On Sat, 10 May 2008 10:02:13 +0100, MM wrote:
>>>We do indeed. Am I not always saying so? But now the police intend to
>>>get tough with known troublemakers and everyone is up in arms!
>>
>>Mainly because experience tells me that they will leave the *real*
>>troublemakers alone and harrass the youngsters who rarely cause
>>significant problems.
>
>Well, that is because they are not addressing the targets accurately,
>not because of the zero-tolerancing policy itself (which is what this
>amounts to).
The way to address the troublemakers is to gather sufficient evidence
to get them convicted of their crimes. I know that that might be
harder work than harrassing innocent youths, but it is what the police
are paid to do.
>>It is certainly not a technique that will make anyone's behaviour any
>>better, and is very likely to make them justifiably upset and lead to
>>greater antisocial behaviour.
>So we do absolutely nothing and allow the intimidation, burglary,
>criminal damage, antisocial behaviour and vehicle crime to carry on as
>per usual?
I'm a bit old-fashioned. I believe that the police should catch
people who are actually committing crimes and get them convicted.
Your preference is to take their photographs and try to annoy them
without worrying overly much whether they are in fact guilty of any
crime.
--
Cynic
|