You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Off the back of the violence against women thread, it was getting derailed and yet I think it’s a really important/interesting subject.
@stevextc posited:
As I said the solution is simple, we need to renormalize violence if the majority of men wish to do anything against harassment of women by strangers or other anti-social behaviour.
Most of us are not going to get involved as potentially saying something carries much higher sentencing than wolf whistling or selling drugs outside the school. (or our local complaint on the schools football ground pavilion)
Both these are to me the same, I’m not getting a criminal record for saying “excuse me that was inappropriate, I think you should apologise” or “could you sell your drugs elsewhere”.
There was also a link to the video of a group of young boys/teens riding around a supermarket in their BMXs.
Are we becoming a nation of wimps who are scared of righting wrongs by our not delivering what used used be known as ‘street justice’?
If someone jumped a queue would you be scared to pull them aside because they’d (successfully) get you charged with assault?
What if they were not just jumping a queue but were manualling their BMX through the checkout in a dangerous fashion?
What would you do/have you done?
Stuff like this really boils my piss.
In my experience it often just takes one person to do or say something to give others the "permission" they need to also intervene.
Much to my wife's annoyance, I am usually one of the first to call people out on shit like this. People trying to jump queues, yoofs throwing empty cans down on the ground within yards of a bin, people sitting in the middle of a footpath, lads harassing a young mother at the local shops. These are just a few recent examples that spring to mind. I find that often, if a few people point out what a dick they're being and vaguely look like they might be willing to do something about it, it's enough to put an end to it.
Are we becoming a nation of wimps
We always have been, Brits On The Piss tours aside.
I am not and would never advocate random violence, but when met with someone wearing a chinstrap during a global pandemic do you a) say to them "excuse me, would you mind pulling up your mask for me please" or b) tut, roll your eyes and ignore it?
I do the latter and I despise myself because of it.
Re: the video, I'm not watching a 25-minute YouTube without context. Does anyone have the Cliff Notes?
^ sorry, @7:20 there is two minutes or so of riding around a supermarket, pulling stuff off shelves, one of them getting grabbed/arrested by elderly woman, then one of them punching a male shopper, etc.
Rest of it is varying degrees of yob tossery on the streets and paths, intimidating a random kid with homophobic insults and staring him down etc.
I like deltacharlie72 tend to get stuck in again much to my wifes annoyance also.
Also they fully blocked the pavement outside MacDonalds, who knows what they were doing inside.
Anyway options:
1) Consider get chatting to one, the point out that they are blocking the pavement. Probs they would guilt into tidying the bikes up.
However, its risky, there are a lot of them and they might be violent/thugs, the video says not, but if you haven't seen the video how would you know.
So you might end up a victim.
2) Calling the cops? Zero confidence here they probably will not do anything, and at worst you are just as likely to end up a victim there too. They like nothing better than a soft middle class target. When I was growing up (small town) 70's/80's you felt you could trust a copper, and your parents taught you that. But now my experience says only call the cops if your life is in serious danger, otherwise involving them is likely to bring you more trouble. This is what I teach my kids, never speak to a cop, avoid them at all costs and if you get stopped keep your gob shut.
3) Walk away, find a different supermarket/mcds. This is my favoured approach.
As I said the solution is simple, we need to renormalize violence if the majority of men wish to do anything against harassment of women by strangers or other anti-social behaviour.
I don't think any-one thinks that vigilante justice is the right way to deal with this problem, do they? I mean define antisocial behavior? some of it is plain fo'shure, (that BMX video) but what you think is anti social won't be for others, and what you think doesn't deserves a clip round the ear, for some is a reason to be the local bully boy. Don't like gay people..? Some-one had to sort them out your honour..
Both these are to me the same, I’m not getting a criminal record for saying “excuse me that was inappropriate, I think you should apologise” or “could you sell your drugs elsewhere”.
This is extraordinary unlikely. The lack of self awareness of at the same proclaiming that violence against women is vanishingly small, and then using "I'm not going to get a criminal record" as your paper thin excuse for not doing anything is Tory Cabinet Minister levels of double-standards
so the answer to violence, is more violence?
all sounds a bit charles bronson. better start growing a moustache.
I blame the parents
What about if someone is riding a bike on a 'footpath', or path where bikes aren't allowed to be ridden? Should someone resort to violence, if the rider doesn't immediately respond to requests to not ride their bike there?
What about if someone is riding a bike on a ‘footpath’, or path where bikes aren’t allowed to be ridden? Should someone resort to violence,
I think the point @stevextc was making (correct me if I’m wrong) is that if a person/persons are endangering you/someone else or being rude (ie attacking you, or parking on yellow lines, or jumping queues) then you can’t intervene because the law is on their side. But if we were the kind of society who would all intervene then the tide would change? So miscreants would fear messing with us rather than the other way around.
Also, dangerous liars would get beaten and so a strong message would be sent? Again, correct me if I’m wrong.
Boris wrote a ministerial code…. one he flagrantly breaks because there are no consequences to breaking it.
IMHO an amendment that says should the PM lie the leader of the opposition is allowed to beat the shit out of them would result in a far more civilised house of commons.To translate this to daily life… when someone just pushes in from of you in the supermarket queue what do you do?
The truth is there is NOTHING you can do except perhaps ask the person on the checkout not to serve them… and they know that.
No, the youths in that video are out of order, no question. But as for using force/violence to deal with the behaviour of someone doing something you don't approve of, where do you draw the line? So if someone thinks it's ok to assault a cyclist on a forbidden path, is that ok because they're able to justify it to themselves? In that video, it would be perfectly legal to use 'appropriate force' to try to prevent a breach of the peace and/or injury to persons. So if you've got the stones, go for it. We're increasingly living in a society where money and power talk louder than the 'law' anyway, see members of our political classes. So if you have the 'power', use it. That seems to be the message...
I think it was Pinker who said that we're living in the most peaceful time ver. The reasons (locally) vary i think, but largely he said that:
1. legitimately held power (democracy)
2. feminisation of societies (more and more women in positions of power, police, govt, judicial, and commercial)
3. Education; regardless of your thoughts on modern education, we're educating people to be rational thinkers rather than traditionalists
4. Global media and trade, humanises the world
Meant the world was becoming less violent. I think then to retreat to a place when "Men were Men" and everyone who stepped out of line gets a "Tar 'n' feathering"...is a backwards step.
I think the point @stevextc was making (correct me if I’m wrong) is that if a person/persons are endangering you/someone else or being rude (ie attacking you, or parking on yellow lines, or jumping queues) then you can’t intervene because the law is on their side. But if we were the kind of society who would all intervene then the tide would change? So miscreants would fear messing with us rather than the other way around.
Mob justice is a big thing in Afghanistan.
It's working out swimmingly for them.
I mean how ****ing stupid does the OP have to be to suggest "renormalizing" violence - oh yeah, street justice Duterte style! Awesome! That's going to work out well in the long term isn't it - and the vast majority of men are definitely not stupid enough for that renormalized violence to spill out into areas where violence isn't appropriate.
Also, does anyone actually really think the police are stupid enough to charge you - if you get attacked after sticking up for a woman and you end up battering them? I know a few people who would have done some time if the police actually cared that much about known miscreants being on the receiving end of questionable "reasonable use of force".
August 2019? Are there any newer videos? Or, like, have those kids had their fun (fUN! everythings alright as long as its FUN!), grown up a bit and are doing something else?
Perhaps those kids just wanted to build some jumps in the local woods, to be able to let off some steam, but the local council kept flattening them...
August 2019? Are there any newer videos? Or, like, have those kids had their fun (fUN! everythings alright as long as its FUN!), grown up a bit and are doing something else?
I won’t be promoting his channel but he’s 21yrs old now (19 in the video) ragging around on bikes weaving between traffic with his gang of 12yr miscreants. A bit like a latterday Fagin on a bicycle. Almost sounds ‘glamorous’ innit. I believe his mum paid his (small) fine for the Asda incident.
Not wishing to focus on that video but the wider picture of meekness.
ie what to do with threating/dangerous/thieving/littering/lying people if the police/justice are increasingly powerless/ and appear to err on the side of the perpetrators?
The amount of money the Tory party spends on law and order (both police and the judicial system) tells you exactly how important this is to society.
It's *our* society that chose to put them in power, so we should assume that this is the outcome that our society desires.
I don’t think any-one thinks that vigilante justice is the right way to deal with this problem, do they?
and that isn't what I was saying rather ... you should feel free to say something without worrying that you will end up in court if they turn it violent.
Calling the cops? Zero confidence here they probably will not do anything, and at worst you are just as likely to end up a victim there too. They like nothing better than a soft middle class target. When I was growing up (small town) 70’s/80’s you felt you could trust a copper, and your parents taught you that. But now my experience says only call the cops if your life is in serious danger, otherwise involving them is likely to bring you more trouble. This is what I teach my kids, never speak to a cop, avoid them at all costs and if you get stopped keep your gob shut.
This is exactly it ...
I think the point @stevextc was making (correct me if I’m wrong) is that if a person/persons are endangering you/someone else or being rude (ie attacking you, or parking on yellow lines, or jumping queues) then you can’t intervene because the law is on their side. But if we were the kind of society who would all intervene then the tide would change? So miscreants would fear messing with us rather than the other way around.
more or less.... I think you missed the most important point though and that is probably a reflection on you in a good way
I have zero faith in the police or criminal justice system in England.
What prevents me saying something is quite literally my answer to "So what you goin to f-ing do about it"
What I'm talking about is the right/ability to SAY something without the fear of ending up on the wrong side of the dock and a criminal record.
To take an example of anti-social behaviour ... "Excuse me you dropped your litter" for which I expect a response from those doing it deliberately of "or what" with everyone around (your witnesses that they punched you first) then walking off quickly to avoid getting involved.
I mean how **** stupid does the OP have to be to suggest “renormalizing” violence – oh yeah, street justice Duterte style! Awesome!
Renormalising violence simply means that. The majority have become denormalised whilst the minority exploit that.
On an individual level this is standing up to bullies but this is on a level of the national psyche. What is missing is the expectation that saying "what you doing to do about it" will be met with several people saying "whatever it takes" and we are all sticking about as witnesses.
This isn't really complicated it is simply readdressing the denormalisation of violence in return for violence as a realistic outcome.
Dropping litter may not see very important, after all you can just pick up after them but what they are being taught is by issuing a threat of violence they can get away with anything.
Over the last few weeks I've had multiple people trying to steal from my drive right in front of me. I started off with "excuse me" ... "went through please leave my property now" to which all I got was violent threats. I picked up a 4' steel bar and asked them to leave again and they couldn't leave quickly enough.
I didn't "need" the steel bar, the steel bar was simply to convince them I was serious and to actually avoid violence by the threat of violence. Yes ironic...
Also, dangerous liars would get beaten and so a strong message would be sent? Again, correct me if I’m wrong.
That was a bit tongue in cheek, I am trying to break the barriers of "civilised behaviour" the younger generation have been indoctrinated with.
Why is Boris lying to parliament when they all know he's lying considered a civilised democracy (in England) but actually calling him out for lying is uncivilised.
Personally I'd gall everytime I had to say "the right honourable" ... and continue the charade the blatent lies are a honest mistake and I find this sort of bullying as bad or worse.
Renormalising violence simply means that. The majority have become denormalised whilst the minority exploit that.
On an individual level this is standing up to bullies but this is on a level of the national psyche. What is missing is the expectation that saying “what you doing to do about it” will be met with several people saying “whatever it takes” and we are all sticking about as witnesses.
This isn’t really complicated it is simply readdressing the denormalisation of violence in return for violence as a realistic outcome.
Dropping litter may not see very important, after all you can just pick up after them but what they are being taught is by issuing a threat of violence they can get away with anything.
Over the last few weeks I’ve had multiple people trying to steal from my drive right in front of me. I started off with “excuse me” … “went through please leave my property now” to which all I got was violent threats. I picked up a 4′ steel bar and asked them to leave again and they couldn’t leave quickly enough.
I didn’t “need” the steel bar, the steel bar was simply to convince them I was serious and to actually avoid violence by the threat of violence. Yes ironic…
You're a fool.
The Dutch manage to not litter without "renormalizing" violence, Maastricht is the safest city that I've ever lived in by far. Whilst Japan is one of the safest countries in the world and yet has a society that tries to avoid conflict at all costs.
People resort to crime and corruption less when society is more equitable, education is better, the national culture values caring about others and housing encourages the development of real communities.
The reason the UK is shit, is because everyone there thinks they're "hard", they have the American style "independent" attitude, hate taxes and secretly want to be like the Americans and use violence/guns to solve everything.
The whole country is suffering from a collective personality disorder.
From the outside looking in, it's increasingly looking like the States or one of those failed borderline democracies that have no cultural values holding it's disparate people together.
You’re a fool.
Ah, the art of insulting people who hold different beliefs than you do showing how to use aggressive behaviour whilst decrying violence.
you should feel free to say something without worrying that you will end up in court if they turn it violent.
I've no worries about talking to folk about picking up their litter, did it only a few months ago outside the practice with some random who just dropped a crisp packet. I just asked him to pick it up, which he did...absolutely no issues
I didn’t “need” the steel bar, the steel bar was simply to convince them I was serious and to actually avoid violence by the threat of violence. Yes ironic…
is this called the clint complex?
The reason the UK is shit, is because everyone there thinks they’re “hard”
Really? What a bizarre assertion on which to base your explanation of the societal problems of 21st century Britain. Presumably there's evidence to support this? Excuse me if I seem sceptical, but in my experience this is true of only a very small proportion of the population.
I think you missed the most important point though and that is probably a reflection on you in a good way
I have zero faith in the police or criminal justice system in England.
What prevents me saying something is quite literally my answer to “So what you goin to f-ing do about it”
Don’t think I missed it? Whether or not it reflects well on me (?) I too have very little faith in the police force/justice system.
Not least as Mrs P (before we met) was for a while stalked, intimidated and threatened by a (male) police officer who once smiled ‘hello’ one sunny day at some traffic lights through open windows. She made the mistake of saying ‘hello’ back. He then asked her out for a drink and she politely declined. He followed her into the daycare parking. And then located her home and number. That prompted months of intimidation, stalking, sitting in his unmarked car all night outside her apartment, calling her intercom and then on her landline pretending to have lawful reasons for watching her apartment. This escalated into direct threats to fabricate evidence, things like accuse her of ‘soliciting’ in a nearby city. Having other departments call her with threats of taking her son away to CPS. She was as you might guess a complete wreck at this point, terrified, so drove immediately to the school with a friend to grab and protect her son, take them to safety. Safety FROM the police/gov, you understand? And then, where is ‘safe’?
It’s a very long story I won’t go fully into it. Upshot was Mrs P luckily had a female friend who was a Lieutenant and had contact in internal affairs. Once she was informed things happened, and Mrs P was called in to give evidence against her tormentor. Turned out he had already been ‘evaluated’ (psychologically) a number of times, and there were almost identical complaints against him from a number of other (similarly young,blonde,slim) women. Yet there he was, still on ‘duty’. Still carrying a firearm. And who were the other cops calling Mrs P at all hours making threats on his behalf?
So he would use his position/power to basically say ‘what are you going to do about it’. She was one of the ‘lucky’ ones. Having friends in the right places helps. I’d also say that it’s essential to pursue and maintain a multigendered police force. This should really be in the Other Thread.
But as for what you believe to be the ‘point’, I did write in the comment before yours:
ie what to do with threating/dangerous/thieving/littering/lying people if the police/justice are increasingly powerless/ and appear to err on the side of the perpetrators?
I believe though you’re maybe missing a few equally (if not more) important points’ about causes of violence, abuse etc.
Really? What a bizarre assertion on which to base your explanation of the societal problems of 21st century Britain. Presumably there’s evidence to support this? Excuse me if I seem sceptical, but in my experience this is true of only a very small proportion of the population.
Yes really.
You only notice the British love for it when you leave, be it Spitfires or glassing each other on a Friday night.
Ah, the art of insulting people who hold different beliefs than you do showing how to use aggressive behaviour whilst decrying violence.
The countries in the world with the highest levels of violence are also those with the highest levels of mob justice and lowest levels of institutional effectiveness and legitimacy. They aren't the countries with the lowest levels of mob justice or "normalized violence". Things are getting shitter in the United Kingdom not because of pacifist lefty wokism but because yall voted Tory who have spent the past 11 years underfunding your police, undermining your judiciary and encouraging further increases in inequality.
So he would use his position/power to basically say ‘what are you going to do about it’.
This should really be in the Other Thread.
Yeah well, as I was saying it's two sides to the same coin.
Having other departments call her with threats of taking her son away to CPS.
which is the ultimate low, dirty .. but lucky it worked out but that's not the part I was referring to.
I didn’t “need” the steel bar, the steel bar was simply to convince them I was serious and to actually avoid violence by the threat of violence. Yes ironic…
What I meant is between the "excuse me" and the violence part. Hence the reason I used a steel bar to reinforce my request rather than just keep telling them to leave which they obviously weren't taking seriously. At this point my request was suddenly in a language they understood and thus avoided the violence that would have likely followed.
I believe though you’re maybe missing a few equally (if not more) important points’ about causes of violence, abuse etc.
Perhaps ... the point is whatever the cause Mrs. P.s nemesis is a dick.
There is no doubt in my mind he is equally abusive all round to anyone that offends or questions him. He's the sort of cop that carries round the 2g of crack hidden away to set someone up or will quite happily fabricate evidence or stop and search someone for being the wrong colour.
And who were the other cops calling Mrs P at all hours making threats on his behalf?
A few speculations but officers over which he had sway ? Owed a favour? Pack mentality?
About 11-12yrs ago a set of officers were sent out multiple times to stop and search white folk.
(This was later recorded by Lord Carlyle) and every one of them went and did just that. Not a single one reported this anywhere that went anywhere until it was stumbled over in a review more or less by accident. (A review of stop and search and how mysteriously several thousand white people were all stopped and searched and issued 5090's over a couple of days in 2 locations but no a single non-white)
Despite this being clearly illegal they did it anyway...
Were they all "bad" ? I think more likely it was following orders and pack mentality.
However, a bit of a distraction ... why did they go along with it.
The bigger question perhaps is the WHY...?
I am rather skeptical of people who make money by long psychological ramblings because what it comes down to is them proving a theory. People with weird morals do what they do because they can using whatever tools they can.
Given its now popular to knock a few years off if they can make some "it's cos of my childhood guv" its hardly surprising they can find the evidence. Just like it was popular to say "I was evil but now I found Jesus" .... "erm can I get paroled" in the past.
We are educated and indoctrinated to see violence as somehow Bad... but it's just a tool.
Some lie, some cheat .. and this is somehow meant to be less bad... steal £500M through cheating and lying and you get told off or at worst a suspended sentence or sent to a white collar facility.
Why does someone steal £500M ? Because they can and they think they can get away with it.
We are educated and indoctrinated to see violence as somehow Bad… but it’s just a tool.
So, it's OK for me to come and beat the shit out of you until you do what I say? Dude...That attitude is seriously ****ed up.
as long as its 'good' violence....
So, it’s OK for me to come and beat the shit out of you until you do what I say? Dude…That attitude is seriously **** up.
How do you get to that conclusion?
My point is how is that better or worse than you scamming me for my life's savings?
On the other hand if you did come over to beat the shit out of me are you suggesting I just let you do it or perhaps I should pay you to go away instead of resorting to violence? I'm sure you won't come back... honest if I pay you.
5 years ago i would have been scuffling with them lads regardless. No way would i put up with someone acting like that near me. But i have changed over the last few years. It all boils down to one sentence which eventually made me draw a line and stop caring.
Who do you think you are?
Argument with blokes either ends up in fighting or who do you think you are?
Argument with women always ends up with who do you think you are.
Argument with kids always ends up with who do you think you are.
Eventually i looked at myself and the incidents and realized that i was doing it to try to make someone else's life easier. Blocking pavements with stupid parking, i was trying to help mothers with prams, kids near roads, wheelchair users. I ended up with a bunch of mothers screaming at me WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?? Mothers stood there with pushchairs.......
I have pulled up plenty of people about letting their dogs shit everywhere. Its always Who do you think you are.
Now i just don't give a toss. Joe public, and i include myself and every one of you in this is full of contradictions which have lead me to one conclusion. We get what we deserve. Whether its covid, brexit, politics, anti social behavior, riots there never can be a winner. You will interpret everything to suit your own purpose. imagine being a police officer these days, it must be the most confusing time in history to want to serve and protect.
Anyhow, i must admit my life has been easier these days. I don't give much of a care about what's going on around me and i havent had an argument in a few years. I must admit to pangs of guilt watching some scallys smashing drink bottles on the local dog walking path the other night. In the past i would have challenged them and possible had a bit of a scuffle. Instead i went home and told my family to adjust their dogs walks for the next few days to avoid the path so our dogs didnt get hurt. Who do i think i am to challenged these scallys anyhow? All those owners who walk their dogs, well who am i to them?
Its a shame. One of the things that made me most proud of my father (Ex forces and prison service) was that he was the guy who would happily throttle the local scallys if they stepped out of line. He was the guy who would arrange football and cricket for everyone to join in and the scallys actually respected him. The fact he was built like a brick shithouse, could make me piss my pants just by shouting and had a temper seemed to make him popular with these lads. I remember being at a party once where it kicked off. 18yr olds fighting, police called, drink and bottles smashed everywhere. It was wild. My dad heard about, knew i was there and walked up to the building. A bottle was thrown at him by someone and then they realized who it was. I swear on my life someone shouted out **** that Mr thelittlesthobo!!! The whole place stopped in its tracks. He had the place cleared out before the police turned up and no one got into trouble. These days he would either be stabbed or prosecuted.
How many years should this granny get for assaulting the bike thief?
How do you get to that conclusion?
Really? in your post you say "it's just a tool" so why is it not OK to use it? I'm struggling to think how else to interpret "It's just a tool"
My point is how is that better or worse than you scamming me for my life’s savings?
No one has said violence and fraud are equivalent, apart from you.
How many years should this granny get for assaulting the bike thief?
Probably none, as reasonable force was used and is legally allowed?
TheLittlestHobo
Exactly... very close to what I wrote on the local FB the other day.
A bunch of youths have set up shop on the school/youth sportified pavilion and the place is littered with needles and residents getting abuse.
Now i just don’t give a toss. Joe public, and i include myself and every one of you in this is full of contradictions which have lead me to one conclusion. We get what we deserve.
Yep, my answer was why should I get involved my kid doesn't play football and you've done this to yourselves by tolerating their antisocial behaviour when they intimidate someone at the shop round the corner or push people around and noone stands up to them.
One of my female friends pinged me after with a wink ikon... as last year her sons bike was stolen and I went with her husband and son to recover it from the ebay lister.
Quite happy to do that as they are willing to stand up for themselves and not involve the police. (Well the police dis-involved themselves)
No violence was needed, just 3 blokes saying we've come to collect his bike now hand it over.
No violence was needed, just 3 blokes saying we’ve come to collect his bike now hand it over.
What if there'd been 6 bigger blokes, waiting for them?
To take an example of anti-social behaviour … “Excuse me you dropped your litter” for which I expect a response from those doing it deliberately of “or what” with everyone around (your witnesses that they punched you first) then walking off quickly to avoid getting involved.
In my experience it often just takes one person to do or say something to give others the “permission” they need to also intervene.
I think those two have it really. People get away with a lot because so few people stand up and say 'that's not right, stop it'.
I appreciate that being a fairly fit bloke in my thirties I'm probably in a position to do this more than others, and I do if I see one person well out of order (for example throwing litter back into the car from which it was ejected, chasing a burglar, standing in front of a vehicle until the driver puts his telephone away, not letting someone move on until they have picked up their dog poo) Would I do this to a group? Probably not. Would I do this to a group if I thought the bystanders would intervene if anything did happen? Probably, but then nothing would happen because that group would know that the bystanders would join in if required.
The fewer people stand up the more that antisocial behavour is normalised. It's up to all of us to challenge what is wrong where we feel able to do so until that becomes the norm again. The police aren't everywhere all the time, we can't expect the state to solve every little problem, we have to take responsibilty and step up.
The example I always give is two guys hacksawing a bike lock on my university campus, dozens of people just walking passed. I was the only one who went over and asked politely what they were up to (they showed me a broken key and said the lock was buggered, fair enough, carry on, but literally no-one else had done anything, busy place, broad daylight)
Probably none, as reasonable force was used and is legally allowed?
She stole a bike then assaulted the person who she stole it from and she was stupid enough to video it.
Would you say the same if it was an old bloke stealing the bike and she was a 6'6 150kg bloke?
How do you get to that conclusion?
Really? in your post you say “it’s just a tool” so why is it not OK to use it? I’m struggling to think how else to interpret “It’s just a tool”
Yes its just a tool like a filleting knife or email. The point is the how and context.
e.g. it's apparently OK for the 72 yr old granny to assault the 23 yr old bike thief...
My point is how is that better or worse than you scamming me for my life’s savings?
No one has said violence and fraud are equivalent, apart from you.
No plenty of people are saying violence is bad yet weirdly condone the granny assaulting the young man.
So why is it OK to send an email to scam me from my lifes savings but not to remove a thief from my property using violence?
What if there’d been 6 bigger blokes, waiting for them?
Make that decision at the time... now we know where they live.
We are educated and indoctrinated to see violence as somehow Bad… but it’s just a tool
This suggests you see it as neutral (see: just) , to be used as necessary
Yes its just a tool like a filleting knife or email. The point is the how and context.
But here you imply context. There's a lack of internal consistency in your thinking isn't there?
No plenty of people are saying violence is bad yet weirdly condone the granny assaulting the young man.
But you're smart enough to understand why that might be though?
Make that decision at the time… now we know where they live.
No but you turn up, and the odds are against you. What do you do then? Go ahead with your original plan? Or, let's face it, you'd run away. And therein lies the rub; it's all about power. It's all fine whilst power is on your side, but when it's against you, what do you do then? There's always, always, someone bigger, harder, or just more mental and prepared to use extreme violence, than you, out there. And if you continue down the route of using violence as a 'tool', one day, you'll meet them.
What would you do/have you done?
They can do as they wish so long as they don't bother me or damage my property.
Generally harmless but annoying and normal for western culture.
If this was in Borneo they would probably be regretting into their adulthood probably mentally traumatised too. In Borneo their parents would be punished first and they would see their parents traumatised in front of them when the community hit back as a way of punishment. The punishment would be blunt and brutal.
If the police resources were put in before the incident it might not of happened,
Scotes will do what they want if they regard somewhere as an ungoverned space
No but you turn up, and the odds are against you. What do you do then? Go ahead with your original plan? Or, let’s face it, you’d run away. And therein lies the rub; it’s all about power. It’s all fine whilst power is on your side, but when it’s against you, what do you do then? There’s always, always, someone bigger, harder, or just more mental and prepared to use extreme violence, than you, out there. And if you continue down the route of using violence as a ‘tool’, one day, you’ll meet them.
Sorry, but you sound like the sort of person who looks for an excuse as to why you shouldn't get involved.
I'm not judging that, some people just don't feel confident to. But I don't understand your criticism of people who don't sit back and accept the wrongs done against them or others in their community; who are willing to step forward and say "That's not on!" Without at least the perception that people will call them out, or take a stand against them, there are unfortunately those in our society who will see that as permission to do as they please, take what they want and make everyone's life a bloody misery.
nickc
This suggests you see it as neutral (see: just) , to be used as necessary
But here you imply context. There’s a lack of internal consistency in your thinking isn’t there?
But you’re smart enough to understand why that might be though?
To start at the last .. yes... I see why but then that is not my inconsistency is it? It's apparently fine for a 72yr old grannie to assault this young gentleman.
No but you turn up, and the odds are against you. What do you do then? Go ahead with your original plan? Or, let’s face it, you’d run away. And therein lies the rub; it’s all about power. It’s all fine whilst power is on your side, but when it’s against you, what do you do then?
As I said we'd have crossed that bridge when we came to it. Had we thought that would be the case we would have taken a few of the extra lads from their rugby club but since he was expecting a lone woman we didn't think that would be necessary.
There’s always, always, someone bigger, harder, or just more mental and prepared to use extreme violence, than you, out there. And if you continue down the route of using violence as a ‘tool’, one day, you’ll meet them.
So what do you suggest in the meantime? Just let people steal from me or my family and friends?
If someone decides to have a go anyway should I just plead with them to stop hitting me, offer to pay them to stop?
The truth is most of the people who act tough and menacing aren't, they are just people used to getting their own way through threat and people being submissive.
Equally many if not most of the really really dangerous people don't respond to "you dropped your litter" with "so what you going to do about it" either because they save violence for the ring (or people robbing them), military operations, have years of training or for the scariest because they are psychopaths who operate below the radar like the Hindley's and Bundy's or because their employer is a psychopath.
As I said we’d have crossed that bridge when we came to it. Had we thought that would be the case we would have taken a few of the extra lads from their rugby club but since he was expecting a lone woman we didn’t think that would be necessary.
So; your version of 'proportionate response' to what is fairly low level crime (not condoning bike theft, it's horrible to suffer, but in the grand scheme of things, it's low level), is to turn up mob handed to physically intimidate someone? So; what if they'd then got their rugby mates, who are bigger than your rugby mates, what do you do then? What if, when faced with such a scary situation, someone pulls out a knife or even a gun, and someone gets seriously injured or killed? Over a stolen bike? And you think that's ok?
So what do you suggest in the meantime? Just let people steal from me or my family and friends?
Maybe consider what is appropriate and proportionate action, rather than going round there mob-handed and running the risk of causing/encountering violence? Yes it's frustrating, but that's life.
The truth is most of the people who act tough and menacing aren’t, they are just people used to getting their own way through threat and people being submissive.
I can't quite believe the irony here...
Sorry, but you sound like the sort of person who looks for an excuse as to why you shouldn’t get involved.
No; you weigh up the pros and cons, and act accordingly. Risking escalation of a situation over something relatively petty, isn't being 'hard', it's being stupid.
I’m not judging that
But you just did...
Sorry, but you sound like the sort of person who looks for an excuse as to why you shouldn’t get involved.
The last time a mate of mine got involved - he ran over and king hit the guy in the back of the head - knocked him unconscious, the guy banged his head on the way down and was unconscious for a good hour. His wife was even more traumatised because of that by the end of the night.
Domestic violence doesn’t always and often doesn’t need more violence to solve, it’s such a retarded idea - what’s needed is better mental health provision, education and intervention teams.
The reason the UK is shit, is because everyone there thinks they’re “hard”
It's because they are. They're been getting told so since Shakespeare.
The fewer people stand up the more that antisocial behavour is normalised.
I've tried telling people they've dropped litter etc, occasionally they just pick it up, mostly they tell you to **** off, or they do it but then drop more 50m down the road. The issue for me is why do so many people feel so antisocial in the first place?
I remember being in Geneva airport after a UK festival crowd had left on coaches for an event I was working at - Swiss guy was devastated/furious at all the litter that had just been left lying around. Anecdotally I feel like most other European countries are much cleaner and others say the same - why? My theory would be it's the huge inequality and selfish individualistic attitudes we are taught to have here.
Fear of being disapproved of/bollocked isn't really the way to make people behave like decent human beings.
bridges
So; your version of ‘proportionate response’ to what is fairly low level crime (not condoning bike theft, it’s horrible to suffer, but in the grand scheme of things, it’s low level), is to turn up mob handed to physically intimidate someone? So; what if they’d then got their rugby mates, who are bigger than your rugby mates, what do you do then? What if, when faced with such a scary situation, someone pulls out a knife or even a gun, and someone gets seriously injured or killed? Over a stolen bike? And you think that’s ok?
Whether they feel intimidated or not is really up to them... perhaps they should have thought of that before stealing the bike.
So; what if they’d then got their rugby mates, who are bigger than your rugby mates, what do you do then? What if, when faced with such a scary situation, someone pulls out a knife or even a gun, and someone gets seriously injured or killed? Over a stolen bike?
Seriously.. who gives a toss? I'd never do anything if I lived my life like a mouse.
What if I fall off my bike? What if someone runs into me? What if a meteorite strikes the house?
Maybe consider what is appropriate and proportionate action, rather than going round there mob-handed and running the risk of causing/encountering violence? Yes it’s frustrating, but that’s life.
What exactly do you mean by running the risk of causing/encountering violence?
That's like saying by setting off early to a click and collect I run the risk of arriving 5 mins early and having to stand outside for 10 mins... it's a minor inconvenience but if it means missing the rush hour traffic it's well worth it.
I mean ideally the lads mum could have gone round by herself and asked nicely... ideally the click and collect would open at a time to avoid rush hour ... but in the vast scheme of things the minor inconvenience of some violence is outweighed by the major inconvenience of having a bike stolen.
I can’t quite believe the irony here…
If you can't understand the difference between hitting someone to stop them hitting you or stealing from you and hitting someone to steal from them you need a good hard think.
If you can’t understand...
I think we'll leave it there, because you clearly don't.
bridges
I think we’ll leave it there, because you clearly don’t.
Perhaps you need to view this from respecting the wishes and customs of others?
This is merely respecting the different ways different people prefer to do things. It's no different than someone says "collect only" for a bike sale or "no trades"...
If someone say's collection only or no trades I don't keep asking them to justify WHY ... I might experimentally ask "if I arrange a courier" or "would you trade for" but if they say no I don't start hassling them why not.
Bloke nicks bike, advertises on eBay
His Mum finds the bike and we find a resolution that's acceptable to everyone.
His family decided they were not going to pay to get the bike back...
His mother didn't want to have sex with him for the bike
So the thief was given a choice of options acceptable to him ...
a) hand over the bike
b) we're taking it anyway
He decided on option a which is good as it was our preferred option... the rest is up to the thief.
If he feels more comfortable handing over the bike after being beaten up then he can choose that option, if he wants to not get beaten up he can choose that option.
It's merely being respectful of others different ways of doing things.
My preferred option is he just hands over the bike but I'm not so disrespectful of others so if he prefers because it's his preferred way of doing things he can get a battering first if that's what he wants.
It may well be his preferred method was to get paid and have sex with the mum but that wasn't on the table.
The same with the thieves on my drive.
They made it clear that threats of violence was their preferred method of communication.
It would be dis-respectful of me not to consider their choices. Perhaps they have a Spartan mother at home who wants to see them come back with the injuries or the loot?
I'd have been much happier had they just left when asked or even happier of they had offered to pay me a fair part of the going rate for the 350kg of steel but that wasn't a valid choice for them so I was willing to respect their wishes and use violence.
It turned out that they didn't actually want violence and the threat was all they needed to satisfy their wishes.
What I didn't do was insist on my preferred method ... that my method was the only way.
It's like they needed the real threat of violence to accept they can't just steal from people's property through intimidation.
Cougar; get a life. Seriously. And perhaps have some input into this thread, the reason I joined this forum:
https://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/getting-back-in-the-saddle-whats-new/
It would be a more constructive use of your time.
Stevextc; I'm not going to continue arguing with you because a) it's not a very constructive use of my time, and b) we're always going to see things differently, so let's leave it at that. Thanks. I'll say just this, however: standing for something you believe in, is a world apart from using the same tactics of fear and intimidation as others, to get what you want. So; if you feel you have to use such, then that's always going to be your call. These are decisions we must all make in society. I hope that clears things up.
bridges
Sorry, but you sound like the sort of person who looks for an excuse as to why you shouldn’t get involved. I’m not judging that
But you just did…
No. I didn't. What I said was..
I don’t understand your criticism of people who don’t sit back and accept the wrongs done against them or others in their community; who are willing to step forward and say “That’s not on!”
Saying I don't understand someone's viewpoint, is not judging it. It is stating simply that I do not understand the thought process through which someone goes to arrive at that viewpoint.
A lot of the circular discussion here seems to be perpetuated by your and others' (I'm looking at you oakleymuppet) misnterpretation of what people mean when they state that they are happy to speak up/stand up when people 'try it on'.
I'm not sure if you really don't get the difference, or are just being obtuse for the sake of it.
oakleymuppet
The last time a mate of mine got involved – he ran over and king hit the guy in the back of the head – knocked him unconscious, the guy banged his head on the way down and was unconscious for a good hour. His wife was even more traumatised because of that by the end of the night.
This is certainly not what I (or, I'm pretty sure most of the people posting here) think of when I talk about speaking up against people anti-social behaviour. That's just having a scrap.
The 'discussion' seems to have run it's course now. And for that reason...
The reason the UK is shit, is because everyone there thinks they’re “hard”
Nah. The reason it's shit is because no-one cares.
They say they do. They'll flag-wave and whine about sovereignty and foreigners and all the rest of it, right up until the point where they have to take some responsibility. Then the fast food wrappers go out of car windows with gay abandon, cars get keyed out of jealousy, I get to look at crudely spray-painted cock & balls out of my bedroom window. It's all someone else's fault. And it doesn't matter because everyone else is doing it, what's another dog poo or fag end when we're ankle-deep?
An integral part of our nation's psyche is an overinflated sense of superiority and entitlement, both as individuals and as a country. It's a cancer on our society. As a previous poster wrote, all we hear is "who do you think you are?" That isn't what they mean, what they mean is "do you think you're better than me?"
Wander round a town centre in another European country. Go to France, say, or Poland. Hell, go to the US. Sure, everywhere has its good and bad bits but generally it's just not like here and it's a stark contrast. Their national pride manifests as keeping the streets clean rather than beating someone up because they happen to have been born brown.
it’s apparently OK for the 72 yr old granny to assault the 23 yr old bike thief…
Far as I can see, her 'assault' was holding onto a bike with two hands until he gave up.
The worst thing in that video is the two blokes just standing watching the show.
Well yes Cougar, I agree - but all of that individualism is wrapped up in a wannabe "I'm hard" America light individualism. They all think they can get rich and live the 'Murican dream in little England. People wouldn't be say "Who do you think you are", if they aren't up for confrontation. In Japan, you'd get sheepish looks of embarrassment and profuse apologies.
spray-painted cock & balls out of my bedroom window
Must admit, I did once put a huge cock and balls on the parents driveway using a power hose.
Cougar; get a life. Seriously. And perhaps have some input into this thread, the reason I joined this forum:
I was a moderator here for ten years, I recently resigned. In my experience as such, in the vast, vast majority of times when someone is argumentatively vocal five minutes after joining it's a continuation of why they were previously banned in the first place. We can smell them a mile off because they just can't help themselves. After a while you get to recognise persistent individuals' "handwriting" even.
If I'm wrong and your tale is genuine then I sincerely apologise. But you are very much an outlier should that be the case.
Either way, it's no longer my concern. The team have means of cross-referencing and will work it out one way or the other, I have no doubt.
If I’m wrong and your tale is genuine then I apologise. In either case, it’s no longer my concern. The team have means of cross-referencing and will work it out one way or the other.
No. I didn’t. What I said was..
All due respect; what you said was:
"you sound like the sort of person who looks for an excuse as to why you shouldn’t get involved"
Your exact words. In my mind, that's a judgment. I never said 'don't get involved' clearly, there are times when you need to, to protect yourself or others. But again; there's a difference between that, and using threats and intimidation to counter other threats and intimidation, in a manner which could escalate matters way beyond anything reasonable. See what I'm getting at? So; someone thinks it's ok to take matters into their own hands, but then if you do so, and fall foul of the law, you have no redress, do you? You can't just say 'oh well he started it'. I actually think Stevextc's approach to getting the stolen bike back was probably 'proportionate', and it's good it worked out ok; I'm just pointing out that such actions can, and often do, have very negative consequences. It's that, which we must think about before acting at all.
As a previous poster wrote, all they hear is “who do you think you are?” That isn’t what they mean, what they mean is “do you think you’re better than me?”
Now this, is something I'm happy to engage with. With so much in society, it's all about power relationships. The kind of people who throw litter on the floor are invariably those lacking self-respect; the ones that do it to get a reaction, are those who feel unempowered in their lives. It's worth examining that aspect, in order to understand, and find ways to lessen/prevent such behaviour, that's the best approach. Those lary little ****ers in the video riding their bikes through Asda; they know it's out of order, and they're just doing it to get a reaction, in order to be able to feel some sense of 'power', that's very clear. It's really not far removed from a bunch of hooligans in a pub, as alluded to earlier. Gang/mob/pack mentality. I know I was guilty of that as a youth, and I'd be amazed if many others weren't as well.
So; how do we, as a society, help those who feel unempowered, feel empowered?
If I’m wrong and your tale is genuine then I sincerely apologise. But you are very much an outlier should that be the case.
No worries. I'm a narky **** at the best of times. I mean no-one any malice though, so I hope it's all good.
👍 likewise.
But again; there’s a difference between that, and using threats and intimidation to counter other threats and intimidation, in a manner which could escalate matters way beyond anything reasonable. See what I’m getting at? So; someone thinks it’s ok to take matters into their own hands, but then if you do so, and fall foul of the law, you have no redress, do you? You can’t just say ‘oh well he started it’. I actually think Stevextc’s approach to getting the stolen bike back was probably ‘proportionate’, and it’s good it worked out ok; I’m just pointing out that such actions can, and often do, have very negative consequences. It’s that, which we must think about before acting at all.
It all comes down to what you think are "very negative consequences" or "beyond anything reasonable". Everyone has different ideas and perceptions of this.
Some people would say breaking an arm is "very negative" .. I fall of bikes as a hobby... I expect to and do break a few bones every year. Some people think a dislocated shoulder is a "very negative consequence", others just see it as missed races but would view a torn achilles as "very negative consequences" yet they still take the risks. I mention these specifically because this isn't a male preserve.
Some people think its a joke to get someone to roll off a 5' blind drop onto rocks and some people think it's a joke that their mate just got them to roll off a 5' blind drop onto rocks ... knowing that I'd view anyone breaking into their parents house and stealing 2 one-off custom bikes would expect to have the holy shit beaten out of them when they get caught... and knowing that I wouldn't think there is "excessive". If you go round targeting and robbing the parents of someone who has spent years killing people as a job you have to realise if you get caught the consequences are likely serious.
The thing is there are always some people willing to take that risk but as the consequences become more serious and likely the numbers of these people diminish rapidly.
Having a couple of Rottweilers is a great deterrent to burglars ... however having a sign saying "Danger Guard Dogs" is nearly as good.
This is why as someone else said earlier ... some dick with an expectation of the crowd intervening will think twice before actually doing something... the problem is they know from experience they can intimidate or threaten people in front of a crowd and no-one will step in.
Far as I can see, her ‘assault’ was holding onto a bike with two hands until he gave up.
The worst thing in that video is the two blokes just standing watching the show.
Exactly my point .. (do you know the (alleged) thief wasn't prosecuted) but then neither was the granny. You have to wonder if the two lack of prosecutions are related in a deal.
However, it wasn't HER bike and she had no proof it was stolen ... so she was on shaky ground but being a 72yr old granny was in her favour.
Now swap her round mentally for a 6'8" (or whatever) ex marine... and the fact you don't know the bike had been stolen you just watch the video. Obviously its a bike so you'll be biased but imagine how that might change your perception...
Notice the guys in the video sorta grab the bike but avoid grabbing the guy? Why do you think that is?
My point from the other thread p7eaven brought here is we need more people like that granny and we need the two blokes to feel like they can grab the bloke and if necessary get involved and that they won't be in court having to justify.
Remember the bike thief can leave any time he wants he just has to let go of the bike... he choses not to because he's (presumably) confident the blokes (or any other passers by) won't get involved or if they do he'll sue their asses.
Those lary little **** in the video riding their bikes through Asda; they know it’s out of order, and they’re just doing it to get a reaction, in order to be able to feel some sense of ‘power’, that’s very clear. It’s really not far removed from a bunch of hooligans in a pub, as alluded to earlier. Gang/mob/pack mentality. I know I was guilty of that as a youth, and I’d be amazed if many others weren’t as well.
Erm .. so that's the thing. Me and all my mates spent our spare time doing martial arts and competition fighting. Getting lary in a pub or elsewhere was considered VERY VERY BAD form.... I stopped fighting professionally when I had my finals as I was constantly healing something.
So; how do we, as a society, help those who feel unempowered, feel empowered?
Well, those 2 blokes in the video and all the passers by need to feel they can get involved without justifying their actions in court.
TBH, the thread was won on page 1 with this:
Things are getting shitter in the United Kingdom not because of pacifist lefty wokism but because yall voted Tory who have spent the past 11 years underfunding your police, undermining your judiciary and encouraging further increases in inequality.
TBH, the thread was won on page 1 with this:
To be fair if your 1974 means year of birth you missed part.
The watershed I saw started with the miners strike and then poll tax riots.
It became apparent that the government couldn't rely on local policing to stand-up to the local communities if the local communities vastly outnumbered the police and the police were community police.
Prior to this is was "normal" for communities to stand against an injustice or threat and if they were violently attack to respond.
What came out of this was social engineering the if you are attacked it's not acceptable to fight back.
We started to punish children for being bullied if they stood up for themselves or their friends instead telling them they should let the other kid(s) knock them unconscious then "tell a teacher" when they come round because fighting back is "uncivilised/unacceptable".
Over time this developed a pavlovian reaction to fighting back in any way shape or form (violent or not).
The unintended consequences of this were to break local communities apart and to encourage those who are already outside of communities due to their criminal behaviour to exploit this.
"Why didn't you stop the burglar you saw leaving my house with my possessions? "
"I'm not going to jail for your possessions, I shouted at them and they told me to F-off or get battered so I called the police they may come round tomorrow, next week, who knows .. it's what we're meant to do, you can claim on the insurance anyway"
So we developed into a nation more interested in our shoes than noticing the granny being beaten up...
I deleted my original response, to summarise I don't believe in vigilante justice and I do believe in properly funding our justice system so that people who do commit crimes are rehabilitated into society and contribute.
We started to punish children for being bullied if they stood up for themselves or their friends instead telling them they should let the other kid(s) knock them unconscious then “tell a teacher” when they come round because fighting back is “uncivilised/unacceptable”.
I was raised in a household where the opposite view held sway. I'd happily DM you my experiences of that, spoiler alert - it's not pretty.
To be fair if your 1974 means year of birth you missed part.
Undoubtedly.
The watershed I saw started with the miners strike and then poll tax riots.
It became apparent that the government couldn’t rely on local policing to stand-up to the local communities if the local communities vastly outnumbered the police and the police were community police.
There's a common theme to both events. If you voted for the party that was in office then and is in office now and complain about heavy handed and inconsistent policing then I've some news for you.
There’s a common theme to both events. If you voted for the party that was in office then and is in office now and complain about heavy handed and inconsistent policing then I’ve some news for you.
That's a bit of an assumption. I didn't EVER and neither do I expect the majority of this forum.
I was raised in a household where the opposite view held sway.
This is about communities and the nation(s)
to summarise I don’t believe in vigilante justice
This is the problem ... stepping in to protect a pensioner who is being beaten senseless vigilante justice?
When did it become vigilante justice to dare ask someone to stop stealing from a neighbour in case they attack you and you end up in court?
and I do believe in properly funding our justice system so that people who do commit crimes are rehabilitated into society and contribute.
We don't have a society as such any more... and perhaps as a result of that the justice system is ineffective.
Our court system is full of people defending themselves for acts such as failing to secure a ladder so a thief can't use it to break into their house... determining if the granny being beaten required someone to physically touch the mugger... chasing people who have say iplayer coererced onto their TV into buying TV licences even though they don't use it etc.
The police system has NEVER been there for crime (in general). e.g. for burgulary it doesn't usually just randomly spot a guy climbing out if a window with a mask and a sack saying Swag ... it relied on a community to see the guy and detain him until the police arrived.
Now most people are more scared of detaining the burglar and defending their actions in court than anything else.
so that people who do commit crimes are rehabilitated into society and contribute.
You mean just lie to a parole board to get released early and go back to committing crimes with the added skills and knowledge they learned in rehab?
Our court system is full of people defending themselves for acts such as failing to secure a ladder so a thief can’t use it to break into their house
I’m not arguing otherwise as I don’t have the info/stats, but again, from where/who are you getting yours?
How do you know that the courts aren’t instead/actually full of cases of abuse?
ie (not an exhaustive list, and feel free to cherry-pick as I simply copy pasted.
* Assault, hitting, slapping, punching, kicking, hair-pulling, biting, pushing
* Rough handling
* Scalding and burning
* Physical punishments
* Inappropriate or unlawful use of restraint
* Making someone purposefully uncomfortable (e.g. opening a window and removing blankets)
* Involuntary isolation or confinement
* Misuse of medication (e.g. over-sedation)
* Forcible feeding or withholding food
* Unauthorised restraint, restricting movement (e.g. tying someone to a chair)
Domestic violence or abuse can be characterised by any of the indicators of abuse outlined in this briefing relating to:
* psychological
* physical
* sexual
* financial
* emotional.
Types of sexual abuse
* Rape, attempted rape or sexual assault
* Inappropriate touch anywhere
* Non- consensual masturbation of either or both persons
* Non- consensual sexual penetration or attempted penetration of the vagina, anus or mouth
* Any sexual activity that the person lacks the capacity to consent to
* Inappropriate looking, sexual teasing or innuendo or sexual harassment
* Sexual photography or forced use of pornography or witnessing of sexual acts
* Indecent exposure
Types of psychological or emotional abuse
* Enforced social isolation – preventing someone accessing services, educational and social opportunities and seeing friends
* Removing mobility or communication aids or intentionally leaving someone unattended when they need assistance
* Preventing someone from meeting their religious and cultural needs
* Preventing the expression of choice and opinion
* Failure to respect privacy
* Preventing stimulation, meaningful occupation or activities
* Intimidation, coercion, harassment, use of threats, humiliation, bullying, swearing or verbal abuse
* Addressing a person in a patronising or infantilising way
* Threats of harm or abandonment
* Cyber bullying
Types of financial or material abuse
* Theft of money or possessions
* Fraud, scamming
* Preventing a person from accessing their own money, benefits or assets
* Employees taking a loan from a person using the service
* Undue pressure, duress, threat or undue influence put on the person in connection with loans, wills, property, inheritance or financial transactions
* Arranging less care than is needed to save money to maximise inheritance
* Denying assistance to manage/monitor financial affairs
* Denying assistance to access benefits
* Misuse of personal allowance in a care home
* Misuse of benefits or direct payments in a family home
* Someone moving into a person’s home and living rent free without agreement or under duress
* False representation, using another person’s bank account, cards or documents
* Exploitation of a person’s money or assets, e.g. unauthorised use of a car
* Misuse of a power of attorney, deputy, appointeeship or other legal authority
* Rogue trading – e.g. unnecessary or overpriced property repairs and failure to carry out agreed repairs or poor workmanship
Types of modern slavery
* Human trafficking
* Forced labour
* Domestic servitude
* Sexual exploitation, such as escort work, prostitution and pornography
* Debt bondage – being forced to work to pay off debts that realistically they never will be able to.
Or maybe the courts are ‘full’ of cases of dog poo crime? Or drug offences? Or people suing others for making them stub their toe? Could I make that ‘argument’?
I guess what I’m asking Steve, is how do you know that you aren’t skewing the argument in favour of an (unwitting) straw-man snapshot of the situation based on ‘anomalous’ cases which may only gain high public profile (and distortion) via the media/clickbait/outrage-mongering?
Our court system is full of people defending themselves for acts such as failing to secure a ladder so a thief can’t use it to break into their house… determining if the granny being beaten required someone to physically touch the mugger… chasing people who have say iplayer coererced onto their TV into buying TV licences even though they don’t use it etc.
What a load of absolute rubbish.
You mean just lie to a parole board to get released early and go back to committing crimes with the added skills and knowledge they learned in rehab?
You mean just don’t have the figures for recidivism to hand so throw out the claim that most (more than 50%) of criminals reoffend unless there is a very real threat of violence/harm to their person?
Our court system is full of people defending themselves for acts such as failing to secure a ladder so a thief can’t use it to break into their house… determining if the granny being beaten required someone to physically touch the mugger… chasing people who have say iplayer coererced onto their TV into buying TV licences even though they don’t use it etc.
I strongly suspect that you're conflating your perception of what is going through our court system than the reality.
This is the problem … stepping in to protect a pensioner who is being beaten senseless vigilante justice?
A very specific scenario described there, most pensioner abuse happens behind closed doors, making it difficult to "step in". I have on one occasion "stepped in" when travelling home on a train late at night when a drunk guy has harassed a lone woman. In doing so, I made sure that the police were waiting for the perpetrator when he got off the train.
When did it become vigilante justice to dare ask someone to stop stealing from a neighbour in case they attack you and you end up in court?
If this is something you witnessed first hand then how did you deal with it, did you report it to the police? Did you attempt a citizen's arrest?
You mean just lie to a parole board to get released early and go back to committing crimes with the added skills and knowledge they learned in rehab?
In the UK our justice system is increasingly punitive in that long sentences are meant to be a deterrent, while there's less focus on rehabilitation. Statistically, 75% of criminals who receive a custodial sentence will reoffend within nine years of release, 39.3% will reoffend within twelve months of release. In Scandinavia, where the per-capita prison population is very low and more emphasis is placed upon rehabilitation, reoffending rates are less than 20%.
It's well worth reading up on https://thesecretbarrister.com/ for first hand accounts of how our justice system is being systematically hollowed out and how fewer offenders are caught.
...chasing people who have say iplayer coererced onto their TV into buying TV licences even though they don’t use it etc...
Is this is a conscious non-sequitur?
Now most people are more scared of detaining the burglar and defending their actions in court than anything else.
There are examples of vigilantism whereby a suspected criminal has been physically harmed and later proven to be innocent - we've seen this occurring during The Troubles, not to mention this guy, who slashed car tyres of vehicles being driven by people seen to be using mobile phones. Again, no actual proof of wrongdoing was given, nor was there any consideration given to the thought that the person suffering the financial loss of having to replace tyres may not have been the person driving the vehicle and using their phone.
p7eaven
I’m not arguing otherwise as I don’t have the info/stats, but again, from where/who are you getting yours?
Or maybe the courts are ‘full’ of cases of dog poo crime? Or drug offences? Or people suing others for making them stub their toe? Could I make that ‘argument’?
Randomly youtube selected a tv license video last night.
I was just sorta chilling not taking note until they showed how many people in a single magistrates court were there for not paying for a TV license.
This just made me think, pretty much everyone I know who has had a court appearance (or invitation to) is over some trivia like a PCN (me), swerving into a bus lane to avoid a fire engine (me)...
The video itself was actually about a pensioner who legally didn't have to pay... court ruled in their favour and TV licensing refused to refund... and apparently the baliffs were called in against the BBC.
I doubt you meant this to be a debate about TV licensing and it is just a topic example... the point really being that the modern non-community (IMHO) way is to just send stuff to courts.
The person may have a perfectly valid excuse/reason but the council (for example) don't even read it. I went to court for the PCN ... they were dismissed .. I didn't bother for the bus lane as I don't own the cameras.
Indeed for lots of things courts find the overwhelming majority of cases dismissible. I looked into a few before, I think one is box junctions for example. Fines are issued without evidence (a photo isn't evidence) or the box junction itself is illegal. the council know this but still send a demand or "see you in court".
How do you know that the courts aren’t instead/actually full of cases of abuse?
Without reference to your list the main answer is because any serious local cases are all over the press.
There are examples of vigilantism whereby a suspected criminal has been physically harmed and later proven to be innocent
If someone is leaving the neighbours house with a TV or taking someone's pension etc. it's a bit beyond "suspected". Or in my personal case 2 blokes stealing off my drive in front of me. I asked them to leave nicely... one just came and threatened me whilst the other continued stealing.
Whether they are later proven innocent or not doesn't change the fact they were stealing from me and asked to leave.
There is a world of difference (IMHO) between asking someone to stop stealing, they threaten you so you hit them (or I managed to get them to leave by producing a steel bar) and going round with a battery powered angle grinder and finding someone looks like they might be the right one.
It’s well worth reading up on> https://thesecretbarrister.com/
prob worth a read later so bookmarked but what you are saying isn't a world off what I was saying
If this is something you witnessed first hand then how did you deal with it, did you report it to the police? Did you attempt a citizen’s arrest?
I don't report ANYTHING to the police anymore.
and I'm not going to make a citizens arrest because I then have to wait for the police.
On occasions I have intervened I don't wait round for the police either. In one I was thanked by the bus driver and advised to get off and disappear as he had already reported the youths and police would be on their way and wanting to arrest someone.