How to remove human rights types from existence?

[Ecks Ridgehead]

JagLover said:

Ecks Ridgehead said:

(Furthermore, if we want to get really philosophical (which no-one ever does, unfortunately), then unless a youth actually lives at where this "hanging out" is going on, then he is by definition on his way to a destination...which is exactly as the JL Pavement Act 2008 says it should be).

There are already measures being used against this problem that are nearly as perscriptive or even more so.

For example dispersal orders and curfews.

Why did you respond to the part in brackets but not the two main parts of my post?

Edited by Ecks Ridgehead on Tuesday 12th February 14:21

[Vipers]

Ecks Ridgehead said:

Vipers said:

Again the "rights" of ordinary people going about their business, are being compromised by those who think all the rabble hanging round shop doors are there for the good of the community. THEY ARE A BLOODY NUSIENCE, and yes they do intimidate folk. Imagine an old 80 year old lady being intimidated by these "kids" take a swing at their head with her handbag, it doesnt take imagine to see who would come off worse.

Not a chance the scrots would. This country is going down the tubes FAST, too many bloody people with nothing else to do you look after the rights of the perps, just wait until they are on the receiving end for a change.

Fantastic! Loving the idea that an 80-year-old lady taking her handbag and swinging it at the head of someone who is simply standing on the pavement and breaking no law is somehow not wrong. Sounds like you're a Llap Goch Master!

I did say "being intimidated", interesting site you put me onto, have to digest it later. Tks

[cg360]

Chris71 said:

that doesn't mean we should all be kept out of city centres at night and only women allowed in.

Happens every Thursday. It's called late night shopping.

[Twincam16]

Mosquito devices, talking CCTV cameras, cameras attached to remote-control helicopters, there was one story on the news a while ago about some stores that had started playing classical music outside to drive the 'youths' away.

And where is PC Plod while all this is going on? Down the station, filling in a form in triplicate.

PCSO Plodling is out there in his 'lite' uniform that marks him out as a powerless pen-pusher, and he can approach them and say in a nasal whine 'can you move on please' and the youths will say 'no, what are you gonna do about it?'.

And he'll just move on, because the youths are right. There is nothing the police can do about it.

We need to bring back respect for our police. That means fewer forms, more powers of physical arrest, but most importantly, a sense of importance in the community. Kids should know their local PCs by name, because they're out on the beat. They should be responsible for that beat, and the active policing of it, with their own sense of priorities and no forms to fill in unless they've just banged someone up in a cell. That means if there's a bunch of intimidating hoodies hanging around outside Spar trying to get all and sundry to buy them some White Lightning and 20 Lamberts 'or else', they can move them on whilst turning a blind eye to a five year old who's accidentally dropped a lolly stick, without having to fill in a form.

Seriously, next time I hear a chav say 'what you gonna do?' to a figure of authority, I want them to legally be able to say 'this' before bundling them into the back of a police van.

[Ecks Ridgehead]

Vipers said:

Ecks Ridgehead said:

Vipers said:

Again the "rights" of ordinary people going about their business, are being compromised by those who think all the rabble hanging round shop doors are there for the good of the community. THEY ARE A BLOODY NUSIENCE, and yes they do intimidate folk. Imagine an old 80 year old lady being intimidated by these "kids" take a swing at their head with her handbag, it doesnt take imagine to see who would come off worse.

Not a chance the scrots would. This country is going down the tubes FAST, too many bloody people with nothing else to do you look after the rights of the perps, just wait until they are on the receiving end for a change.

Fantastic! Loving the idea that an 80-year-old lady taking her handbag and swinging it at the head of someone who is simply standing on the pavement and breaking no law is somehow not wrong. Sounds like you're a Llap Goch Master!

I did say "being intimidated", interesting site you put me onto, have to digest it later. Tks

But the problem with using "being intimidated" as a justification to attack someone is that "intimidation" is entirely subjective, and would lead to a society where attacking someone without physical provocation is permitted under certain circumstances...which doesn't sound like the kind of respectful, responsible society that people on here would like to create.

Enjoy learning about Llap Goch...

[Raify]

Ecks Ridgehead said:

...... and would lead to a society where attacking someone without physical provocation is permitted under certain circumstances...which doesn't sound like the kind of respectful, responsible society that people on here would like to create.

Now you're being ironic.

[Vipers]

Ecks Ridgehead said:

But the problem with using "being intimidated" as a justification to attack someone is that "intimidation" is entirely subjective, and would lead to a society where attacking someone without physical provocation is permitted under certain circumstances...which doesn't sound like the kind of respectful, responsible society that people on here would like to create.

Enjoy learning about Llap Goch...

I understand what you are saying, but I am refering to the situation of a group of youths blocking the entrance to a shop, as they do on occasions, and people are trying to get in, I dont think we have to push our way through a bunch of kids with "Excuse me", when its blatenly obvious what you wish to do.

And why on earth do they congregate outside shops? its beyond me, except they are just out to cause problems, and intimidate joe public trying to access the shop. Yes it is subjective I know. Hope you see where I am coming from. Sadly we live in a society where ferel kids, if that is the right term, roam the streets looking for a fight with anyone who cares to be about, this is not the society I grew up in.

I have no idea how we change it, but change it we must.

[Bing o]

Vipers said:

Ecks Ridgehead said:

But the problem with using "being intimidated" as a justification to attack someone is that "intimidation" is entirely subjective, and would lead to a society where attacking someone without physical provocation is permitted under certain circumstances...which doesn't sound like the kind of respectful, responsible society that people on here would like to create.

Enjoy learning about Llap Goch...

I understand what you are saying, but I am refering to the situation of a group of youths blocking the entrance to a shop, as they do on occasions, and people are trying to get in, I dont think we have to push our way through a bunch of kids with "Excuse me", when its blatenly obvious what you wish to do.

And why on earth do they congregate outside shops? its beyond me, except they are just out to cause problems, and intimidate joe public trying to access the shop. Yes it is subjective I know. Hope you see where I am coming from. Sadly we live in a society where ferel kids, if that is the right term, roam the streets looking for a fight with anyone who cares to be about, this is not the society I grew up in.

I have no idea how we change it, but change it we must.

But wouldn't you say "excuse me" to a little old lady if she was in your way?

The decline of manners in this country is dreadful - people look at me like I'm crazy when I say "excuse me", "thankyou" or "you're welcome".

[tinman0]

Slightly off topic, but can anyone who isn't a teenager hear the mossy? I certainly can I and I'm mid 30s.

Or does it just mean that I haven't pounded my hearing into oblivion?

[JonRB]

Ok, now that I have finally found the definitive thread on this and aren't going to be hit by the repost police:

The thing that gets me is that, not only are these things indiscriminate, but what kind of bollocky crap is it that "young people" have excellent hearing and "people over 25" can't hear?

I'm in my late 30's and I have quite excellent hearing - always have had - and I'd wager that I could hear this thing whilst some kid who has been clubbing 3 times a week would probably not.

Edited by JonRB on Tuesday 12th February 17:50

[Holst]

tinman0 said:

Slightly off topic, but can anyone who isn't a teenager hear the mossy? I certainly can I and I'm mid 30s.

Or does it just mean that I haven't pounded my hearing into oblivion?

I can hear them and im 26

I also cant watch my friends TV because it makes a very high pitch noise that nobody else can hear, my friends thought I was going nuts untill a friends son (about 14) came to the house and complained about the whine as well.

[JonRB]

Holst said:

I also cant watch my friends TV because it makes a very high pitch noise that nobody else can hear, my friends thought I was going nuts untill a friends son (about 14) came to the house and complained about the whine as well.

I know what you mean. I regularly experience things like that.

The latest is the instrument panel in my new (to me) Sagaris that has a high-pitched whine. I haven't even bothered mentioning it to the dealer as I know that nobody else will be able to hear it, and even if they do there won't be anything they can do about it.

At least you can change a TV.

Edit: Ok, you can change a car too, but the monetary amounts are a bit different. And cars are more emotive.

Edited by JonRB on Tuesday 12th February 18:09

[sjn2004]

Ecks Ridgehead said:

JagLover said:

Ecks Ridgehead said:

If you are intimidated by children standing outside a shop then I would suggest that the problem is with you, not the children.

Virtually every day a law abiding member of the public is beaten to death, or near to death, by these 'children'.

1. By my calculations your claim would mean that around 40 people will have been beaten to, or near to, death in 2008, and around 350 people in 2007. Can you provide any evidence to back up this claim of yours?

2. Intimidation never killed anyone.

Maybe he exaggerated the number of cases of murder, but there are several cases in the press this week. As to your second point, should you be allowed to intimidate people only if it causes mental injury?

You should also note that the mosquito is noise activated(by shouting etc), produces sound 5dBA above ambient and has a range of 15 metres. Its a highly effect way of getting rid of gangs of morons without the need for confrontation. It should be applauded.

[VictorMeldrew]

Tony*T3 said:

I personally think they should be banned from public areas.

A bit harsh perhaps, maybe a curfew would be a good compromise.

I am reminded of a guy I heard about in Bradford the other day. Ex para, personal bodyguard type - when he came across a group of "yoofs" making a nuisance of themselves in a churchyard he simply walked up to them and had a quiet word. Then he opened a gym and gave them something to do, and the area is now pretty much crime free. Itwas pretty inspirational.

Not generally recommended though. This guy could look after himself, and from all accounts has an "air" about him that simply commands respect. Nonetheless, he shows that providing a strong and positive role model can make a world of difference, especially when many of the problem youths have no tangible father figure in their lives. He deserves a medal in my book.

Putting up squawk boxes to move the "problem" elsewhere on the other hand does absolutely nothing of lasting value, other than highlight the inadequacy of the shopkeeper in question in the trouser filling department. It wouldn't surprise me at all if long term the effect was to remove a minor nuisance and replace it with something more serious.

[Vipers]

Bing o said:

Vipers said:

Ecks Ridgehead said:

But the problem with using "being intimidated" as a justification to attack someone is that "intimidation" is entirely subjective, and would lead to a society where attacking someone without physical provocation is permitted under certain circumstances...which doesn't sound like the kind of respectful, responsible society that people on here would like to create.

Enjoy learning about Llap Goch...

I understand what you are saying, but I am refering to the situation of a group of youths blocking the entrance to a shop, as they do on occasions, and people are trying to get in, I dont think we have to push our way through a bunch of kids with "Excuse me", when its blatenly obvious what you wish to do.

And why on earth do they congregate outside shops? its beyond me, except they are just out to cause problems, and intimidate joe public trying to access the shop. Yes it is subjective I know. Hope you see where I am coming from. Sadly we live in a society where ferel kids, if that is the right term, roam the streets looking for a fight with anyone who cares to be about, this is not the society I grew up in.

I have no idea how we change it, but change it we must.

But wouldn't you say "excuse me" to a little old lady if she was in your way?

The decline of manners in this country is dreadful - people look at me like I'm crazy when I say "excuse me", "thankyou" or "you're welcome".

Indeed I would, BUT I dont feel I should be the one to ask to be allowed to pass through a doorway to a bunch of kids with nothing better to do. (Although I would as I am a polite chappie), But isn't it blatenly to them that I want to enter the door, thats why I am heading towards it in the first place?

[Bing o]

Vipers said:

Bing o said:

Vipers said:

Ecks Ridgehead said:

But the problem with using "being intimidated" as a justification to attack someone is that "intimidation" is entirely subjective, and would lead to a society where attacking someone without physical provocation is permitted under certain circumstances...which doesn't sound like the kind of respectful, responsible society that people on here would like to create.

Enjoy learning about Llap Goch...

I understand what you are saying, but I am refering to the situation of a group of youths blocking the entrance to a shop, as they do on occasions, and people are trying to get in, I dont think we have to push our way through a bunch of kids with "Excuse me", when its blatenly obvious what you wish to do.

And why on earth do they congregate outside shops? its beyond me, except they are just out to cause problems, and intimidate joe public trying to access the shop. Yes it is subjective I know. Hope you see where I am coming from. Sadly we live in a society where ferel kids, if that is the right term, roam the streets looking for a fight with anyone who cares to be about, this is not the society I grew up in.

I have no idea how we change it, but change it we must.

But wouldn't you say "excuse me" to a little old lady if she was in your way?

The decline of manners in this country is dreadful - people look at me like I'm crazy when I say "excuse me", "thankyou" or "you're welcome".

Indeed I would, BUT I dont feel I should be the one to ask to be allowed to pass through a doorway to a bunch of kids with nothing better to do. (Although I would as I am a polite chappie), But isn't it blatenly to them that I want to enter the door, thats why I am heading towards it in the first place?

There are stupid ignorant people everywhere, usually in my way.

"Excuse me" never hurts though

[dhutch]

I have to admit ive only skim-read this (5page) thread.

However my view is that is inappropreate for them to be used.

Im actauly now 20 so not technicaly a teenager, however i find it shocking the way that people do pigion-hole teenagers as been bad. Im quite nice, actually! I dont go round saying that 'old fuddy duddys' (people over about 50 ) all drive to the corner shop listen to clasical music and hate kids.
- Plus, while some 'teenagers' are 'upto no good' a large number of crimes/offences are covered by people who proberbly wouldnt hear the horrable things. And conversely, they also wrongly affect small children, babys, dogs, etc.

I dont have a problem with shops etc that are target able having audiable panic buttons, that would be heard by all, if the case of a serous issue. And i agree that certain teenagers cause problems, and that it would be great if that wasnt the case. But quite simply im supprised these things are even liegal anyway!
- What next, 4ft high steps to keep window shoping pensioners out of certain areas? Powerfull blasts of 33hz to keep women at bay? Heavy metal to keep accountants at home.



Daniel

[tinman0]

sjn2004 said:

Ecks Ridgehead said:

JagLover said:

Ecks Ridgehead said:

If you are intimidated by children standing outside a shop then I would suggest that the problem is with you, not the children.

Virtually every day a law abiding member of the public is beaten to death, or near to death, by these 'children'.

1. By my calculations your claim would mean that around 40 people will have been beaten to, or near to, death in 2008, and around 350 people in 2007. Can you provide any evidence to back up this claim of yours?

2. Intimidation never killed anyone.

Maybe he exaggerated the number of cases of murder, but there are several cases in the press this week. As to your second point, should you be allowed to intimidate people only if it causes mental injury?

Several? Three today.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/new...