Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
How bad is bad?
"Sacha" wrote in message ... On 2011-08-10 10:39:20 +0100, Kay said: On 09/08/2011 17:39, in article , "Sacha" wrote: I appreciate what you're saying, Kay but Harry's remark was not inclined towards working for the benefit of the community as a whole, but more to hoping he could fool the trouble into becoming someone else's problem. If there's a problem area, all the people in that street, or on that estate, working *together* may produce a result. "Pull up the ladder, Jack" won't do it. AIUI, there are areas where crime has been pretty bad but where determined residents have managed to clean it up and get their lives back in their own hands again. But have they got rid of the crime or merely displaced it? Changing the subject - we have a problem (as most places do) of where do older teenagers go when they want to get together with their mates? They don't want to be sitting under the eye of their parents - and, indeed, parents, especially those without large houses, don't really want half a dozen noisy young males in the house. So residents complain, and they get displaced from Morrisons car park - but they haven't decided to stay at home, instead they've moved to the field opposite the sheltered bungalows. There are so many underlying problems leading to this sort of behaviour that at present, I think people can only tackle what affects *them*. The wider picture and - perhaps - a solution may then start to emerge. But the first step seems to be to show people like Baz's criminal that criminal acts won't be tolerated by anyone in that street/estate/community. I think what an experience such as Baz's shows us is that the softly softly approach by politicians, who then instruct the police and the judiciary, simply doesn't work. Back to the days of "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime". As to what is done about youths who kicked around, bored and so forth, I wish I had an answer. Youth Clubs used to be a solution but no doubt these are now deeply uncool. But it seems to me that there are two answers to this, firstly, parents should always know where thir children are, who they're with and what time they are expected home. And secondly, children have to learn their place on the 'ladder' - being 'bored' or whatever the excuse is, does not give them the right to be a damned nuisance to others. Perhaps *their* parents have to get together and organise themselves and their children into areas where they can enjoy each other's company without upsettinig neighbours. I know this sounds simplistic and perhaps, idealistic but until parents do start to demonstrate concern, interest and that actions have consequences, why should their children think otherwise? I'm talking about a return to basic parenting where every family has to take responsibility for how children are raised and for teaching them how to live within the wider world without being a pain to everyone around them. We can all only do that in our own small way, starting with ensuring those who cause nuisance or crime are dealt with. -- Sacha With so many marriages, if they bother to get married in the first place, breaking up and couples flitting from couple to couple, how do you expect the 'Family Home' to be a Unit? Brothers and Sisters might not even know which 'Father' is which. As a family which has stuck together for over 54 years, I still have the same wife, and all of the children, all four of them, have the same Mother and Father, I am sometimes not at all amazed that the 'Family Unit' has gone out of the window. How many readers of this newsgroup have the same partner they started out with over 30 years ago? Mike -- .................................... Don't take life too seriously, you'll never get out alive. .................................... |