How to tell the difference between UK, aus and US cops

[sambo]

^:lol:

Ha ha you've got to laugh haven't you! We have a government who haven't got a clue about anything anymore let alone getting to grips with this shitee. What a #$%!& sorry mess it all is Laughing  

That's basically it really, yeah. :lol: :?  :shock:  :shock:

Find salvation in your guitars boys, it's all we've got!

That just conjures imagery of a load of geezers strumming away in trenches or something. :lol: :oops:

[Johnny Mac]

^:lol:

Ha ha you've got to laugh haven't you! We have a government who haven't got a clue about anything anymore let alone getting to grips with this shitee. What a #$%!& sorry mess it all is Laughing  

That's basically it really, yeah. :lol: :?  :shock:  :shock:

Find salvation in your guitars boys, it's all we've got!

That just conjures imagery of a load of geezers strumming away in trenches or something. :lol: :oops:

Well they could be used as non lethal weapons! Get the sound from a rig of over cooked Kochs up to around 170db point in the direction of the enemy and chug. Then when they get too close chug at will!  8)

[Jonny]

The English cop would also have wondered "Hmmm, is he black?"

Y'know, institutionalised racism and all that.

LOL

[Philly Q]

The thing is the parents aren't going to get better. Why is this? Well I've got a few theorys to bang around. I was born in the sixties which isn't that long ago really. My parents were born in the thirties. Theirs just at the end of Victoria's reign. So 3 generations away from so called Victorian Values what ever they may be but you get the picture.

I've got another couple of theories to throw in the pot...

For most of our history we've never been too far away from a war.  And during those wars, people pulled together and strengthened their sense of community.  Nowadays, we still get involved in international conflict, but it doesn't involve most of us because the weapons are more powerful and sophisticated.  And with 24 hour news, more moral ambiguities become clear, it's not so clear who the good guys are, so we're not necessarily all on the same "side".

And then there's religion.  50 or 100 years ago, the vast majority of people shared a common(ish) religion - a large percentage even believed in it.  Again, it strengthened communities.  Nowadays, we might claim to be a "Christian country", but who goes to church or actually believes?  Pretty much no-one.  And in our multi-cultural society, there are lots of religions - they create divisions instead of common ground.

Not that I want to get sent off to war or start going to church (I'm an atheist!), but it seems that even those factors which used to make our society more united are now making it more fractured than ever before.  

I really think the human race as a whole has peaked and is now in free fall.

Yep, we're a decadent society.  Roll on that environmental disaster to wipe us out like the dinosaurs!  

[sambo]

Well they could be used as non lethal weapons! Get the sound from a rig of over cooked Kochs up to around 170db point in the direction of the enemy and chug. Then when they get too close chug at will!  8)

HA! A whole brigade of soldiers chugging on their Kochs!!! Yes, that is the way forward! :lol: :oops:



And Phil- totally agree about religion + war e.t.c. Just pretty much EVERYTHING about our society does not lend itself to togetherness. Especially with a growing population and the mass media.


I think we can overcome it. But how we would do that, and if we actually WILL, I'm not sure.


 :?

[dave_mc]

The thing is the parents aren't going to get better. Why is this? Well I've got a few theorys to bang around. I was born in the sixties which isn't that long ago really. My parents were born in the thirties. Theirs just at the end of Victoria's reign. So 3 generations away from so called Victorian Values what ever they may be but you get the picture. Her husband Albert supposedly being all virtuous ect according to his memorial near The Albert Hall. People aspired to all of this back then, well most did. Now they don't even know what a virtue is or as Philly pointed out the difference between right and wrong. So is this how things were before The Victorians came along? Not sure, perhaps one of us is a historian and could shed some light. So if you have no education, no morals intellect or logic ect your left with instincts, which in their basic form are fuking scary! Drugged up cave teens with shooters, great eh! I can see your point Phil, get to the basics and stop them being criminals in the first place but with parents so deluded and in denial you've got no chance. I really think the human race as a whole has peaked and is now in free fall. There isn't enough space, resources and were not the only country breeding things like this. Ha ha you've got to laugh haven't you!  We have a government who haven't got a clue about anything anymore let alone getting to grips with this shitee. What a #$%!& sorry mess it all is  :lol:  Find salvation in your guitars boys, it's all we've got!  :roll:

the problem is, though, that victorian values were shite, and also london/britain wasn't some kind of nostalgic safe place where everyone danced hand-in-hand under rainbows during her reign either.

i don't know what to do to sort it out either, but as philly says, we need to see why they commit crimes, and cut it off at the source, as it were. no point in sending someone to jail for 5 years to be "tough on crime" if they come out more hardened criminals than they went in.

These super-rich oligarchs (who got their money by EXTREMELY dubious means), hedge fund owners, businesses avoiding as much tax as possible (seems tesco is at it now too) etc. flaunting their wealth and not having to pay tax either aren't exactly helping to set a good example. If people with more money that it's possible to spend without being daft and putting in an order for 6000 learjets are trying to shirk their responsibility to pay fair taxes, how the heck do we persuade those worse-off that they're doing something which is "wrong"?

I'm far more concerned with the cheapos who already are doing better than 99.9999% of the population, but who are still not content, and are still trying to gip the system.

You know what's wrong? Tax evasion when you're already one of the richest people in the country.

 

Don't get me wrong, i'm not in favour of thugs, or people who go round happy-slapping etc. I want them locked up as much as the rest of you do. But I also want the Mr Burns-style characters locked up too.  :twisted:

[Kilby]

In the past the pond life who are todays chav parents would not have spawned as they would have been cannon fodder in some war or another. Unfortunitely these days they live long enough to inflict ther rat faced offspring upon the rest of us.

I have lived most of my life with armed cops (not whimpy pistols and MP5s) and never found them a problem.

Then I experienced the Met firearms teams who where just itching to shoot. I have to say they where the most undisiplined & childish representives of the law that I have ever seen. I'm just glad that I wasn't carrying a table leg or MP3 player at the time http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/13/mp3_gun_swoop/ (to understand the reference)

[noodleplugerine]

HA! A whole brigade of soldiers chugging on their Kochs!!!

Now that's just not helping the military stereotypes!

[sambo]

Too right Dave!

I'm just glad that I wasn't carrying a table leg or MP3 player at the time http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/13/mp3_gun_swoop/ (to understand the reference)

Oh my GOODNESS, no way- I saw this on a late-night crime program recently I'm sure of it. A woman rang the police with a description of a man who she thought had a gun, and he got on the bus and was followed by a helicopter, and then held up by armed police shortly after he got off the bus. It sounds too similar to be a different story. Except the program mentioned nothing of the mp3 player or the fact that it was a case of mistaken identity basically. That is unbelievable.

[MDV]

My god,

What have I created  :o

Some good points, though.

For the record, I think a reasonable factor in it is the impunity that kids can feel in public now.

You touch them and its assault at the least, threats of molestation at worst. We overprotect our children and therefore, to a degree, render them immune to the idea of consequence. Most systems, schooling and law in particular, are geared up to automatically regard children and teens as victims and to protect them.

At what point did we forget that kids can be utter bar-stewards and need to learn that there are repercusions for being a tw@t? At what point did we forget that if you give a young delinquent an inch, they'll take a mile and laugh at your gullibility a moment later?

I think if the public, i.e. any given person, were more entitled in the eyes of the law to defend themselves against aggressors, and the moral reletavism of ultimate causation of violent behaviour removed from the law and each person made responsible for each act in isolation (i.e. you come at someone with a knife and nobody gives a $%&# that youre poor and addicted to crack or your daddy beat you you came at someone with a knife and you have to answer for that) then we'd have a safer country.

[sambo]

My god,

What have I created  :o

Some good points, though.

For the record, I think a reasonable factor in it is the impunity that kids can feel in public now.

You touch them and its assault at the least, threats of molestation at worst. We overprotect our children and therefore, to a degree, render them immune to the idea of consequence. Most systems, schooling and law in particular, are geared up to automatically regard children and teens as victims and to protect them.

At what point did we forget that kids can be utter bar-stewards and need to learn that there are repercusions for being a tw@t? At what point did we forget that if you give a young delinquent an inch, they'll take a mile and laugh at your gullibility a moment later?

I think if the public, i.e. any given person, were more entitled in the eyes of the law to defend themselves against aggressors, and the moral reletavism of ultimate causation of violent behaviour removed from the law and each person made responsible for each act in isolation (i.e. you come at someone with a knife and nobody gives a $%&# that youre poor and addicted to crack or your daddy beat you you came at someone with a knife and you have to answer for that) then we'd have a safer country.

I don't like to keep agreeing with people so much, but again- I agree with everything you said.


To be honest, speaking as someone fresh from this societies education system, a heavily disciplinary system in schools would do WONDERS. I'm not talking bringing back the cane, but as you say, it's all about consequence. The little shitees in my school didn't give a TOSS about what they did; no sufficient punishment, or incentive to behave. Now couple that with what Phil mentioned earlier about parents siding with kids, and you have a recipe for disaster which ends in teachers having littler to no control.

[38thBeatle]

That story about the guy with the MP3 player reminds me of a guy I was talking to today. He was arrested by the police and held for 6 hours after having been dabbed and dna'd. His crime? He innocently bought a van  that turned out to have been stolen. He'd done HPI checks beforehand and nothing untoward showed up. He was trying to tax it when the problem arose and the police were informed. So he loses £5.7k as the vehicle is(quite rightly) confiscated and then gets treated like that. This guy was 43 years old and had never had any contact with the police all his life-not even a parking ticket. Meanwhile there are scrotes walking our streets laughing at us and immune from any form of punishment. They put pensioners refusing to pay council tax in jail and let muggers and burglars go free- figure that one out and if you can make sense of it, can you let me know please. That lot in the asylum that is Westminster have a lot to answer for.

[indysmith]

Ahh, politics :lol:
The word politics is derived from 'poly' meaning MANY and 'ticks' meaning BLOOD SUCKING PARASITES.

[dave_mc]

I don't like to keep agreeing with people so much, but again- I agree with everything you said.


To be honest, speaking as someone fresh from this societies education system, a heavily disciplinary system in schools would do WONDERS. I'm not talking bringing back the cane, but as you say, it's all about consequence. The little shitees in my school didn't give a TOSS about what they did; no sufficient punishment, or incentive to behave. Now couple that with what Phil mentioned earlier about parents siding with kids, and you have a recipe for disaster which ends in teachers having littler to no control.

i don't know what to do to be honest. my dad was a teacher, and i'm not too long out of school myself, and i know discipline is a major problem.

however, I know fine rightly, from my experience in school, that all the more strict teachers managed to achieve, more often than not, was to scare the bejasus out of those pupils who were already behaving- people like me and my friends. the real hardened misbehavers didn't care less- being told off was often even a badge of honour. what is it they say? the law is only for those stupid enough to follow it...

of course, the really, really strict teachers sometimes managed to scare everyone- the downside being that it was too much to lose, even for those already behaving. I'd rather have been in a class with people misbehaving than been scared to sneeze at the wrong time (as you were with a couple of teachers)- treatment like that was verging on abuse, frankly.

we can't really try kids as adults in court, and also the problem is, for many people there is no deterrent. Look at countries with the death penalty- people still commit crimes (in many cases, more crimes than countries without such a stiff punishment)... a lot of criminals (a) don't think they'll be caught or (b) feel like they have nothing to lose or even (c) make a calculated risk based on how much there is to gain if they aren't caught.

Those are pretty hard things to fight against.

I think if the public, i.e. any given person, were more entitled in the eyes of the law to defend themselves against aggressors, and the moral reletavism of ultimate causation of violent behaviour removed from the law and each person made responsible for each act in isolation (i.e. you come at someone with a knife and nobody gives a $%&# that youre poor and addicted to crack or your daddy beat you you came at someone with a knife and you have to answer for that) then we'd have a safer country.

i agree, but the problem with not looking at the causes of crime will mean that the public will feel more able to defend themselves, but there'll be about ten times as many people coming at you with a knife...

i wouldn't fancy my chances against someone with a knife.

of course, we could just legalise handguns. that'd be awesome.  :twisted:  (i'm being serious)

[sambo]

however, I know fine rightly, from my experience in school, that all the more strict teachers managed to achieve, more often than not, was to scare the bejasus out of those pupils who were already behaving- people like me and my friends. the real hardened misbehavers didn't care less- being told off was often even a badge of honour. what is it they say? the law is only for those stupid enough to follow it...

of course, the really, really strict teachers sometimes managed to scare everyone- the downside being that it was too much to lose, even for those already behaving. I'd rather have been in a class with people misbehaving than been scared to sneeze at the wrong time (as you were with a couple of teachers)- treatment like that was verging on abuse, frankly.

Yeah you have a point. Even the best teachers can't control everyone. And if you push too hard then as you say, where do you draw the line before it becomes abuse.

But basically on the whole, it's a battle that needs to be fought on two fronts at the same time for anything to get better. Firstly, locating and fighting the causes of the crime- education and a sense of morality and responsibility with kids as they grow up. Treat them more like adults, more interaction between kids/adults in the community e.t.c. so that there isn't such a huge gulf between generations.

Secondly, at the same time, be tough on the existing crime, with youths especially. Perhaps tougher than we are, to send out a strong message.


I think. :lol: