so........

[reohn2]

Statistics aren't always right,see TC's post above.

No they're not, but we're comparing two pretty recent eras - the "golden age" (1960's) to the present.

However, lets not prevent facts getting in the way of opinions, after all where would that take us?

Kwackers wrote:- R2, the issues you bring up are long and complex

Thats the problem we (you and me) are trying to untangle this mess(the UK) its so complex we can only give our opinions based on our observations(thats why I agreed with TC) it is indeed complex.We like to be right,unfortunately none of us are completely right (otherwise we'd all be Libral Democrats )so we reach the situation where you and me have to agree to disagree again.

On the broken Britain issue,if its not broken then its severely bent

[Edwards]

I have tried to avoid watching the news but fell I may have mist something yesterday.
I am not certain if I got this right.
After a short courtship in a ceremony attended by the press Cameron and Clegg announced their marriage.
Then I heard that Cameron had given Clegg a job in the Cabinet. I thought that they were no longer supposed to employ wives or partners.

I am now wondering if Sam Cam will be putting what happened last night on U Tube.

After all we all know what the Private School boys can get up to

[kwackers]

I think thirdcrank pretty much summed it up here:-

I think it's probably right that the way stuff is reported affects our perceptions of it. I've also heard it suggested that as we become generally more law-abiding (or less tolerant of those who are not) then these arguably higher social standards will make delinquent behaviour seem even more common. In short, a lot of the figures are not really comparable and our expectations / tolerance change with time.

The simple fact is however that the way crime is reported these days is massively more in your face that during the "golden era". R2's belief that murder was once a crime that shocked the nation is proof of that - at the time people were being murdered at the rate of one a day - so why where the reported cases so shocking? Then answer is obviously because only the big cases made national news and people only got to hear about those.
What's changed these days is 24 hour news channels, sensationalist papers looking for stories and access to every regions local news such that every event has a full page, big impact version of it just a mouse click away.

I can remember being in assembly at school (during the "golden era") and we were all warned to stay away from a guy that used to sit in his car near the school gates.
So think about this for a minute - a paedophile sat in his car watching the kids coming in and out of school and the best we did was warn kids to stay away! Can you imagine that today?
Not only that but back then abuse was never discussed, only recently as people come forward (usually because their abusers have died) are we beginning to see the true state of things back then, stories of people running away to avoid their abusers and simply being hauled back home by the authorities effectively allowing the abuse to continue.

The trouble with the past is it only looks rose tinted until you begin to dig, then you find all the sh!t.

[DougieB]

I think thirdcrank pretty much summed it up here:-

I think it's probably right that the way stuff is reported affects our perceptions of it. I've also heard it suggested that as we become generally more law-abiding (or less tolerant of those who are not) then these arguably higher social standards will make delinquent behaviour seem even more common. In short, a lot of the figures are not really comparable and our expectations / tolerance change with time.

this made me smile. Out of the whole UK population, who are the 'we' to which it is referring ? I'd suggest the 'we' are the relatively well-off minority that can afford a couple of (£200+) bicycles, Internet access at home, have a mind to wonder about the complexities of law and order, have aspirations, leisure time in cafes, etc..

So, 'we' changed what is socially acceptable and are now demonising 'them' for not obeying our new set of rules. while 'they' probably feel ever more alienated (and poorer) by their perception of the relatively lavish lifestyles 'we' enjoy. are 'we' regressing to the Victorian values of etiquette and social protocol ?

should we bring back peasant shooting ?



Ironically, I think, the 'we' subset of the UK find it socially acceptable to drive over the speed limit, download music illegally, share/copy DVDs, RLJ (amongst other many other relatively minor things). I don't think it's much to do with becoming more law-abiding, more to do with which particular set of laws the active voters choose to match their current mood; which is why politics and the media are so fickle.

[kwackers]

Ironically, I think, the 'we' subset of the UK find it socially acceptable to drive over the speed limit, download music illegally, share/copy DVDs, RLJ (amongst other many other relatively minor things). I don't think it's much to do with becoming more law-abiding, more to do with which particular set of laws the active voters choose to match their current mood; which is why politics and the media are so fickle.

I don't.

But you're right, people are fickle, the subject is complex and way beyond anything that could be resolved here, but hopefully the sound bites will encourage people to think about the issues a bit more...

[glueman]

There was a radio programme recently that claimed Georgian England was the nation's most crime ridden period since the middle ages. Behind the fine classical frontages and enlightenment values violence and murder were commonplace and alcoholism endemic. Capital punishment covered a range of offences and life was cheap in all aspects.

I wonder whether the organised violence of two world wars put paid to an enthusiasm for fighting in the streets in C20th, and people were happy to get on with their lives away from flying bullets?

[reohn2]

As an illustration of crime ridden/severely bent/off the rails Britain:-
At lunchtime I listend to Radio 2 there was a woman,a doctor's partner, who told the tale of her harrowing experience when a mentally ill patient of her partner's was dropped off at their house by the police,she wasn't told by anyone how ill this woman was(the woman had stopped taking her medication)she had welcomed her into the house whereupon the woman stabbed this poor lady 32 times with a carving knife that she took from a kitchen drawer.
She dragged herself into the street and lay down in the road thinking someone would help,cars drove around her,people walked past ignoring her pleas for help,until finally a young building worker ran to her assistance by this time the woman was standing over her with the knife still in her hand.
The man disarmed her,a crowd of onlookers gathered, as he was only wearing a T shirt he asked for assistance to keep her warm until the ambulance arrived,whereupon one chap was heard to say "I'm not getting my jacket dirty",some how this poor woman survived.

To cap it all her assailant was able to claim compensation from her victim.
She got five times more compensation than her the victim was able to claim from the criminal injuries board.

I'd say thats whats wrong with our society.

[kwackers]

As an illustration of crime ridden/severely bent/off the rails Britain:-
At lunchtime I listend to Radio 2 there was a woman,a doctor's partner, who told the tale of her harrowing experience when a mentally ill patient of her partner's was dropped off at their house by the police,she wasn't told by anyone how ill this woman was(the woman had stopped taking her medication)she had welcomed her into the house whereupon the woman stabbed this poor lady 32 times with a carving knife that she took from a kitchen drawer.
She dragged herself into the street and lay down in the road thinking someone would help,cars drove around her,people walked past ignoring her pleas for help,until finally a young building worker ran to her assistance by this time the woman was standing over her with the knife still in her hand.
The man disarmed her,a crowd of onlookers gathered, as he was only wearing a T shirt he asked for assistance to keep her warm until the ambulance arrived,whereupon one chap was heard to say "I'm not getting my jacket dirty",some how this poor woman survived.

To cap it all her assailant was able to claim compensation from her victim.
She got five times more compensation than her the victim was able to claim from the criminal injuries board.

I'd say thats whats wrong with our society.

OK, I've done some research for you R2.

Firstly, this event happened 25 years ago (or 15 years after the "golden age"), so hardly an example of a contemporary event.
Second the passers by ran away rather than simply "walked past" - not surprising since there's a blood stained mad woman with a large carving knife - as Julie Chimes says herself - so would she!
Thirdly the woman didn't claim compensation from her victim, it was claimed against another (undisclosed) party whom she claimed allowed her to roam free knowing she was schizophrenic.

So, allow me to paraphrase your story.
A woman who was hearing voices from God, attacks and nearly kills someone. Passers by run for their lives when confronted with a bloodstained mad woman wielding a carving knife.
A young builder sees what's happening and jumps in thereby saving the womans life.
The attacker successfully sues (the government??) for releasing her whilst she was unsafe.

As a footnote, the only nasty bit is the guy who didn't want to get his jacket dirty, but this is a half remembered piece of information from a woman who was to all intensive purposes unconscious on the floor. It may be true, it may not quite be what was said. I couldn't find any witness statements to verify this.

All in all an event that can (and has) happened throughout history, far from being a story about human failures I see it as a triumph, she was after all rescued by the builder whilst people around her where panicking.

Should she be able to make a compensation claim against a system that had after all apparently failed her? I guess there's a whole new moral dilemma in there....

[mark a.]

That's great! Poor R2, he's going to feel so deflated when he reads that.

[DougieB]

Ironically, I think, the 'we' subset of the UK find it socially acceptable to drive over the speed limit, download music illegally, share/copy DVDs, RLJ (amongst other many other relatively minor things). I don't think it's much to do with becoming more law-abiding, more to do with which particular set of laws the active voters choose to match their current mood; which is why politics and the media are so fickle.

I don't.

But you're right, people are fickle, the subject is complex and way beyond anything that could be resolved here, but hopefully the sound bites will encourage people to think about the issues a bit more...

neither do I. but, the seemingly 'less significant' law breaking, to the point of social acceptability by the people who matter, amazes me. I'm not an advocate for zero tolerance, but there seem to be a lot of people who do advocate zero tolerance for illegality where the particular behaviour is just something they don't like anyway.

[reohn2]

OK, I've done some research for you R2.

Firstly, this event happened 25 years ago (or 15 years after the "golden age"), so hardly an example of a contemporary event.
Second the passers by ran away rather than simply "walked past" - not surprising since there's a blood stained mad woman with a large carving knife - as Julie Chimes says herself - so would she!
Thirdly the woman didn't claim compensation from her victim, it was claimed against another (undisclosed) party whom she claimed allowed her to roam free knowing she was schizophrenic.

So, allow me to paraphrase your story.
A woman who was hearing voices from God, attacks and nearly kills someone. Passers by run for their lives when confronted with a bloodstained mad woman wielding a carving knife.
A young builder sees what's happening and jumps in thereby saving the womans life.
The attacker successfully sues (the government??) for releasing her whilst she was unsafe.

As a footnote, the only nasty bit is the guy who didn't want to get his jacket dirty, but this is a half remembered piece of information from a woman who was to all intensive purposes unconscious on the floor. It may be true, it may not quite be what was said. I couldn't find any witness statements to verify this.

All in all an event that can (and has) happened throughout history, far from being a story about human failures I see it as a triumph, she was after all rescued by the builder whilst people around her where panicking.

Should she be able to make a compensation claim against a system that had after all apparently failed her? I guess there's a whole new moral dilemma in there....

The compensation that the schizophrenic woman claimed could indeed be from the state and not from her victim so I stand corrected on that.
As for people running away from such a situation, would you? seeing as you're the one who claims we all need to be policemen.
I hardly think things have changed much in the last 25 years, in fact I think they're worse now than then.
The nasty bit is the fact that the state allowed someone with such an illness (given that she wasn't taking her medication)to wander about the streets,and that people did infact runaway from a woman needing help in such a situation,they even drove around Julie Chimes by in cars as she lay on the ground bleeding to death(potentially),and that the attacker recieved five time more compensation than her victim.
Those are the points I was making,perhaps you and others,it seems,don't think are valid.I wouldn't think they were valid either if I thought society had come on in leaps and bounds since then,I wish it were so, but I don't.

[reohn2]

:lol: That's great! Poor R2, he's going to feel so deflated when he reads that.

Not at all!
I got a couple of points slightly wrong but the overall story illustrates some of our problems as a society,and how we,don't seem to be able to fix them,or are you happy with the social situation the UK finds itself in?

[kwackers]

As for people running away from such a situation, would you? seeing as you're the one who claims we all need to be policemen.

Would I? I don't know. Twice in the past I've attempted intervention, both muggings. Once in Rome when heard a commotion, saw a lad sprinting away and an elderly lady running after him, he very obviously had her handbag. Sadly he was 2-300 meters away and I did a lot less running back then.
The second time was on Kensington High St, again a shout and I saw a young girl and a lad running for it on the other side of the road, I ran across and followed him up a side street before losing sight of him in an alley. To be fair at this point in a dark alley I realised how vulnerable I was and backtracked.
So I can't say. I *think* I'd weight the situation up, could I take her? Is there any backup? Anything handy I can use as a weapon? Should I try and distract her until others come?
Who knows, fortunately the odds are neither of us will ever have to find out.

I hardly think things have changed much in the last 25 years, in fact I think they're worse now than then.

I don't believe they have, my point has been through this thread that things weren't that great back then either. Given 60 million people I'm afraid stories like this are a foregone conclusion from time to time regardless of societies intention.

The nasty bit is the fact that the state allowed someone with such an illness (given that she wasn't taking her medication)to wander about the streets

Possibly, who decides whether she's a danger or not? Again a balance has to be struck, you can hardly lock up everyone who isn't mentally 100%, neither can you let them all go free and thus somewhere in the middle you'll occasionally either lock up people who don't need it or let someone free who shouldn't be.
Again, sheer numbers and odds mean you can only hope to minimise events like this, stopping them is nigh on impossible.

,and that people did infact runaway from a woman needing help in such a situation,they even drove around Julie Chimes by in cars as she lay on the ground bleeding to

As I said, confronted by a knife wielding maniac I have every sympathy for people running away - as did the victim.

death(potentially),and that the attacker recieved five time more compensation than her victim.

The amount was settled privately, given that neither me nor you are in a position to decide whether it was fair or not. I'd err on "not" but without transcripts and details of her claim who knows. at the end of the day she was a mentally ill woman who was apparently failed on several levels both before and on the day and almost ended up killing someone.

Those are the points I was making,perhaps you and others,it seems,don't think are valid.I wouldn't think they were valid either if I thought society had come on in leaps and bounds since then,I wish it were so, but I don't.

I do think they're valid, I also think society has come on in some ways and gone backwards in others and I suspect thus it will always be as it changes and is balanced and re-balanced.
I wish there was an easy answer, but events like this are a dice game where the odds can be loaded for or against but never removed.

[reohn2]

Kwackers
You'd make a good politrickian!

[kwackers]

Kwackers
You'd make a good politrickian!

No thanks.

Two reasons.

1. It's a thankless task for which you'll only ever be remembered for the bad stuff.
2. Somebody once told me I look like Gordon Brown...


Oh - and a politician would actually make a song and dance, use the story to show how the world had gone to hell in a handbasket and then detail their policies to fix it.

So in this case, I'll:

Create an "Heroes" award to hand out dosh to our Hero Citizens.
Create a central database for mad people with compulsory registration.
Ban carving knives with more than a 2" blade and the selling of such knives to mad folk.
Introduce tagging and GPS for mad folk with their positions highlighted on google maps so folk will be safe.

I'm sure I can come up with some others.
Can I count on your vote?