Slashdot Mirror
The London Riots and Facial Recognition Technology
nonprofiteer writes "A bunch of vigilantes are organizing a Google Group dedicated to using recently revealed facial recognition tools to identify looters in the London riots. While Vancouver discussed doing something similar after the Stanley Cup riots, the city never actually moved forward on it. Ring of Steel London, though, is far more likely to incorporate FRT into its investigative work."
A related article points out how development of face-recognition technology has been kept under wraps by some organizations, but we're getting to the point where it'll soon be ubiquitous.
who are these people? I mean, white? black? muslim?
Libertarianism is stupid, there can NOT be that much individualism simply because one of us isn't worth more than ALL of us.
That is the sad truth.
But then again, extremism is ALWAYS bad, left right or lib aut.
I hope they get caught.
Most of the rioters are black, and they all look alike.
Could we find a more loaded term than that? I don't think so. Heaven forbid some folks actually try to glom together and do good.
100% of rioters identified used Facebook, Twitter of flickr. In related news, a new study shows Facebook, Twitter and flickr users found to be 100% more likely to take part in riots than those who do not use Facebook, Twitter or flickr.
"The most dangerous enemy of a better solution is an existing codebase that is just good enough." -- Eric S. Raymond
Reminds me: Somewhere on the internet is a description of how to build an anti-camera cap. Basically a baseball cap with a battery, and a row of powerful IR emitters along the rim. It utilizes that most security cameras can see into the IR, so the camera will gain down and leave the face in darkness, or at least distort it enough to nullify automated face recognition. Can be used during transport, where wearing a cap is not as suspicious as covering the face. ... Or will it soon be so that anyone not instantly recognized will automatically be a suspect? :-)
Since the introduction of biometric passports the UK already has a database capable of being used for facial recognition for the majority of people in the country.
1. ski mask
2. ???
3. profit!!
brought to you by John Dillinger
I find it extremely offensive that these people would completely ignore the poor class in Tottenham and readily jump to aid of the investigators (and likely the prosecutors).
I eagerly await more riots in England. In fact, go nuts UK!
All this talk and nobody posted a site up yet with all the perps identified and tagged? Sounds like design by committee, where there's only one real developer who understands and can do the work and a bunch of yakkers just chatting it up because they can't do it but want to be important or included.
C'mon, website up in T-minus how many hours?
PS: On a side note. Hearing the word Riot brings back the memories of the LA Riots and the one story that I remember is the guy with a hunting rifle living across the street from his friend's electronics store and keeping it looter free and allowing it to survive in tact while everything else got robbed or burned. When the shit hits the fan and the police aren't there to help you, just be prepared to help yourself and you'll do well! Too bad about London, as to quote FPS Russia, "One of those Beech countries, where you can't have guns!"
After the dust settles I'm sure only the people caught in the process of rioting will be prosecuted. Even if a camera records a man running into the store, grabbing something and running out, and even if that man is uniquely identified, he can always claim that someone forced him to do that, threatening him with a knife. In a quiet situation this lie can be untangled, evidence found, witnesses questioned, etc. etc. However in *this* mess it is impossible to prove or disprove the story, even though it is obviously a lie through and through. But you can't convict based on "obvious" things; you convict based on proven facts. Besides, the police already has about a thousand of rioters caught red-handed. They don't need more; they can't even find enough jail cells.
If only this technology were JUST going to be used on a bunch of minging neds and chavs, I'd have no problem with it.
But it'll be used for everyone all too soon.
Ah well, in the meantime, I'll be only too happy to watch a bunch of warbling brats get their arses handed to them by the cops.
[End Of Line]
It's coming sometime, maybe, uh, now...?
I was just in the UK and in some of the suburbs in London there were signs up about SmartWater being used in the area. I think it was just being used to tag property but some of the other applications there seem interesting.
In a riot-like situation where there are too many people to feasibly make significant arrests it seems like it would be useful to have a way of "tagging" them and then pull them more of them in in the subsequent days.
A week ago I was also in Nottingham and walked past a police station was firebombed yesterday. When in Fulham I twice took my 9 month old baby to the swimming pool at Normand Park. I didn't perceive any sort of tension while I was there and it seems like the whole place just went mad between me getting on and off a plane back to Australia.
And it's not even an accurate use off the term to boot.
Who are you? The new #2 Who is #1? You are #617565. I am not a number, I am a free man! Muhahaha.
i believe that's the correct word.
Reminds me of McArthur Wheeler: (from http://plus.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php/component/content/article/62/103182-pittsburgher-stupidity-in-the-news-the-mcarthur-wheeler-effect- )
At 5 feet 6 inches and about 270 pounds, McArthur Wheeler is an easily recognizable man — even when wearing lemon juice on his face.
That certainly came as a surprise to Wheeler, 45, of Versailles Street, McKeesport. He was incredulous in April when Pittsburgh robbery detectives told him that he had been identified in surveillance photographs as one of the two men who robbed two banks in Brighton Heights and Swissvale on Jan. 6.
"But I wore the lemon juice. I wore the lemon juice,'' a puzzled Wheeler told the even more puzzled detectives.
The detectives' confusion turned to incredulity as Wheeler explained about his would-be lemon aid.
"Someone told him that if you put lemon juice on your face it makes you invisible to the surveillance camera,'' recounted a still chuckling Cmdr. Ronald Freeman of the investigations branch.
They should be promoted for outstanding service to society those vigelantes. It's nothing less than the guerrilla gunners in east timer, the land of the rising run it's called, stamping out the abhorrant Indonesia nation from their cities. TAKe Up YOUr EFFORt FOr FREEDOm BABy! JAMie OLIVer should be the first to be commended for standing up to the institution. Great job Dire Straits; and Bladerunner soundtrack. Great job Vengalis. Your a hacker mate. A pro. -Oscarian aka Ian O Stolz
"I love deadlines. I love the "whooshing" sound they make as they pass by." - Douglas Adams.
In an European context, vigilantes are also criminals, as the only organization which is allowed to use force is the state, which is legitimatized by the citizens.
On a side note: The problems in the UK are the same as in France or other countries. You people without a perspective and treated as second class citizens do not accept the state as their institution. They perceive the state as their enemy. In the UK they used CCTV to keep these people under surveillance which results in two things:
a) Crimes move to other areas
b) People get even more suppressed (at least they feel that way) which can erupt at any time.
To prevent such developments in future, we have to find a way to share the GDP more fairly.
What? You guys haven't gotten your masks from Fed Ex yet?
It's only a loaded term if you have a belief that vigilantism is always inherently bad.
Personally, I'm not convinced it is, so to see them called vigilantes doesn't give me a bad impression those folks.
Sometimes vigilantes can be real heroes, sometimes they can be complete idiots. Take the case in hand and decide for yourself what kind of vigilantes they are, don't assume they're always inherently bad.
I fear that a purely technical solution will make this situation a lot worse. People filming the riots will be beaten up, or worse.
Watching this amazing video, I can't but wonder: what the hell is going on in the UK? Where did so much hate and anger come from?
Guy Fawkes?
I mean, if there was ever a right occasion for wearing that mask, rioting in London would be one, right?
I think that the idea that these fashions will catch on to stop day to day facial recognition quite reasonable. See: CV Dazzle
Heaven forbid some folks actually try to glom together and do good.
Not always
An automated way to identify and persecute the demotivated, malcontent, teevee educated victims of your lovely welfare state. At least the Katrina strand-ees had an excuse.
Facial recognition may be awesome, but that aside, police seem to be under budgets globally. Even if the rioters are eventually convicted, most of us don't earn in a day what it costs to keep a person in jail/prison for one day, let alone the millions and millions of dollars/pounds to run people through the legal system. Additionally, billions have been spent on wars in far off lands. With no hope for many of seeing a wage increase anytime soon, the cost of food and lodging increases by the week, Most of us are in the majority of being soon to be pentioned with 10 or 20 years left, but the rioters appear to be young by all reporting. What is their future -- of a worse life of 60 or 70 years?. Who is holding the cards of hope? .
You people without a perspective and treated as second class citizens do not accept the state as their institution. They perceive the state as their enemy. [..] People get even more suppressed (at least they feel that way) which can erupt at any time.
slightly off-topic. this msnbc blog entry shows some interesting insight in the dynamics of the group:
a Londoner when asked by a television reporter: Is rioting the correct way to express your discontent?
"Yes," said the young man. "You wouldn't be talking to me now if we didn't riot, would you?"
The TV reporter from Britain's ITV had no response. So the young man pressed his advantage. "Two months ago we marched to Scotland Yard, more than 2,000 of us, all blacks, and it was peaceful and calm and you know what? Not a word in the press. Last night a bit of rioting and looting and look around you."
Oops, blacklisted!
Mod parent up. When people are out of "civilised" ways to put across their message, they resort to violence. This isn't violence with a direct aim - e.g. as the violence by the US in the Middle East is subjugation of strategically important areas - this is violence as a way of saying "I'm fed up and someone to take notice!" If you loved your society, you wouldn't destroy it. If, as a young man (or teen, it seems), you do not feel a sense of belonging and love and support - if you are not given the opportunity to contribute - then why would you value what is around you?
The looters coming in after the riots are being emphasised because it's pretty hard to argue about the social plight of someone who runs off with a 42 inch TV "because I can". There is a massive PR exercise to paint this as merely thieves thieving. There's also a PC exercise to avoid pointing out the cultural make-up of rioters - predominantly black in some areas, white in others - because people are so afraid of thinking they're implying "black people are criminals!" rather than "youths in black communities in central London are alienated and have no voice, no meaningful representation and no opportunity to do anything about it". We have moved on from overt police racism of the '80s (and well done to the police for doing that) but we have not moved on from the power dominance of a single culture in Britain.
Unfortunately, in any class struggle (sorry, Torys, that's exactly what it is!), these sorts of organic riots tend to result in more oppression. It may do something to raise awareness, but absent an organised army it is only joint peaceful action which tends to effect change. In particular, had the unions not been so far up New Labour's arse over the last decade that the wider working population would be forgiven for remembering who they were created to serve, they would have opposed changing market and labour conditions.
In short, it still takes a village to raise a child. Even the most stable and loving family (which, as anyone knows, inner London is full of) can only do so much. When the average boy turns 16 - and we're not talking about the geniuses of the world, but the majority of average ability - society has the choice to lift him up or to leave him to fend on his own. Where resources exceed demand, he might be able to do the latter. Where they do not, what should he endure? And, if you have not helped him, what gives you the right to tell him what is right and wrong? Even if you think you have some natural superiority, what makes you think the young man will listen?
So when the jails overflow in England, where will they send them?
I don't think they've ever had to do something like this before.
a Londoner when asked by a television reporter: Is rioting the correct way to express your discontent?
"Yes," said the young man. "You wouldn't be talking to me now if we didn't riot, would you?"
The TV reporter from Britain's ITV had no response. So the young man pressed his advantage. "Two months ago we marched to Scotland Yard, more than 2,000 of us, all blacks, and it was peaceful and calm and you know what? Not a word in the press. Last night a bit of rioting and looting and look around you."
I guess they must have been marching on Scotland Yard to protest at the lack of policing in their area and that the police were taking too much of a 'softly softly' approach on gun and gang crime, then. Because the net effect of the riots and the media coverage is going to be an increased police presence, possible increases in police powers and wide support in the general population for the 'robust' use of those powers. I'm sure that's what he and his fellow 'demonstrators' would have wanted.
> To prevent such developments in future, we have to find a way to share the GDP more fairly.
What you mean is you want to take even MORE of MY money and give it to other people.
Given that I already pay 40% + income tax, plus a second income tax called "National Insurance", 20% on everything I buy, more on alcohol, something like 70% taxes on petrol....I don't think so.
I'd diagnose a different problem:
- After over a decade of a government whose priority was "education, education, education", we have reports that 20% of kids in London leave primary school unable to read - Evening Standard
- Burglary, Assault, etc are generally not punished in any meaningful way - people get community sentence upon community sentence, instead of a visible, clear, deterring punishment
But why blame the arsonsists and looters when instead you can blame "society"
Britain hasn't had a recent history of long-term police oppression of freedoms following riots in the style familiar even to Europeans and Americans. What is more, any such action may raise group awareness: "I'm not the only one who feels like this, though I see rioting will not solve the problem." There's always a segment of society that would want anyone who isn't like them to be put in chains and into forced labour, but it's not pervasive. You're right that it will make things feel worse in the shorter term. But when someone is stuck between a rock and a hard place, sometimes he ends up throwing rocks.
I'm not certain that anyone minds an increased police presence per se, though. Has anyone actually objected to seeing uniformed policemen walking around in the street? Much better that than CCTV or plainclothes. What matters is the laws the police are made to enforce and whether they enforce them equitably according to process.
(1) Stop thinking of money as "yours" in some philosophical sense and start understanding it as a way society chooses to allocate resources to those best able to manage it. The extent to which that happens is the extent to which capitalism works - if it stops happening then there will be no-one to protect "your" precious money anyway, as happens when people are looted or their pension funds raided or whatever;
(2) Lots of money is taken from you and mostly wasted on to weapons manufacturers, corporations in public-private partnerships and overpaid civil servants. High tax doesn't imply a working welfare state. Lots of feudal systems collected high taxes and it certainly wasn't for the benefit of the peasants.
Rioting and looting is far more news worthy then a protest march so it isn't exactly surprising is it?
Maybe the next time I protest something and it's not headline news I should start rioting too?
Why the hell are you giving these people any legitimacy? If you're well enough off to have a Blackberry to organize looting, you are not fucking oppressed.
Indeed playing the racial card always gets everyone.
Ugh. *facepalm*
Sarcasm. Learn it.
"People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.
Why on earth would your beliefs be in any way relevant? Are you aware that the machine in front of you allows you to search for information so that you can test your beliefs. Shocking, eh?
The key point of the definition is that a vigilante takes extra-legal action; a vigilante is one who acts outside of the existing legal framework. Publishing the identity of the looters is not operating outside of the law. In fact it actually supports the official effort to identify looters from video shot during the riots. Only acting on the identities to go and mete out some kind of illegal retribution would be vigilante action, and as there is no suggestion that they will do so the use of the word is loaded as the GP originally stated.
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
Vigilantes. Plural form of Vigilante.
Definition of Vigilante: A member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority, typically because the legal agencies are thought to be inadequate.
TFA is about a group of citizens who have chosen to band together in order to compile evidence of criminal activity, without authority from the government, because they don't feel that the LEO agencies are pulling this off. ... So it's actually EXACTLY the right word.
Sure, and if they went on a killing spree they would get even more media coverage. The point being?
It certainly doesn't legitimize rioting and looting as a political tool.
Their claims about borderline police abuse seem also legit. Seems like the Met (metropolitan police) has been more or less harassing black people for decades. Some random excerpts from the Guardian (20011) the Daily Mail (2009), the London Evening Standard (2005), the Telegraph (2002). Note that although the problem has been known for decades, nothing changes.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/oct/17/stop-and-search-race-figures
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1220860/Black-adviser-police-stopped-searched-100-TIMES-accuses-force-racial-profiling.html
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-10867097-met-is-racist-in-use-of-stop-and-search.do
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1412459/Black-people-more-likely-to-be-stopped-by-police.html
If I was searched more or less on every corner, just because my skin is black, I would feel somewhat disrespected as well...
The AC troll's television and eyesight are fine, it's what laughingly passes for a brain that's defective :)
i will tell you whats going on, i am from Hackney , London one of the worst affected areas. Hackney even though it gets bad press , is not L.A, it can be a nice area. The problem with these youths is that they rejected society, it wasn't society that rejected them. They have contempt for the law , because the law puts reasonable boundaries on acceptable behavior.They rejected education which was given freely because they wanna be a rap star, or a gangster and get easy money. they reject hard work , social convention's because they wanna be bad men.
A lot of them can barely read, barely write, and barely talk. They are un-employable and scream racism when they can't get a job as a banker, or a lawyer, because they have minimal qualifications and a huge chip on there shoulders.
I grew up in Hackney and had exactly the same chance's and become successful, why because i valued education.
These looters have no political motivation, this is about stealing, stealing from shops which give the local community employment, bacuse of these looters, there friend's, there families will be losing job's. Companies will not want to invest in these area's and they will compound there issue's and all the stereotypes about them. Do not see this about empowerment, or getting back at capitalism, it's about getting the newest trainers, the newest blackberry. Most of them wouldn't know who Malcom X or Martin Luther King where.
The people they are stealing from are not rich, they are not banker's, they are Sri Lanken immigrant's, poor White, Poor Black, poor Asisn's people.Hackney is not LA, it is not divided on Race Lines, communities get along and deplore the action's of these rioters.
These fools, these scum are not heroic or nice, they would stamp on your head until your brain damaged, just to get your phone.
If people want to look at who the Racist's are in this whole mess, start looking at the Rioters.
Precisely. If the government stripped away most of your rights, but you retained your Blackberry for some reason, you're clearly not oppressed. What determines if you're being oppressed is whether or not you have a Blackberry.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Sure, and if they went on a killing spree they would get even more media coverage. The point being?
The point being that desperate people do desperate things.
It certainly doesn't legitimize rioting and looting as a political tool.
That does not make it disappear though, nor can it be solved by arresting thousands of people and installing 20 million more cameras (with or without facial recognition).
In this case we are talking about looting thugs, looking for any excuse to get violent.
People like you have been excusing this behaviour for years blaming it on social ills and lack of this that or the other. Bollocks! Most if not all of the rioters have far more material wealth than a number of east european states yet you don't find mass rioting there. The problem is lazy feckless children brought up by lazy feckless parents with a liberal education system that doesnt' teach them any discipline or respect. And no , teachers shouldn't have the "earn" respect from a teenager, they should be given it automatically.
"Unfortunately, in any class struggle"
Oh grow up student boy and smell the coffee of reality. Class has nothing to do with it - most of the properties looted and burnt were owned and run by working class people. If there was any class in volved it was the workshy violent underclass.
In any other country a lot of those rioters would have been shot dead already , its only in namby pamby liberal britain run by hand wringing excuse everything muppets like you where we let them burn the place down.
It seems that facial recognition don't recognize "dark-skinned" faces ! Remember back in 2009 : http://idle.slashdot.org/story/11/06/29/1228216/Using-Facial-Recognition-To-Find-the-Best-Bar And know the kinect : http://www.gamespot.com/news/6283514/kinect-has-problems-recognizing-dark-skinned-users So....
> When people are out of "civilised" ways to put across their message, they resort to violence
It's 2011. There are a gazillion ways to put across your message, completely for free. You're using one of them right now.
no taxation without representation!
That is interesting. Anyway, over here in continental europe, we have been wondering for ages why you destroyed your own university system so thoroughly (as measured by competitiveness of English researchers in an international setting). It is a complete mystery to us why your school system is so miserable, etc. Maybe the ruling class is not actually interested in helping the people?
I don't know what you are talking about. The british system is extremely opressive and repressive. Ever heard of ASBOs?
1132: BBC reporter at Highbury Magistrates Court John Brain tells BBC 5 live the first person who appeared in the dock this morning was a 31-year-old teacher called Alexis Bailey. She pleaded guilty to being part of the looting of the Richer Sounds store in Croydon
The above from the BBC.
The below from me.
Now I guess some will say that teachers are not payed well enough but second class citizens? Come on, it ain't that bad. Not even for art teachers.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Great, I'll try that. I'll start by thinking of your money as mine.
no taxation without representation!
In an European context, vigilantes are also criminals, as the only organization which is allowed to use force is the state, which is legitimatized by the citizens.
It is easy to ignore your further points when your initial premise is instantly recognisable as utter bullshit. Use of force is not vigilantism unless it is dishing out punishment outside the law. As for the state being the only thing allowed to use force, does a club bouncer/doorman not use force from time to time to keep to defend themselves and others and to keep the peace in the club? Are you under the impression we have state-run clubs?
More detail on the UK situation if you're interested at all in the truth: http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/self_defence/
One of the more inspiring aspects of this whole situation is how well some immigrant communities have been stepping up: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3Hp2pOQYqk
Not that any of this has anything to do with the original post about image analysis.
That's an indictment of the press, nothing more.
I live in Clapham Junction about 100m from the center of the riots there. I was down there there watching. Most of the kids (and they were kids) were having a great time, throwing bottle and having a laugh - I didn't see anyone I'd describe as angry.
All night people were wandering up my street stashing loot in rubbish bins, then coming back later to collect and load into cars that were doing the rounds. Nice cars, bit boy-racerish for me but not cheap. The ones that were seen "stealing milk and baby clothes" were no more significant than the ones stealing shampoo - there are cases of it on my street - and I suspect they were just a little late to the party. A friends sister saw her neighbours kids walking home with a TV each - a 2 bedroom house on that street will go for £400,000.
Yes, there's undoubtedly some alienation but there bigger problem is the unwarranted sense of entitlement - "I deserve a TV", "I'm getting my taxes back". As a genuine guardian reading, hand-wringing socialist leftie I didn't see a great deal of urban alienation on display, but I did see a great deal of self-absorbed greed.
Nevertheless there is a significant number of people in this country who feel they have no voice - and that's not just those who resort to violence, but the hard working, law abiding too. Look at the way Blair ignored 1.5 million people turning up on his doorstep to protest going to war in Iraq. Look at the way there were thousands of students protesting tuition fees peacefully yet the media was dominated by the handful who decided to break things. If the people in power constantly refuse to acknowledge the voice of the masses (and people feel they have no real representation at the polls, when every party seems to have the same approach of empowering the powerful and taxing the poor and even the party they supported can volte face on their promises) then this is always going to be the end result sooner or later.
It doesn't legitimise their actions in any way, but it damn well helps to explain them. I see politician after politician on the news this week saying they can't understand why people would react this way - THAT is scary, it should be blindinly obvious why people are reacting this way and the politicians should be talking about how they deal with the factors that cause this reaction, not trying to blame it all on mindless yobs.
"It's a fair cop, but society is to blame for failing to lift me up."
"Outdated business models" is code for "I don't like paying for things, but want them anyway"
It's nothing to do with taking more of your money, it's to do with making sure everyone is taxed fairly. That 20% you pay on everything you buy, the tax on your petrol, these are unfair taxes, they disproportionately hurt people the poorer they are. The truth is, if we abolished all these ridiculous "hidden" taxes and had a single tax based on income (real income, no fudging the numbers or porting your earnings through an offshore umbrella company or whatever other tricks people use in the name of creative accountancy) then we could do away with tiered income tax bands and the vast, vast majority of people in the country would be better off - probably yourself included unless you're rich enough that you have nothing to complain about. You still wouldn't have a fair society (the poor still need to eat or heat their homes and the prices here will still disproportionately hurt them) but you'd have a fairer society, which is a start.
The "Ring of Steel" surely refers to the City of London, a.k.a. the Square Mile or Financial District. Security there is heightened because it was an IRA target on more than one occasion. There wasn't much rioting there this time, though I was there in 1999 when the anti-globalisation protests were taking place. But the rest of Greater London is not "ringed" in any real sense - nothing that onerous in Tottenham, for example.
(this is not a
I'd have been rather interested in their answer to the question "How did you vote in the last election?"
(1) Stop thinking of money as "yours" in some philosophical sense and start understanding it as a way society chooses to allocate resources to those best able to manage it.
You mean, best able to use it to do evil.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The NBC article repeats the same bad excuse as we've heard a lot of so-called experts put forward, that the rioters are more or less justified because they're poor and have been for generations. That you're poor does NOT justify setting fire to businesses or other people's homes, nor creating anarchy in the streets. Fighting with the police does not solve anything. Burning things does not solve anything. It basically makes no sense to explain away the events using this bad excuse.
No, the heart of the matter is that the youths are out of control. They have no respect for anyone or anything, least of all the police and other authorities. The reason for this is generations of equally dysfunctional people give up in advance and blame everybody but themselves, especially during the daily trips to the local pub where they meet each other and further reinforce this. The highlights are the regular fights with various 'enemies' usually under the guise of football hooliganism or similar.
If you watch UK tv-shows like "Road Wars" or "Brit Cops" or "Police, Camera, Action" (sort-of UK variants of "Cops") you'll notice that every time the police encounters youths for whatever reason, they almost always spit, swear aggressively and abuse the officers verbally right from the start, and they do it non-stop. The interaction is severely limited to the police using whatever force they need to make the youth accept that he's the underdog and that the police control the situation. It is obvious that there's an extreme hate towards the police for whatever reason, but that this hate has taken on a life of its own. It's gone beyond reason and seem psychopathic.
There's no fix through social efforts here. These people are basically somewhere between deranged and evil, and social efforts will yield nothing. It has been tried countless times and it always fails. There is only one thing that works: Force, and a lot of it. It is necessary to remove at least one generation of misfits completely and send them somewhere for re-education or 'storage' (jail) if that fails. They have reached a critical mass and feeds and reinforce each other, and you have to remove from that mass in order to regain control.
There are two steps - One to handle what has happened, and two to prevent more. The first step involves every means necessary to identify the people rioting and looting and bring them to justice. Facial recognition is a great way to do this. There's a gazillion CCTV cameras in the affected areas and almost everybody exposes their face at some point. These people must be arrested and punished as hard as possible. It is important to send the signal of the severe punishment. We're talking lengthy prison sentences as well as restitution for the damages. I know most are poor but someone has to pay and it's only fair that the rioters and looters pay up in full, even if it will take them the rest of their lives and then a few generations to pay. If they can't or won't pay, they can rot in jail for the rest of their lives. At least it will insure that they don't do any more rioting or looting, and maybe someone will come to their senses and realize the evil circle must be broken in order to make any progress and move on and up from there their parents came from.
The efforts following the riots will help prevent more, but until people grow up and starts behaving, a massive police presence is necessary. Only that way can any attempt at restarting anything quickly be brought under control and whatever offenders arrested immediately and prosecuted. When it's obvious that mischief and crime are stopped quickly and punished swiftly the people will move on. It's what worked elsewhere through the times and it will still work in the UK.
so the choice is between:
1. not hearing a good message
2. hearing a bad message
because whatever the rioting produces, it certainly doesn't promote any valid agenda
you can't fight injustice with injustice
and looting is certainly injustice
so now, whatever positive changes SOME of the looters sought (the rest are simple criminal hooligans) is now utterly and completely destroyed, and won't happen, because the rioters have turned society against them, they are not sympathetic to their concerns anymore
good job
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
FFS, at least give a modest description of what the video is next time.
No, it doesn't help to explain them at all. Did 1.5 million people riot in London just because they were ignored? Nope. Because these were ordinary, civilized, and decent people.
The truth is, these rioters are hopeless waste-of-spaces that have no respect for anything or anyone, and are just looting and vandalizing for no reason other than "it's a bit of a laugh" or "I can get away with it, so why not". These really are the type of scum that you wouldn't piss on if they were on fire.
Want to know what it accomplishes? Nothing.
People would be better in the US if, instead of whining on the internet, they get up and protest.
I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
The fact that you got modded down for that shows the child like mentality of the moderators on here. Teenagers don't get irony and of course they're never to blame either - its always someone else fault.
Yup , 500,000 polish came over here and most of them got jobs that the chavs are too lazy to take.
Sorry, there are plenty of opportunities but its far easier for some members of society to sit on welfare and whinge. And when they bored whining because everyone got fed up with listening, they cause trouble.
LA only has slightly more lax gun laws than London, and the shop the GP was talking about wasn't an isolated incident. Koreatown was isolated by the riots so that the police weren't there. The residents organized an armed resistance and survived the riots by carrying out a protracted gun battle against the rioters.
And our murder rate... I'm afraid that is down to our culture. In the U.S. you could outlaw pointy sticks and not affect our murder rate. We are just seriously violent people. Which means the U.S. really shouldn't be used as an argument for or against firearms controls in European nations. Better to look at examples like Czech Republic and Belgium to predict the effect of more lax gun laws in the UK would be. Switzerland's low murder rate with high gun ownership is likely also due to a unique culture (and high standard of living) and not replicable elsewhere.
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
Christ , you're beyond dumb if you seriously believe any of that sub-undergraduate level sociology drivel you just posted. You should get a job with Liberty or the Howard League, you'd be perfect.
Violence just perpetuates the hate used to drive these types of conflicts. Protesting only works when you actually protest for something and not just against something. You need more than empty slogans and rhetoric if you expect to really change anything. Look at the protests in the Egypt, the protesters were more than willing to organize to storm the barricades but once they achieved their goal of removing the person they felt was responsible for their misery they have reverted to fighting and arguing amongst themselves and have not accomplished anything to improve their society. The downtrodden masses in London or in any other country never accept that they themselves are partly responsible for their situation. Personal responsibility and the willingness to improve your own life plays a big part on the quality of life. The organized marches in DC during the fight for minority rights are a good example of how to achieve positive results using public protests. Throughout the country protesters and their supports were attacked violently and yet they still continued on with their cause until they were either killed, beaten down, or arrested. At the same time the leaders of these protests displayed both intelligence and competence that heled to demolish the stereotypes of that era. The protesters in the 60's knew exactly what they were protesting for which was equal protection and rights under the law and they achieved that goal without resorting to mindless violence. Had they done so they would have failed in their quest. Of course racial discrimination did not end overnight and it is still an ongoing struggle today but who could have even entertained the idea in the 1960's that the US would elect a black president? None of these efforts used to achieve this goal resulted from the type of violence and anarchy sweeping England or other countries today. The rioters in England have focused the public's attention on the violence instead of the underlying reasons they use to justify their violence.
Do some good ... do you mean,
Get together and workout how to prevent people from _wanting_ to cause such social disruption in the future ? or
Go to extreme lengths to make sure every wrongdoer is punished to the maximum extent of the law.
For some reason I thought you pommies where more socially evolved, and actually looked after your people.
No, no. All the worlds political leaders get their cues from slashdot posts and polls on facebook.
Can I light a sig ?
Yup , 500,000 polish came over here and most of them got jobs that the chavs are too lazy to take.
Most of my work is elsewhere in the EU. What goes around comes around.
Sorry, there are plenty of opportunities but its far easier for some members of society to sit on welfare and whinge. And when they bored whining because everyone got fed up with listening, they cause trouble.
I know some people who prefer to sit on welfare and whinge, so I'm not disputing that they exist. But believe me, if you think there are plenty of opportunities then you have no clue what's happening on the ground. Did I mention that my son is severely dyslexic, so to all intents and purposes he can't read or write? That doesn't stop him doing physical work, except when the employers demand a degree to hand out towels. It's wrong to assume that because the articulate and well educated can usually find something that everybody can, and it's wrong to assume that everybody is able to respond to education.
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
"we have not moved on from the power dominance of a single culture in Britain."
Well, obviously. It's called government. Now, just what would you suggest we replace it with?
The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
I am never amazed at the sense of helplessness I get from Europeans. They expect the government to do everything for and when it doesn't, for some reason petty theft is "justified". Pathetic.
Gandhi said "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." These current groups of thieves and thugs aren't noble citizens rising up against their oppressors. They are violent, thieving thugs with no concept of passive resistance -- no concept of the better good.
Poor you say? Look at these people
http://catchalooter.tumblr.com/
They are very well dressed. They are very well fed. These are not helpless Somalis trying to get their food aid. These people would be upper middle class in 75% of the countries on Earth but are so consumed by jealousy and helplessness that they have turned to selfish destruction.
Many of you, who are paralyzed by the thought of another citizen owning a gun, try to draw comparisons to the LA riots in 1992. Do you not remember Korea Town? Lack of gun control works. The LA riots were not brought under control by the police. It was private individuals, with their private guns, that laid down the law and stopped the anarchy.
The British people are helpless and dependent. From yesterday's Guardian:
"Scotland Yard’s 6,000 street officers were hopelessly outmanoeuvred" by " boys and girls, most no older than 15, and some apparently as young as eight". One resident: “Where are the police? Why are they not here? People are frightened.”
Americans in the 1992 riots were in no such mood:
"We are glad the National Guard is here. They're good backup."
Many years ago a historian (please enlighten me to the name if you can remember) did a study on the rise and fall of civilizations. He identified a phase immediately before collapse: Dependence
i heard the same interview, and i couldnt believe these people were speaking english.
i hear people from all over the world speak english on news reports, people from vietnam, pakistan, east africa, the middle east, russia, etc. i even heard vladimir putin speaking english to a CNN reporter.
i can understand vladimir putin's english, but i can't understand teenagers in the middle of london.
Are these people not getting enough entitlements?
that is, if you believe in things like evidence and reason.
oh fuck it , nobody cares anymore
A lot of security cameras are controlled from a central (off site) location. The video is almost always saved. There will surely be video data up to the point where the camera is destroyed. I'll bet there would be a very good close up shot of the perpetrator. The point is that while they might be useless after being destroyed, they would still gather useful data up to that point.
What makes you think those two goals are any different?
1. Punish the wrongdoers very harshly
2. People won't want to cause social disruption that results in harsh punishment for themselves
"Violence only perpetuates the hate?"
Violence also perpetuates one other thing you might have overlooked: CHANGE.
The Vandals and the Visigoths didn't just "perpetuate the hate," they also effected change. Same for the U.S. Westward expansion.
The French Revolution was very violent, but it effected a change that many perceive as good.
If you don't address the root causes of violence, you just seal the lid on a boiling pot of water.
"f you think there are plenty of opportunities then you have no clue what's happening on the ground"
I have plenty of a clue thanks. There is work out there if people want to do it. Where do you think the jobs to keep the polish and other recent immigrants employed came from? Did Harry Potter way his magic wand?
"Did I mention that my son is severely dyslexic"
That didn't stop Richard Branson nor plenty of other well known business and scientific people.
Those were different times. Martin Luther King was educated and believed in civil societies. Remember that this was just after WW2 and before punk rock, so security, hierarchy and order were a must for those fellas. Race is a great common denominator, makes it easier to have a cohesive group (you can readily identify with your leaders, see). Mohandas Gandhi was a lawyer, a highly learned person, and he too believed in law and order. Finally, they all knew why they were fighting, as their enemy was also highly cohesive: white laws and white people.
The banner of this generation is "Indígnese", "Indignez-vous", "Be pissed". No race or national interests here; you just have to feel angry about your current situation to get involved. There are no leaders and no reason to have them: It's more about figuring out what to do next and people will vote with their attentions and feet. As any self-regulated system, chaos is part of the meal. So what if there's violence, it furthers our goals, as GGPP put it. And why are they rioting? Whom are they rioting against? In a context of exclusion and poverty with no clear antagonist, it may as well be society as a whole. Egypt protesters were at the beginning highly organized and mostly peaceful because there was a defined enemy (the dictator) so even the military recognized this and wouldn't interfere. Until something big happens, these will be the protests in the Western world, at least for a few decades more.
Finally, your remarks about responsibility are interesting, to say the least. These people are responsible for their actions, true, because it's the only resource available for them. But what about the prime minister, or the members of the parliament? They made the laws and took the decisions that led to this situation, after all. They are much more responsible for the current state of affairs as they affect the whole country, so why do you leave them outside of your comment? There's no spontaneous generation, this couldn't happen in my city even when somewhat violent and big demonstrations are not uncommon.
I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
Have you noticed that a lot of the recent immigrants went back smartish when they discovered that the opportunities here were not as good as they expected? If there are so many opportunities, care to suggest what my son should be doing other than spending every day scouring the newspapers and the net, knocking on the doors of local businesses with his CV and filling in job applications? Don't say "set up his own business"; he wouldn't be capable of running one because of his learning difficulties. Don't say "Go to college", he's been and failed, and is struggling to pay off the debt he incurred. It's no good citing Branson. Times have changed since he made his fortune, every dyslexic has a different spectrum of abilities and difficulties, and he needed his stroke of luck of editing a student magazine at just the time the government removed the retail price regulations on music media (and the mainstream outlets missing their chance to capitalise on that). Just because one made it doesn't mean that the path is available to everyone.
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
> When people are out of "civilised" ways to put across their message, they resort to violence It's 2011. There are a gazillion ways to put across your message, completely for free. You're using one of them right now.
Violence gets you listened to much quicker. It's why terrorism works, depending on the situation.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
"It's a fair cop, but society is to blame for failing to lift me up."
Well it may be to blame for keeping you down.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
It's all wonderful, however right now the rest of the population also needs to start thinking about rioting against the system in a different way: guns.
If the police cannot help the home and business owners to protect their properties, if people are getting mugged and killed on the streets, it's time for the people to realize - there ain't nobody out there to help you. Get guns. Fuck the government - they can't protect you. If you are in this situation and police can't protect you, you must protect yourself.
I believe this is a great business opportunity at this point - selling guns and ammo to general population in places where guns are generally outlawed. Lots of money can be made on this I bet.
You can't handle the truth.
WTF? Try heading to your local university library and reading any machine vision journal from the last decade. Loiter detection, shoplifting detection, crowd estimation, it's all there.
There are other interviews too. Like this one, where the riots are 'good fun.' Cute accents in that audio clip even if you don't care what they are saying.
Or the story of this guy who must have a miserable life:
In many ways, Mr. James’s circumstances are typical. He lives in a government-subsidized apartment in northern London and receives $125 in jobless benefits every two weeks, even though he says he has largely given up looking for work. He says he has never had a proper job and learned to read only three years ago. His mother can barely support herself and his stepbrothers and sisters. His father, who was a heroin addict, is dead.
He says he has been in and out of too many schools to count and left the educational system for good when he was 15.
“No one has ever given me a chance; I am just angry at how the whole system works,” Mr. James said. He would like to get a job at a retail store, but admits that he spends most days watching television and just trying to get by. “That is the way they want it,” he said, without specifying exactly who “they” were. “They give me just enough money so that I can eat and watch TV all day. I don’t even pay my bills anymore.”
The poor guy's drawn a raw lot, but it's not the government's fault either, unless you think they should sterilize incompetent parents or something. One wonders what he would do if he were given more money.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Why the hell are you giving these people any legitimacy? If you're well enough off to have a Blackberry to organize looting, you are not fucking oppressed.
Every child in London has a mobile phone, many of which are Blackberry. It's the old "if you are rich enough to have a car/TV/shoes/tin roof over your head you're not poor" argument always trotted out by people.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Boulder did this a few years back for their riots very successfully. They posted security picture images on the web with a $50 anonymous reward.
Yes, there's undoubtedly some alienation but there bigger problem is the unwarranted sense of entitlement - "I deserve a TV", "I'm getting my taxes back". As a genuine guardian reading, hand-wringing socialist leftie I didn't see a great deal of urban alienation on display, but I did see a great deal of self-absorbed greed.
Interesting, but isn't there a distinction between the torching of buildings/attacking the police and the subsequent simply criminal looting?
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
- After over a decade of a government whose priority was "education, education, education", we have reports that 20% of kids in London leave primary school unable to read - Evening Standard
Call me thick, but I don't see how reducing taxes and spending less money on education is going to improve this.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
That is interesting. Anyway, over here in continental europe, we have been wondering for ages why you destroyed your own university system so thoroughly (as measured by competitiveness of English researchers in an international setting). It is a complete mystery to us why your school system is so miserable, etc. Maybe the ruling class is not actually interested in helping the people?
The Establishment absorbed and neutered any of the radical left wing energy that Labour had, transformed it into "New Labour" (which is/was just watered down Conservatism) and proceeded to fuck up education because they realised that being able to think may help you get a better job, but it also encourages you to question the system.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Wow never have I seen such a sense of entitlement in all my life. Society does not owe you a sense of love and belonging that would be your families job. Ultimately you are responisible for yourself, your happiness and your behavior. The world owes you nothing and if you start relying on society to take care of your every whim then you will also have to give up your freedom. Because if other people are responsible for you then much like your family they get to say how you will live what you will and won't do. Grown ups that are even semi responsible people don't want a nanny state.
"Have you noticed that a lot of the recent immigrants went back smartish"
No I haven't noticed. I still hear plenty of foreign languages on the tube.
"care to suggest what my son should be doing "
How about getting a job on a building site, or cleaning or 101 other low skilled jobs. If he's that badly dyslexic then thats going to be his lot for life. Unfair but thats just the way it is. Either way , given that blind people can manage to get jobs citing dyslexia as an excuse for being unemployed is frankly pathetic.
The police in the US have an app that searches for outstanding warrants + criminal histories using facial recognition. Pretty scary http://slashdot.org/submission/1751294/Sending-you-to-Jail-Theres-an-app-for-that
You know what violent protesting accomplishes? A lot of publicity yes, but negative publicity. There's hardly a faster way to alienate potential supporters than acts of violence. I know I'm far less interested in helping their cause than I was prior to the riots in London. Now I'm rooting for them to find the people responsible for the riots and throw the law at them to hopefully discourage such acts in the future.
Well, obviously. It's called government. Now, just what would you suggest we replace it with?
A better government?
Mod parent up. When people are out of "civilised" ways to put across their message, they resort to violence.
Well, that can be one reason. Here's some other reasons people resort to violence:
* They don't think at all and don't really give a shit, they just like the buzz
* They think it's not really doing any harm to anyone they know, so why should they care?
* They are greedy and want stuff without any effort, and violence seems like a good way to get it
* They think they will get away with it, so why not?
* They are sociopaths (see above - common emotions felt by sociopaths)
* They have grown up in a violent community and it is the only way to get by
None of that really supports your silly 'class struggle' assertion though does it?
Additionally, a riot is not a protest, stealing is not a protest, arson of shops and homes is not a protest, looting is not a protest, and it should be treated completely differently - if you start looting and burning shops, I'm afraid different rules apply, and you can expect to be treated harshly and to experience violence in your turn from those you threaten. The police have been remarkably lenient, many in the UK would say far too lenient.
And, if you have not helped him, what gives you the right to tell him what is right and wrong?
So what is housing benefit, unemployment benefit, free schooling, free medical care, if not help? What a washed-out tired excuse of an argument - it's all the environment's fault, and the poor little rioters could do nothing to save themselves. These people have had plenty of help, and have chosen to reject the society they live in - there should be consequences for that, or we won't have a society at all in the end, just a free for all. Everyone in the UK has the right to judge the scum doing the rioting, and they do judge them harshly - let's hope the courts agree.
I said the people were "partly" responsible for the situation they find themselves in. Why did it take 25 years for the Egyptians to get a thumb out and do something about their situation? What exactly are the protesters in England trying to accomplish? And spare the "truth and justice" bullshit and layout some concrete reasons and realistic solutions to correct the problems. Running government officials out of office might make the mob feel good until they stop and look around and find no one running the store and realize they can not blame anyone except themselves since they no longer have a government to blame. And someone above mentioned violence being a good way of changing things and I totally agree. It's good to have a forest fire every now and then to clean out the dead wood and reinvigorate growth but running through the streets stealing and burning isn't going to accomplish anything. The next global war will most likely be the only solution to changing the entire paradigm of our current civilization. Hopefully enough people will survive and they can start over from scratch and apply the lessons learned if there are actually any records remaining to learn from.
Great, I'll try that. I'll start by thinking of your money as mine.
The grandfather post didn't say 'assume you are a government', but whoever modded you 'Troll' is monumentally stupid.
If they're just trying to identify people from photos they're not doing "law enforcement" without legal authority. Saying they're vigilantes is like saying that people who report a crime are vigilantes.
If they were going around punishing people without legal authority then sure they're vigilantes.
So no it's not the right word at all.
"Have you noticed that a lot of the recent immigrants went back smartish"
No I haven't noticed. I still hear plenty of foreign languages on the tube.
I said "a lot", not "all". And we do get tourists in London, too.
How about getting a job on a building site
They all need at least City & Guilds certificates (because of safety); he's tried to get one, but failed the course because he couldn't do the written elements.
or cleaning or 101 other low skilled jobs.
That's what he's trying for. None around, at least not for anybody with learning difficulties.
If he's that badly dyslexic then thats going to be his lot for life. Unfair but thats just the way it is.
We know.
Either way , given that blind people can manage to get jobs citing dyslexia as an excuse for being unemployed is frankly pathetic.
Blind people count towards disability quotas. Dyslexics don't. And even so, the unemployment rate for blind people is over 70%.
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
slightly off-topic. this msnbc blog entry shows some interesting insight in the dynamics of the group:
a Londoner when asked by a television reporter: Is rioting the correct way to express your discontent?
"Yes," said the young man. "You wouldn't be talking to me now if we didn't riot, would you?"
The TV reporter from Britain's ITV had no response.
That is because the reporter was not up to the work he was doing. He should asked the guy what he would like to say now that he has a possibility to speak. He would have produced a gush of drivel of leftist platitudes. They usually do and with the general idea that they are victims of "state" and "society" while they are completely ignorant about their own conduct that adds to their state of being bored.
And bored they are as they do not really have material poverty: They know not hunger, not cold from winter. That is what this is all about: This is about nihilistic, bored, self-centered people doing something. People who do not have a slightest interest in anything sensible. If they would, they would appreciate other people's life's work (like a small business shop) and would refrain from burning it down.
God, I fucking hate when people are being complete dicks and these lefties treat them like some fucking victims.
Our beliefs are all we have.
"the ends justify the means"
"the ends justify the means"
"the ends justify the means"
Yeah, we got your point.
I could care less what they call them. Just round me up a posse so I can chase the slime balls and hooligans who created this havoc and put each ans every one of othem in a public pillory, with nothing but bread and water for two days. Not to mention providing locals with one free rotten tomato throw. I really want to see those assholes cry, and beg for mercy.
Don't know why everyone assumes I was talking about violent protests... whatever. You can close your eyes and say "Meh, throw them to jail", or you can bypass the tediousness that this "negative publicity" creates and think about what's going on. Guess what, at this point there's no cause anymore! This is just angry people, opportunists, and sheeple. It's out of control now, but at the beginning they were peaceful protests, and there was a reason. Most likely, if we believe the article GGGPP showed, this started because of alienation and poverty that eventually exploded for the slightest reason. Want to discourage future riots? Don't alienate your citizens.
I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
I said the people were "partly" responsible for the situation they find themselves in.
And I said you are correct, but they are just a small, if not the smallest, cog in the machine.
Why did it take 25 years for the Egyptians to get a thumb out and do something about their situation?
It took 25 years because the Egyptian culture (Arab, in general) had elements that made it possible. It isn't strange that young adults were and are instrumental for the Arab Spring to succeed.
What exactly are the protesters in England trying to accomplish? And spare the "truth and justice" bullshit and layout some concrete reasons and realistic solutions to correct the problems.
Ok, I'll spare you. At this point, they don't want to accomplish anything, they are just angry and/or taking advantage of the chaos around. I never said violence was good, necessary or justified, only that it was hardly a surprise, given the circumstances. I may like pacifism, but I am a pragmatic. As to the specifics, stop alienating the population. I read an article a few months ago about this stuff: pacific protests against corporations that did creative accounting, taxes for the wealthy, cuts for tertiary education, etc. It was really just a matter of time if you ask me. Happened in Greece, Spain, Chile and Argentina. Why wouldn't happen in the UK?
Running government officials out of office might make the mob feel good until they stop and look around and find no one running the store and realize they can not blame anyone except themselves since they no longer have a government to blame. And someone above mentioned violence being a good way of changing things and I totally agree. It's good to have a forest fire every now and then to clean out the dead wood and reinvigorate growth but running through the streets stealing and burning isn't going to accomplish anything. The next global war will most likely be the only solution to changing the entire paradigm of our current civilization. Hopefully enough people will survive and they can start over from scratch and apply the lessons learned if there are actually any records remaining to learn from.
I find absolute chaos somewhat distasteful. I would much rather avoid further disorder, as it makes the whole process of improvement slower.
I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
Where do you think the jobs to keep the polish and other recent immigrants employed came from?
Laying off British workers.
Where I was working at the time the borders were opened, within about two weeks all the British cleaners disappeared and were replaced by Poles. Who were mostly young blonde girls with degrees so we didn't complain too much, but I'm guessing the women they replaced weren't too happy about it.
What government would not involve the power dominance of a single culture?
The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
What is it about torching buildings that you wouldn't describe as 'simply criminal'? I would be strongly in favor of death penalty for arson, myself.
Here's some other reasons people resort to violence:
None but the last explain simultaneous peaceful protests, subsequent riots and following looting across the country.
Additionally, a riot is not a protest, stealing is not a protest, arson of shops and homes is not a protest, looting is not a protest,
A protest is what? Is it when someone whispers that they're unhappy and you ignore them?
This might not be the most effective way to protest, and in the short term it will act against the favour of the protestors, but it's certainly a protest. I'm sure the current government is very happy about what's going on - just as Thatcher was happy when people rioted and grinning like a clown over the Falklands. Desperate people resorting to violence make the best targets.
and it should be treated completely differently - if you start looting and burning shops, I'm afraid different rules apply,
What if I start a war and that war involves bombing shops and killing its owners? What if my financial hoodwinking means your finances are ruined and your shop is dismantled? Do different rules apply then? Or is the destruction of one business a tragedy but the destruction of a million businesses a statistic?
you can expect to be treated harshly and to experience violence in your turn
Civilised society would expect its police force to stop you by using means only in proportion to the threat you cause. If you want violent retribution, please move to the Middle East - you sound like you'd be most welcome.
So what is housing benefit, unemployment benefit, free schooling, free medical care, if not help?
Housing benefit does not guarantee you a safe home suitable for a human to live in a dignified manner. It's also in the process of being reduced substantially such that many people in inner London will have to move. Tell me: why do you think some people are homeless for more than a few days? Either it is that everyone who is homeless chooses (i.e. while of sound mind) to live without a home, or not even housing benefit guarantees a safe home. What is more, it is not a requirement for councils to provide housing or even to refer to private housing unless you pass several stringest tests; in my borough, there are zero council houses as the remainder have been sold off over the last few years, so any referrals would be to private housing associations.
Unemployment benefit has many conditions attached to it and is often taken away at the whim of your supervisor (never been on it, but have worked with people reliant on such). Anyway, people don't want £65/week, they want the chance to participate in society - which includes a job. There are always jobs for the bright and the well-connected, but there are simply very few jobs for the average youth in inner London right now. While the looting is a minor part of the riots, emphasised by the appropriate PR machine, do you see riots and subsequent looting in rich, happy communities? No, because people who are rich and happy will go along with the system and buy the TV - there are always exceptions but they are too few and far between for a riot+loot. A necessary prerequisite for simultaneous riots across some country is deep discontent.
Schooling doesn't guarantee you an education. Have you ever worked in a London school? Even the average state school fails at preparing your brain since Thatcher's National Curriculum and sale of exam boards to publishing houses have together created a racket of inflated grades and learning only to pass the test.
The NHS is still plodding along nicely as long as your problems are physical and fairly routine. But if you have a complex mental health problem, you may be waiting for years to see the right person, or not have the appropriate treatment available to you on the NHS at all (it depends a lot on the Trust you're under).
You s
Society does not owe you a sense of love and belonging that would be your families job.
OK, let's say you as part of wider society do not owe the disaffected youth anything.
Then the disaffected youth owes you nothing either.
In particular, he does not owe you the respect not to smash your store and take the stuff inside.
I guess you have made your bed.
The Internet is built on so much "nanny state" academic and military research that I question the sanity of anyone who sits online with an argument such as yours.
One where the cultural background of people in government varies?
Is that really what you meant? Cultural background? We already have a parliament, indeed a Cabinet, like that. I wonder how much more diverse, and in what way, it would need to be in order to meet with your approval. Are we talking quotas here?
But of course, no matter how culturally diverse the MPs may be, there still has to be a single culture of government and establishment. Otherwise power could not be exercised, and a government that cannot use power is no government at all.
The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
Rene Descartes step forward from your anonymity and create a user account.
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
As long as the youths want to spend time in jail then they are free to act like asses. That's why we have laws and law enforcement.
These dissafeccted youths are spoiled rotten little shits that from a global prespctive are very wealthy. Ask the Somalis that are currently starving what they think of these little self absorbed pricks.
They should be arrested by the cops so they get it through there dense little prick skulls that the world does not revolve around them and there are consequences to being a little prick that thinks he's owed something by society.
You appear to have quite a sense of entitlement. You think society, via taxpayers, should pay policemen to arrest these people and a justice system to house them in jail just to accommodate for your particularly Daily Mail brand of anger.
I say that society should, via taxpayers and voluntary schemes and good example, give these people a part to play so they are productive and contributing rather than unhappy and a burden. I don't think that anyone is entitled to anything, but it's what you've got to do if you want to live in a functioning, comfortable, happy environment.
Did 1.5 million people riot in London just because they were ignored? Nope. Because these were ordinary, civilized, and decent people.
Nope. Because they weren't the ones suffering directly and substantially from the war in Iraq.
...hopeless waste-of-spaces... scum... wouldn't piss on...
Ah, the sub-humanity argument. It was only a matter of time. Is Godwin invoked yet?
The worst I've heard is "if you stop providing help for people and they don't commit suicide it means they're happy enough to live and don't need any more help". It sounded insane at the time, but it's just the reductio of any "it could be worse thus it's good enough" argument.
(And the uniforms were really smart, so you were free... would any non-free person have such a smart uniform?)
Not cold from winter? Well, Britain doesn't have the coldest winters in the world, but what the hell are you talking about? Thousands more people die in the UK during cold winters. Study Dept of Health figures or any number of newspaper articles - even in the right wing papers - which regurgitate figures. Older people are of course more vulnerable because, well, they're older.
As for hunger, you're right, the one thing most first world countries have achieved is hardly anyone without an eating disorder dying from simply not having enough food available. Malnutrition, on the other hand, is a very real problem tackled with various advice for health professionals. The effects of malnutrition in youth are far more insidious.
People don't want to simply be alive: they want to live. A handout of enough food and shelter to remain alive is not good enough. You can give that to any poorly treated animal in a cage.
I really want to see [another human] cry, and beg for mercy.
That says enough about you.
The unions funding Labour let it happen. Was it because their members were stupid or because their leadership are corrupt hoodwinkers? Did they think they would still receive (temporary) concessions for their members while ignoring their wider role protecting the working population?
The merest suggestion of the dropping of Clause IV should have been cause for every union funding Labour to totally withdraw support. I do not understand why any worker is prepared to remain a member of these hypocritical institutions.
Maybe because it's only loaded for RETARDS LIKE YOU, you disgusting piece of maggot-riddled cattle shit!
Didnt your grandmother tell you "preventing is better than cure" ?
Harsh punishment might stop known wrongdoers from repeating their actions, but its not going to stop people from being in the situation where they would consider "turning bad".
If people feel like they are part of society, they wont harm it, and go to great lengths to protect it.
What should happen is for the government to try and understand why these people became so desperate and opportunist in the first place, and try and stop people from getting into that situation.
If you understand the person/group your in conflict with, then your opposition to it becomes more effectively.
Firstly the taxpayer is me, I am the taxpayer. It is the governments responsibility to make and enforce the laws that is why we agree to pay taxes. That is why we all agree to have a Government it is a fundamental cornerstone of civilized society. If the government chooses willfully or through incompetences not to enfore their own laws then they are no Government at all. They Govern nothing. At that point it is anarchy and survival of the fittest.
Young people have a part to play they are choosing not to play it and be productive memebers of society therefore they deserve our scorn and to be locked up. We all have a part to play in society, simply many people these days are only in it for themselves and chose to do as they please and not agree to societal norms, which is fine, yet they should pay the agreed upon proce for their behaviour. Plenty of people are not happy that's no excuse for lawlesness, looting and stealing rather it is an excuse and a poor one at that. These people are feckless criminals nothing more.
It's people with your attitude that will be the end of civilized society. You simply can't have a civilized society without laws and law enforcement willing to enforce those laws that is the very definition of anarchy.
While they're at it, can they look over a few remaining photos from Prague in '68? The Stazi didn't manage to track down and shoot *everyone* there.
Harvard Professor Robert Putnam's study showed that the more racially diverse a society is, the lower the levels of trust.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/
Slashdot = Sarcasm
Common POS system
May alsonorth face sale make you more in the meeting, to improve the sound of your ambitions, and sits east toward the west. Face to the west is especially good, because you can not only get some ambitions, but you may also get some content. And, if you are training office romances, facing west. Common POS system
May alsonorth face sale make you more in the meeting, to improve the sound of your ambitions, and sits east toward the west. Face to the west is especially good, because you can not only get some ambitions, but you may also get some content. And, if you are training office romances, facing west. Common POS system
May alsonorth face sale make you more in the meeting, to improve the sound of your ambitions, and sits east toward the west. Face to the west is especially good, because you can not only get some ambitions, but you may also get some content. And, if you are training office romances, facing west. Common POS system
May alsonorth face sale make you more in the meeting, to improve the sound of your ambitions, and sits east toward the west. Face to the west is especially good, because you can not only get some ambitions, but you may also get some content. And, if you are training office romances, facing west. Common POS system
May alsonorth face sale make you more in the meeting, to improve the sound of your ambitions, and sits east toward the west. Face to the west is especially good, because you can not only get some ambitions, but you may also get some content. And, if you are training office romances, facing west.
None but the last explain simultaneous peaceful protests, subsequent riots and following looting across the country.
There was one peaceful and justified protest in Tottenham, the rest is just looting and anarchy because they think they'll get away with it. The violence is completely unrelated to one man's death - see the multiple interviews with looters which prove this. Remarkable how you justify all this violence and stealing with 'peaceful protest' because it fits your wold view. Do you have any sympathy for those who have been burned out of their homes, and shopkeepers who have lost their livelihood, who you apparently consider collateral damage, or is all of your sympathy for the scum who are doing the burning?
What if I start a war and that war involves bombing shops and killing its owners?
That war would be wrong, illegal and a waste of money and life, like most wars in history. It would also have nothing to do with riots. Nice try.
Civilised society would expect its police force to stop you by using means only in proportion to the threat you cause. If you want violent retribution, please move to the Middle East - you sound like you'd be most welcome.
i.e. violence is met with violence. I said nothing about retribution, and I don't wish you to leave my country, just that you would grow up and face the real issues here instead of hiding behind your off-the-shelf lefty opinions. Stop and think for yourself for once instead of spouting platitudes.
You speak, evidently, like someone who hasn't actually had it tough and who assumes that all people need is a small handout in order to live a safe, happy life.
You speak like someone who is happy making assumptions without any sort of evidence, so long as they reinforce your ossified world view.
In our society in over to find useful employment and have a decent standard of living all people need is a positive attitude, some luck, and the little bit of help from society (which society provides, in an imperfect way) - their background is of course going to determine a lot of their life unless they are remarkable - like most people and most places in history, that's a very hard problem to crack, and no-one has done it yet, but they *can* escape it, even if in some small way, and they are encouraged to do so. No-one starves unless they have other issues, no-one goes without a home for long (run-down as much of our public housing is, it is still a roof over your head), and it is possible to get a job in most circumstances, even if you have to leave where you live and move (as I did). I'm not saying I agree with cutting this safety net even further, or that it is universally fair, but that is completely unrelated to the issue of whether people should be allowed to riot and loot to express themselves. PS I've been on the dole, and I know life isn't easy, another assumption completely wrong. I'm well aware of the limitations of the safety net, and how it is being dismantled - I'm also aware there is a culture of lawlessness and selfish exploitation in our country (at both ends of the social scale) which needs to be stamped out. There are plenty of things that need fixed in our welfare state, without dismantling it, and many of the cuts this gov. has started are ideological and unneeded, but your pontifications and religion of dependence do nothing to help this problem, quite the reverse.
Go back to your Daily Mail and thank working society for building and running the civilisation which keeps you in comfort.
I don't read the daily mail (it's full of puerile rubbish and bad writing, much like the guardian), don't use the word nigger, and consider looters scum (of all races and backgrounds, many are not black). Funny how your assumptions are universally wrong isn't it? Perhaps you should examine some of your other thoughtless opinions as well. I do find it interesting
Well said. Wish I had mod points. Even after everything thats happened I can't believe there are still liberals like the OP who seem to be utterly detached from reality. I can only think they're nothing more than pseudo intellectual bookworms who are up on trendy theory but completely lacking in real world experience. I can only hope the OP is a student and will grow up eventually.
Lets face it , a large number of british workers are just bloody lazy and do a poor job. Sure, some employers sacked brits to employ foreigners on lower wages but thats the exception rather than the rule. Generally eastern europeans that come over here have a better work ethic than native brits. The lazy polish stay in poland.
Also lets not forget that a lot of these immigrants do jobs the british simply won't do such as working on farms.
You appear to have quite a sense of entitlement. You think society, via taxpayers, should pay policemen to arrest these people and a justice system to house them in jail just to accommodate for your particularly Daily Mail brand of anger.
You're the only one bringing up the Daily Mail, says something about you and your prejudices I suppose, but it really is not the stinging rebuke you seem to imagine.
I say that society should, via taxpayers and voluntary schemes and good example, give these people a part to play so they are productive and contributing rather than unhappy and a burden. I don't think that anyone is entitled to anything, but it's what you've got to do if you want to live in a functioning, comfortable, happy environment.
You really do seem completely divorced from reality - have you ever lived on an estate? Have you any idea what life is like? If not I suggest you do and see how far your 'good example' gets you - it really would be an education for you. Some people are selfish, violent and beyond redemption (at least in the short term) - to deal with them we need prisons and the force of law, or there will be no public space left in which to build a functioning, comfortable and happy environment. Among those people I would class looters - perhaps you'd like to have them as neighbours, but personally I would not.
Encouraging people to lead a happy and comfortable life (by providing opportunities and education) comes after society's rules have been enforced by the rule of law. We can argue over the benefits and costs of both, but one cannot function without the other, and stealing playstations and attacking innocents are not an acceptable form of expression, no matter how frustrated or downtrodden teaching assistants are feeling.
Posting anonymously, because cowardice is sometimes in order.
In Manchester, the crime boss of neighbouring Salford has been arrested.
Some of the London activity may have been political, but the looting in Manchester and Salford was just mass robbery. Social problems may have helped Noonan recruit these looters, but organised crime supplied the organisation.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8693843/UK-riots-suspected-Manchester-gangster-Dominic-Noonan-arrested.html
Didnt your grandmother tell you "preventing is better than cure" ?
Harsh punishment might stop known wrongdoers from repeating their actions, but its not going to stop people from being in the situation where they would consider "turning bad".
Yes but the idea is to prevent the next group of people from turning bad.
If people feel like they are part of society, they wont harm it, and go to great lengths to protect it.
Societies get divided up based on race, class, and religion. The more that is done to stoke tensions, the stronger the divisions become. But that includes when liberal politicians instigate class warfare by talking about "the rich" (as if they're some monolithic bloc) stealing from "the poor". A lot of the explanation and justification I'm seeing presented on behalf of the rioters is going right along with that. They're not trying to heal society or ease conflict, they're just trying to make "the rich" into the bad guys to give them an excuse to do whatever they want.
1: police ask the public to send in pictures of the riot to help identify "criminals"
2: it is astoundingly easy to make decent Photoshops these days.
3: how long before faked pictures start being submitted, showing politicians/businessmen/celebrities/enemies of the hacker at the riot scenes?
It's only a loaded term if you have a belief that vigilantism is always inherently bad.
To law enforcement, it is always bad - you're cutting into their monopoly.
I would say I'm being sarcastic, except that the cops are actually complaining about citizen groups that are defending houses and stores.
What about "English Defence League", these are definitely folks that get "together and do good".
Because on one side we have these rioters, who just come together to riot for fun, most of them people who shouldn't be in England to begin with. On the other side we have the friendly Neighborhood watch, hard-working, law abiding fascists, who just know how to solve social and economical problems the old-fashioned way.
It is obvious that whoever is attempting to characterize as 'vigilantes' people who are trying to identify and bring to heel the mindless rioters in Britain is much more sympathetic to the hoodlums and their destructive tendencies than to stopping such behaviour. This is so typical of today's moral relativists who have such a slippery set of pseudo-values that they are unable to recognize mindless hooliganism when it occurs. There is little doubt that unemployed young hooligans who infest the streets of Britain's cities need to be channeled into constructive behaviour that might benefit both themselves and society, but trying to deal with at least part of the problem is more constructive and necessary than mere carping criticism from the do-nothing liberal left. During the last major social upheaval in North America, unemployed and potentially violent young men were conscripted into work gangs to help build needed infrastructure and to head off the kind of violence seen in Britain in the last week. Perhaps something of that nature is now needed again.
Wait, wait, don't tell me; let me guess.
Not enough welfare and other free public benefits in Great Britain?
"Outdated business models" is code for "I don't like paying for things, but want them anyway"
"Societies get divided up based on race, class, and religion."
And that is the problem.
Capitalism encourages people/business to compete to sell their products and services, the _reward_ is money, thats fine. The problem is that money is not only a reward, but also a means of _survival_.
So people who cant compete for the "reward" depend on social security to survive, its that or starve on the street.
So when a society has financial difficulties, it has to choose to either reduce the _reward_ for the rich or make it harder for the the poor to _survive_.
If a society doesnt want division between rich and poor, then choosing to reduce the _reward_ is the only reasonable choice, as those who need money for _survival_ dont have a choice.
It takes two sides to have an argument, if you think its all the other persons fault then you should realize you are biased.
There are so many different function
Thanknorth face jackets you, "and the aquatic" words will no longer sunscreen is an advertising. Use prevent bask in one reason is the skin protection more and more aging.There are so many different function
Thanknorth face jackets you, "and the aquatic" words will no longer sunscreen is an advertising. Use prevent bask in one reason is the skin protection more and more aging.There are so many different function
Thanknorth face jackets you, "and the aquatic" words will no longer sunscreen is an advertising. Use prevent bask in one reason is the skin protection more and more aging.There are so many different function
Thanknorth face jackets you, "and the aquatic" words will no longer sunscreen is an advertising. Use prevent bask in one reason is the skin protection more and more aging.