Knife Crime

[VladimirIlyich]

1 minute ago, Lee909 said:

What we need is a good person with a sword to stop the bad people with knives

More pork swords and less stainless steel swords.

[Lee909]

2 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

More pork swords and less stainless steel swords.

Not sure swinging a pork sword at them would do much but get you circumcised or having a fulltime career as a eunuch

[VladimirIlyich]

1 minute ago, Lee909 said:

Not sure swinging a pork sword at them would do much but get you circumcised or having a fulltime career as a eunuch

It works with dogs!

[Kepler-186]

3 minutes ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

I think this is a really difficult thing to talk about for 2 reasons; the majority of the victims are black and some of the recent crimes are almost too awful to contemplate. The kid in Sydenham who was killed in April was a soft gentle child who was autistic, walked with a stick and was hacked to death by other children with machetes in broad daylight whilst their mum (who drove the killers to the scene) just stood by and watched. It was probably mistaken identify as well. Just unbelievably fucking horrific.

 

I think this is why the “blame it all on the Tories” reaction is so appealing. It stops you having to think about this awful stuff and gives you an instant oven ready answer. Of course it’s nonsense, nobody really thinks that these crimes would stop if a Labour Government was elected and don’t forget the big rise in knife crime in london has actually happened under a Labour mayor despite an increase in police numbers. The actual answers are far more complex and nuanced but nobody so far in this thread has come up with anything constructive that could actually be implemented as a government policy.
 

Still, it’s all the evil Tories fault, let’s go back to talking about beans on a fry up. 

You’re pretty thin skinned about getting called out for bad takes. Most posters here I’d reckon are quite left leaning without that meaning undying devotion to Labour: but what it also means is a

load of us grew up on different areas of Merseyside, a place that was only saved by the direct injection of EC Objective One funding in the 90s, and have no time for this “oh the Tories can’t be that bad” thing you’ve got going on. They despise the working class, they hate Liverpool, and they must laugh their cocks off at the gullible twats in Brexitland who are aligning with them over shitty culture war shite. 
 

The City of London is full of drug crime, but the criminals go back to their gated residences in Surrey or wherever the fuck past all the old London neighbourhoods that are rife with knife crime, drugs, poor schools, low educational achievement and family breakdown. 
 

All Tories are cunts end of. For balance, Labour are a bunch of ball washing bastards.

 

 

[Pidge]

3 hours ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

No it doesn't. Police numbers are at 32,531 officers in London compared to the peak of 32,766 in 2020.  

 

Paradoxically the knife crime rate has gone up in line with the increase in police numbers in 19/20 which suggests that there isn't really a link either way

 

Still lets not bother with al this nuanced factual stuff and realistic policy ideas, its all the fault of the evil tories. 

 

 

 

Inferring causation from a few charts is "nuanced" and "factual" is it?

 

Not sure about that.

[Bruce Spanner]

Funding in real terms has been cut by the best part of 3/4 of a billion pounds, so much so they had to sell of stations to pay towards it, remember the gov are responsible for the spending allowance and a lot of this goes in to counter terrorism, which is bound up on the budgets, so to make up the shortfall, which is a relatively new thing, Khan had to literally sell the polices home.

 

GMB estimate that the met have lost 9000 jobs, CPSO’s and support

 

https://www.gmb.org.uk/news/shock-figures-reveal-23500-police-staff-cut-under-tories

 

Funding to children’s services has been cut by around 1/2B

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/knife-crime-causes-and-solutions-editors-guide-to-what-our-academic-experts-say-113318

 

The article also suggests ways in which this has been allowed to happen.

 

Crime in London is not as high as many big cities, especially violent crime.

 

https://fullfact.org/crime/London-vs-england-2016-2020/

 

Knife crime in London has increased by around 2% nationally, against 7% nationally.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/knife-crime-england-london-hits-record-high-a4342451.html%3Famp

 

Former Home Secretary, Amber Rudd in leaked documents claimed that Tory cuts had led to an increase in violent crime

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/08/police-cuts-likely-contributed-to-rise-in-violent-leaked-report-reveals?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

Sadiq Khan and explains how the cuts have disproportionately hit London which will bring cuts up to £850b since 2010

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-news/sadiq-khan-announces-500million-cuts-18497949.amp

 

Research shows that stop and search is ineffective and contributed to the problem.

 

 https://fullfact.org/crime/does-stop-search-work/

 

Here is what I meant by the graph about stop and search being nonsense. They reclassified it in 2012, 2014 and latterly with section 60, so a lot of searches didn’t go in to the actual figure, which is much higher.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/oct/28/met-police-criticised-for-multiple-errors-in-stop-and-search-practice

 

Info on the huge cuts to services.

 

https://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/our-key-themes/local-government-finance/london’s-local-services-investing-future/decade-austerity

The benefits of drug liberalisation, we in Blighty have one of the most restrictive of anywhere in the developed world and, surprisingly higher rates of offence for drug related crimes, we also have some of the highest rates of addiction and deaths

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_liberalization

 

And on and on and fucking on...

 

I wasted my time finding things I already knew for the benefit of nothing really, but maybe it’ll provide context for some, before they embarrass themselves alligning with those that cause the problem.

 

No matter what government is in there will never be change without will and this government more that any, ever, has neither the will nor the inclination to change a fucking thing.

 

[Kepler-186]

Why change anything when you can text the plod to do what you want, then delete all records, and report back to Murdoch, ready to blame the next group in the crosshairs to deflect from the thieving from the taxpayer.

Again, for balance, Big Joe was an amateur compared to these, the descendants of Empire builders. 

Informative post. 

[Bruce Spanner]

9 minutes ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

Can we just be clear that you think the answer to violent crime is to “legalise all drugs” presumably including crack which causes users to suffer paranoid delusions and become violent. Have I understood you properly ? 

No, you have not.

 

And there are far more moveable pieces than this one, but it is part of a solution, yes.

 

But keep bringing a singular problem to a much larger discussion, it’s served you well so far.

 

I do believe in a policy akin to Portugal’s, or that certain American states are looking to implement, along with more progressive European ideas around personal possession policies work, yes. They are showing remarkable efficacy on reducing crime and dependency and if we had a forward thinking government they’d already be making inroads to emulate certain aspects suitable to Britain.
 

 

[Bruce Spanner]

1 minute ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

Well you did say “legalise all drugs” as part of the response to knife violence and it is well documented that crack use is associated with violence and paranoia so  which part of what you said did I get wrong ? 

Eventually that would be the desired outcome, yes.

 

A system whereby crack was regulated would eliminate a whole host of personal and societal problems, and as with the Portuguese system treatment is bound up in this, so you’re killing two birds with one stone.

 

You're throwing a red herring though as I’m not sure it’s crack heads who are getting stabby, I’m sure you’re right though and would be able to back this up? 

 

[Jairzinho]

What are the benefits of it being illegal? 

 

 

[Bruce Spanner]

Just now, Colonel Kurtz said:

Seriously mate, I know we are never going to agree on anything but crack is an unbelievably horrific drug which completely destroys people’s lives.

 

Read this article on the affect of mothers taking crack on their new born babies then tell me you think this should be legalised. 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/childhoods-end-what-life-is-like-for-crack-babies-188557/amp/

Again, singular issue in a bigger debate, it’s disingenuous.

 

I know what crack can do, I’ve seen it at close quarters, that’s why you look for a solution to a problem, not double down on tactics that have never worked, what’s so difficult about that?

 

Do you think the aim of legalisation is to have a nation hooked? 
 

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-hasnt-the-world-copied-it?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

Mad.

[Jairzinho]

If it was legalised I'd deffo start sprinkling it on my breakfast. 

[Bruce Spanner]

3 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

If it was legalised I'd deffo start sprinkling it on my breakfast. 

I reckon I’d only kill four hookers a week, down from my usual twelve, if I was allowed to do that.

[Bruce Spanner]

10 minutes ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

Again to repeat the point just so we are completely clear, you think part of a larger answer to knife crime is to decriminalise crack cocaine even though (as widely reported) it causes profound and irreversible brain damage in new born babies. Do you really not see how insane and morally bankrupt  that position is ? 

No, as it has been shown to work in other countries and as a globe we are working towards more progressive, strategic approaches towards drugs and addiction, and in turn reducing the larger societal impacts they have. We in Britain are behind our international counterparts, to our shame.

 

Now, how morally bankrupt is it to not consider alternatives to a demonstrably failing system which allows the very same things you rally against?
 

 

[Kepler-186]

Cato Institute, those lovable rogues who aren’t in any way far right libertarians opposed to a slightly socialist government. They should stick to sorting out kids being murdered in schools by other kids with assault rifles in

the Land of the Free. 
 

How big an issue is crack in the UK anyway? People can’t function when they’re on it, and there’s no headlines about a crack epidemic. 

[Bruce Spanner]

 

1 minute ago, Kepler-186 said:

Cato Institute, those lovable rogues who aren’t in any way far right libertarians opposed to a slightly socialist government. They should stick to sorting out kids being murdered in schools by other kids with assault rifles in

the Land of the Free. 
 

How big an issue is crack in the UK anyway? People can’t function when they’re on it, and there’s no headlines about a crack epidemic. 

 

You beat me to it!

 

From the same report...

 

'None of this should be read as a condemnation of the Portuguese government: they expanded treatment and tried to lower the number of non-violent drug users in prison, which are good things. Indeed, I have spent a great deal of time pursuing similar goals with state and national governments. My complaint rather is that the Cato report doesn’t do a sufficient job of helping us all understand the complexity of what happened in Portugal, the positives and the negatives that policymakers know are always both present in the world of public policy. Instead the report gives a partial picture that supports a particular (perhaps predetermined) conclusion, and that creates doubt in my mind about its value as serious policy analysis.'

 

[Kepler-186]

Kurtz you’ve taken Bruce’s overall points, ignored them, and doubled down on a fixation with crack babies. 
 

If there is a crack epidemic it’s the governments fault, and last I checked they’re Tories. 
 

Anything else is just deflection. 

[Bjornebye]

4 hours ago, Lee909 said:

What we need is a good person with a sword to stop tories pretending to be decent people

. 

[Bruce Spanner]

4 minutes ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

Facts tendon facts irrespective of who reports them.

 

Crack is not that big an issue here but maybe that’s becuase it’s illegal.

@Bruce Spanner thinks the answer to increasing youth violence is to make crack cocaine freely available through your local Boots pharmacy then use the tax revenue raise to increase public spending. The profound brain damage caused to babies of crack using mothers is not a concern apparently and anyway it’s the Tories who are the morally corrupt.
 

This whole thread has been quite an eye opener. 

 

You literally understood none of it, did you?

 

That is an amazing way to misrepresent, bravo, shows so little imagination it's almost applause worthy.

 

Stick your head back under the rock you've been living under.

[Bjornebye]

2 minutes ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

No I haven’t. He said a couple of times he advocated making crack completely legal as part of a wider response to the knife epidemic and when I pointed out the horrific damage this would cause to new born babies he just ignored it. 

Kurtz, for what its worth everyone knew you were a tory fart within hours of you joining but... you were given a chance and you grasped it. Don't ruin it. You're a decent poster, getting into stuff like this is only gonna end up with more dead old people and a skip full of lilt on your driveway. 

[Bruce Spanner]

3 minutes ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

Well let’s try one last time. Do you think crack should be made legal ad part of the response to knife crime (which you have said yes to already) and how do you address the issue of pre natal brain damage ? 

 

A proactive policy towards drugs and addiction would stop future instances of this and yes and I would support that.

 

Not too fucking difficult to grasp, is it?

[Kepler-186]

7 minutes ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

Facts tendon facts irrespective of who reports them.

 

Crack is not that big an issue here but maybe that’s becuase it’s illegal.

@Bruce Spanner thinks the answer to increasing youth violence is to make crack cocaine freely available through your local Boots pharmacy then use the tax revenue raise to increase public spending. The profound brain damage caused to babies of crack using mothers is not a concern apparently and anyway it’s the Tories who are the morally corrupt.
 

This whole thread has been quite an eye opener. 

Behave lad, you live in a big house in leafy green Surrey with a prospective Tory councillor the only drug violence you’re likely to see if when Charlie and Jeremy from the golf club snort too much  and fall out about who has to ring for another drop off. 
 

The Cato Institute are cocks. Slightly to the right of the NRA. 
 

Bruce and I both listed solutions to try to address the issues and you’ve gone all Ben Bradley crack den. 
 

 

 

[Strontium]

48 minutes ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

Again to repeat the point just so we are completely clear, you think part of a larger answer to knife crime is to decriminalise crack cocaine even though (as widely reported) it causes profound and irreversible brain damage in new born babies. Do you really not see how insane and morally bankrupt  that position is ? 

 

I think crack should be legal, but I don't think babies should be allowed to take it.

[Bjornebye]

16 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

I think crack should be legal, but I don't think babies should be allowed to take it.

Hahahaha

15 minutes ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

Ha ha. I’m stopping now, it’s too depressing spending Friday nights talking about dead teenagers and brain damaged babies. I’m going to watch old episodes of Das Boot to cheer myself up. 

Just start a thread on favourite brands of concrete or something. 

 

 

 

[Chairman Meow]

@Colonel Kurtz Drug prohibition has been around for about 100 years now and has done fuck all to curb it. Do you not think that after 100 years of doing the same thing over and over again it's maybe time to try an alternative approach?

 

Look at the Portugese and Swiss models on it, they've seen pretty unbelievable results through legalisation, not a free for all where anyone can do what they want. But a considered approach which involves reaching out to people who are using and recognising it for what it is in the majority of cases, a form of self medication for people who are trying to escape the real world.

 

To be honest, it sounds like you haven't got a fucking clue what it's like growing up with abuse, depression and barely being able to leave the house without something to dull the world. If you can't find the understanding or empathy to actually see some of the root causes then it's not worth any of us even trying to explain as you quite possibly will never get it. That's not a dig, but everyone experiences the world differently and if you haven't lived it, then it's something that is probably never going to make sense.

 

 

If you can't use empathy, and as a Tory I imagine that's pretty difficult for you, try considering it as a business case. Look at how much it costs law enforcement to completely fail to stop drug usage, I would reckon it would be a hell of a lot cheaper to simply supply drugs to those who wanted them and put the money to improving other services, or the ever popular lowering of taxes. You also have to additional benefit of lowering the associated crimes of people committing crime to use which should see a quality of life improvement for the victims of said crime. Fixed supply of drugs without any of the shit that gets cut into it means less hospital emergencies and overdoses etc. with the associated costs of treatment thereby meaning NHS resources can go elsewhere. There have been studies which looked at costings, I don't have any to hand, but off the top of my head they found something like spending 10% of what is currently spent on enforcement was more effective by a huge amount over spending on enforcement. 

 

There is no 100% "fix the drug problem" policy that will ever touch everyone and stop some people getting totally fucked as a result. 

 

But the reality is that 100 years of doing the same thing over and over clearly hasn't worked.

 

For further research, I'd also suggest you read about the work they did in Glasgow to reduce knife crime which seems to have been highly effective. Like the Swiss and Portugese did with drugs they approached it as a "public health issue" and it seems to have worked.