Discussion
Infringement of human rights or acceptable restrictions?
[i]An "upstanding" teenager who is subject to a town centre curfew is to challenge anti-social behaviour laws in court.
The 15-year-old will say a "dispersal zone" in Richmond, London, where police can remove all under-16s from the area after 9pm, infringes his human rights.
The youth, backed by campaign group Liberty, is taking Richmond Council and the Met police to London's High Court.[/i]
[url]Full story|http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4580305.stm[/url]
[i]An "upstanding" teenager who is subject to a town centre curfew is to challenge anti-social behaviour laws in court.
The 15-year-old will say a "dispersal zone" in Richmond, London, where police can remove all under-16s from the area after 9pm, infringes his human rights.
The youth, backed by campaign group Liberty, is taking Richmond Council and the Met police to London's High Court.[/i]
[url]Full story|http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4580305.stm[/url]
-hoo.Whats the betting this little t
t`s parents are members of Liberty or some other liberal bunch of Rs?
As far as I can see, he has done nothing wrong, so consequently the police have done nothing.
It could be likened to complaining that if he goes shoplifting he will be arrested.
Whats the point of this court case? No doubt it`s at our expense.
More powers to plod I say - if kids are out misbehaving after 9 pm , castration is the only reasonable punishment. (copyright Pam Stevenson, NTNoCN circa 1980)
t`s parents are members of Liberty or some other liberal bunch of Rs? As far as I can see, he has done nothing wrong, so consequently the police have done nothing.
It could be likened to complaining that if he goes shoplifting he will be arrested.
Whats the point of this court case? No doubt it`s at our expense.
More powers to plod I say - if kids are out misbehaving after 9 pm , castration is the only reasonable punishment. (copyright Pam Stevenson, NTNoCN circa 1980)
My parents would never have considered allowing me to be out after 9:00pm at 16 or under. In fact - it wasn't until I was of an age to go to the pub (17ish-18) that I had any reason to be out so late.
If kids are out and about in an area with no reason to be there and a history of trouble after 9:00pm...I see no reason why the Police shouldn't have the power to "move them on" or even take them home.
Bloody parents should be insisting on it anyway - shouldn't have to be the cops job!
Its totally different in an Entertainment/Leisure Centre where they have things to do until late - if they are there with their parent's permission...and I'm surprised Liberty don't see it that way!
If kids are out and about in an area with no reason to be there and a history of trouble after 9:00pm...I see no reason why the Police shouldn't have the power to "move them on" or even take them home.
Bloody parents should be insisting on it anyway - shouldn't have to be the cops job!
Its totally different in an Entertainment/Leisure Centre where they have things to do until late - if they are there with their parent's permission...and I'm surprised Liberty don't see it that way!
Heard on the radio, Liberty are indeed backing this, but the boy in question has never been in any trouble. Apparently the curfew means he can't walk back home after a local football match or after going to the cinema.
While i can see the point for curfews on kids who have created trouble, can't see any benefits in enforcing it on those who haven't; it will probably just create resentment against the local Bib.
While i can see the point for curfews on kids who have created trouble, can't see any benefits in enforcing it on those who haven't; it will probably just create resentment against the local Bib.
As far as I can see from the story he is challenging it because the police have the power to remove under 16's from the area, not because the police have removed him from the area.
If he wins his case and precedent is set then that will just mean that the police will probably take less interest in dealing with this stuff in future in case they get their hand slapped for doing their job.
Hell, I got thrown into a hedge by a couple of coppers cause they suspected I was the person who had recently robbed some stuff from a petrol station going by the description they had. After checking my details and being satisfied that I wasn't even in the country at the time of the robbery they went on their way. Who cares, at least they were trying to catch the baddies!!!!
If the police get taken to court every time they try to create a better, safer, less threating place for decent people then I despair. Let them do their bleedin job. At least Richmond is attempting to tackle a problem.
If he wins his case and precedent is set then that will just mean that the police will probably take less interest in dealing with this stuff in future in case they get their hand slapped for doing their job.
Hell, I got thrown into a hedge by a couple of coppers cause they suspected I was the person who had recently robbed some stuff from a petrol station going by the description they had. After checking my details and being satisfied that I wasn't even in the country at the time of the robbery they went on their way. Who cares, at least they were trying to catch the baddies!!!!
If the police get taken to court every time they try to create a better, safer, less threating place for decent people then I despair. Let them do their bleedin job. At least Richmond is attempting to tackle a problem.
stackmonkey said:
Apparently the curfew means he can't walk back home after a local football match or after going to the cinema.
While i can see the point for curfews on kids who have created trouble, can't see any benefits in enforcing it on those who haven't; it will probably just create resentment against the local Bib.
The point is this - the lad IS NOT under curfew. Nor will he ever be if he behaves himself. He is going to court with a claim that if he does misbehave, his right to be out on the street ater 9pm MAY be taken away. What is the problem with that?
Can we get this into perspective?
The police already have lots of powers that enable them to deal with little tw@ts that are causing trouble. So why do they need some more?
I would be pretty pissed off if this sort of "law" was levelled at me, it basically makes the Police into Judge, Jury and Executioner. It is grossly unfair and completely pointless IMHO.
The police already have lots of powers that enable them to deal with little tw@ts that are causing trouble. So why do they need some more?
I would be pretty pissed off if this sort of "law" was levelled at me, it basically makes the Police into Judge, Jury and Executioner. It is grossly unfair and completely pointless IMHO.
"Off with the goolies....cut 'em off, right off" 
stackmonkey said:
Apparently the curfew means he can't walk back home after a local football match or after going to the cinema.
Fair point. If I was him, though, I'd just make sure I was wearing something smart enough and walk on home anyway. Why bother going to court about it!
I agree this seems a blunt instrument with which to tackle a particular problem...
Anything that buggers up the little tossers is fine by me.
We have a generation of whining no marks who should be brutalised to at least some reasonable degree, instead of held up as fully paid up subjects and protected from everything under the sun including their own bouts of poorly timed flatulence.
Beat them up, send them abroad and them beat them up again when they get there.
Human rights? Pitiful: where were your grandad's human rights when he was having his bollox blown off, defending your rights to buy a mobile phone with a f@cking stupid frog bleeper X-box i-Pod dooberyfirkin, eh, Jimmy boy?
What a tw@t: I really hope he gets done over by a Qualcast, ruddy peasant!
We have a generation of whining no marks who should be brutalised to at least some reasonable degree, instead of held up as fully paid up subjects and protected from everything under the sun including their own bouts of poorly timed flatulence.
Beat them up, send them abroad and them beat them up again when they get there.
Human rights? Pitiful: where were your grandad's human rights when he was having his bollox blown off, defending your rights to buy a mobile phone with a f@cking stupid frog bleeper X-box i-Pod dooberyfirkin, eh, Jimmy boy?
What a tw@t: I really hope he gets done over by a Qualcast, ruddy peasant!
I assume the police will only be moving along groups of youths hanging about, probably targeting the hoodie/baseball cap wearing youths.
If he is returning from the cinema or football then he will be passing through and not stopping so I don’t see a problem. I bet if he wore Jeans, normal jumper and left the cap at home I wouldn’t have thought the police would give him a second glance.
He spouts on about his human rights, what about the human rights of the people who want to go out at night and not be intimidated buy these groups hanging about.
If he is returning from the cinema or football then he will be passing through and not stopping so I don’t see a problem. I bet if he wore Jeans, normal jumper and left the cap at home I wouldn’t have thought the police would give him a second glance.
He spouts on about his human rights, what about the human rights of the people who want to go out at night and not be intimidated buy these groups hanging about.
Sometimes, I get the feeling that some of you were born middle-aged, can you not remember being young?
What did you do when you were 14/15/16 in the evenings? Personally, I used to go to a youth club occasionally (but you always got the trouble-making scrotes turn up, so it was less painful to stay away), the only other options were to hang around in my own or friends' houses or go for a walk. After 16 I went down the pub, but in current times that's not an option for young people, so what do they do? I'm not defending the trouble-making scotes that are the problem, but I would hazard to state that IMHO, they must be in the minority, if they're not then we're really in trouble!
But things are far more complicated that the single issues that result in knee-jerk totalitarian rulings like this one, but as has be the case before, the real losers are those that are doing no harm whatsoever, but "wait!" cry the proponents of such legislation, "those that are not causing trouble have nothing to worry about", oh yeah?, this would require "discretion", when was the last time you met a police officer/parking warden/security guard/congestion charge administrator/etc etc that used "discretion"???
Think about it, perhaps the requirement for additional legisaltion is not purely to empower the police, but just maybe to pave the way for "outsourced" security patrols and include the scope for more revenue generation from on the spot fines for teenagers who have the temerity to be out after 9 o'clock. Does it really sound so far fetched?
What did you do when you were 14/15/16 in the evenings? Personally, I used to go to a youth club occasionally (but you always got the trouble-making scrotes turn up, so it was less painful to stay away), the only other options were to hang around in my own or friends' houses or go for a walk. After 16 I went down the pub, but in current times that's not an option for young people, so what do they do? I'm not defending the trouble-making scotes that are the problem, but I would hazard to state that IMHO, they must be in the minority, if they're not then we're really in trouble!
But things are far more complicated that the single issues that result in knee-jerk totalitarian rulings like this one, but as has be the case before, the real losers are those that are doing no harm whatsoever, but "wait!" cry the proponents of such legislation, "those that are not causing trouble have nothing to worry about", oh yeah?, this would require "discretion", when was the last time you met a police officer/parking warden/security guard/congestion charge administrator/etc etc that used "discretion"???
Think about it, perhaps the requirement for additional legisaltion is not purely to empower the police, but just maybe to pave the way for "outsourced" security patrols and include the scope for more revenue generation from on the spot fines for teenagers who have the temerity to be out after 9 o'clock. Does it really sound so far fetched?
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff