Murder rate in London higher than in New York for the first time

[Guest MattP]

2 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Fred & Rose West, Shipman, Nilsen, Brady & Hindley, Bellfield, Ian Huntley, Venables & Thompson and the Yorkshire Ripper all largely grew up under Tory govts.

 

It's official: Tory govts cause moral bankruptcy, poor parenting and mass murder. 

I don't get this response I just said it was nothing to do with anything party political.

[Milo]

Depresingly on cue... 

 

more stabbings in Croydon this evening, bit close for comfort

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/croydon-stabbing-two-teens-hospitalised-following-double-stabbing-amid-spate-of-london-violence-a3808026.html

[Buce]

3 minutes ago, Milo said:

Depresingly on cue... 

 

more stabbings in Croydon this evening, bit close for comfort

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/croydon-stabbing-two-teens-hospitalised-following-double-stabbing-amid-spate-of-london-violence-a3808026.html

 

I expect they're fighting over your car...

[Rob1742]

3 hours ago, Rogstanley said:

I think quality of parenting is definitely a factor and that's why cuts to things like childcare can be so damaging. Why are some parents so much worse than others do you think?

 

Just follow the life of a bad parent and you'll see the impact of the government all along. Say they're born into a minority ethnic group that in reality does not have the same opportunities as others due to discrimination - straight away they're at a disadvantage and a government who does nothing to redress the balance has missed an opportunity to help.

 

They grow up in a poor family who can't afford to feed them properly, the one opportunity they get for a nourishing meal is at school but school meal funding cutbacks can mean even that becomes out of reach. Another disadvantage.

 

The quality of their education can suffer from cuts. We know in many parts of the country parents are actually having to self-fund schools, a situation that is absolutely scandalous in a so called wealthy country. But if you grow up poor your parents can't afford to contribute and you're probably going to get a limited number of years of poor quality education.

 

Then, if you're lucky enough to get a job then it's probably low paid so when you have kids you're reliant on things like childcare vouchers and a decent quality of childcare being available just to keep the wolf from your family's door. What do you think happens when the government comes along and pulls that rug from under you as well? It all crashes down. What quality of parenting are you actually able to offer, when you're in such a shit situation? It's no wonder so many families break apart really is it. 

 

As you can see the government have impacted upon the story every step of the way and in the case of the Tories it's negative impact after negative impact I'm afraid.

I remember a time when I was younger and I blamed the government for everything. Once I stopped thinking like that, life became much better.

 

Nb, can’t recall what party was in power at the time. 

[Rob1742]

11 hours ago, Rogstanley said:

No I know it has been going on for years. I remember watching McIntyre Undercover on the subject probably 20 years ago. Point is that we're seeing a big spike in murders now, considerably more than we've seen in the past so the problem is definitely getting worse under this government and I think my point about young people feeling excluded from society stands. Not saying labour or any other government would stroll in and fix the issue immediately but it's a certainty that the sort of divisive policies and austerity we get from the Tories will make it worse. That's why it's getting worse.

You’ve not by any chance had your benefits stopped have you? 

[ealingfox]

44 minutes ago, MattP said:

I don't get this response I just said it was nothing to do with anything party political.

 

Pretty sure tongue was ensconced in cheek for that one tbf

[Rogstanley]

1 hour ago, Innovindil said:

Complete utter tosh. 

 

I think this is the first time a post on here has actually made me angry. 

 

Who the **** are you to be coming into here and suggesting poor people can't be good parents. You make a mockery over every good parent that has suffered through poverty by providing a ridiculous cop-out for the bad parents. It's not their fault they're shit parents because they have no money? Get in the ****ing bin. 

Wtf? 

 

Point out exactly where I’ve said poor people can’t be good parents?

 

Edit - actually having read my post back I do see what you mean. It wasn’t my intention to make being poor an excuse for bad parenting, but rather to demonstrate how government policies can impact upon the quality of parenting people are able to offer. I was thinking of a situation where say a father barely sees his wife or kids because he has to work all hours in the gig economy because the government have cut back on childcare funding. He can’t be a the best parent possible if he’s never at home, can he? Do you see what I mean?

 

Do you agree with MattP’s post that the increase in London murders is down to bad parenting? If so how do you explain why all the bad parents seem to come from those same areas and communities?

[Rogstanley]

36 minutes ago, Rob1742 said:

You’ve not by any chance had your benefits stopped have you? 

No mate, never claimed a benefit in my life and won’t ever need to. I’ll probably take the state pension if it’s still available, blow it on a cruise or something.

 

 

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

I don't get this response I just said it was nothing to do with anything party political.

 

48 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

 

Pretty sure tongue was ensconced in cheek for that one tbf

 

Yes, I was being flippant. Sorry if that wasn't clear. I wasn't seriously suggesting that Tory govts inevitably increase crime - and realised that you were not making a party political point either, Matt.   

 

However, to the extent that I had a serious point (it was meant as a light-hearted post), I was posting something ridiculously simplistic to express the view that your post was also ridiculously simplistic.

I find it ridiculous that you can dismiss any influence of central govt funding, mayoral control, social issues, culture or policing - and claim that it's all down to people not being taught about right/wrong and 99% to poor parenting.

 

I'm not seeking to excuse violent criminals. Killing people is clearly very wrong - but the idea that this is all caused by poor parenting and that other factors have no impact just seems insane.

The association between poverty and crime is well established (though not simple causality). So, are you saying that this is pure coincidence - and that, coincidentally, people in poor communities also happen to be poor parents, and that causes crime?!

If (racial/youth/gender) culture has no impact, why does so much of the violence involve young black men killing other young black men? If you are dismissing any impact of lower policing levels, why not get rid of the police altogether?

 

I've no idea how good/bad a job on policing Khan is doing as mayor (or Boris before him), but either way the mayor's impact is heavily restricted by mainly relying on central govt funds for the Met. Police.

 

You seem to want to dismiss all social factors and boil it all down to personal morality - and to blame the parents of young criminals, regardless of circumstances. Of course, it is a moral failing to kill people, but it's a lot easier to fail morally if you can see few opportunities and are living in a chaotic environment where some people are dangerously violent and you have a lack of protection, be that from parents absent at work or elsewhere or from police or wider community, social facilities etc. Are you seriously suggesting that if all these kids had grown up in Hampstead in well-off families, with good opportunities, social facilities, with criminals well controlled by the police, they'd have still ended up killing people because of their rubbish parents?

 

Sorry, didn't mean to go on so long. I'm all for moral responsibility. Some will manage that despite difficult circumstances - and some will fail despite having privileged backgrounds. But a lot more people will fail morally in a chaotic, dangerous social environment than in a nurturing environment with safety, opportunity and social support.

It's not something that I know a lot about, but I know that simplistic moralising won't sort it out. Here's a very dry, academic-speak article highlighting the complex causes of crime and how they inter-relate (i.e. it's not just "poverty->crime" either).

http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199914050.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199914050-e-28

 

 

[Buce]

7 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

 

Yes, I was being flippant. Sorry if that wasn't clear. I wasn't seriously suggesting that Tory govts inevitably increase crime - and realised that you were not making a party political point either, Matt.   

 

However, to the extent that I had a serious point (it was meant as a light-hearted post), I was posting something ridiculously simplistic to express the view that your post was also ridiculously simplistic.

I find it ridiculous that you can dismiss any influence of central govt funding, mayoral control, social issues, culture or policing - and claim that it's all down to people not being taught about right/wrong and 99% to poor parenting.

 

I'm not seeking to excuse violent criminals. Killing people is clearly very wrong - but the idea that this is all caused by poor parenting and that other factors have no impact just seems insane.

The association between poverty and crime is well established (though not simple causality). So, are you saying that this is pure coincidence - and that, coincidentally, people in poor communities also happen to be poor parents, and that causes crime?!

If (racial/youth/gender) culture has no impact, why does so much of the violence involve young black men killing other young black men? If you are dismissing any impact of lower policing levels, why not get rid of the police altogether?

 

I've no idea how good/bad a job on policing Khan is doing as mayor (or Boris before him), but either way the mayor's impact is heavily restricted by mainly relying on central govt funds for the Met. Police.

 

You seem to want to dismiss all social factors and boil it all down to personal morality - and to blame the parents of young criminals, regardless of circumstances. Of course, it is a moral failing to kill people, but it's a lot easier to fail morally if you can see few opportunities and are living in a chaotic environment where some people are dangerously violent and you have a lack of protection, be that from parents absent at work or elsewhere or from police or wider community, social facilities etc. Are you seriously suggesting that if all these kids had grown up in Hampstead in well-off families, with good opportunities, social facilities, with criminals well controlled by the police, they'd have still ended up killing people because of their rubbish parents?

 

Sorry, didn't mean to go on so long. I'm all for moral responsibility. Some will manage that despite difficult circumstances - and some will fail despite having privileged backgrounds. But a lot more people will fail morally in a chaotic, dangerous social environment than in a nurturing environment with safety, opportunity and social support.

It's not something that I know a lot about, but I know that simplistic moralising won't sort it out. Here's a very dry, academic-speak article highlighting the complex causes of crime and how they inter-relate (i.e. it's not just "poverty->crime" either).

http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199914050.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199914050-e-28

 

 

 

I think what Matt was describing is a central tenet of Tory philosophy - the feckless poor. The only way they can justify such pronounced inequality of wealth and opportunity is to blame poverty, crime and all the other social ills on the people themselves.

[Strokes]

8 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

I think what Matt was describing is a central tenet of Tory philosophy - the feckless poor. The only way they can justify such pronounced inequality of wealth and opportunity is to blame poverty, crime and all the other social ills on the people themselves.

Most of these gang members aren’t poor, they just don’t have legitimate earnings.

[Guest]

Can anybody think of any other law and order issues that the government aren't responsible or accountable for? 

 

Can mattp really not make the link between, for example, closure of sure start services and an increase in bad behavior?

 

There's been marked increase in murders in the capital so far this year. What's the government's response? The only thing I've seen it do so far is point at the mayor in an attempt to abdicate responsibility. That is, after all, this government's MO. Where's TM on the issue? Amber Rudd? Shameful lack of leadership from the top. 

 

 

 

[Buce]

4 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Most of these gang members aren’t poor, they just don’t have legitimate earnings.

 

Possibly, though I'd like to see you provide the evidence for that, but they likely grew up in poverty, in an area blighted by poverty.

[Strokes]

37 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Possibly, though I'd like to see you provide the evidence for that, but they likely grew up in poverty, in an area blighted by poverty.

I don’t have statistics and I’m not claiming they weren’t raised in relative poverty. However part of the attraction of these gangs is that it’s quite lucrative, in comparison to any other opportunity they are ever likely to have. Stabbings, murders and turf wars are them just protecting their business.

Did you watch that bbc iplayer thing on moped gangs I posted up a few pages back? It’s quite an eye opener and is certainly insightful.

[Buce]

4 minutes ago, Strokes said:

I don’t have statistics and I’m not claiming they weren’t raised in relative poverty. However part of the attraction of these gangs is that it’s quite lucrative, in comparison to any other opportunity they are ever likely to have. Stabbings, murders and turf wars are them just protecting their business.

Did you watch that bbc iplayer thing on moped gangs I posted up a few pages back? It’s quite an eye opener and is certainly insightful.

3

 

So you are agreeing then? Crime is a reaction to poverty, not necessarily a consequence of bad upbringing?

[Strokes]

Just now, Buce said:

 

So you are agreeing then? Crime is a reaction to poverty, not necessarily a consequence of bad upbringing?

Yeah but I think it’s a mixture of many things but poverty and lack of opportunities once they have committed minor offences is definitely the biggest from my point of view. The money these guys (and girls) can make from what they see as fair game crime, puts any legitimate money they could ever earn into insignificance. But no I’m not blaming the tories, many of these gang members are mid twenties to thirties and would have also been raised under a labour government. It’s just not as simple as that.

 

[Buce]

8 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Yeah but I think it’s a mixture of many things but poverty and lack of opportunities once they have committed minor offences is definitely the biggest from my point of view. The money these guys (and girls) can make from what they see as fair game crime, puts any legitimate money they could ever earn into insignificance. But no I’m not blaming the tories, many of these gang members are mid twenties to thirties and would have also been raised under a labour government. It’s just not as simple as that.

 

 

I didn't say I was blaming the Tories either (at least, not exclusively). I was making the point that blaming the poor for being poor (and all that comes with it) is part of Tory philosophy, something MattP was displaying in his post.

[Guest MattP]

Sorry @Alf Bentley -too much beer.

[Guest MattP]

20 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

I didn't say I was blaming the Tories either (at least, not exclusively). I was making the point that blaming the poor for being poor (and all that comes with it) is part of Tory philosophy, something MattP was displaying in his post.

Definitely. 

 

Personal responsibility should always be a huge part of the Tory philosophy - if we ever get to the point of making excuses for bad behaviour they'll lose my vote.

 

My four grandparents and two parents all grew up "poor" but were taught the difference between right and wrong, nothing the government did would ever have been used as an excuse to commit crime.

 

Vast majority of poor are decent law abiding, crime only "comes with it" if they choose to do so.

[Rogstanley]

8 minutes ago, MattP said:

Definitely. 

 

Personal responsibility should always be a huge part of the Tory philosophy - if we ever get to the point of making excuses for bad behaviour they'll lose my vote.

 

My four grandparents and two parents all grew up "poor" but were taught the difference between right and wrong, nothing the government did would ever have been used as an excuse to commit crime.

 

Vast majority of poor are decent law abiding, crime only "comes with it" if they choose to do so.

So why do you think 'bad parents' (your term) are concentrated in specific areas?

[Innovindil]

11 hours ago, Rogstanley said:

Wtf? 

 

Point out exactly where I’ve said poor people can’t be good parents?

 

Edit - actually having read my post back I do see what you mean. It wasn’t my intention to make being poor an excuse for bad parenting, but rather to demonstrate how government policies can impact upon the quality of parenting people are able to offer. I was thinking of a situation where say a father barely sees his wife or kids because he has to work all hours in the gig economy because the government have cut back on childcare funding. He can’t be a the best parent possible if he’s never at home, can he? Do you see what I mean?

 

Do you agree with MattP’s post that the increase in London murders is down to bad parenting? If so how do you explain why all the bad parents seem to come from those same areas and communities?

**** me. Sorry for my over emotional outburst. Shouldn't come onto ft inebriated. 

 

I'd say yes and no tbh. It definitely isn't just down to bad parenting. Growing up in poverty sucks, it's one of the hardest things a kid can go through.  Having the piss taken out of you because you can't afford stuff like clothes, games, school trips and are usually a little light in the lunch is awful. It's easy to grow up with an attitude that life is unfair. 

 

However, for how hard it is, it does not, and should not, provide an excuse for criminal behaviour. I understand what you're saying about a dad working all the time and not being able to be the best parent he can be, you're right. That doesn't mean there isn't enough time to teach kids the difference between right and wrong. 

 

Even after that, it doesn't mean a kid will grow up to live within the law. We're all different. Some use such experiences to give themselves motivation to be better, others give up and will take on a life of crime. 

 

I get the whole "poverty causes crime" view, but in my view it doesn't have to. Some of the poorest people I know are the nicest, some of the richest I know are the scummiest. Using poverty as a simple excuse for this behaviour really does belittle the good people that deal with poverty. 

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, MattP said:

Definitely. 

 

Personal responsibility should always be a huge part of the Tory philosophy - if we ever get to the point of making excuses for bad behaviour they'll lose my vote.

 

My four grandparents and two parents all grew up "poor" but were taught the difference between right and wrong, nothing the government did would ever have been used as an excuse to commit crime.

 

Vast majority of poor are decent law abiding, crime only "comes with it" if they choose to do so.

And, in your opinion, does removing help from parents that struggle add to or detract from the problem?

 

Does losing 20,000 police officers help or hinder efforts to solve the problem of gangs?

 

Personal responsibility is fine. But you can't ignore the other issues that are involved.

[Rob1742]

It is increasing now because social media makes attacks easier to escalate. So something that may have simmered and gone away doesn’t. It carries on, and quickly comes to fruition.

 

You can blame government cuts for the increase, and yes it could put more pressure on certain families, but other families have pressures too and they don’t  go gunning people down.

 

Cuts have needed to happen to rid the UK of the benefit culture. I often heard cases of people not working because it was more beneficial not too. I knew two lads personally who quit work to be a doleite.

 

The issue arose when these communities came over. They were not integrated into society, they formed their own communities and some have failed to see life outside of this. 

 

Schooling, parenting, mentors, they all form part of most people’s lives and they will have all formed part of these communities lives too, yet they choose a gang mentality and to kill people. 

 

You can choose to get out, you can choose a different path, but by not integrating these communities from the start it has lead to them living a ghetto life and they have stayed in their own. 

 

Dont go blaming governments, they have provided housing, and benefits for these communities like they have for others. These people have a mindset issue. Not all of them, but some of them. Some break free, most do, but there are opportunities to do well just a mile or so away from these ghettos, but people’s mindset lead them to stay there for some reason.

 

And people feeding them news that it’s governments fault makes it worse for them as they will believe it rather than see opportunities a few mile from home.

 

 A few miles from home is the West End, a breeding ground for jobs and opportunities, but some choose not to take these. 

 

I was always told I would be lucky to get any job as the government were at fault. I was never told I was any good at anything. I looked at myself as different to others, not as good as others , and I never would be due to the government. I had a factory job on £29 a week and was told I was lucky.

 

But I started to look around, I started to listen to people outside of my family, I started to pick up information, and at the age of about 23 I thought I started to feel good about myself and most importantly move in different circles. 

 

Forget this government fault crap, it’s a mindset issue within the communities and different mindsets are active just a few miles away from these communities.

 

Most have moved, integrated and done very well, but others stay in that bubble. But giving them an extra £20 a week or reopening the sure start centre won’t do it. It’s a mindset thing and that’s what needs to change, nothing else. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Innovindil said:

**** me. Sorry for my over emotional outburst. Shouldn't come onto ft inebriated. 

 

I'd say yes and no tbh. It definitely isn't just down to bad parenting. Growing up in poverty sucks, it's one of the hardest things a kid can go through.  Having the piss taken out of you because you can't afford stuff like clothes, games, school trips and are usually a little light in the lunch is awful. It's easy to grow up with an attitude that life is unfair. 

 

However, for how hard it is, it does not, and should not, provide an excuse for criminal behaviour. I understand what you're saying about a dad working all the time and not being able to be the best parent he can be, you're right. That doesn't mean there isn't enough time to teach kids the difference between right and wrong. 

 

Even after that, it doesn't mean a kid will grow up to live within the law. We're all different. Some use such experiences to give themselves motivation to be better, others give up and will take on a life of crime. 

 

I get the whole "poverty causes crime" view, but in my view it doesn't have to. Some of the poorest people I know are the nicest, some of the richest I know are the scummiest. Using poverty as a simple excuse for this behaviour really does belittle the good people that deal with poverty. 

This is a fair post.

The 'doesn't have to' point is well made. But I would add to it by saying it doesn't have to but does make it more likely by increasing the likelihood that young people will be exposed to conditions that feed gang culture.

[Rob1742]

3 minutes ago, toddybad said:

And, in your opinion, does removing help from parents that struggle add to or detract from the problem?

 

Does losing 20,000 police officers help or hinder efforts to solve the problem of gangs?

 

Personal responsibility is fine. But you can't ignore the other issues that are involved.

Increasing police presence isn’t the issue, it’s altering the mindset of the people. You could put 20,000 police in Tottenham and they will still want to kill each other.