Human rights what Human rights

[Loosehead]

Just reading about the court decsion on the case of a teenager using the HR act to stop the police enforcing a  curfew. Apparently it is against his "human right". Am I the only who thinks that only criminal scum have human rights? I mean what about my human right to live in peace or the human rights of the population to protect itself from the depraved scum that are our youth these days? Old ladies can't even put up barbed wire on their back fence in case the poor darlings hurt themselves. The HR act in my mind is being totally misused and is unncessary, I remember when we used, what has become rare these days, Common sense.

[Oneeyedvic]

Loosehead - sorry to come in so late on the question - but to answer it:

The youth in question is a sensible 15 year old who is taking some of his GCSEs early so I would assume (rightly or wrongly) he is of slightly above average intelligence.

I am really against all this anti social behaviour, adn do see it every day. My wife stops me from doing anything about it, and I am afraid that I listen to her - not because I am scared of any of the youths, but I am afraid as to what they may do to my wife when I am not around.

That said - the law in question (or my understanding of it) allowed police to pick up anyone under the age of 16 for any reason - whether or not they belivee they are commiting / about to commit an offense.

All the things you list in your follow ups are offenses. Whether or not the police do something about it or not is another matter.

I don't believe that the police have a right to stop anyone for no reason and to force them to go home. That is what this case was about.

[mfewell]

Hello Loosehead,

[mfewell]

Hello Loosehead, yuou

[bernardo]

Everybody has human rights - that's why they are called "human rights", not "scum rights" or "criminal rights".  For that reason, the 15-year-old has the right to go about his business without being arrested simply for being under 16.  The ruling of the court does not mean that the police are somehow-as-if-by-magic prevented from policing or controlling yobs or vandals or criminals.  It means that they have to concentrate their efforts on those who are being anti-social or abusive or violent.

[shaneystar]

Not all youngsters are bad.The media seems to single out the ones who are and ignores the rest.Who I believe are in the majority.This young chap in the news seems to be a sensible sort of kid to me.However the police do get out of their prams sometimes.I won't knock them generally,I have a brother who was in the police for thirty years but even he admits they are sometimes over zealous these days.My son was at a cash machine a good few years ago now,with a mate.Son owed mate some money.He passed him the ten quid and they were suddenly surrounded by police.On the pavement ,handcuffed,searched and my son's car searched.Carted off to the nick.Son phoned me .I hared up there.They thought they had been passing drugs.Apparently they had been staking this particular spot out as a known drug dealers spot.
I was furious.They had nothing on them.They were innocent lads on a night out.I demanded an apology but got nowhere.You can't tar them all with same brush.But it seems to me a lot of people want to.Where were my son's human rights on that occasion?

[Loosehead]

acw:

With the "Little Darlings" label I was trying to portray my utter disgust in the way that the parents of these yobs refuse to believe that their "little Darlings" could possibly do wrong. I'm sure there's a grammatical term for it!

I have had little direct experience, a few minor incidents. Are we not allowed to get angry on behalf of others that suffer?  You see It doesn't have to happen to me before I feel concerned about it.

If we punished criminals in this country then we wouldn't be on the verge of turning our homes into fortresses.

[acw]

I did realise it was sarcasm - I'm not stupid. 

Not ALL parents of ALL yobs feel that way - yet again you are making sweeping generalisations. 

You were speaking as though you knew about it first hand, rather than just believing every word you read in the tabloid press.  If it was happening to you/your loved ones, I'd have had more chance of understanding your viewpoint. 

And we DO punish criminals - don't get started on the whole "They have a TV in their room so it must be Butlins" rubbish. 

If you think punishment is that easy, why don't you turn into a physical vigilante, rather than just a verbal one, and go beat some vermin little darlings up and see how YOU like prison!?!

I just think you need to read more into it than the tabloid press or the internet.  Go to your local library.  Read law journals.  Read House of Commons reports.  I think you would end up with a more balanced view and thus feeling less like the last angry man.  I think it would make you feel safer and less aggrieved.  Society is NOT out to get you.  Nor is it out to protect criminals.  You might be advised to find a bit of perspective.  You are clearly smart enough to know not to read every word you read in the papers.  Come on!!

[ICEMANSAV]

Just to add my pennies worth, acw have you ever been victim to yob behaviour? I agree with invested powers in the Police to carry out these checks, the example above highlights that sometimes Police will get it wrong, yet not often and I would prefer the police to have some form of power to act in the name of prevention. Yobs today are protected ASBO's are medals, its ok defending young people in general but when they are not contributing and causing havoc then surely punishment should be that, a punishment.

[Oneeyedvic]

ICEMANSAV - would totally agree that police should have the power to detain, arrest and prosecute for anti social behaviour.

What the recent court case was about was actually that the police could force you to go home - even if they agreed you were not doing anything. They could do this to any child under 16.

Doesn't seem very fair to me.

Another daft piece of legislation drawn up by a terrible government with a majority to pander to those middle class people who belive everything they read in The Sun or Daily Mail.

Or maybe we could stop all anti social behaviour by making alcohol illegal and closeing every pub and off-licence in England. That would certainly stop a lot of anti scoial behaviour.

[mfewell]

Loosehead, I've had to call the police for the last 2 Saturday evenings - kids mindlessly pulling down trees just behind my garden fence. I don't do 999, just the ordinary number. Interestingly they ask "Black, White, or Asian". I am tempted to ask why that matters unless they are stats-gathering. There is another interpretation but I am not going to be the first to make it.

I'm dreading tomorrow evening.

[eupraxia]

We live on a rough estate. It's not unheard of here for 5 yearolds to be out a 11pm at night on their own. When you complian its usually ignored. We have 6ft fences which hubby put up with barbed wire on the top. The police told him that so long as the fence was over 6ft it was ok. They really shouldn't be climbing up there in the first place.

One of the slightly smart kids round here told the others we have the back yard covered with land mines. :-). They believe him.we don't often get groups of kids hanging round but we tend to ignore them. Doing anything else ends with a slanging match.

[OBonio]

Kids playing footy in a car park in the centre of town. The public football pitches are a 10 minute walk away. They still insist in kicking this ball about the car park despite being moved on by police etc. They even cajole and stick their fingers up at the police as they drive past. The police can't do anything. The parents can't do anything. I can see a bunch of people in hoodies coming to sort them out after a few pints of Stella though!

[acw]

No, I suppose I haven't been a direct victim of gang behaviour.  But then I haven't been saying that I support the gangs.  What I've been trying to say is that the HRA is an improvement on the situation before.  And also that describing people as scum and vermin doesn't help anything.  AND, making sweeping generalisations just weakens any arguement. 

I totally agree that gang and yob culture needs to be curtailed, but NOT at the expense of human rights for ALL. 

A balance must be struck - something that quite a few people seem to be having problems grasping. 

Mind you - if people don't "get it" that the papers rarely report good news - such as successful use of the HRA (because that just doesn't sell papers), then they just probably don't even understand why I'm talking about a balance.  Because all they (want to) see is a one sided arguement. 

[ICEMANSAV]

Not everyone reacts to a newspaper report, give the people here credit for free thinking. Looking away from the sun or daily mail and into real life, gangs and some youths are making life a misery for others. The HRA has benefitted countless people and it is obviously a step forward. The nail was hit on the head by saying gang and yob culture needs to be curtailed, give yobs a loop hole and they will use it.

[chompu]

As a retired police officer I would like to make a contribution here. During my service I saw a gradual erosion of respect for the law and the curtailing of the powers to deal with it. Most notably the police and criminal evidence act. A sledghammer to crack a nut if I ever saw one. Yes, it is quite correct that the majority of law abiding people should have their human rights protected. The problem is that the levels this has reached provide a very handy shield for the guilty. Let me give just one example of how ridiculous this has become. I am proud to say that my daughter has followed in her fathers footsteps. Her boyfriend, also a police officer, recently attended a domestic situation where a large and very aggressive man was threatning

[chompu]

his wife with a carving knife. On the arrival of the police he made threats to them. He was squirted with cs gas.His reaction was to laugh and said it didn't bother him so he was squirted again. Fortunately he picked up a tea towel to wipe his face and the two police officers took the opportunity to tackle him, disarm him and arrested him. Their reward? A commendation? A pat on the back? No, a worrying few days wait whilst the cs gas cannister is sent away for analysis to make sure an excessive amount hasn't been used.I could go on all day on other issues but will finish for now by saying it's a sad society that has to spend thousands of pounds on court orders to make twelve year olds behave themselves on the steet.

[Loosehead]

Over to you acw....

[acw]

Waiting for you actually.  I accept this exceptional examples and the views of individuals.  After all - everyone is entitled to his or her opinion.  However, it is absolutely clear that you are not taking on board a WORD anyone is saying as you have not budged an inch since starting this debate. 

If you think the HRA is THAT unecessary, lobby your MP or take your own case to court.  I look forward to reading about THAT in the papers. 

[chompu]

 The problem is acw this is not an exceptional example. It is an example of the burden every police officer has to contend with when using cs gas. Another example, recently introduced. Police officers will normally check individuals they see acting suspciously, particulary at night. Sometimes an interaction which may take up very little time when it is obvious that what at first looked suspcious turns out to be innocent. Now officers have to fill out a form every time this happens. To make matters even more ridiculous in the creation of this totally unnecessary paperwork, in the section for ethnic origin the officer must enter the answer given by the the interviewee. In other words if they are obviously white European but say they are African, then African gets entered on the form. No, I'm afraid not an exceptional example, just one of many. I could go on all day and night. I must say I can see where Loosehead is coming from although I would have perhaps not used such descriptive language as he did. It seems that the silent law abiding majority in this country are not protected by this type of legislation,as per my examples, but suffer from it by the protection it offers the wrongdoers. Loosehead have faith. I have worked with young people all my life, good and bad. I now work in a school and can say that the the majority of young people are not of the type you describe. However, you could question what has happened to their rights to an education when you see it disrupted by the badly behaved minority. A group which schools have very little power to do anything about.

[acw]

I do understand that there are many more examples where those came from.  I just don't think that this can justify a statment that the "HR act... is unncessary (sic)". 

It may be that it has been interpreted in a way that was not intended by the legislators - but that's just the nature of the Common Law.  More cases will adjust the interpretation as exceptions are found to the precedents that have been set. 

I just really don't feel that the HRA is as much of a waste of time as Loosehead says.  I also fear that he/she may not accept your comments Chompu that there ARE nice youths out there, and that they are NOT in the minority. 

If Loosehead would just agree that a better (i.e., calmer and less aggressive) choice of words could have been used in the original question/statement, this whole thing could have been put to bed a LONG time ago!