I feel society is "too liberal" these days. There's also no check/balance on unruly or bad behaviour. To stand up for/protect something is to be seen to be confrontational and apparently, that's a bad thing? Plus, there's no heavy hand option short of sending in the police. Who may or may not turn up for several hours depending on "circumstances".

If 100% of people breaking the law were caught, then criminals or wannabes would reduce in numbers quite quickly. Unfortunately, it seems to me that most criminals do NOT get caught. If it takes a burgular 25-50 break-ins to get nicked, then he gets a suspended sentence, why would that be a deterent to him or anyone else when he's squirreled away £'00s or £'000s of pounds of micked stuff/goods.

We've had easier times for 7ish years plus a great deal of worry and stress for 3-4 years. Times are harder for almost everyone plus the politicians won't stop prattling about it.

What I worry will be an absolute joke is how many of the rioters will we end up paying compensation to? Remand everyone, yes, that's a possibility, and currently, probably the only way of kicking these little ****s in the bollocks hard enough to send a message. To potentially jail one student for nicking a bottle of water seems way OTT for me. I only hope that when cases come to court, reasonable sentences are handed down. Otherwise, we'll be in appeal courts for the next ten years and far poorer at the end of it.

J.

Viva the August youth uprising!

Very disappointing to see Cameron proposing knee-jerk laws to stop Blackberry and social networks in the event of riots.

When I was working in Libya, Gadaffi shut down the internet when the uprisings started. It created an air of uncertainty and unknowing.

It is what authoritarian/totalitarian regimes do, they can monopolise things like communication. Democracies are not supposed to curb the free speech of citizens who are innocent until proven guilty.

You haven't been around for a few days Tony, hope you haven't been up to mischief! :D;)

I've been doing penance.;)

In looterspeak "was you band?" :lol1:

So was I.

And Louise Menche too.

I thought the tories had more brains than this sort of rubbish.

Yes. Cameron's beginning to waver on his proposals to make CCTV less pervasive, as well. He has the rather difficult job of needing to become more authoritarian without becoming too authoritarian.

I though it was pretty low of Cameron and May to initially try and claim credit by insinuating that the riots was brought under control through political intervention and then go on to criticise Police tactics. Obviously trying to deflect the fact that they chose to continue top up their tan whilst the capital was under siege from rioters and looters and didn't come back until they came under fire by the media for sunning it up on holiday.

The laugh is the only thing that really stopped the riots from happening for a second night in Manchester was the weather! And people complain it rains all the time in Manchester ;)

Good to hear that Wandsworth council is seeking to evict a looter from their council house. That will strike fear into the rest of the low-life thiefing fcuktards.

The politicians as ever are hanging on by their fingernails in an effort to claim some sort of kudos for the stoppage of the riots when as that chief of police said, their return from holiday was an irrelevance.

As F1 Man says, the biggest factor in stopping it was the heavy rain anyway.

I somehow doubt it was in fact all due to the increased police presence either.

Les

They will be evicted then housed in private accommodation through lha at even greater cost to the taxpayer.

Well, that and for some reason the shops were running low on stock! :lol1:

Pretty crap if that's the case. Surely if they have breached their tenancy agreement (as suggested on the beeb news last night), then they can't claim from that or any other council for accomodation? Which organisation would be bound to pay for thsi?

The taxpayer:thumb:. The council will not be obliged to house them but housing associations will or failing that they will end up in a private
rental.
If they walked out of the house they would have made themselves intentionally homeless and be entitled to nowt, however because they are facing eviction they will have to be re homed somewhere.

Bummer, that's us! :freak3:

The legend that is Pat Condelll is bang on it (once again!) imo...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pAC0YSmK0g

Yup, you can bet now she is facing eviction she will pocket the housing benefit now instead of paying her rent as well.

Seagull in a Londis

Did you mean "banded"?

Les :)