Should there be a curfew for people under 18 years to reduce crime? [ENDS 28/02/10]

[Catzsy]

The only thing the taxpayer should be funding for these people at the moment is a jail cell. Why should my family and other families around the country work to pay for these dirty habits of people, especially when the fact I brought up that drug dealers would still be active and making a profit so in essence; it wouldnt make one bit of difference - just add to our state bill and de-criminalise drugs even futher making them more and more attractive to younger kids.

If you want to pay for these people then by all means, donate to clinics who 'look after them' and 'help them' get off their dirty habits, but the rest of us have no interest in funding these people - most of whom are rotten-to-the-core, theiving scumbag criminals who cant differ between their right and left hand and wouldnt know what time of the year it is if you shoved a calender under their face.

The problem is ,Dan, that very few actually go to jail. It is just an alternative
way of looking at things that's all as nothing seems to be working now.
Hypothetically there would be no need for 'drug dealers' if it was to be had on prescription and there would be no need for them. Also you can't really talk for the rest of the world. Who is the rest of us? This is just my opinion
and it is a theory being considered by many academics. If one wants to spend even more tax on trying to contain these people from blighting the life of the majority of citizens in this country then fine but I see it as a way of making the 'taking of drugs' less 'cool' - the drug dealers make their money by maing sure they get repeat business which means they encourage youngsters to take them. De-criminalising does not make it legal and some already get methodone on prescription. I cannot see anybody coming into power and building more prisons as it doesn't solve anything except to get them off the streets for a short time and come back and start again. Maybe a radical re-think is what is necessary. What I do think is that we have gone too far in this country particuarly in the Social worker area in accepting excuses for their behaviour for which only they are responsible for.

[-:Undertaker:-]

The problem is ,Dan, that very few actually go to jail. It is just an alternative
way of looking at things that's all as nothing seems to be working now.
Hypothetically there would be no need for 'drug dealers' if it was to be had on prescription and there would be no need for them. Also you can't really talk for the rest of the world. Who is the rest of us? This is just my opinion
and it is a theory being considered by many academics. If one wants to spend even more tax on trying to contain these people from blighting the life of the majority of citizens in this country then fine but I see it as a way of making the 'taking of drugs' less 'cool' - the drug dealers make their money by maing sure they get repeat business which means they encourage youngsters to take them. De-criminalising does not make it legal and some already get methodone on prescription. I cannot see anybody coming into power and building more prisons as it doesn't solve anything except to get them off the streets for a short time and come back and start again. Maybe a radical re-think is what is necessary. What I do think is that we have gone too far in this country particuarly in the Social worker area in accepting excuses for their behaviour for which only they are responsible for.

Of course few people go to jail, just another one of the reasons why I think this government is totally out of touch and rivals the Callaghan government on the 1970s in terms of being out of touch and totally useless. Kids dont take drugs to look cool, kids take drugs to get high while in parties and some get addicted - I dont see why just because some 'experts' and the government say so, that the taxpayer of this country aka the rest of us should pay for their dirty habits.

I agree on last bit, so dont play to them and pander their needs - punish them and try with all your effort to stamp it out. Its unbeatable at the end of the day, but aslong as you can tackle the problem it makes it worthwhile. Instead of paying for the bag heads to sit around and smoke pot all day (by paying their benefits & drugs as you suggest) how about cutting both? - and that'll also hit the drug dealers.

They only have the money to buy drugs because a lot dont work and are on benefits, cut their benefits and what will they do?

[Inseriousity.]

They only have the money to buy drugs because a lot dont work and are on benefits, cut their benefits and what will they do?

Steal, make money through illegal means = crime.

Lock someone up for a year, they come out and may re-offend. Lock them up for two years, they come out and may re-offend. It's not really length of time in prison that stops people committing crime, it's what you do with them while they're in there.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Steal, make money through illegal means = crime.

Lock someone up for a year, they come out and may re-offend. Lock them up for two years, they come out and may re-offend. It's not really length of time in prison that stops people committing crime, it's what you do with them while they're in there.

If they continue to commit crime then do not let them out, very simple. Their choice to commit crime, nobody makes them and ultimately nobody can change them.

[Inseriousity.]

If they continue to commit crime then do not let them out, very simple. Their choice to commit crime, nobody makes them and ultimately nobody can change them.

There's no such thing as choice (maybe that can be the next debate )
People are pressured into certain situations, including crime, maybe because of their financial status, their age etc. Take away the pressure and you'll reduce crime. The unfortunate thing about this idea, I'll admit it, is that it's a very long-term solution and unfortunately, people expect instant results from governments. Instead they spend money into schemes that don't work because they don't understand the pressures that force these people into crime. If the public would be patient (which would never happen with the media), they may actually see a reduction in crime rate but as I say, this will never happen + therefore we will never see the benefits of this system.

[FlyingJesus]

On the drugs issue: prescription cough medicines, nos capsules and mephedrone are legal but still obtained for a large part through drug dealers because they can get it in bulk and sell it cheaper than normal sources. As for "They only have the money to buy drugs because a lot dont work and are on benefits" I only know of one or maybe two people who take drugs a lot and are unemployed on benefits, and as we're talking about under 18s in this thread I don't think the benefits system is applicable anyway.

Check me out disagreeing with both sides of the argument

[-:Undertaker:-]

There's no such thing as choice (maybe that can be the next debate )
People are pressured into certain situations, including crime, maybe because of their financial status, their age etc. Take away the pressure and you'll reduce crime. The unfortunate thing about this idea, I'll admit it, is that it's a very long-term solution and unfortunately, people expect instant results from governments. Instead they spend money into schemes that don't work because they don't understand the pressures that force these people into crime. If the public would be patient (which would never happen with the media), they may actually see a reduction in crime rate but as I say, this will never happen + therefore we will never see the benefits of this system.

No people commit crime because they want something, they know its wrong and think they can get away with it; which a lot of the time sadly they do. A theft for example "I want that TV" and they'll take it. That is how a criminal works, theres no such thing as all this pandering around it like "oh I took drugs because I was under pressure from my friends" or "I stole the TV because I owe £100 to my mate" - you know at the end of the day its your choice if you want to steal/take drugs and you should deal with the consquences. It seems to be the new trend these days that people do things because they are 'depressed' or under 'pressure'.

People need to learn to take responsibility for themselves and stop blaming everyone and everything else.

[Inseriousity.]

No people commit crime because they want something, they know its wrong and think they can get away with it; which a lot of the time sadly they do. A theft for example "I want that TV" and they'll take it. That is how a criminal works, theres no such thing as all this pandering around it like "oh I took drugs because I was under pressure from my friends" or "I stole the TV because I owe £100 to my mate" - you know at the end of the day its your choice if you want to steal/take drugs and you should deal with the consquences. It seems to be the new trend these days that people do things because they are 'depressed' or under 'pressure'.

People need to learn to take responsibility for themselves and stop blaming everyone and everything else.

I am very pleased that you have a full understanding in the criminal mind but it's very narrow-minded to assume that they all go for the same reason of wanting something because that would eliminate all non-money related crimes e.g graffiti.

What needs to be done is finding out why they still do it even though they think it's wrong because, believe it or not, criminals are actually human and therefore will have human reasoning behind it. Find the reasons, get rid of the reasons = decreasing the crime rate.

Lock criminals in prison indefinitely if possible = not finding the cause = not getting rid of the cause = not decreasing the crime rate.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I am very pleased that you have a full understanding in the criminal mind but it's very narrow-minded to assume that they all go for the same reason of wanting something because that would eliminate all non-money related crimes e.g graffiti.

What needs to be done is finding out why they still do it even though they think it's wrong because, believe it or not, criminals are actually human and therefore will have human reasoning behind it. Find the reasons, get rid of the reasons = decreasing the crime rate.

Lock criminals in prison indefinitely if possible = not finding the cause = not getting rid of the cause = not decreasing the crime rate.

There are a lot of things that aren't right in everyones lives; some people are in terrible situations, unemployed and about to lose their house - it doesnt mean they go out and rob like others do. The same with other things, the majority of us dont rob/commit crime so why is it an excuse for others to be able to?

[Inseriousity.]

There are a lot of things that aren't right in everyones lives; some people are in terrible situations, unemployed and about to lose their house - it doesnt mean they go out and rob like others do. The same with other things, the majority of us dont rob/commit crime so why is it an excuse for others to be able to?

Exactly which means there has to be something else in the criminal's life that makes them commit crime and if we found this, we can find solutions to stop this. Possibly, living in a zone of transition, family values different to the majority etc etc.

The problem is this government is under pressure from the public (understandably so when the media constantly sensationalises crime) to get fast results and so when looking for these causes, it's done very quickly and very inefficient to actually produce any validity, which means that money is wasted on these 'schemes' to try to stop criminals offending but it's wasted in all the wrong places so it just looks like this 'liberal' view as you put it is a waste of money and time.