I predict a riot...

[ditzy_pole]

This morning looking online and through the papers I noticed there seems to be a petition doing the rounds demanding for anyone found to have participated in the looting to have their benefit payments cut

Comments

[majic13]

Given that those convicted of participation in the rioting are likely to spend some period of time in prison (can you claim benefits while imprisoned?) and have a criminal record thereafter, I'd say that's sufficient.

Convicted rioters have not only got no job and reduced likelihood of ever getting a job thanks to their criminal record; stop their benefits and now they're cut off from all non-criminal sources of income. What's the alternative?

As for water cannons and rubber bullets, I'm very wary of such tactics being introduced. They could too easily be misused against more legitimate and/or peaceful protestors, and I don't trust the Met not to get carried away.

[nils]

You've just said everything I wanted say, and more eloquently than I could have. ;-)

[medusa_nw]

I agree 100%

[ditzy_pole]

I think water cannons are a good idea not as immediate line of defence, but once the danger has already been ascertained. If the police are faced with people charging at them, throwing missiles/bricks/etc or setting fire to ambulances, smashing fire engines, thus preventing emergency services doing what they need to do then I believe a quick hosing down would make them cease faster.

At the same time were they to employ such tactics the police should be tightly regulated and any cops not following procedures disciplined.

[suitablyemoname]

Impoverished and unemployed single mother makes the stupid decision to grab a pair of shoes from a shop which already has a broken window.

Impoverished and unemployed single mother has all government benefits cut off, because We Must Teach Her A Lesson.

Yeah, that's fair and sensible. That'll teach them to Value And Contribute To Her Community. I can't possibly see this ending badly!

[ditzy_pole]

With the woman above I want to clarify I'm not angry that she got herself a pair of shoes. I am angry that she left her young child in the street, with others running around throwing stuff and looting, whilst she went inside the store for a rummage.

Although I think your point is rather extreme. Should anything like that go through to be made a law I would hope it wouldn't be so black and white, ie looter therefore all benefits cut off, but based on a case-by-case basis. It wouldn't be fair if she got the same punishment as, say, someone who insitgated window smashing, or caused physical damage to somebody.

With the numbers signing it it looks set to be voted on in Parliament (can't see whether numbers have chnaged as it's crashing). I am curious to see what majority will vote for.

[akcipitrokulo]

I agree about the pram - deciding on spur of moment to take advantage of situation & grab a pair of trainers - not the worst thing that's been going on by a long shot. Leaving the kid in danger is a real problem for me - but I still wouldn't take any benefits.

[madwitch]

Considering the level of unemployment in some of the areas that the rioting started in, I'm not sure that would help at all. No money, 50 people applying for every job (Tottenham), including the shit ones, how do you then survive except for crime? And given that several of the people who have gone through the courts already have jobs and just wanted free stuff, what do we do with them? Take their wages away (if they keep those jobs)? Also, many of the kids rioting won't be on benefits. If their parents are, do we take that away?

It won't work. It can't work.

[madwitch]

And apparently, Melanie Philips in the Hate Mail is blaming ultra-feminists for the riots. Where the hell is she getting that from?

[akcipitrokulo]

OK, even for her.. how the hell did that leap of logic take place??

[madwitch]

Because women work now, and don't always get married, and have more than one partner through the course of their lives. Apparently, the idea that the cuts in education allowance and to youth workers could have possibly had the tiniest bit to do with any of this is preposterous.

Oh, and multiculturalism. Not being told that our way is the only right way and all other cultures are lesser and bad is the other thing to blame. And we need our Empire back because we are the best rah rah rah.

I read it, so you don't have to. I feel a bit ill.

[ditzy_pole]

What does marriage have to do with looting?

[akcipitrokulo]

Cutting off benefits would make things worse, and there is the basic idea that benefits are there for those who need them; not those who need them and are the "deserving poor".

I don't think that police should go against rules & regs, because 1) they are there for a reason and 2) if they get to break those rules, then there is the mindset that the rules don't always apply to them. That said, if there were truly non-lethal laternatives that could have stopped a lot of this, then I can see the argument - but it would make me very uncomfortable.