|
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
In article . com,
" wrote: Why don't you emigrate to Singapore - I'm sure you'll feel a whole lot better there. E. Yes, and safe from not only the thugs who make all of our lives a misery, but also the bleeding-heart liberal apologists too. Does the cap fit? Yes, I rather thought that living in one of the most authoritarian states in the world, one with a high death penalty rate and heavily censored media, would appeal to some here. Mind you, given a bit more time we could be joining them thanks to Blair and co. E. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
In message , John Rowland
writes I have never, ever, seen any graffiti on any part of any transport system that was in any way aesthetically pleasing. Quite the opposite, in fact. It's terrorism. Its purpose is to let us know that we have entered a place where the forces of disorder are winning, and law and order can't protect us. The authorities couldn't protect the train from being vandalised, and they can't protect us from being robbed, raped or murdered. Its aim is to make us afraid. Graffiti doesn't have the potential or even the aim of making the lives of the downtrodden materially better, and so is not a defensible political act. applause -- Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building. You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK (please use the reply to address for email) |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
eastender wrote: In article . com, " wrote: Why don't you emigrate to Singapore - I'm sure you'll feel a whole lot better there. E. Yes, and safe from not only the thugs who make all of our lives a misery, but also the bleeding-heart liberal apologists too. Does the cap fit? Yes, I rather thought that living in one of the most authoritarian states in the world, one with a high death penalty rate and heavily censored media, would appeal to some here. Mind you, given a bit more time we could be joining them thanks to Blair and co. E. I realise that it's not everyone's cup of tea, but given that I am a very self-disciplined person, not given to rocking the boat politically, and with little interest in "party politics", but rather more interested in getting to and from work safely, and not flinching every time I hear a thug walking past my car for fear that he will vandalise it, or assault me (or worse) should I have the temerity to remonstrate with him or his many cohorts which make leaving my home after nightfall a rare and dangerous experiece (and I live in one of the better streets in Fulham!), and having no philosophical objections to the death (or other draconian) penalties for those so deserving, and a thorough disgust for the prurient rubbish printed in the vast majority of our newspapers and television media, Singapopre certainly appeals. In fact, Singapore simply reflects our own culture at the time of its independence, and I am frankly, a little tired of the seemingly racist view that their society is any less valid than 21st Century Britain. Marc. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
In article .com,
"John B" wrote: I'm genuinely amused and amazed that people here have equated graffiti to terrorism... it's a scribble on a train. I think it was a wind up - the alternative is too worrying... E. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
John B wrote:
wrote: Why don't you emigrate to Singapore - I'm sure you'll feel a whole lot better there. Yes, and safe from not only the thugs who make all of our lives a misery, but also the bleeding-heart liberal apologists too. Does the cap fit? Yes, I rather thought that living in one of the most authoritarian states in the world, one with a high death penalty rate and heavily censored media, would appeal to some here. Mind you, given a bit more time we could be joining them thanks to Blair and co. I realise that it's not everyone's cup of tea, but given that I am a very self-disciplined person, not given to rocking the boat politically, and with little interest in "party politics", but rather more interested in getting to and from work safely, and not flinching every time I hear a thug walking past my car for fear that he will vandalise it, or assault me (or worse) should I have the temerity to remonstrate with him or his many cohorts which make leaving my home after nightfall a rare and dangerous experiece (and I live in one of the better streets in Fulham!), and having no philosophical objections to the death (or other draconian) penalties for those so deserving, and a thorough disgust for the prurient rubbish printed in the vast majority of our newspapers and television media, Singapopre certainly appeals. In fact, Singapore simply reflects our own culture at the time of its independence, and I am frankly, a little tired of the seemingly racist view that their society is any less valid than 21st Century Britain. And you haven't emigrated there because...? Incidentally, I'm neither particularly well-built nor particularly hardcore, but despite living somewhere appreciably worse than "one of the better streets in Fulham" I've rarely if ever found leaving my house after nightfall dangerous or even scary. Am I incredibly lucky, incredibly blasé, or is everybody else just paranoid...? I think a lot of people are pretty paranoid. Bad things do indeed go on out on the streets, I'm not trying to deny that, but I really hate the whole living in fear thing that some people seemingly embrace. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
John Rowland wrote:
asdf wrote: On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 11:25:14 -0600, Tristán White wrote: Some graffiti is breathtakingly beautiful, some is gloriously witty (think: Banksy). Some of it can really brighten up a boring journey, or make a disused train a work of art. I have never, ever, seen any graffiti on any part of any transport system that was in any way aesthetically pleasing. Quite the opposite, in fact. It's terrorism. Its purpose is to let us know that we have entered a place where the forces of disorder are winning, and law and order can't protect us. The authorities couldn't protect the train from being vandalised, and they can't protect us from being robbed, raped or murdered. Its aim is to make us afraid. Graffiti doesn't have the potential or even the aim of making the lives of the downtrodden materially better, and so is not a defensible political act. I disagree with that analysis. I don't think those who do graffiti have that in mind - I think that reflects your mindset rather than theirs. Note that I do go along with the notion that graffiti can lead an area to have a somewhat malevolent atmosphere to it, at least to an extent. Of course how perception and how much is reality interweave in such a case is an interesting question - some would just say that perception is reality. I *really* disagree with your use of the word terrorism, it just sounds like you're jumping on the bandwagon, using the term for shock value. Poor show. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
In article . com,
" wrote: which make leaving my homeafter nightfall a rare and dangerous experiece (and I live in one of the better streets in Fulham!), Are you really scared? Has anything ever happened to you? In fact, Singapore simply reflects our own culture at the time of its independence, and I am frankly, a little tired of the seemingly racist view that their society is any less valid than 21st Century Britain. This is nonsense. At no time in the 20th century have we had a largely one party state or state controlled media, except for necessary war precautions. You do realise that Singapore tries to control Internet access - still want to live there? E. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
John B wrote:
Perhaps I was overly harsh on the original poster - however, if you're not aiming to be racist, it's probably worth avoiding words that began as racially abusive terms when describing someone of the ethnic group that the term was originally used to describe. Perhaps, but the meaning of words changes over time (e.g. 'gay') so you have to take things in context. For a start, how would anyone have known if they were Irish travellers? Of course I grade crimes. We all know that if they had been caught, they wouldn't have been given a death sentence or pushed under the train. Do we need signs to tell criminals that being near live tracks and trains is dangerous (rather like theme parks that have so many warnings now for safety/indemnity reasons, it's a wonder that ANY visitors can use any of the rides)? But not a very bad one. I'm genuinely amused and amazed that people here have equated graffiti to terrorism... it's a scribble on a train. If you're terrified and intimidated by a scribble on a train, you might as well kill yourself now, because life is going to get appreciably harder than that... Well, although I didn't say that I can see the link - assuming we look at the real definition of terrorism (and not the assumption that a terrorist is someone with a bomb). People do feel scared and intimidated by graffiti. It's the whole purpose of gangs with territorial areas and markings too. We feel intimidated because someone else is claiming an area as their own - and you can and do feel threatened. If people didn't, there would be no motivation to do it. Should people kill themselves because they feel afraid? I am sure some do - especially those living in areas where they suffer a lot worse than just spray paint on walls. If I was being repeatedly provoked or attacked, either physically or by people trying to enter my property, I am sure that sooner or later I'd be considering taking action of my own. How delightful for you. Charming response. The adreneline is pumping and you don't have time to think - you can only react. Fine. So it's self defence, you're acquitted, and all is fine legally. It's only if you try and kill him *while he's running away* that there's a problem. Did you read what I said? It happens in a matter of seconds. So the guy turns and runs as you're about to attack. Can you stop? Will you stop? I have no idea what I'd do in that situation and I bet you can't either. What if you come home and find the burglar already inside and your wife has been murdered? The guy is now trying to run. Do you still let him go because he's running away? I bet you'd go after them - even if they had a knife or gun. Instinct takes over. By your logic, you'd be considered a cold-blooded killer if you got him before he got you. Maybe you would lie and say it was self defence. I know this? Well, because these things DO still happen. Less than they did five years ago. And the main point of visible policing is to make the public, who seem to share your irrational fear of crime, believe that there are policemen out there. I'm not an idiot. Sure Mrs Jones at number 63, who's 91 years old, thinks it is great to see PCSOs walking about or driving in their marked Vauxhall Corsa, yet with virtually no power to do anything as the local chavs give them the finger. She is convinced the police are out there to protect her. While the CSO is around, she probably IS safer than normal. Whoop-de-do. Crime doesn't fall. A few penalty tickets are issued to the trouble makers, but like a high percentage of fines, they aren't paid. Many people are being conned into believing we have more police. Meanwhile the police have virtually no respect for CSOs and hate working with them (still, they are useful for doing the mundane jobs, like 'guarding the bees'). At least special constables are now more highly regarded! My friend is a DCI and speaks of the memos going around telling officers to try and treat CSOs properly, while unofficially they're told to keep a straight face when watching the CSOs trying to do something, so as not to undermine them. CSOs have to ask for advice on just about everything, and the police get tired of it. Visible policing only looks good too. An officer on foot isn't always that useful when the need to react to something a distance away occurs. In many cases, you may as well just use CCTV. According to opinion polls, this is working. It wouldn't be my use of time and money in an ideal world, but anything that calms the hangers-and-floggers without actual hanging and flogging is better than the alternative. Here's a suggestion; More REAL police offers and a return to the more intensive training we had 10-20 years ago (both for street police and traffic police). Opinion polls? What was the question? Do you think there should be more uniformed officers on the street? Have you seen more officers on the street (a lot of people can't tell the difference between a police officer and a CSO)? I do recommend more CSOs, for the reasons above. And presumably you know that if someone breaches an ASBO then they stand a good chance of going to prison? No they don't. More than 50% of ASBOs are breached, but you have to be caught breaking it too - and even then, you don't automatically go to jail. Wake up and smell the coffee! Even the authorities know they're not working, which is why they're trying to look at a way of improving enforcement. But sending people to prison costs *an enormous amount of money* ("an expensive way of making bad people worse", according to some clever Tory whose name escapes me). Either you send everyone who's ever done anything bad to jail forever, or you delay the problem until they escape. The former is barbaric and ruinously expensive; the latter is merely useless. Any criminal off the street is saving someone money. You seem to forget that. Look at the damage done by the graffiti artists at Camden Town station. How long could you lock the offenders up before 'running at a loss'. What about habitual offenders that have been done 400 times and caused millions of pounds of damage in vandalism? The current prison system does seem to help train people to commit more crime - and that definitely needs looking at. The probation system that allows people to keep taking drugs and commit crime to buy them while being 'integrated back into the community' is also a joke. Panorama only scratched the surface when they showed how bad this was. The problem is you can't just assume that because it will be hard for a prisoner to adapt to normal life after a sentence that you might as well not put them there in the first place. If you do this, scrap all laws and the legal system and let's see how that works. Just say to a criminal, 'You've been a naughty boy. Promise you won't do it again'. Doesn't work for parents that bring up kids and make idle threats like 'If you don't behave, you're going straight home' either. The kid soon learns that they aren't actually punished, so they do it more. Where the hell do you live? I'm in a not-especially-rich bit of northeast London; I've never seen any of that kind of thing (I have seen big gangs of RPIs harrassing upset-looking commuters, and the LUL inspector who PF-ed me for forgetting to renew my Travelcard last year treated me with such utter contempt and disrespect that I was vaguely hoping one of these mythical hoodie types would come along and knife him, but sadly they remained mythical). Are you having a laugh? Open your eyes mate. You're sitting at home writing that visible policing works, CSOs are great, ASBOs are enforced, crime is down and hoodies don't exist. Where is this part of north east London? I've lived, worked and travelled around Enfield, Chingford, Woodford, Leyton and Ilford - and you won't have to wait 5 minutes before you see someone or something dodgy. The places I'm talking about are less than 20 miles away. You must have done well to turn a blind eye to all of this. As for your penalty fare. What was the problem? You had no ticket and got a penalty fare. Say "Oops", pay the £20 and go off to renew the ticket! By all means appeal and hope they'll sympathise (if you can produce years of season tickets, you might well be let off) but stop whingeing. You didn't have a ticket and yet you were hoping someone would come along and knife him. My god, is this the same person that has written all of the above? Fine deducted at source from their benefits, usually. Is there any evidence for this "ASBO as badge of honour" story, or is it just a Viz joke that's been reprinted in the less-serious papers? It's based on interviews with people that have got ASBOs. Can you not see how this would be the case? It doesn't take a genius to work out that this would be the case! In 1993, I was arrested (by dawn raid) for running a bulletin board that had a large number of copyrighted files on there (this predated the Internet and file sharing). I was in fact the first person here to be prosecuted, by companies including Sega and Nintendo. As I was young, a member of a software cracking firm (called Fairlight in case anyone cares) it was absolutely amazing to be able to tell everyone on the warez scene that I had been caught, was the first. I suddenly became the centre of attention and a hero. However, unlike others, I stopped running the BBS, pleaded guilty, paid my £3500 fine and forfeited all the computer equipment. I have never done anything like this since. Don't tell me, or anyone else, that this is a VIZ-joke. ASBOs are a good idea, in theory, don't get me wrong - but without proper enforcement they are pointless. We're fighting them. We're winning. I'm not afraid, even if you are. Right. Take the time I was assaulted for trying to save someone being attacked on a train. Off-duty drivers threw me off the train at the same station as the two offenders (who the police have been unable to trace, and have now stopped investigating) and I was - obviously - attacked. This was at the station I use almost EVERY day. I now have to keep my wits about me because I have no way of knowing when they will see me and I won't be surrounded by other people. What happens then? Do you really think that someone in their home would report a neighbour doing something when they clearly know where they live? One day, it's a firebomb through the letter box, damage to property or an attack when you go out. This is why ordinary citizens won't help the police when something happens to someone else. Eventually, in isolated cases, people to stand up. It takes a lot of courage and usually only happens once things get so bad that they have no choice. It makes you wonder why the police exist. Now, I will try and balance things out by saying that the police and councils will sometimes get together and work on solving the problems (evicting people for example) but there are insufficient resources to do so all the time. My "assumptions" are based on the statistics, and aren't wrong. Regarding papers, I was assuming that people who hold counterfactual views do so because of the lying nature of the press, rather than for other reasons. Not everyone goes by what they read in the paper. Sure, some papers play on the fears we all have. Some people prefer to see things with their own eyes and make their own judgement. I do have my own opinions about The Sun and Daily Mail, and in my work I often look at ALL the papers to see what has been said about a single story. I have to say that the Daily Mail *doesn't* always get things wrong! Sure they add their opinion, but take away the comment and look at the facts and you should be able to draw your own conclusions. If you read real newspapers, are aware of the facts, and still hold the views that you hold, I'm at a loss to explain that. What the hell do papers have do with all this? Does everything you talk about revolve around what the media reports? You are a sad man aren't you! Go out and look with your own eyes. Jonathan |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
eastender wrote: In article . com, " wrote: which make leaving my homeafter nightfall a rare and dangerous experiece (and I live in one of the better streets in Fulham!), Are you really scared? Has anything ever happened to you? Yes, I am scared even to open my curtain sufficiently for the roaming thugs to see who is watching them, lest they come back and throw a brick or worse later on. My computer is right next to my 1st-floor window, and if I do open the curtains to see the latest thug urinating or having sex on the bonnet of my car, or just behaving in the thuggish, loutish way that passes for "normal youthful high spirits in 21st Century Britain) I switch off my lights first. Of course "something" has happened to me. I have had my car vandalised on 4 separate occasions - ranging from mere coin/key scratches to a horde of youths who decided it would be fun to run down the whole lengh of the road jumping from car bonnet to car boot and so forth. This cost me almost £1,000 to repair alone. I have had flowers ripped from my front garden. No fewer than 3 trees planted outside or opposite my house, having campaigned for years to get the local authority to do it (even offering to pay personally) have either been ripped out or snapped in half. I had a scarf calmly taken off my neck as I was standing at the bus stop at the head of my road by a young hooded hoodlum, while his friends stood by and watched (a rare occasion for me to be standing at a bus stop to go out in the evening). Countless individuals have urinated against my front garden wall or car. Countless items of rubbish have been thrown into my front garden. A railing has been ripped out from my front fence so that it can be used as a sword against another thug. I have had graffiti sprayed on my front fence. Both of my neighbours have been burgled (it's never happened to me, yet, because I have aged parents living here and the house is NEVER empty). Someone clearly being chased after a drug deal (or similar) had gone wrong ran into a neighbour's house whilst she was unloading her car and her back was turned to the front door, only for her to be confronted by him when she went indoors: I could hear the shouts from inside my front room and I went to help her throw him out - I don't think he quite knew what hit him! So, yes, I am genuinely scared (42-year-old, reasonably fit and well-built male) and rarely set foot outside my front door after dark. If I do, e.g. to put out the rubbish, I check from inside my house up and down the road to see whether one of the marauding hooded bike gangs is on the prowl, or one of the drug-users from the neighbouring side-street's "social housing" is about to throw a disused needle in my direction, or if one of the cannabis-smoking juvenile groups is passing by ready to shout abuse for the mere offence of being a civilised human being not of their ilk. In fact, Singapore simply reflects our own culture at the time of its independence, and I am frankly, a little tired of the seemingly racist view that their society is any less valid than 21st Century Britain. This is nonsense. At no time in the 20th century have we had a largely one party state or state controlled media, except for necessary war precautions. You do realise that Singapore tries to control Internet access - still want to live there? I couldn't care less about a theoretical "one party" state. We have already surrendered 75% (with the rest soon to follow) to Brussels, with no control over the European Commission whatsoever. What is the big difference between Brown/Blair and Cameron anyway that gives me a real choice of an alternative? I don't much care for the media we have - a largely biased state-funded B.B.C. and a myopic money-grabbing gutter press. They're as bad as each other and I regard both with equal contempt. As for Internet access - just what type of site does the Singapore Government try to restrict? What I am allowed to see without being prosecuted or threat of it is already increasing by the day in the U.K. I have no doubt that the U.K. will follow equally draconian politically-correct censorship rules when the technology allows (it's a small step from saying a public performer ought not to belong to a particular political party to saying that the same party ought not to have access to "public" media such as the Internet). E. Marc. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
eastender wrote: In article .com, "John B" wrote: I'm genuinely amused and amazed that people here have equated graffiti to terrorism... it's a scribble on a train. I think it was a wind up - the alternative is too worrying... E. Whilst I might not use the word "terrorist", I would certainly ascribe to the perpetrators the equally vicious motives of callous contempt for their fellow man, an "up yours" in spray paint, with an intent to say "we can do this at will, and nobody can stop us", and the "art" closely reflects the nihilistic "rap" music and gang culture so closely associated with it, which advocates violence, contempt for normal values, idolises sexual and physical abuse of women, drug use and generally deplorable attitudes that blame everyone else for any woes they may feel except themselves. As someone who prosecutes in the Youth Court very frequently (almost every day between August and December, in fact) I can personally testify to the close connection between graffiti, the rap "culture", drug abuse, contempt for women except as objects of sexual gratification and racism of a very nasty and violent type. Did you know, for example, the reason that so many of these youths wear their trousers half way down their thighs is to "empathise" with the murders on Devil's Island in New York who were not allowed belts in prison in case they attempted suicide. That just about sums up where they are coming from doesn't it?! Marc. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
John B wrote:
Am I incredibly lucky, incredibly blasé, or is everybody else just paranoid...? Don't know, but having read; "Work Secretary John Hutton promises a crackdown on the long-term unemployed. He says a 'hardcore' of benefit claimants are spending years on the dole and should be forced to take opportunities or have their benefits cut. Whereas in fact we'd be better off just giving them their dole and leaving them alone." On a site you write for (http://www.thesharpener.net), I am even more worried about your outlook on life! Jonathan |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
On 14 Jan 2007 09:37:20 -0800, Jonathan Morris wrote:
The adreneline is pumping and you don't have time to think - you can only react. Fine. So it's self defence, you're acquitted, and all is fine legally. It's only if you try and kill him *while he's running away* that there's a problem. Did you read what I said? It happens in a matter of seconds. So the guy turns and runs as you're about to attack. Can you stop? Will you stop? In the case of Harry Stanley (the man shot dead by police in the back of the head in 1999 while carrying a table leg in a plastic bag), the officers were exonerated on just that basis: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6047218.stm |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
John B wrote: Perhaps I was overly harsh on the original poster - however, if you're not aiming to be racist, it's probably worth avoiding words that began as racially abusive terms when describing someone of the ethnic group that the term was originally used to describe. Pikeys only suddenly became an "ethnic group" because then they could suddenly jump onto the racial victimhood bandwagon that people like you are so happy to cheer as it trundles past into the pit of social collapse. Most people would cal them workshy lazy troublemaking scum (and yes I've had firsthand experience of their type twice in the last 5 years) but each to their own. Tory whose name escapes me). Either you send everyone who's ever done anything bad to jail forever, or you delay the problem until they escape. The former is barbaric and ruinously expensive; the latter is merely useless. Newsflash - when someones in prison its very difficult for them to commit a crime that will affect anyone outside the prisons walls. Where the hell do you live? I'm in a not-especially-rich bit of northeast London; I've never seen any of that kind of thing (I have Well being a liberal lefty you naturally have your blinkers on so you wouldn't. I live in a flat in north london and in the last 12 months we've had thieves dumping a car in our carpark and youths with knives and knuckle dusters smoking pot in the communal garden on at least half a dozen occasions. Though I suppose in Cloud Cuckoo Land Avenue where your house resides I suspect nothing of the sort happens. B2003 |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
Good grief Mait where do you live?
I live in Plaistow, not the safest of areas as anyone who opens the weekly local rag can testify. But in 9 years living here, I haven't experienced anything like what you have, and I go out all the time as I live a very active social life. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
In article .com,
" wrote: Of course "something" has happened to me. So, yes, I am genuinely scared Are all your neighbours living in a similar state? Strikes me all the things you describe, apart from the burglars, are low level stuff probably over a a longish period, although I have to say as a long term resident of Hackney I've never seen anything like this. Get involved with local community groups and get these kids sorted - that's all they are. I couldn't care less about a theoretical "one party" state. We have already surrendered 75% (with the rest soon to follow) to Brussels, with no control over the European Commission whatsoever. What is the big difference between Brown/Blair and Cameron anyway that gives me a real choice of an alternative? Have you been to Singapore? i have and I can assure you you do not want to sacrifice our democracy, no matter what you think of it. I don't much care for the media we have - a largely biased state-funded B.B.C. and a myopic money-grabbing gutter press. They're as bad as each other and I regard both with equal contempt. Again, go experience the US or Singapore and report back. As for Internet access - just what type of site does the Singapore Government try to restrict? Anything it doesn't like. That could be you. E. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
In article . com,
" wrote: Whilst I might not use the word "terrorist", I would certainly ascribe to the perpetrators the equally vicious motives of callous contempt for their fellow man, an "up yours" in spray paint, with an intent to say "we can do this at will, and nobody can stop us", At some point, you have to ask yourself why they do it. If you really think they were born with 'vicious motives of callous contempt for their fellow man' then you should write a thesis on genetic determinism that will blow Darwin out the window. As someone who prosecutes in the Youth Court very frequently And what job is this, exactly? Did you know, for example, the reason that so many of these youths wear their trousers half way down their thighs is to "empathise" with the murders on Devil's Island in New York who were not allowed belts in prison in case they attempted suicide. This is a wind up, right? Only a fool would fall for an urban myth that no youth in Britain has even heard of. Next you'll be telling us that mods, rockers and punks were not dedicated followers of rebellious fashion, but mimics of deadly prison uniforms of the time. E. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
Tristán White wrote:
I live in Plaistow, not the safest of areas as anyone who opens the weekly local rag can testify. But in 9 years living here, I haven't experienced anything like what you have, and I go out all the time as I live a very active social life. Thankfully most people don't see it or experience problems. Mind you, I also find that many people turn their head when something happens. After I was assaulted for helping someone else, I will keep my head down in future too. I haven't been mugged or attacked on the street in 32 years (bar the incident mentioned above) and don't fear for my life when walking from the town centre/train station (where the problems are) to my house which is in a nicer - but by no means perfect - area. I am street wise though, and believe me, you can see where trouble spots are. Cross the road, take another route, turn around and wait - all things you can do to keep safe. Timing matters too, as walking anywhere at pub turn out time wasn't good and if I've come home on the last train, walking by the nightclub at 2am isn't wise. In the morning, travel in rush hour and you're fine but wait until the scum wake up, and the fingers up at the inspectors, jumping over the wall all begins and continues all day. The RPIs seem to take it in their stride but I am not sure what company policy is now. One of them was assaulted before Christmas and I bet they're being told to bite their lip when they're provoked now, which is why the evaders are getting more cocky. The fact is, you do what you do to ensure your own safety - and it has paid off so far. The wife would never do what I do, as she would be far more likely to be attacked if she walked home at 2am through the town centre. She gets a cab, or I pick her up. If she is with me, she will never let me get involved with anything and will walk to another carriage or even get off the train/bus/tube. This might make her (and me) safe, but it isn't stopping the incidents taking place. Jonathan |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
Boltar wrote:
Well being a liberal lefty you naturally have your blinkers on so you wouldn't. I live in a flat in north london and in the last 12 months we've had thieves dumping a car in our carpark and youths with knives and knuckle dusters smoking pot in the communal garden on at least half a dozen occasions. Though I suppose in Cloud Cuckoo Land Avenue where your house resides I suspect nothing of the sort happens. This is what a website he writes for says; "John Band is a London-based writer and business analyst. He enjoys Talking And Writing About Business And Politics, bad puns, good pubs, bad punk, strange pieces of technology, and offending people. His views on at least some of the above have been quoted in the Economist, the BBC, the Financial Times and the Telegraph (and less impressively, the Daily Mail and the Metro)." So, he's written for the Daily Mail!! Maybe he's not proud of it but I bet he accepted their money! Perhaps this is why he also claims it is full of crap - he possibly wrote it!! I think what this means is that he likes to wind people up. He doesn't believe any of the drivel he posts - it's just a game. Gold help us all if that isn't the case. Jonathan |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
|
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
In article . com,
"Boltar" wrote: I live in a flat in north london and in the last 12 months we've had thieves dumping a car in our carpark Oh no a dumped car! Call the marines! and youths with knives and knuckle dusters smoking pot Smoking pot! Whatever next - you know where that leads... It's grim up north London but I didn't realise that it's the end of civilisation as you know it. E. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
Boltar wrote:
Richard J. wrote: I would hardly call painting the Mona Lisa "defacing" the canvas. The canvas was there to be painted on. Someones wall isn't. Perhaps this is too complex a concept for you to understand? No, it isn't, but the context of my comment to the preceding posts is evidently too complex for you to understand. Yes, there *are* graffiti artists who create real works of art on surfaces which previously had no visual value. For example, a café-front shutter in Paris (see http://images.fotopic.net/y74ltp.jpg ) Is that supposed to be the best example you can find? It looks no better than a million pictures in childrens books. Its hardly on par with Da Vinci. I didn't claim it was. It happened to be one I saw being painted, and my photo of it was already on the web. I merely said that I regarded it as a work of art without commenting on how good a work it was. If it was done without the owner's permission, it was also vandalism. [Rest of your post snipped, as you seem to have completely misunderstood the drift of my posts in this thread.] -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
Tristán White wrote: Good grief Mait where do you live? I live in Plaistow, not the safest of areas as anyone who opens the weekly local rag can testify. But in 9 years living here, I haven't experienced anything like what you have, and I go out all the time as I live a very active social life. As I said earlier, Tristan, I live in one of the "better" roads in Fulham. Houses in my road cost in excess of £600,000, (Prince Charles used to date a girl living a few doors down, Lady Jane Wellesley) and the thugs who frequent my road don't live here (they can't afford to), but it is a cut-through between the high street and various council estates and other problem areas. In fact, the street running parallel behind mine is far worse: it has a high proportion of "social housing" (Mr. Freeman, a previous Labour councillor and now a bigwig in the legalise cannabis campaign was one of them) and I keep my car door locked when I drive through it even in daylight. The street which forms a T junction with mine at the far end recently had a gang-related raid where teenagers stormed into a house with firearms. They are the sort of people that pass up and down my road to get to the main road and make me frightened to leave my home at night. Funnily enough (I've lived here for 42 years - my entire life) there was a notorious criminal family living a few doors down from us. I used to play football with one of the sons. We got on really well, and they certainly kept all trouble away from this road - not ****ing on one's doorstep as it were, and when someone stole my bike from my front garden about 35 years ago, within hours of them finding out about this, it was returned! Marc. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
Adrian wrote: ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying : Are you really scared? Has anything ever happened to you? snip woes of "one of the better streets in Fulham" Move somewhere less pikey. Why should I move from the house in which I was born and lived my entire life just so that the lunatics can really run the asylum with impunity? Marc. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
John B wrote:
Fine. So it's self defence, you're acquitted, and all is fine legally. It's only if you try and kill him *while he's running away* that there's a problem. It seems to me there's a little hole here. Mr V is threatened by Mr Y. Mr V feels his life is under threat, and begins to act to kill Mr Y with a handly weapon. In between the time V begins his "defensive attack" and the time the weapon kills Mr Y, Y has (quite sensibly) turned to run. Y is therefore (e.g) shot in the back. Should V be judged on the situation when he decides to act and commits himself; or on the situation when the bullet strikes home? ObTransport: Interview with Bernhard Goetz http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP...17/lkl.01.html #Paul |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
|
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
Jonathan Morris wrote:
Perhaps I was overly harsh on the original poster - however, if you're not aiming to be racist, it's probably worth avoiding words that began as racially abusive terms when describing someone of the ethnic group that the term was originally used to describe. Perhaps, but the meaning of words changes over time (e.g. 'gay') so you have to take things in context. For a start, how would anyone have known if they were Irish travellers? Fred Barras and Brendon Fearon (sp?), it was widely reported at the time. But not a very bad one. I'm genuinely amused and amazed that people here have equated graffiti to terrorism... it's a scribble on a train. If you're terrified and intimidated by a scribble on a train, you might as well kill yourself now, because life is going to get appreciably harder than that... Should people kill themselves because they feel afraid? I am sure some do - especially those living in areas where they suffer a lot worse than just spray paint on walls. OK, so I should have been more tactful in the original post; I accept that continued harrassment can drive people to suicide, and that that's a very bad thing. Seeing some graffiti on your train is not an example of the above. Fine. So it's self defence, you're acquitted, and all is fine legally. It's only if you try and kill him *while he's running away* that there's a problem. Did you read what I said? It happens in a matter of seconds. So the guy turns and runs as you're about to attack. Can you stop? Will you stop? As another poster has pointed out, you will be acquitted even if you don't stop (indeed, had Tony Martin lied that that was the case when he shot Fred Barras, then he would have been acquitted). I have no idea what I'd do in that situation and I bet you can't either. What if you come home and find the burglar already inside and your wife has been murdered? The guy is now trying to run. Do you still let him go because he's running away? I bet you'd go after them - even if they had a knife or gun. Instinct takes over. By your logic, you'd be considered a cold-blooded killer if you got him before he got you. Maybe you would lie and say it was self defence. Strictly, according to the law, you'd be guilty of manslaughter due to diminished responsibility. In practice, it would be hard to find a jury who'd convict you. I'm not an idiot. Sure Mrs Jones at number 63, who's 91 years old, thinks it is great to see PCSOs walking about or driving in their marked Vauxhall Corsa, yet with virtually no power to do anything as the local chavs give them the finger. She is convinced the police are out there to protect her. While the CSO is around, she probably IS safer than normal. Whoop-de-do. Crime doesn't fall. A few penalty tickets are issued to the trouble makers, but like a high percentage of fines, they aren't paid. Many people are being conned into believing we have more police. Meanwhile the police have virtually no respect for CSOs and hate working with them (still, they are useful for doing the mundane jobs, like 'guarding the bees'). At least special constables are now more highly regarded! My friend is a DCI and speaks of the memos going around telling officers to try and treat CSOs properly, while unofficially they're told to keep a straight face when watching the CSOs trying to do something, so as not to undermine them. CSOs have to ask for advice on just about everything, and the police get tired of it. Visible policing only looks good too. An officer on foot isn't always that useful when the need to react to something a distance away occurs. In many cases, you may as well just use CCTV. I agree absolutely. But the point of CSOs is to make Mrs Jones happy to go outside, and less scared that the muggers and rapists she reads about in the news will mug and rape her. Which is fine, because they almost certainly won't - crime victims are overwhelmingly concentrated among men aged 15-24. According to opinion polls, this is working. It wouldn't be my use of time and money in an ideal world, but anything that calms the hangers-and-floggers without actual hanging and flogging is better than the alternative. Here's a suggestion; More REAL police offers and a return to the more intensive training we had 10-20 years ago (both for street police and traffic police). Has police training (for non-CSOs) got appreciably easier over the last 10 years? Genuine question. Opinion polls? What was the question? Do you think there should be more uniformed officers on the street? Have you seen more officers on the street (a lot of people can't tell the difference between a police officer and a CSO)? "How scared are you of crime?" I do recommend more CSOs, for the reasons above. And presumably you know that if someone breaches an ASBO then they stand a good chance of going to prison? No they don't. More than 50% of ASBOs are breached, but you have to be caught breaking it too - and even then, you don't automatically go to jail. Wake up and smell the coffee! Even the authorities know they're not working, which is why they're trying to look at a way of improving enforcement. How do you know that more than 50% of ASBOs are breached, if the people breaching them aren't caught? & I know that people who are caught don't automatically go to jail, but enough of them do for it to be a serious prospect. But sending people to prison costs *an enormous amount of money* ("an expensive way of making bad people worse", according to some clever Tory whose name escapes me). Either you send everyone who's ever done anything bad to jail forever, or you delay the problem until they escape. The former is barbaric and ruinously expensive; the latter is merely useless. Any criminal off the street is saving someone money. You seem to forget that. Look at the damage done by the graffiti artists at Camden Town station. How long could you lock the offenders up before 'running at a loss'. What about habitual offenders that have been done 400 times and caused millions of pounds of damage in vandalism? I'd be interested to hear from someone at LUL about how much the Camden debacle actually cost... some scrubbing and some white paint really oughtn't to be that expensive. But I'd tend to agree with you in the specific context of vandalism(/arson/etc) that - because the crime is both expensive and a deadweight loss rather than a transfer - prison is probably more cost effective than for (e.g.) shoplifters. Where the hell do you live? I'm in a not-especially-rich bit of northeast London; I've never seen any of that kind of thing (I have seen big gangs of RPIs harrassing upset-looking commuters, and the LUL inspector who PF-ed me for forgetting to renew my Travelcard last year treated me with such utter contempt and disrespect that I was vaguely hoping one of these mythical hoodie types would come along and knife him, but sadly they remained mythical). Are you having a laugh? Open your eyes mate. You're sitting at home writing that visible policing works, CSOs are great, ASBOs are enforced, crime is down and hoodies don't exist. Where is this part of north east London? I've lived, worked and travelled around Enfield, Chingford, Woodford, Leyton and Ilford - and you won't have to wait 5 minutes before you see someone or something dodgy. The places I'm talking about are less than 20 miles away. You must have done well to turn a blind eye to all of this. Finsbury Park. And aside from the occasional smokings of weed, drunks ****ing against a wall, and one time when a dickhead in a chavmobile was randomly throwing eggs at passers-by, I've genuinely not seen or experienced any crime while I've been here. As for your penalty fare. What was the problem? You had no ticket and got a penalty fare. Say "Oops", pay the £20 and go off to renew the ticket! By all means appeal and hope they'll sympathise (if you can produce years of season tickets, you might well be let off) but stop whingeing. You didn't have a ticket and yet you were hoping someone would come along and knife him. My god, is this the same person that has written all of the above? Obviously I wasn't *seriously* hoping that someone would knife him. However, his attitude was deeply unpleasant (and this was all on Oyster, so he could already see in his reader my last few months' worth of season tickets) - he seemed to really enjoy the fact that he was costing me money and making me late for work, rather than showing any kind of respect or empathy. FWIW, I also got PF'ed when I was 17 and travelling without a ticket or a real excuse; the inspector was perfectly polite and reasonable, and I was happy to pay the fine and came away with no malice towards him at all. -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
Jonathan Morris wrote:
Well being a liberal lefty you naturally have your blinkers on so you wouldn't. I live in a flat in north london and in the last 12 months we've had thieves dumping a car in our carpark and youths with knives and knuckle dusters smoking pot in the communal garden on at least half a dozen occasions. Though I suppose in Cloud Cuckoo Land Avenue where your house resides I suspect nothing of the sort happens. This is what a website he writes for says; "John Band is a London-based writer and business analyst. He enjoys Talking And Writing About Business And Politics, bad puns, good pubs, bad punk, strange pieces of technology, and offending people. His views on at least some of the above have been quoted in the Economist, the BBC, the Financial Times and the Telegraph (and less impressively, the Daily Mail and the Metro)." So, he's written for the Daily Mail!! Maybe he's not proud of it but I bet he accepted their money! Perhaps this is why he also claims it is full of crap - he possibly wrote it!! Not paid - well, not directly - I was doing it for my then employer (expert interviews and PR pieces). It did give me a good understanding of how well-researched the different papers a the Economist and the FT are very rigorous; the Metro will print any old ****; the Daily Mail will print any old **** as long as it suits their agenda (genuine story: I put out a PR piece on confectionery, and got a call from a Daily Mail hack asking if people were buying more traditional sweets out of a desire to return to the 1950s...); the Independent will misunderstand you and print something you didn't even say, by mistake rather than because of their agenda; and so on... I think what this means is that he likes to wind people up. He doesn't believe any of the drivel he posts - it's just a game. Gold help us all if that isn't the case. Gold usually helps people, I'd suggest. ;-) The reason I get involved in debates on crime issues is because I vaguely hope that someone might read what I have to say and realise that they've been looking at things the wrong way. Far too many people don't understand that crime and the fear of crime are both actually falling; far too many people don't realise that the vast majority of victims of violent crime are the same 15-24-year-old males they are scared of, rather than people like themselves; and so on. I'm aware that coming armed with some facts and without Chicken Licken beliefs about the sky falling in is unpopular and largely gets you accused of being a drivelling maniac, but it's a price I'm occasionally willing to pay. But sod it - I've said my piece now, anything else will just be nitpicking and midgets fighting over bugger all, so I'm drawing a line under it. I'll try and stick to Oyster and Crossrail in future... -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
On 13 Jan 2007 07:26:55 -0800, "John B" wrote:
John Rowland wrote: Tony Martin is a hero who killed a pikey scumbag in the dark and who shouldn't have been on his property. And who cares about the ethnic origin of the child he killed? (well, racists might, I suppose). Is pikey a race? I thought it was a behaviour pattern. The primary meaning of "pikey" is "Irish traveller", Was. These days it's interchangeable with the more common "chav". |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
But it no more entitles the property occupier to shoot the miscreant in the back. Not as a "matter of right" but the circumstances could be that the "property occupier" has reasonable fear that the "miscreant" still represents a threat despite having his back turned. Seems to me that the "boys" started it. They initiated the confrontation. The "property occupier" should not be expected to operate with 20/20 hindsight. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
eastender wrote:
"John Rowland" wrote in : It's terrorism. Its purpose is to let us know that we have entered a place where the forces of disorder are winning, and law and order can't protect us. The authorities couldn't protect the train from being vandalised, and they can't protect us from being robbed, raped or murdered. Its aim is to make us afraid. Graffiti doesn't have the potential or even the aim of making the lives of the downtrodden materially better, and so is not a defensible political act. Why don't you emigrate to Singapore - I'm sure you'll feel a whole lot better there. If you think people who say things which you don't like but can't find fault with should leave the country, you'd feel a lot more at home in the Singaporean cabinet than I would. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
In article ,
"John Rowland" wrote: eastender wrote: "John Rowland" wrote in : It's terrorism. Its purpose is to let us know that we have entered a place where the forces of disorder are winning, and law and order can't protect us. The authorities couldn't protect the train from being vandalised, and they can't protect us from being robbed, raped or murdered. Its aim is to make us afraid. Graffiti doesn't have the potential or even the aim of making the lives of the downtrodden materially better, and so is not a defensible political act. Why don't you emigrate to Singapore - I'm sure you'll feel a whole lot better there. If you think people who say things which you don't like but can't find fault with should leave the country, you'd feel a lot more at home in the Singaporean cabinet than I would. Can't find fault with? It's absurd, that is if you're not trolling. As I said, if you're so unhappy here and really feel we live in a lawless society, then there are other places you feel far more secure in. E. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
eastender wrote: In article . com, "Boltar" wrote: I live in a flat in north london and in the last 12 months we've had thieves dumping a car in our carpark Oh no a dumped car! Call the marines! Well given the police normally don't care about them but this time they turned up in an hour with 2 plods and a tow truck I suspect they done more than dodged a train fare. and youths with knives and knuckle dusters smoking pot Smoking pot! Whatever next - you know where that leads... It's grim up north London but I didn't realise that it's the end of civilisation as you know it. Sorry , didn't you read the bit about knives and knuckle dusters? Or is that normal around where you live? Mayne you can't read very well, would explain a lot. B2003 |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
wrote in message
ups.com... eastender wrote: In article .com, "John B" wrote: I'm genuinely amused and amazed that people here have equated graffiti to terrorism... it's a scribble on a train. I think it was a wind up - the alternative is too worrying... E. Whilst I might not use the word "terrorist", I would certainly ascribe to the perpetrators the equally vicious motives of callous contempt for their fellow man, an "up yours" in spray paint, with an intent to say "we can do this at will, and nobody can stop us", and the "art" closely reflects the nihilistic "rap" music and gang culture so closely associated with it, which advocates violence, contempt for normal values, idolises sexual and physical abuse of women, drug use and generally deplorable attitudes that blame everyone else for any woes they may feel except themselves. Lots of rap music is not "nihilistic", and has a great moral message many should embrace. However some does not. Same goes for pop, rock, soul, whatever. There are bad artists in every genre. Lumping everything together demonstrates you are incapable of (or unwilling to) think of these people as individuals. As someone who prosecutes in the Youth Court very frequently (almost every day between August and December, in fact) I can personally testify to the close connection between graffiti, the rap "culture", drug abuse, contempt for women except as objects of sexual gratification and racism of a very nasty and violent type. Did you know, for example, the reason that so many of these youths wear their trousers half way down their thighs is to "empathise" with the murders on Devil's Island in New York who were not allowed belts in prison in case they attempted suicide. That just about sums up where they are coming from doesn't it?! No, I think you'll find most youths wear their trousers around their thighs because that's the popular thing to do. Not everyone knows the reason why their popular clothes are worn the way they are. Do you know how the clothes you wear came about? What social factors played apart in creating and shaping them? Obviously not. Sure, it might have started out as a sign of respect or solidarity, but claiming that EVERYONE who wears their trousers in such a fashion is observing such a show only serves to show you are incapable of thinking of these kids as individuals, but part of some sort of hive-mind. Grow the **** up, please. Marc. You need some help, seriously. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 08:38:28AM -0800, Boltar wrote:
No , the scumbags get the money afterwards once they're in the nick: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6142416.stm The story in question is about people who were already getting medical treatment to reduce and eventually stop their use of addictive drugs, but the prison service didn't permit those programmes to continue. Given that the drugs to which they were addicted are available illegally in prisons, withdrawing the treatment that was keeping the users *off* drugs was clearly very irresponsible. So are you saying that people shouldn't be compensated for medical malpractice? Or that only *nice* people should be compensated for medical malpractice? -- David Cantrell | A machine for turning tea into grumpiness My mission for this year is to get to the top of google's results when you search for "Ken Thompson" |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 09:44:33AM -0800, Boltar wrote:
So if I came and painted all over your car/house/furniture which would cost you thousands to fix , then so long as it some sort of vague artistic merit that would be ok would it? Shall I get my brushes? If you do a good job then I'd be delighted for you to paint my house. It's about due for a re-paint, and to get your art-work to stick you'll have to do all that undercoat boringness as well. Thanks! -- David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Computer Science is about lofty design goals and careful algorithmic optimisation. Sysadminning is about cleaning up the resulting mess. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
Boltar wrote:
Sorry , didn't you read the bit about knives and knuckle dusters? You were that close to see them? You're a brave man. It's true a lot of kids carry knives - it's a big problem. But did these kids use them? Mind you it coudl eb lot worse - wait til they're outside your house with machine guns. E. |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
eastender wrote: Boltar wrote: Sorry , didn't you read the bit about knives and knuckle dusters? You were that close to see them? You're a brave man. It's true a lot of kids I saw them through my window. They're not the brightest and thought no one could see them or no one was home as they showed the gear off to their mates or just thought no one cared enough to do anything since they'd been there before (wrong - smoking pot is one thing , getting out weapons is another entirely). So I called plod , who to their credit actually showed up in a reasonable time but then blew it by parking their van in the one place where the yobs could see it and promtly legged it over a nearby wall before PC Dimwit and friend had even got out (perhaps that was the idea). On the plus side we haven't seen the kids again since though that could be just because of the weather. B2003 |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
"John B" wrote in message
oups.com... Jonathan Morris wrote: You must have done well to turn a blind eye to all of this. Finsbury Park. And aside from the occasional smokings of weed, drunks ****ing against a wall, and one time when a dickhead in a chavmobile was randomly throwing eggs at passers-by, I've genuinely not seen or experienced any crime while I've been here. I saw a guy steal a scooter cover near Finsbury Park. Oh, and there was that mad imam guy. That's about it. That whole part of London looks scary but is as safe as you can find. dave |
Boys killed by Underground train after spraying graffiti
"Boltar" wrote in message
ups.com... John B wrote: Perhaps I was overly harsh on the original poster - however, if you're not aiming to be racist, it's probably worth avoiding words that began as racially abusive terms when describing someone of the ethnic group that the term was originally used to describe. Pikeys only suddenly became an "ethnic group" because then they could suddenly jump onto the racial victimhood bandwagon that people like you are so happy to cheer as it trundles past into the pit of social collapse. Most people would cal them workshy lazy troublemaking scum (and yes I've had firsthand experience of their type twice in the last 5 years) but each to their own. Tory whose name escapes me). Either you send everyone who's ever done anything bad to jail forever, or you delay the problem until they escape. The former is barbaric and ruinously expensive; the latter is merely useless. Newsflash - when someones in prison its very difficult for them to commit a crime that will affect anyone outside the prisons walls. And it's very difficult for them to give back to society. Prisons are not a holding station - they're supposed to rehabilitate people. This is not the 1700s. People in prison cost money, people outside of prison make money. Getting those in Prison outside is of top-priority for the nation as a whole. Make the criminals not criminals, and you're set. Or we could just spend tens of thousands a year per criminal, and not even try to help them, even though poor circumstances are usually the cause of criminal behaviour. Where the hell do you live? I'm in a not-especially-rich bit of northeast London; I've never seen any of that kind of thing (I have Well being a liberal lefty you naturally have your blinkers on so you wouldn't. I live in a flat in north london and in the last 12 months we've had thieves dumping a car in our carpark and youths with knives and knuckle dusters smoking pot in the communal garden on at least half a dozen occasions. Though I suppose in Cloud Cuckoo Land Avenue where your house resides I suspect nothing of the sort happens. OH ****! Crimes that didn't hurt you! You poor baby! Awww! How hard it must have been, sitting inside, knowing someone's smoking POT nearby once every 2 months! Oh no! We'd better declare marshall law, as there is obviously no turning back from youths smoking weed! The end of days is upon us! I guess if you see kids and are scared of them, nothing is going to change that. As has been pointed out before, you're not likely to be a victim of crime, and even less likely than you were a few years back. I live in North London too, and I see a much different view of the outside world. I guess poor evil in my book - it's obviously a different story for you. B2003 dave |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:11 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk