British Violence

[quote]Sifu wrote:

Britain is much worse, for politicizing government statistics, even with Obama taking responsiblity for the census away from the commerce department and putting Rhambo in charge.
[/quote]

It happens on the city level constantly here. Crime is not so much a nationwide problem here, so to speak, as it might be in Britain. But in city and state politics, is huge. And manipulated accordingly, of course.

[quote]
Yours is especially fucked up because that could feasibly swing rulings on cases. Unbelievable.

Good point, I hadn’t really thought about it like that before but yes it allows for the politicizing of murder cases. Under NuLabour the police have become highly politicized. If they want to lower the murder rate all they have to do is not arrest anyone. Prosecuters can also reduce the murder rate by lowering the charge to manslaughter or blowing their prosectution. [/quote]

Exactly.

[quote]Sifu wrote:
makkun wrote:
Oh no - another statistic by the Daily Mail (a well established source for reliable statistics), based on figures assembled by the Tories no less. The truth is finally out.

I would trust the Tories to be a little bit more truthful than NuLabour, maybe not a lot more but it is quite believable that for certain types violent crime the US is safer than the UK.

I am sure that a lot of British won’t want to believe that article is accurate. Even amongst my relatives I find that the British have this delusion that just because they don’t have firearms Britain is safe from violent crime, unlike the “fucking Yanks” with all their guns making them violent.

What happens next is that Sifu will come along and blame immigrants and Nulabour (and Guardinistas), and that only the BNP can save us, irrespective of any statistic one might post (which of course are all forged by the government).

Do tell Makkun, it sounds like you find them blameless. Do you?

There is a reason why the Labour party is called NuLabour. The reason why Labour had to be rebranded as NuLabour is because the last time they held power they ruined the economy and were bringing in boatloads of immigrants and using them for gerrymandering. That is why Margaret Thatcher is seen as such a saviour. There is nothing new about NuLabour it was just a gimmick that the British were stupid enough to fall for because the Tories got complacent with power.

The mess that has been made of Britain is very much the fault of Labour. They are soft on crime. They have always been bleeding hearts who can’t stand bad people suffering the consequences of their bad behaviour. The papers in Britain are full of acts of mayhem where the perpetrators are only doing a year or two in jail or just getting a fine for something that in the US would result in the perp doing 10yrs, 20yrs or even life. ie In the US we don’t have absurdities of the law such as one punch manslaughter allowing people to get away with murder.

Then there has been the systematic destruction and politicization of the police. NuLabour has made the courts and the police useless to the point that a lot of people don’t even bother reporting crime anymore.

If immigration is causing the rise in crime that again is the fault of NuLabour because they are the ones who ended border controls. They do not screen prospective immigrants, they do not take into consideration where they are coming from, they will take anyone from anywhere. They don’t even deport illegal immigrants, who have committed crimes, who have been all the way through the legal process and had a court say tey can’t stay in Britain any longer.

[/quote]

I’ll agree about New Labour and old Labour on the economy. They certainly do have a nasty habit of screwing it up and making everyone but a few a lot worse off.

And yeah I’ll agree about the immigration under New Labour they have taken the piss out of the British voter extensivly with their immigration policy.

I’ll also agree about their abuse of statistics. The way crimes and illnesses are counted in the UK is beyond funny. Even minor crimes. I recently was with a girl who was pickpocketed in a shopping center. I insisted she went to the police. They refused to register the crime because there is according the desk monkey no way to solve the crime. Now I hate security camera’s more than the next guy but seriously what are they there for if it’s not to solve crimes like this?

The trouble is the Tories are no better. Yes they do tend to fix our economy. But speeches like “there is no such thing as society” certainly didn’t help to make our country a better place. Nor did so many of Thatcher’s policies. Although I did love the old home secretery (John Howard?)'s view that most crime is commited by criminals and that by locking them up for longer the public were safer.

The other thing is the Daily Mail is not a viable source of independent news. They stir up every story to sell papers in a tabloid manor. Trouble is they do it with real issues instead of reality TV stars. There is no way the UK has as much violent crime as RSA. I mean one in three women have been raped there according to one story I read recently. As bas as the UK there is no way we are that bad. Yet.

And there is no way the BNP would turn out to be any better than the current mainstream parties.

[quote]Sifu wrote:
The Scots do have a certain agnst and they keep daggers in their socks. Alcohol is a big part of the problem. It makes people very volatile. Even when they are sober people who drink a lot can be volatile. The Scots really haven’t changed since the time of Ceaser. I had a Scottish freind in London who when I mentioned he looked just like someone out the Highlander movie he replied that he was one of the extras.

The British courts also have a completely different attitude to the American attitude on alcohol and drugs. The American attitude is if can’t control your behaviour while intoxicated then you shouldn’t be drinking or getting high. The American courts take the attitude that if you are sober and you choose to drink or get high you are responsibile for that choice to get high, therefore you are responsible for you actions when you are high because you were sober before you chose to get high. In the American system of justice intoxication is no excuse for breaking the law.

The British attitude is if you are drunk or high and you get out of control you are not responsible for your actions. In the British legal system intoxication is a legitimate excuse. This is also an attitude with the British public. This is why it is quite common for young Brits to post pictures of themselves on facebook or bebo or myspace where they are totally wasted and doing something which they should be really embarassed by. The reason why they aren’t embarrassed is because they rationalize it that since they were wasted they weren’t responsible for their actions, so it’s just a big joke.

Thanks for including the statistics at the bottom. Yay Detroit, we’re number one. Detroit can be really dangerous but it is somewhat predictable. If you stay in the suburbs like Southfield which is on the list and shares a common border with Detroit (8 Mile Rd.)then your chances of falling victim to violence are drastically reduced. In Britain even in nice areas violence can just happen, it’s not as predictable as Detroit. [/quote]

What a total load of tripe!

Scots haven’t changed since the times of Ceaser, [sic] what a total joke! For a start, Highlander was set about 1,500 years after the Romans left and a Highlander would have looked and behaved very differently than a Pict (the predominant people around at the time of the Roman Empire. Since that time obviously there has been further mixing and intermingling of bloodlines, particulary with the Angles and Jutes, Britons and Scottis.

Secondly to claim that British Culture is more permissive of alcohol and drugs based on myspace is hilarious. Having seen US Spring Breakers at first hand I can calmly state that the US and UK have similar numbers of young drunk idiots.

Finally to claim that random violence is likely to break out in any area of Britain at any time is a huge misrepresentation. Britain is very similar to the US in this way (though much smaller) there are rough areas and nice areas in the rough areas, bad stuff happens. In the nice areas, bad stuff is rarer but still happens occasionally.

[quote]Sifu wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Sifu wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Sifu wrote:

In Britain they changed the rules for counting murders so that if they have dead body that is the result of foul play they don’t count it as a murder until after the killer has been arrested, tried and convicted of murder. If the killer is only convicted of manslaugter then they don’t count it as a murder. In the US the dead body is counted as a murder even if the killer is never caught or if the killer is convicted for a lesser charge.

That is the kind of creative accounting strategies that NuLabour has instituted in order to reduce the homicide rate.

Classic.

Thanks buddy. Don’t the British come up with the most absurd bullshit that defies all logic?

They do the same shit over here. That’s why you can never believe the numbers- they’ll fuck with them in any way possible to make it seem like crime is going down, when you can’t really tell unless you walking those streets.

Britain is much worse, for politicizing government statistics, even with Obama taking responsiblity for the census away from the commerce department and putting Rhambo in charge.

Yours is especially fucked up because that could feasibly swing rulings on cases. Unbelievable.

Good point, I hadn’t really thought about it like that before but yes it allows for the politicizing of murder cases. Under NuLabour the police have become highly politicized. If they want to lower the murder rate all they have to do is not arrest anyone. Prosecuters can also reduce the murder rate by lowering the charge to manslaughter or blowing their prosectution. [/quote]

Whereas in the US the police are never under any pressure to manipulate the figures to hit quotas and targets (where do you think the Brits got the ideas from?)

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Sifu wrote:

Britain is much worse, for politicizing government statistics, even with Obama taking responsiblity for the census away from the commerce department and putting Rhambo in charge.

It happens on the city level constantly here. Crime is not so much a nationwide problem here, so to speak, as it might be in Britain. But in city and state politics, is huge. And manipulated accordingly, of course.

Yours is especially fucked up because that could feasibly swing rulings on cases. Unbelievable.

Good point, I hadn’t really thought about it like that before but yes it allows for the politicizing of murder cases. Under NuLabour the police have become highly politicized. If they want to lower the murder rate all they have to do is not arrest anyone. Prosecuters can also reduce the murder rate by lowering the charge to manslaughter or blowing their prosectution.

Exactly.[/quote]

The difference is scale. In the UK, pretty much everyone reads national newspapers whereas in the US because it is far larger, people tend to have their focus more regionally.

[quote]Sifu wrote:
[…]

What happens next is that Sifu will come along and blame immigrants and Nulabour (and Guardinistas), and that only the BNP can save us, irrespective of any statistic one might post (which of course are all forged by the government).

Do tell Makkun, it sounds like you find them blameless. Do you?[/quote]

No.

[quote] There is a reason why the Labour party is called NuLabour. The reason why Labour had to be rebranded as NuLabour is because the last time they held power they ruined the economy and were bringing in boatloads of immigrants and using them for gerrymandering. That is why Margaret Thatcher is seen as such a saviour. There is nothing new about NuLabour it was just a gimmick that the British were stupid enough to fall for because the Tories got complacent with power.

The mess that has been made of Britain is very much the fault of Labour. They are soft on crime. They have always been bleeding hearts who can’t stand bad people suffering the consequences of their bad behaviour. The papers in Britain are full of acts of mayhem where the perpetrators are only doing a year or two in jail or just getting a fine for something that in the US would result in the perp doing 10yrs, 20yrs or even life. ie In the US we don’t have absurdities of the law such as one punch manslaughter allowing people to get away with murder.

Then there has been the systematic destruction and politicization of the police. NuLabour has made the courts and the police useless to the point that a lot of people don’t even bother reporting crime anymore.

If immigration is causing the rise in crime that again is the fault of NuLabour because they are the ones who ended border controls. They do not screen prospective immigrants, they do not take into consideration where they are coming from, they will take anyone from anywhere. They don’t even deport illegal immigrants, who have committed crimes, who have been all the way through the legal process and had a court say tey can’t stay in Britain any longer.[/quote]

Sadly, under Labour, the prison population has basically doubled, even though crime rates are consistently pointing down:
‘Crisis now defines the core of the English and Welsh penal system. Despite a 42% decline in the amount of crime reported to the British Crime Survey since 1995 the prison population has soared to an all time high of almost 84,000 in 2008 (83,810 on 1 August 2008 - more than doubling since 1992) and overcrowding has reached record levels.’

It could have to do with their idiotic attempts to appear ‘tough on crime’ by adding 3600 (yes, you read that number correctly) new offences, many of which can indeed land you in prison.

Labour’s crime policies - as so many other of its social policies - have failed miserably in the attempt to woo middle England. We don’t see many evidence based policies in the UK, rather a populist approach trying to appease public mood that is mostly based on impression rather than evidence.

I don’t debate you any more, basically since you had to be moderated (for once) for your usage of racist language. It’s bad enough that you are allowed to agitate on behalf of the British National Party here - so I take to be called a ‘punk’ by you as a compliment.

Makkun

[quote]lou21 wrote:
Sifu wrote:
makkun wrote:
Oh no - another statistic by the Daily Mail (a well established source for reliable statistics), based on figures assembled by the Tories no less. The truth is finally out.

I would trust the Tories to be a little bit more truthful than NuLabour, maybe not a lot more but it is quite believable that for certain types violent crime the US is safer than the UK.

I am sure that a lot of British won’t want to believe that article is accurate. Even amongst my relatives I find that the British have this delusion that just because they don’t have firearms Britain is safe from violent crime, unlike the “fucking Yanks” with all their guns making them violent.

What happens next is that Sifu will come along and blame immigrants and Nulabour (and Guardinistas), and that only the BNP can save us, irrespective of any statistic one might post (which of course are all forged by the government).

Do tell Makkun, it sounds like you find them blameless. Do you?

There is a reason why the Labour party is called NuLabour. The reason why Labour had to be rebranded as NuLabour is because the last time they held power they ruined the economy and were bringing in boatloads of immigrants and using them for gerrymandering. That is why Margaret Thatcher is seen as such a saviour. There is nothing new about NuLabour it was just a gimmick that the British were stupid enough to fall for because the Tories got complacent with power.

The mess that has been made of Britain is very much the fault of Labour. They are soft on crime. They have always been bleeding hearts who can’t stand bad people suffering the consequences of their bad behaviour. The papers in Britain are full of acts of mayhem where the perpetrators are only doing a year or two in jail or just getting a fine for something that in the US would result in the perp doing 10yrs, 20yrs or even life. ie In the US we don’t have absurdities of the law such as one punch manslaughter allowing people to get away with murder.

Then there has been the systematic destruction and politicization of the police. NuLabour has made the courts and the police useless to the point that a lot of people don’t even bother reporting crime anymore.

If immigration is causing the rise in crime that again is the fault of NuLabour because they are the ones who ended border controls. They do not screen prospective immigrants, they do not take into consideration where they are coming from, they will take anyone from anywhere. They don’t even deport illegal immigrants, who have committed crimes, who have been all the way through the legal process and had a court say tey can’t stay in Britain any longer.

I’ll agree about New Labour and old Labour on the economy. They certainly do have a nasty habit of screwing it up and making everyone but a few a lot worse off. [/quote]

The economic policies of Labour have destroyed entire industries that were world leaders. But economic mismanagement is not the only bad similarity between old and Nulabour another thing they have in common is taking the mainstream people for granted and being preoccupied with the welfare of other groups like the criminals.

[quote]
And yeah I’ll agree about the immigration under New Labour they have taken the piss out of the British voter extensivly with their immigration policy. [/quote]

They act as if they have a mandate from the people to engage in mass immigration on a scale rivalling America at the turn of the twentieth century yet there never was a vote. Just like there never was a vote on adopting a new constitution that transfers the peoples sovereignty to the EU.

[quote]
I’ll also agree about their abuse of statistics. The way crimes and illnesses are counted in the UK is beyond funny. Even minor crimes. I recently was with a girl who was pickpocketed in a shopping center. I insisted she went to the police. They refused to register the crime because there is according the desk monkey no way to solve the crime. Now I hate security camera’s more than the next guy but seriously what are they there for if it’s not to solve crimes like this? [/quote]

The cameras are there to get the British people conditioned so that they are comfortable with the government monitoring their every move and so the government can monitor those who it considers threats to it’s power. Crimes against the little people like your friend don’t wattant the use of such a power.

[quote]
The trouble is the Tories are no better. Yes they do tend to fix our economy. But speeches like “there is no such thing as society” certainly didn’t help to make our country a better place. Nor did so many of Thatcher’s policies. Although I did love the old home secretery (John Howard?)'s view that most crime is commited by criminals and that by locking them up for longer the public were safer.[/quote]

The Tories aren’t going to be much better, because they are owned by the same masters. But at least they aren’t all hung up on being all bleeding hearted for the most dysfunctional part of society suffering the consequences of their actions. The liberals are too hung up on the poor lads being punished by being put in jail. They have lost the concept that putting people in jail is not just about punishing them. some people need to be put in jail and kept there for an extended amount of time because they are dangerous.

Look at all the public relations intiatives they keep talking about for how they are going to take people caught carrying knives and put them in jail for years. Everytime I see one of these initiatives in the news I wonder why instead of going after people carrying knives don’t they instead concentrate on locking up the criminals who have already committed a violent crime and hurt someone. A big part of the reason why people feel the need to carry knives is because they feel they need to protect themselves and they don’t have faith in the criminal justice system’s ability to protect them from violence because they see murderers and other violent criminals getting off with light sentences.

[quote]
The other thing is the Daily Mail is not a viable source of independent news. They stir up every story to sell papers in a tabloid manor. Trouble is they do it with real issues instead of reality TV stars. There is no way the UK has as much violent crime as RSA. I mean one in three women have been raped there according to one story I read recently. As bas as the UK there is no way we are that bad. Yet. [/quote]

Sure you have to take what the Mail writes with a grain of salt but they do dig up some stuff where one has to wonder what happened to peoples common sense. I think that is one of the reaons why people complain about the Mail is because they ponit out some of the ridiculous bullshit that goes on in Britain.

[quote]
And there is no way the BNP would turn out to be any better than the current mainstream parties. [/quote]

Why is that? One big difference that I see between the BNP and all the other parties is the BNP is focused on putting the British people first. The BNP’s focus is within the borders of Britain. All the other parties politicians think their first priority is the rest of the world. The mentality is fuck the British, we are going to save the world. ie Gordon Brown boasting in parliament a few months ago that he had “saved the world” from the financial crisis. As the leader of the British nation Gordon should have been focused on getting the British house in order.

Another big difference I see in the BNP is they are not afraid to take political positions that are a liability to their getting elected. Lib/lab/con ukip are full of slimey politicians who will say one thing to get themselves elected then not do what they said they were going to do.

In the US we have a similar situation with Barack Obama and Reverand Wright. I don’t agree with him on some things but I actually like Reverand Wright more than Obama. The reason why I like Reverand Wright more than Obama is because the Reverrand comes right out and tells you what is on his mind instead of bull shitting people so he can be “popular” in order to get one over on them.

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
The Scots do have a certain agnst and they keep daggers in their socks. Alcohol is a big part of the problem. It makes people very volatile. Even when they are sober people who drink a lot can be volatile. The Scots really haven’t changed since the time of Ceaser. I had a Scottish freind in London who when I mentioned he looked just like someone out the Highlander movie he replied that he was one of the extras.

The British courts also have a completely different attitude to the American attitude on alcohol and drugs. The American attitude is if can’t control your behaviour while intoxicated then you shouldn’t be drinking or getting high. The American courts take the attitude that if you are sober and you choose to drink or get high you are responsibile for that choice to get high, therefore you are responsible for you actions when you are high because you were sober before you chose to get high. In the American system of justice intoxication is no excuse for breaking the law.

The British attitude is if you are drunk or high and you get out of control you are not responsible for your actions. In the British legal system intoxication is a legitimate excuse. This is also an attitude with the British public. This is why it is quite common for young Brits to post pictures of themselves on facebook or bebo or myspace where they are totally wasted and doing something which they should be really embarassed by. The reason why they aren’t embarrassed is because they rationalize it that since they were wasted they weren’t responsible for their actions, so it’s just a big joke.

Thanks for including the statistics at the bottom. Yay Detroit, we’re number one. Detroit can be really dangerous but it is somewhat predictable. If you stay in the suburbs like Southfield which is on the list and shares a common border with Detroit (8 Mile Rd.)then your chances of falling victim to violence are drastically reduced. In Britain even in nice areas violence can just happen, it’s not as predictable as Detroit.

What a total load of tripe!

Scots haven’t changed since the times of Ceaser, [sic] what a total joke! For a start, Highlander was set about 1,500 years after the Romans left and a Highlander would have looked and behaved very differently than a Pict (the predominant people around at the time of the Roman Empire. Since that time obviously there has been further mixing and intermingling of bloodlines, particulary with the Angles and Jutes, Britons and Scottis.[/quote]

It was Scottish G who mentioned Hadrians wall I just thought I would kid him a little about the Romans. So stop getting your panties all in a bunch. I know about the Picts. It was the Roman General Julius Ceasar who in his “Commentarii de Bello Gallico” described how the Pict warriors would paint themselves blue before they went into battle. If you follow football you should know that there are still Scots who like to paint themselves blue.

[quote]
Secondly to claim that British Culture is more permissive of alcohol and drugs based on myspace is hilarious. Having seen US Spring Breakers at first hand I can calmly state that the US and UK have similar numbers of young drunk idiots.[/quote]

No I wasn’t basing that solely on myspace. Yes American kids can hold their own on getting fucked up. The difference though is the attitude of the adults towards that behaviour. In Britain getting pissed is a big joke. ie When Tony Blairs son was found drunk and passed out on a sidewalk in London people thought it was funny. When the Bush twins got minor in possession tickets it was seen as a scandal for the White House.

I am fairly certain I have shown this one to you before.

Thieves who steal to feed an addiction to drugs, drink or gambling could escape jail under new sentencing guidelines.
They would even escape jail if they hit or threaten a vulnerable victim, such as an elderly shopkeeper.
The normal jail term for criminals who steal from vulnerable people would start at 18 weeks.
But if there are mitigating circumstances a community order could be imposed, the Sentencing Guidelines Council suggest.
Mitigation could include criminals who stole to feed a drugs, alcohol or gambling addiction, or who were “motivated by desperation or need”, said the council.
The same defence of stealing to feed an addiction would also apply to shoplifting and other larger thefts.

[quote]
Finally to claim that random violence is likely to break out in any area of Britain at any time is a huge misrepresentation. Britain is very similar to the US in this way (though much smaller) there are rough areas and nice areas in the rough areas, bad stuff happens. In the nice areas, bad stuff is rarer but still happens occasionally. [/quote]

My grandmother lived in the nicest part of her town, but when I lived with her for a while I quickly learned that the main street just outside her front door got way sketchy on a Friday Saturday night. The kind of public intoxication and random violence that I saw there would not be tolerated in the suburb of Detroit that I grew up in.

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Sifu wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Sifu wrote:

Whereas in the US the police are never under any pressure to manipulate the figures to hit quotas and targets (where do you think the Brits got the ideas from?)[/quote]

There you go! Blame it on the fucking Yanks!

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
The Scots do have a certain agnst and they keep daggers in their socks. Alcohol is a big part of the problem. It makes people very volatile. Even when they are sober people who drink a lot can be volatile. The Scots really haven’t changed since the time of Ceaser. I had a Scottish freind in London who when I mentioned he looked just like someone out the Highlander movie he replied that he was one of the extras.

The British courts also have a completely different attitude to the American attitude on alcohol and drugs. The American attitude is if can’t control your behaviour while intoxicated then you shouldn’t be drinking or getting high. The American courts take the attitude that if you are sober and you choose to drink or get high you are responsibile for that choice to get high, therefore you are responsible for you actions when you are high because you were sober before you chose to get high. In the American system of justice intoxication is no excuse for breaking the law.

The British attitude is if you are drunk or high and you get out of control you are not responsible for your actions. In the British legal system intoxication is a legitimate excuse. This is also an attitude with the British public. This is why it is quite common for young Brits to post pictures of themselves on facebook or bebo or myspace where they are totally wasted and doing something which they should be really embarassed by. The reason why they aren’t embarrassed is because they rationalize it that since they were wasted they weren’t responsible for their actions, so it’s just a big joke.

Thanks for including the statistics at the bottom. Yay Detroit, we’re number one. Detroit can be really dangerous but it is somewhat predictable. If you stay in the suburbs like Southfield which is on the list and shares a common border with Detroit (8 Mile Rd.)then your chances of falling victim to violence are drastically reduced. In Britain even in nice areas violence can just happen, it’s not as predictable as Detroit.

What a total load of tripe!

Scots haven’t changed since the times of Ceaser, [sic] what a total joke! For a start, Highlander was set about 1,500 years after the Romans left and a Highlander would have looked and behaved very differently than a Pict (the predominant people around at the time of the Roman Empire. Since that time obviously there has been further mixing and intermingling of bloodlines, particulary with the Angles and Jutes, Britons and Scottis.

It was Scottish G who mentioned Hadrians wall I just thought I would kid him a little about the Romans. So stop getting your panties all in a bunch. I know about the Picts. It was the Roman General Julius Ceasar who in his “Commentarii de Bello Gallico” described how the Pict warriors would paint themselves blue before they went into battle. If you follow football you should know that there are still Scots who like to paint themselves blue.

Secondly to claim that British Culture is more permissive of alcohol and drugs based on myspace is hilarious. Having seen US Spring Breakers at first hand I can calmly state that the US and UK have similar numbers of young drunk idiots.

No I wasn’t basing that solely on myspace. Yes American kids can hold their own on getting fucked up. The difference though is the attitude of the adults towards that behaviour. In Britain getting pissed is a big joke. ie When Tony Blairs son was found drunk and passed out on a sidewalk in London people thought it was funny. When the Bush twins got minor in possession tickets it was seen as a scandal for the White House.

I am fairly certain I have shown this one to you before.

Thieves who steal to feed an addiction to drugs, drink or gambling could escape jail under new sentencing guidelines.
They would even escape jail if they hit or threaten a vulnerable victim, such as an elderly shopkeeper.
The normal jail term for criminals who steal from vulnerable people would start at 18 weeks.
But if there are mitigating circumstances a community order could be imposed, the Sentencing Guidelines Council suggest.
Mitigation could include criminals who stole to feed a drugs, alcohol or gambling addiction, or who were “motivated by desperation or need”, said the council.
The same defence of stealing to feed an addiction would also apply to shoplifting and other larger thefts.

Finally to claim that random violence is likely to break out in any area of Britain at any time is a huge misrepresentation. Britain is very similar to the US in this way (though much smaller) there are rough areas and nice areas in the rough areas, bad stuff happens. In the nice areas, bad stuff is rarer but still happens occasionally.

My grandmother lived in the nicest part of her town, but when I lived with her for a while I quickly learned that the main street just outside her front door got way sketchy on a Friday Saturday night. The kind of public intoxication and random violence that I saw there would not be tolerated in the suburb of Detroit that I grew up in. [/quote]

Go on, I’ll bite, which town are we talking here?

Serious question here, how old were you when you lived in the UK and how long ago was it?

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Sifu wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Sifu wrote:

Whereas in the US the police are never under any pressure to manipulate the figures to hit quotas and targets (where do you think the Brits got the ideas from?)

There you go! Blame it on the fucking Yanks![/quote]

Lol. British politics has been borrowing the worst bits of US Politics for years. That is not really the US’s fault, it is more the British Public’s fault for swallowing it.