Model Railway Wanton Vandalism.. :(

[otolith]

Eric Mc said:

Too many imponderables.

I would be really surprised if this event will "inspire" somebody else to trash a model show or that a perception that the leniency of the punishment might encourage them.

The case is more general than that. The thing that should have stopped them, if they didn't have the moral compass to do so, is a fear of consequences. That would be a fear of the consequences of criminal damage, not specifically of trashing model shows.

[dr_gn]

otolith said:

Eric Mc said:

Too many imponderables.

I would be really surprised if this event will "inspire" somebody else to trash a model show or that a perception that the leniency of the punishment might encourage them.

The case is more general than that. The thing that should have stopped them, if they didn't have the moral compass to do so, is a fear of consequences. That would be a fear of the consequences of criminal damage, not specifically of trashing model shows.

Or, ideally, fear of what their parents would do to them. Total lack of respect for all involved. The absolute minimum should have been for them to pay back the monetary value of the damage.

[MarkwG]

otolith said:

The case is more general than that. The thing that should have stopped them, if they didn't have the moral compass to do so, is a fear of consequences. That would be a fear of the consequences of criminal damage, not specifically of trashing model shows.

"Fear of consequences" never works for wanton vandalism - these are not people who are rationally thinking it through; it's spur of the moment idiocy, not planning a bank raid.

[otolith]

MarkwG said:

otolith said:

The case is more general than that. The thing that should have stopped them, if they didn't have the moral compass to do so, is a fear of consequences. That would be a fear of the consequences of criminal damage, not specifically of trashing model shows.

"Fear of consequences" never works for wanton vandalism - these are not people who are rationally thinking it through; it's spur of the moment idiocy, not planning a bank raid.

Sure it does, for all sorts of things, just not all of the time. People still break the speed limits plenty, but if the worst consequence was a snotty letter from the police, they'd do it more. Some people, particularly young men, are at times incapable of balancing consequences against immediate gratification, but most of the time most people are. The more immediate, likely and (some way further down) severe the consequences, the less likely we are to risk them.

[MarkwG]

otolith said:

MarkwG said:

otolith said:

The case is more general than that. The thing that should have stopped them, if they didn't have the moral compass to do so, is a fear of consequences. That would be a fear of the consequences of criminal damage, not specifically of trashing model shows.

"Fear of consequences" never works for wanton vandalism - these are not people who are rationally thinking it through; it's spur of the moment idiocy, not planning a bank raid.

Sure it does, for all sorts of things, just not all of the time. People still break the speed limits plenty, but if the worst consequence was a snotty letter from the police, they'd do it more. Some people, particularly young men, are at times incapable of balancing consequences against immediate gratification, but most of the time most people are. The more immediate, likely and (some way further down) severe the consequences, the less likely we are to risk them.

So how do you explain repeat offending then? Speeding is a poor example, considering the number of people who not only continue to speed, but have racked up a considerable number of points doing so. How do you explain youngsters who put their lives on the line to graffiti railway lines, then? The consequences there are potentially death, yet we still see painted railway tunnels. It's simply not how the adolescent brain, particularly the young male ones, works.

[Evangelion]

I was unfortunately too late to donate, otherwise I certainly would have done.

To make amends, is there a webpage where one could contribute towards the cost of sending a hitman to pay these low-lives a visit?

[otolith]

MarkwG said:

So how do you explain repeat offending then? Speeding is a poor example, considering the number of people who not only continue to speed, but have racked up a considerable number of points doing so. How do you explain youngsters who put their lives on the line to graffiti railway lines, then? The consequences there are potentially death, yet we still see painted railway tunnels. It's simply not how the adolescent brain, particularly the young male ones, works.

People, particularly young males, do still do risky things, yes, whether the risk is prosecution or becoming a sticky mess on the front of a train. Without risk, they’d do it more. Publicly demonstrating that there are no consequences even if you get caught and prosecuted doesn’t help.

[anonymous-user]

Yertis said:

robemcdonald said:

Some kids have trashed a model show and folk are talking about capital punishment... etc.

It's actually quite an interesting discussion isn't it. There can be few more harmless and gentle pastimes than model railways. The models themselves often realise some sort of idealised version of the past. Nothing gets hurt.

Destroying these miniature utopias therefore seems a particularly nihilistic thing to do. "Our real life is a bit stty, so we're going to wreck these little visions of a less-stty world too. Nobody gets out alive." Obviously, I doubt that was ever articulated. I don't think many children make anything very much today.

But I think that's what is behind the passionate reaction to this particular incident.

Why did they do it? Model-making has never been cool, but looking back at my own childhood nearly all the boys had a stab at a few (or more) kits, and lots of us had Hornby train sets. In fact, I struggle to remember any who definitely didn't have models in some form or other. I put on a little model show with a couple of other boys when I was about 14, to raise funds for a ski trip. Nothing got broken, several of the rougher older boys unexpectedly came up to talk about their own models, and this was at a comp with a pretty lousy reputation. But I think most kids had some understanding that things like model railways don't spring into existence spontaneously, and respected them accordingly.

I don't know that modern children understand that – I don't think many actually make things. (I may be wrong and would be happy to learn that.) I know there are various games that are creative, but that's not the same as really physically making something.

Edited by Yertis on Friday 23 August 14:07

I think it’s just a random act of kids trashing something. It seems much more personal as so much time and love has gone into the hobby but this kind of thing has always gone on.

I’ve vandalised stuff in my youth that I’m deeply ashamed of now. The owner maybe woke up and saw a big human sized gap in their hedge on a Sunday morning and wondered if they had been targeted personally or what the motives were. When it was just some idiots that were young and had got drunk and thought it would be funny.

It’s easy to look at this kind of thing and see a deeper malaise but it’s often just idiot kids being idiot kids.

[MarkwG]

otolith said:

MarkwG said:

So how do you explain repeat offending then? Speeding is a poor example, considering the number of people who not only continue to speed, but have racked up a considerable number of points doing so. How do you explain youngsters who put their lives on the line to graffiti railway lines, then? The consequences there are potentially death, yet we still see painted railway tunnels. It's simply not how the adolescent brain, particularly the young male ones, works.

People, particularly young males, do still do risky things, yes, whether the risk is prosecution or becoming a sticky mess on the front of a train. Without risk, they’d do it more. Publicly demonstrating that there are no consequences even if you get caught and prosecuted doesn’t help.

That doesn't make sense: you say they still do risky things, but they'd do it less if the risk was greater: patently not the case, if the risk is death, that's as high risk as it gets, yet we still have anti social activity where the potential of death exists, & we still have repeat behaviours.

No one is saying, as far as I can tell, that there shouldn't be consequences, just that they don't act as a deterrent - they act as punishment, after the event, which is about society demonstrating that a wrong has been done, & corrective action should be taken to appease the victims & society.

[otolith]

MarkwG said:

otolith said:

MarkwG said:

So how do you explain repeat offending then? Speeding is a poor example, considering the number of people who not only continue to speed, but have racked up a considerable number of points doing so. How do you explain youngsters who put their lives on the line to graffiti railway lines, then? The consequences there are potentially death, yet we still see painted railway tunnels. It's simply not how the adolescent brain, particularly the young male ones, works.

People, particularly young males, do still do risky things, yes, whether the risk is prosecution or becoming a sticky mess on the front of a train. Without risk, they’d do it more. Publicly demonstrating that there are no consequences even if you get caught and prosecuted doesn’t help.

That doesn't make sense: you say they still do risky things, but they'd do it less if the risk was greater: patently not the case, if the risk is death, that's as high risk as it gets, yet we still have anti social activity where the potential of death exists, & we still have repeat behaviours.

No one is saying, as far as I can tell, that there shouldn't be consequences, just that they don't act as a deterrent - they act as punishment, after the event, which is about society demonstrating that a wrong has been done, & corrective action should be taken to appease the victims & society.

The magnitude of the consequences is not a particularly strong factor in deterrence - the likelihood and the immediacy are.

[Saleen836]

It's been rebuilt
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire...