Crime
We are given two different sets of crime statistics. One comes from the police, which records actual crime reported and the other comes from what the British Crime Survey, is basically a research model. Needless to say, the government uses these statistics, which seem to say that overall crime is falling. No one, other than the government and the police, believes this to be the case.
One of the statistics definitely without dispute is that violent crime has increased dramatically since 1997. Gun crime and probably more worrying is the huge increase in knife crime amongst the young. The police and our government are totally responsible for creating an environment that our knife-carrying thugs feel there is absolutely no reason for them not to carry knives.
A difference can be made. In November the police decided to have a crack-down on knife crime. In high crime areas young gangs were stopped regularly and searched. What happened, word got about that the police had implemented this policy and remarkably knife crime started to decrease. Quell surprise.
We have seen further evidence that this type of policing works. In Manchester they have been attacking gun crime and surprise surprise the incidence of gun crime is dropping, like a stone.
The police should be enforcing these policies at all times. If they did this then it is likely that there would be consistent decrease in knife crime and it is also likely that a greater police presence on our streets would see reductions in other crimes, particularly drug ?related offences and other street crimes like robbery. The police use the excuse that they don?t have the man power to maintain this type of strategy. Why not; the labour government tell us time and time again that there are more police than there ever been. Where are they?
There were nine policemen, in full body armour, available to arrest Damian Green, the shadow home affairs minister. If they had asked him to come to the station to answer questions then there would have been nine more officers available to combat real crime.
If the figures are to be believed, which is difficult given this government?s preponderance for fixing figures to suit their case, and then the number of crimes involving robberies and burglaries are down. Much of the reduction in these crimes comes from simply redefining crimes. Many crimes now only warrant a caution; this of course means that these particular crimes are not recorded as a crimes. This makes a huge difference. It?s the same as the waiting list scam in the National Health Service. The government have ensured that the waiting lists have shortened by stopping people getting onto the waiting lists until it?s absolutely necessary.
What this government has fundamental failed to tackle is crime involving young people and crime involving drugs. We have gangs of kids roaming the streets reeking havoc without it seems any police presence. Day after day we read of totally innocent people being beaten senseless by these feral gangs. This problem has to be tackled and these thugs need to be removed from our streets.
Do we go down the zero tolerance route? Rudi Guiliani famously introduced a zero tolerance to crime policy in New York and it had an amazing effect on crime levels. They started by prosecuting people who committed low level of crime, breaking windows, graffiti etc and then moved onwards and upwards, eventually tackling knife and gun crime. Some may remember that this policy in the UK was brought in by Ray Mallon in the town of Hartlepool.
At the time he was heavily backed by Anthony Blair and New Labour. Not everyone was in favour and of course the liberals won through; Mallon was suspended on trumped charges and the project started to disintegrate. Spare a moment and click on this BBC link; it gives an excellent background and some pros and cons. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/36107.stm .
Looking at the results it would appear to work but only if the politicians and the police have the balls to see it through over a long period, say 10 years.
What do you think? If adopted it would mean tackling crimes like vandalism, cycling on pavements etc etc.
The courts don?t help, far too many people, who are convicted of vicious crimes, are allowed back onto the streets either at the point of conviction, through suspended sentences, or very soon after they have been sent to prison because of over-crowding of our prisons or because of the parole system, which is slanted towards the criminal rather than the victim.
The Howard League of Penal Reform automatically rejects any argument, which involves imprisonment. We don't know how to answer the argument that in Europe the UK has the highest proportion of its population in prison. But until we know and understand the reasons we suggest the following:
First step; build as quickly as possible 5000 new prison places. If the necessary funds can be found this should take no more than a year.
Second step. Make a real attempt to remove the huge number of illegal immigrants, which at the moment are blocking our prisons from being used for criminals. This should be done by sending them to wherever they came from. There will be an outcry but it is the only way to tackle the problem. By taking this course of action it will also send out a message to all possible illegal immigrants that if they get caught here in the UK they will be sent back automatically to the country of their origin. Again this will mean that certain parts of the Human Rights Bill will need to be repealed.
Thirdly. Remove from the prisons, people who are held there because they are mentally ill. We are not talking about the criminally insane, but people that should be cared for in a caring environment.
It is estimated that these actions would provide between 10 and 20,000 more prison places.
Fourthly, implement punishments to fit the crime. Jack Straw made the comment some years ago of three strikes and your out. This was referring to robbery and burglary, needless to say in the years since this became government policy, only a handful have had the 5 year sentence imposed.
A couple of years ago we were told that if you were caught carrying a gun it would be an automatic 5 year sentence. Again only a handful of thugs have had this sentence imposed.
Post a Comment
Please Login or Register to post a comment.
|
