Should British Government take benefits/housing off rioter's?

[Frolic_Fun]

Throwing a bit of money here and there will not change things if the person is an utter bastard. The problems will still be there and new problems will arise to replace any problems that once existed. Plus people will always find something to complain about REGARDLESS what you do.

You may think everyone can be happy, peaceful equal and free but that relies on good intentions that simply don't exist from most people and it never will no matter how much you spend, educate etc. It'll never be like that and to suggest it is highly naive. I suggest you look at the root of the problem rather than blaming a few conservatives: humans.

['Butterflies']

Some people are bastards. They wont stop being bastards because they have money.
However, the majority of people who cause trouble arent bornn bastards. A lot of them are the way they are because of their circumstances. The more deprived their upbringing, the more trouble they seem to cause.

And Im not just blaming the Tories. The last government was shit as well.
The real blame lies with the people who vote simply what is best for themselves, rather than caring about wjat is best for society.

I suppose it is one of the flaws of democracy.

[bodie]

I didn't think the last government was bad.  It was a big mistake to make Gordon Brown PM.  I do think Tony Blair was good in his day.  He clearly needed to go but his replacement should have stayed as chancellor. I thought at the time that
Harriet Harmon would go for it.   

Haven't made my mind up about the new labour leader yet.

They had three consecutive term of office so they weren’t that bad.  There have been plenty of times in my life that I really didn’t notice any difference between governments.  I guess it depends on who you are.  I really benefited from Tony Blair’s Government. 
*  When my baby was born Gordon Brown sent me a cheque in the sum of £250.  He did to parents of all babies.  You couldn’t touch it,  the only person able to cash it in is the Urchin,  on his 18th birthday.  You just needed to decide on where to deposit it.  Some just wanted it put in a bank a/c and there were several options on investing.  I invested the Urchin’s.  That was 4 years ago.  It is now worth £600.  I haven’t even added to it myself.  I think the idea that every child has a small nest egg on their eighteenth is brilliant.  Think of all those parents who can’t afford driving lessons or university places for their child – what a relief as it could be quite a sizeable amount of money.  Guess what?  It has now been scrapped by the new coalition. 
* Labour also introduced free nursery places for 2-4 year olds.  12 hours a week.  I did benefit from this too.  I also used one of the many ‘sure start’ centres which have now been closed.
These things might not be important to some folks,  unless you are a parent. 

I think the minimum wage was also a good policy to introduce. 

I think people tend to think 'they're all the same' about politicians,  and indeed i used to think that too,  but clearly there is a major difference to the poorest areas of society.

Not saying Labour are saints.  They were also  involved in the  fiddling of expenses outrage.  The difference was, however, the tories were claiming for such things as 'having their moat cleaned'  Say's it all.

[odeon]

As far as punishment goes,  i would agree some should do jail.  I would reserve this for the ringleaders more,
or the ones with a criminal record as long as your arm.

I think putting someone of that age in prison, if it is their first offence is not so wise.  I have often questioned
the wisdom of putting a load of thieves all together in a prison.  It is not hard to guess what type of stuff they
talk about.  I have never been in prison,  and i am really guessing here but i can't help but think of them as
a University of Crime where they pick up tips how not to get caught next time. 

Only the most sick and violent crimes should be custodial.  I suppose it could be argued that is soft, but i am
thinking about 'reform' and not just punishment.  Some kind of community work like what Callaway said would
be a better solution than jail for a young offender.

The problem with the soft approach is that it wouldn't get the offenders off the street or stop the next riot from happening. Sure, jail might be a place where they'll learn more but how do you scare them from doing it again and laughing off the punishment?

[Squidusa]

The problem with the soft approach is that it wouldn't get the offenders off the street or stop the next riot from happening. Sure, jail might be a place where they'll learn more but how do you scare them from doing it again and laughing off the punishment?

 

[bodie]

As far as punishment goes,  i would agree some should do jail.  I would reserve this for the ringleaders more,
or the ones with a criminal record as long as your arm.

I think putting someone of that age in prison, if it is their first offence is not so wise.  I have often questioned
the wisdom of putting a load of thieves all together in a prison.  It is not hard to guess what type of stuff they
talk about.  I have never been in prison,  and i am really guessing here but i can't help but think of them as
a University of Crime where they pick up tips how not to get caught next time. 

Only the most sick and violent crimes should be custodial.  I suppose it could be argued that is soft, but i am
thinking about 'reform' and not just punishment.  Some kind of community work like what Callaway said would
be a better solution than jail for a young offender.

The problem with the soft approach is that it wouldn't get the offenders off the street or stop the next riot from happening. Sure, jail might be a place where they'll learn more but how do you scare them from doing it again and laughing off the punishment?

  I do think in general prison is a place that should be reserved for just certain crimes.   JMO
However i cant object to custodial as it is lawfully within the range of punishments a court can issue for these offences.  Anyone who was involved in the riot would likely know the maximum and minimum sentences.  It's the evictions of relatives and withdrawing benefits.  That is what i find unacceptable.  I expect Cameron to operate within the law, and not deviate from it by extending his anger towards an offenders family.

My ideas about prison are just my own view.  People think 'retribution' before 'reform'  but the reality is life inside is
not that harsh any more.  They are mixing with like minded individuals and making contacts.  They get to use the gym
and keep fit. They study and can obtain qualifications. They have hot meals, healthcare and are sheltered from the elements.  I think as a punishment it is a bit too easy,  and as i think it is a place to learn more crime,  it fails to reform which doesn't make our streets safer in the long term.  I personally think this course of action wrong for a young offender on a first offence. 

To directly answer your question about keeping them off the streets i would suggest 'tagging'.  A suspended sentence, with community service and a tag.  It is cheaper than jail.  Anyone found out of their home after the set time - straight to jail!  Also daylight activities can be monitored and if police decide to 'bring him/her in' they know exactly where to find
them.  It is still an infringement on the criminals liberty but without the social input of hardened criminals in jail.

[odeon]

Tagging, IMO, is not punishment enough.

I'm leaning towards Squid's ideas.

[bodie]

Providing the basket is positioned correctly
-  i'm all for it

[Binty]

Nyet.