paid into the tax pot.

And as for Switzerland - yup it's got very low crime and probably the most opressive and nit picking sets of laws since Nazi Germany (remind me where the Nazi gold went again?!) - even to the extent that its a crime to have an untidy garden. Come on - they're no model for anything except good fondues and successful morally corrupt banking. I'd happily swap a few murders rather than live in that bleached out state of conformist appologists for Eugenics

Just a few examples of Swiss stupidity:

Quote
Clothes may not be hung to dry on Sunday.
You may not wash your car on a Sunday.
It is considered an offense to mow your lawn on a Sunday, because it causes too much noise.
It is illegal to flush the toilet after 10 PM.
A man may not relieve himself while standing up, after 10 PM.
Though it is illegal to produce, store, sell and trade absinth (special alcohol), it is legal to consume it.
It is required that every car with snow tires has to have a sticker on its dashboard which tells that the driver should not drive faster than 160 km/h with these tires.
If you forget you car-keys inside the car and you leave the car open, you will be punished.

Oh, and on a less light side:

Quote
The history of eugenics in Switzerland remains insufficiently explored. Research programmes are in progress. However, individual studies and facts are already available. For example:

The report of the Institute for the History of Medicine and Public Health "Mental Disability and Sexuality. Legal Sterilisation in the Vaud Canton between 1928 and 1985" points out that coercive sterilisations took place until the 1980s. The act on coercive sterilisations of the Vaud Canton was the first law of this kind in the European context.

Hans Wolfgang Maier, head of the Psychiatric Clinic in Zurich pointed out in a report from the beginning of the century that 70% to 80% of terminations were linked to sterilisation by doctors. In the period from 1929 to 1931, 480 women and 15 men were sterilised in Zurich in connection with termination.

Following agreements between doctors and authorities such as the 1934 "Directive For Surgical Sterilisation" of the Medical Association in Basle, eugenic indication to sterilisation was recognised as admissible.

A statistical evaluation of the sterilisations performed in the Basle women's hospital between 1920 and 1934 shows a remarkable increase in sterilisations for a psychiatric indication after 1929 and a steep increase in 1934, when a coercive sterilisation act came into effect in nearby National Socialist Germany.

A study by the Swiss Nursing School in Zurich, published in 1991, documents that 24 mentally-disabled women aged between 17 and 25 years were sterilised between 1980 and 1987. Of these 24 sterilisations, just one took place at the young woman's request.

Having evaluated sources primarily from the 1930s (psychiatric files, official directives, court files, etc.), historians have documented that the requirement for free consent to sterilisation was in most of cases not satisfied. Authorities obtained the "consent" required by the law partly by persuasion, and partly by enforcing it through coercion and threats. Thus the recipients of social benefits were threatened with removal of the benefits, women were exposed to a choice between placement in an institution or sterilisation, and abortions were permitted only when women simultaneously consented to sterilisation.

More than fifty years after ending the National Socialist dictatorship in Germany, in which racial murder, euthanasia and coerced sterilisations belonged to the political programme, it is clear that eugenics, with its idea of "life unworthy of life" and "racial purity" permeated even democratic countries. The idea that a "healthy nation" should be achieved through targeted medical/social measures was designed and politically implemented in many European countries and in the U.S.A in the first half of this century. It is a policy incomparable with the inconceivable horrors of the Nazi rule; yet it is clear that authorities and the medical community were guilty of the methods and measures applied, i.e. coerced sterilisations, prohibitions of marriages and child removals – serious violations of human rights.

Ugh. No thanks. I prefer British chaos.

 

Sorry, the copyright must be in the template.
Please notify this forum's administrator that this site is missing the copyright message for SMF so they can rectify the situation. Display of copyright is a legal requirement. For more information on this please visit the Simple Machines website.