Firstly can i say that i am not taking the tory side on this one! (needed to point that out just in case you were thinking i was!).

anyway, on with the rebuttal!

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

it's all very well to spout off figures like that (and they may well be right) but he has to back it up with evidence.

- Well in fairness Gareth he does say he is using the same source as Howard, doesn't he?

ive reread the article, and cant see where he actually said that (maybe im going crazy! if its there please quote where he actually says that!)

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

If the figures are true it would certainly surprise me, and it gives a different perspective of the general impression we get from the media in general.

- It would hardly be the first time that a sizeable section of the UK media persues it's own political agenda rather than state the bald figures now would it?

totally agree with you, kind of what i was getting at.....just i never put as directly as you have.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

i myself was the victim of a crime about a year ago, from a young girl of eastern european decent - i think romanian.

- But come on Gareth, you're surely not going to write off all Romanians as criminal types now are you? Michael Howard would hardly like that!

of course im not! just purely using this as an example, from personal experience of the problems immigration and asylum CAN bring (of course by far the large majority of immigrants are law abiding citizens).

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

i feel this article is not tackling the real issues and is squabbling about petty details in the hope of discrediting the conservatives. so sorry sminkey, i dont agree with your assessment of this being "an excellent article".

- You are free to hold your opinions but how do those opinions stand in the light of a slightly different side to the tale (officially sourced now for you too)?

Surely if the stats show Howard & Co are manipulating this part of the immigration story it does bring to light something beyond mere spabbling and the petty?
Is it not justifiable to discredit the tories for such a superficial alarmist reading of the stats?

well i will take a detailed look at the stats next week (right now i have an assignment to be submitted by monday - need to get back to it!!!), but if theyre correctly interpreted then yes it should be pointed out. but like i said the way the article is written it does seem to be saying "look the tories have got it all wrong, this is not really a problem at all". when clearly there is a big problem with immigration and asylum issues.

also you have no response to the issue i raised about the insinuation that some of the right-wing media is racist.....wonder what you make of that?

Originally posted by gareth_24
Firstly can i say that i am not taking the tory side on this one! (needed to point that out just in case you were thinking i was!).

- No need Gareth, I never thought you were.

ive reread the article, and cant see where he actually said that (maybe im going crazy! if its there please quote where he actually says that!)

- Surely it is implicit in his comments -
" The stats used by Michael Howard in support of his "I Believe" conceal some interesting subtleties. Take 2003. In that year 362,000 people left and 513,000 came in - a difference of 151,000. Of those departing, 191,000 were Brits and 171,000 were foreigners. And of those coming in, 277,000 were British returnees and 246,000 were Auslanders . Bear with me. That means that 88,000 more Brits came in than went out and 75,000 more outsiders. Sooo... more than half of that city the size of Birmingham is made up of excess returning Britons."

the way the article is written it does seem to be saying "look the tories have got it all wrong, this is not really a problem at all". when clearly there is a big problem with immigration and asylum issues.

- I think there is a perceived problem within a section of British society (and has been for years), whether that equates to a more general actual problem I doubt very much myself.

also you have no response to the issue i raised about the insinuation that some of the right-wing media is racist.....wonder what you make of that?

- When it comes to the line certain UK papers prefer to take I think some knowingly walk a very fine line.
I have to say that yes I have certainly seen selectivity from papers like The Daily Mail, The Telegraph, The Express and The Sun so slanted and so biased on matters of race that I would consider them to have been racist on occassion.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

- Surely it is implicit in his comments -

implicit? it doesnt STATE that he is using the same figures, he can IMPLY all he likes, but he could quite easily be using figures sourced elsewhere. ive taught myself to question everything said by journalists especially if i believe they may have an agenda!!!

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- I think there is a perceived problem within a section of British society (and has been for years), whether that equates to a more general actual problem I doubt very much myself.

ok well as i said earlier, everyone's political views are moulded by their own experiences - maybe if you lived elsewhere in the country you would feel differently and vice versa with myself.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- When it comes to the line certain UK papers prefer to take I think some knowingly walk a very fine line.
I have to say that yes I have certainly seen selectivity from papers like The Daily Mail, The Telegraph, The Express and The Sun so slanted and so biased on matters of race that I would consider them to have been racist on occassion.

well i cant believe youve brought The Sun into an intelligent political debate!!! as for the other papers, well i read the telegraph reasonably regularly, and often believe it speaks sense - i feel this paper does often "tell it like it is" and echo the opinions of many - certainly their recent campaign to give homeowners the right to defend their own homes against burglars was an excellent one, for example. i actually think that they do a better job of representing a sensible right wing agenda than the conservatives do.....

but whether right or wrong - my point was, for a good piece of journalism, you cannot make points like that without backing them up!

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

I can find figures for a circulation of just under a million...

So well under a million sold when the population is approx 60million isn't impressing me too much.

i never said most people read it. most people read the sun and suchlike, and unfortunately this is where most people's poltical views lie!!! but, and this is unsubstantiated, i feel that more people in britain have right wing tendancies towards things like common sense and ant-PC policies. the telegraph, whatever else, stands up for these things, IMO, without being racist.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
Wow, I thought it was a typically populist, short-sighted and very badly thought out little 'band-wagon', hitching a ride on the indefensible actions of weirdo Tony Martin who thought it was perfectly ok to shoot a youth in the back as he ran away.

maybe he shouldnt have shot at them, but i certainly feel no remorse at what he did - my parents have had theyre property attacked many times and trust me, i'd love to see a little "right-wing" justice for the perpatrators. but the law doesnt allow this (dont get me wrong im not advocating that shooting at them should be allowed, but there should be some just form of punishment from the powers that be ). so, whereas yes, what tony martin did was wrong, i can sympathise with him.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
The fact that almost no-one is ever charged 'protecting their property' seemed to have passed them completely

admittedly, its not that common - but the fact that ANYONE is charged with protecting their property is ludicrous. and most peoples perception is that they cant.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
Fear of crime sells newspapers (they even admit it themselves) so that is what they are about, claims about social responsibility etc are just so much nonsense for the gullible IMO.

quite possibly it does, but this is because the public, in general, agree with the fact that crime is out of control in many parts of the UK. i certainly dont count myself as gullible, i agreed with the campaign by the telegraph because i had those opinions despite it, not because of it.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
But lets not kid ourselves here, there is really only one source for these figures. No-one else but the Home Office is collating or can collate these stats at each point of entry and with each claim for residence or asylum. There may be a few periphal ststa available from airlines or ferry companies but the bulk of this is done once and by officials.

you could well be right, sminky and you probably are - but you shouldnt be so "gullible" as you said above journalists can get their sources from anywhere, as im sure you know.

Originally posted by gareth_24
most people read the sun and suchlike, and unfortunately this is where most people's poltical views lie!!! but, and this is unsubstantiated, i feel that more people in britain have right wing tendancies towards things like common sense and ant-PC policies. the telegraph, whatever else, stands up for these things, IMO, without being racist.

- Well we'll have to agree to disagree on this then gareth cos I don't think most hold these views. I don't think 'most' read the British press either.

If that were the case (that the press represents a majority right-wing view in Britain) we'd have never had nothing but ever more successful right-wing govs, which clearly is not so.

maybe he shouldnt have shot at them

- ....and he had an illegal firearm. I don't think we want to endorse that kind of thing.

my parents have had theyre property attacked many times and trust me, i'd love to see a little "right-wing" justice for the perpatrators.

- Funnily enough so have mine; and yes it would, seemingly, be nice to get hold of a few of the little f*ckers and beat seven shades out of them. Cos we imagine that would 'solve' the problem.

The trouble is that what actually happens is that kids being kids all that happens is they either wait for the able-bodied son(s) to leave and go home or they get their older family involved or even if you 'sort' that particular crowd you get the next generation messing about the way kids mess about.

Seen it with my own eyes, it actually makes the situation a lot worse in the end. It's no solution.

what tony martin did was wrong, i can sympathise with him.

- I had symapthy right up until he got out his unlawful gun and shot to death a youth running away from him.

admittedly, its not that common

-- "not that common"!?

Well if you mean 'hardly ever happens' then yes, it is indeed not that common.

but the fact that ANYONE is charged with protecting their property is ludicrous. and most peoples perception is that they cant.

- Sorry but I think there should be a facility for dealing with those psychos who are incapable of controlling themselves and who go waaaaay to far.

Which is all that (almost never used) law is all about. Put like that I see most people agreeing with it's retention.

quite possibly it does, but this is because the public, in general, agree with the fact that crime is out of control in many parts of the UK.

- I don't agree with your conclusion. I think it's more like the public have been 'trained' into an acceptance of this all-pervading 'threat'. It's quite perverted and unhealthy.

The thing is that it was the tory party and their mates in the press who went to town with this and even when crime fell under their gov they found they couldn't get people to stop believing crime was down!

Reap what you sow or what, eh?

journalists can get their sources from anywhere, as im sure you know.

- Oh I knw. That's why I asked the guy. Hopefully he replies and we get specific references.....ploughing through those Home Office stats seems as deadly an occupation as it's possible to have!

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- Funnily enough so have mine; and yes it would, seemingly, be nice to get hold of a few of the little f*ckers and beat seven shades out of them. Cos we imagine that would 'solve' the problem.

i never said it would solve the problem! it'd make you feel good, albeit for a short amount of time. and then yes youre right it could well lead to worse. however, in the abscence of real justice in the country, sometimes it seems as if violence is the best course of action. this is why it is harsh to punish those who protect their own homes, because in the spur of the moment people can be irrational when under threat.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- I had symapthy right up until he got out his unlawful gun and shot to death a youth running away from him.

wasnt aware that the gun was illegally owned until you said. totally agree he shouldnt have done it. but as i said people can act irrationally when theyre homes and property are under threat. and i will never shed a tear for the kid who died.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- Sorry but I think there should be a facility for dealing with those psychos who are incapable of controlling themselves and who go waaaaay to far.

agreed. but defining "way to far" needed to be done. to an extent it now has been (whether or not thats related to the sunday telegraph campaign - i dont know)

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- I don't agree with your conclusion. I think it's more like the public have been 'trained' into an acceptance of this all-pervading 'threat'. It's quite perverted and unhealthy.

as ive said to you before, our opinions are moulded by our experiences and backgrounds. my perception is that crime and anti-social behaviour is escalating alarmingly and i can only see it getting further out of control as kids are growing up learning to accept the things that we see and hear on our streets everyday. one of the problems with crime figures is sminky, so many crimes go unreported because of people not having the faith in the police to solve the crime. i think it would be fair to say that in the last 2 years that my parents have been victims of crime more than 20times - theyve probably reported about 1/2 of those - of which there has not been one arrest (and i doubt even one investigation).

do you use public transport at all sminky? im guessing you dont, because this is where you really get to see the problems with our next generation. spitting, swearing, vandalism, smashed windows, shouting, pushing, verbal abuse, smoking (not just cigarettes) even p*ssing on theback seats. ive seen it all.

this is why I perceive crime to be out of control. instead of assuming people are dummies and brainwashed into everything, maybe you should occasionally give them a little more credit and believe that what ive just described is not unique to me, and im my experiences are very minute compared to others - for example, ive never been on the end of a serious crime.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
The thing is that it was the tory party and their mates in the press who went to town with this and even when crime fell under their gov they found they couldn't get people to stop believing crime was down!

IMO, this issue shouldnt be politicised. but for what its worth i think that the tories would be better at punishing offenders (and rightly so) but still nobody has the guts to tackle the root causes.

Originally posted by gareth_24
sometimes it seems as if violence is the best course of action. this is why it is harsh to punish those who protect their own homes, because in the spur of the moment people can be irrational when under threat.

- But Gareth this is also what we have our brains, civillisation and the rule of law for.

Just because something seems the thing to do on the spur of the moment is hardly much justification in itself, is it?

Our civillisation lasts about 10second (if that) if we go the other way IMO.

but as i said people can act irrationally when theyre homes and property are under threat.

- I agree, it's just that most of us on't go out and get a shotgun saw it off and load it to use it on anyone we imagine shouldn't be there. The possibilities for accident (as happens in the US) are enormous and horrendous.

and i will never shed a tear for the kid who died.

- I doubt he was one of societies' finest but then again since when did a little 'breaking and entering' entitle anyone to kill you?

agreed. but defining "way to far" needed to be done. to an extent it now has been (whether or not thats related to the sunday telegraph campaign - i dont know)

- Aha! Something you would credit this gov as having done then, hmm?

as ive said to you before, our opinions are moulded by our experiences and backgrounds. my perception is that crime and anti-social behaviour is escalating alarmingly

- But every generation says this about the following ones. I could show you a famous quotation where it talks about kids being violent and unruly, of having no respect, refusing to listen to their elders, or teachers etc etc written by a Roman guy. No doubt there is a Greek text and an ancient Egyptian one too.

It's, to an extent, life. As we age the natural thing is to begin to fear our abilities in 'what if' situations we were completely able to deal with when we were younger and fitter.

Throw in a media well tuned into the profitability in a climate of fear and well, none of it helps, IMO.

.....and it doesn't mean society is collapsing either.

do you use public transport at all sminky? im guessing you dont, because this is where you really get to see the problems with our next generation. spitting, swearing, vandalism, smashed windows, shouting, pushing, verbal abuse, smoking (not just cigarettes) even p*ssing on theback seats. ive seen it all.

- Yep, been there seen that, attempted to stop the worst of it sometimes, been abused and threatened as a result.

I am not claiming all is rosey in the garden. I am simply saying that for all it's faults living in Britain today is not by any means the worlds worse, in fact we are in the priviledged few % of the world who get to enjoy a life of relative stability and lawfullness.

instead of assuming people are dummies and brainwashed into everything

- I have not assumed that. I am simply stating the obvious, really. Most people do not personally experince crime (violent or otherwise) yet there is undoubtedly a feeling of being personally under threat.

I do not think they are 'brainwashed' but I do think it is reasonable to point out that they must be 'learning' this perception somewhere.

what ive just described is not unique to me

- Did I not just say that I have had similar experiences? Particularly regarding our parents?

and im my experiences are very minute compared to others - for example, ive never been on the end of a serious crime.

- OK. That's one way of looking at it.
Another (IMO more plausible way considering the infrequency of serious crime) is that, thankfully, most have no experience of serious crime either, too.

IMO, this issue shouldnt be politicised.

- I agree but sadly it is, very.

but for what its worth i think that the tories would be better at punishing offenders (and rightly so) but still nobody has the guts to tackle the root causes.

- As I've said before persuing ever harsher punishment is not only IMO usually ineffective but a waste of resources ultimately.

Why should we as a society put up simply going along with the huge costs of crime and our bloated imprisonment system when there is another approach which is far cheaper and far healthier for us as a society to choose?

I'd go for a Euro system in a heatbeat over the repressive US-type 'model' any day.

[edit on 18-2-2005 by sminkeypinkey]

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
Just because something seems the thing to do on the spur of the moment is hardly much justification in itself, is it?

Wasn't saying the action was correct, just saying that people act irrationally in the spur of the moment when threatened.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

- I agree, it's just that most of us on't go out and get a shotgun saw it off and load it to use it on anyone we imagine shouldn't be there. The possibilities for accident (as happens in the US) are enormous and horrendous.

amen. with you on that.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- Aha! Something you would credit this gov as having done then, hmm?

of course there are a few things this govt has done that i approve with (although not many).

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

It's, to an extent, life.

well that doesnt mean we should accept it.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
.....and it doesn't mean society is collapsing either.

the word collapsing is possibly a little strong. but i do believe its going downhill. bigtime. guess theres not much more to be said on that - i think we have a difference of opinion there!

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

- OK. That's one way of looking at it.
Another (IMO more plausible way considering the infrequency of serious crime) is that, thankfully, most have no experience of serious crime either, too.

but the amount of violent crimes are rising, and i honestly cant see of any government policy that is going to stop this, infact while the leniancy continues - it will only get worse.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

- As I've said before persuing ever harsher punishment is not only IMO usually ineffective but a waste of resources ultimately.

well first of all - the punishment has to fit the crime. not like a guy in swansea who killed an iraqi because of his race while out at night, and got jailed for 4 years (this sentence was given last week). he'll be out in 2. and secondly - you can still give harsher punishments but use effective rehabilitation methods at the same time.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

I'd go for a Euro system in a heatbeat over the repressive US-type 'model' any day.

in the long term, yes. in the short/medium term - not an american model exactly, but certainly a harsher one than is currently in place.

Originally posted by gareth_24
well that doesnt mean we should accept it.

- I'd agree with you there gareth.
Id' also say that whilst we do not and should not just accept this neither should we give ourselves over to those who seek to use this kind of subject to frighten and manipulate people over this by exaggeration and taking this beyond it's actual real proportion.

but the amount of violent crimes are rising

- True, yet it remains small despite this.
I'm not trying to be complacent about it I just think we should not allow ourselves to get carried away on % increases; from time to time we should look at the bald numbers which remind us that it is not as large a problem as some make out.

and i honestly cant see of any government policy that is going to stop this, infact while the leniancy continues - it will only get worse.

- Again we will have to disagree. I believe that an ever harsher response solves nothing, in fact I'd suggest it actually is counter-productive and merely produces a society with ever rising levels of brutality and violence.

the punishment has to fit the crime. not like a guy in swansea who killed an iraqi because of his race while out at night, and got jailed for 4 years (this sentence was given last week). he'll be out in 2.

- There will always be cases at the extreme, they do not IMO inform us about the system overall though.