It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Future gang members 'can be spotted at age three'

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Future gang members 'can be spotted at age three'


www.telegraph.co.uk

Theresa May, the Home Secretary, unveiled plans to cut off gang violence at the root by intervening in “problem families” from the moment children are born.

A new Home Office report said the beginnings of teenage violence lie in the “very earliest childhood experience”.
It found warning signs are “already clear” by the time a child enters primary school, including neglect, aggression, absence from class and slow development.
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   
... neglect, aggression, absence from class and slow development

I must profess to some jealousy that teachers in the UK have enough socio-pyscological and developmental psychology acumen to detect behavioral issues that don't manifest themselves until a decade or so later.

I can't say that there aren't statistical models that bear out the theory... but my children aren't theoretical, and should my child be a slow learning, demonstrating frustration and angst in school because of some factor I am unaware of, I am grateful that some unknown teacher can't decide to label him or her as a future criminal.

I don't know what baggage such a stigma might force upon a child as they mature; but I do know that parenting should have more to do with the outcome than a teacher.

Of course, in America we don't ship our kids off for part of the year, which I guess is more common in the UK.

Come UK members, explain to me how this works, and whether you're willing to accept this kind of social engineering as part of the educational system?

www.telegraph.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 4-11-2011 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 02:28 PM
link   
So what's the solution?

Confiscate any kid that resembles these characteristics even remotely from their families and place them in those government run homes?

What a farce.

Yeah kids never change after age 3, at that age they are fully developed and nothing will change that?


# 1) Fire this person.

# 2) They can get a job as a psychic instead since that's their forte'.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


This is just the normal empty BS that spews quite naturally from politicians mouths...

I was thinking, who is going to police this? And how?

In the article Idiot Duncan smith says "Improving “dysfunctional” communication between hospitals, social workers and police is crucial"....lol as a social worker myself I know this is unlikely with a system that is already at breaking point due to lack of funding in infrastructure, low moral, burnout, unrealistically high case loads etc etc etc....

however, "No new money will be available for prevention of gang violence, since riots involving hundreds of gang members blighted London and other UK cities over the summer."....lol

Maybe this will be policed by volunteers from caMoron's big society...lol


Same old Tory rhetoric/dinosaur thinking....




posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Sounds a bit like Minority Report.

Guess they are gonna prosecute 3 year old's before they can commit a crime.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   
oh no....




It found warning signs are “already clear” by the time a child enters primary school, including neglect, aggression, absence from class and slow development.


my little nephew might be a future gangbanger..

going to check if he's packing heat next time


seriously what the hell ?



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars

Of course, in America we don't ship our kids off for part of the year, which I guess is more common in the UK.


Parents in the UK allow their children to be shipped-off for part of the year?

Would you kindly clarify for those of us not familiar with this subject, thank you.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by kneverr

Originally posted by Maxmars

Of course, in America we don't ship our kids off for part of the year, which I guess is more common in the UK.


Parents in the UK allow their children to be shipped-off for part of the year?

Would you kindly clarify for those of us not familiar with this subject, thank you.


Perhaps that was an ignorant way to express the idea. I had thought that many children in the UK go off to schools where they stay through the school year and go home for vacation.... sort of like "Hogwarts" but without the magic....
edit on 4-11-2011 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 03:10 PM
link   
This is easily one of the most foolish things I have read in some time and it clearly lacks some simple thought. How many kids turned to gangs and then got out? How many kids were troublemakers and then grew up and stopped?

When I was a child I was a handful, putting it mildly. I had some real issues myself, I especially was clueless when it came to expressing myself in any type of productive manner. When I was angry, it was even worse. I would just act out or lash out at anything in my path. Eventually the State did get involved and I was institutionalized for a crime I never committed. However the "adults" in my life at that time really believed by having me arrested and placed into the juvenile "justice system" they were doing me a favor.

It didn't work. When you take a kid with issues and has a potential to be violent, has the potential to do criminal acts and place him with a bunch of kids who already do criminal acts and act out violently, you are pretty much dooming that kid to do all the things you were trying to prevent. The child has no choice because acting that way becomes a matter of survival. If you don't act in such a fashion, the other kids will view you as weak and you become a target for them.

I went from being a kid who pretended to drink because my friends were drinking and I didnt want to look like a wuss, to being a kid who did drink, do drugs, take advantage of others. I went from being a kid who tried to avoid fights, to being a kid who looked for fights.

This is nothing more than an example of "pre crime". The state wants to punish people who they feel will one day commit a crime, before they actually commit one.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 04:42 PM
link   
It's simply the police state flexing it's muscles and injecting fear into the populace as a means of control.

It's not just kids, either. They claim now that they can detect future crimes and criminals before a crime even takes place. It's Minority Report in real life. Welcome to Nazi Germany.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 04:53 PM
link   
I don't really get the point of the vast majority of psychological labels out there, but one I fully agree that needs to be focused on is primary psychopathy.

Primary psychopaths are born without the neurobiology to grow a conscience. There are specific biological deviations which can be seen on an MRI.

I think it's in everyone's best interest to tag all the psychopaths out there. They need to be called out, so that they never rise to positions of significant influence, and so we can better study and try to treat their predatory state, and make use of them in a civil way.

Besides the psycho's everyone else should be allowed to grow and try their best to make it, IMO.

Gang members are usually secondary sociopaths. It means that, while they may have more of a "genetic load" towards psychopathy than the average, environmental circumstances were required to bring about the antisocial behavior. It's usually mire of a result of a messed up social system on the whole, than pure genetics.

There are too many gang bangers who wisened up to think that they should be judged so early and condemned to be bad people for the rest of their lives! That's just ignorance.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   
I am not sure how it works in the UK. But in the USA the solution is simple. Legalize ALL drugs, the gangs and cartels will have no reason for recruitment because they will not be making as much money. Less crimes, more study's on drugs so we can find out how we can help these people instead of locking them up. It will take them off the streets so it will be harder for kids to find them. When i was a kid I could find a dime faster then i could get a bottle of beer. I do not think more people would pick up the needle if any thing because they would be legal we would have a massive education burst on these drugs because they would be legal.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   
I dont think this is far fetched at all. I mean psychologist can also use predictive measure for children around this age to determine the likelihood of them developing a mental illness later in life. They dont do this to say 'put that kid on medication.' They use the information to create programs that teach at risk youth resilience skills. These skills have been proven to prevent the development of mental illness.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by acmpnsfal
 


You're talking about Cognitive Behavioral Therapy? Yes, that can help. But you risk a lot of other things when you empower kids against their parents. That's probably a good thing (looking at the case of Judge William Adams for a prime example) but kids need to respect their parents. Do you just rip the kids from their homes? Well, that damages people too. What do you do? You have to treat the whole family. You end up treating all of society. Best method we have for social programming - and we use it all the time - is TV.

We've finally found a good use for that thing.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 05:58 PM
link   
I hear the comments about how ridiculous this all sounds, but I would like to play devils advocate, and use my own expirience to illustrate a very serious and important point.

I went to primary school when I was four and a half years of age. Before I went to that establishment,I was an inquisitive, wide eyed, constantly fascinated child, genuinely ready to learn, and already well engrossed in science, and enthusiastic about learning as much as I could about virtualy everything.

By the time I left primary education at the age of eleven years old, I was interested in one thing. Getting through the day without being kicked half to death by the psychotic , barely homnid creeps in my year, who probably shouldnt have been within two hundred yards of other HUMANS let alone other children. I learned more about self defense in school , than I learned about mathematics, english, science, or anything else for that matter.

There were children in my primary school who were doing hard drugs before they were even ten. Im not from London, or some other heavily developed melting pot. Im from the Thames Estuary, right down on the mouth of the river. Violence, sadism, genuinely horrific levels of inhumanity were par for the course,daily occurances at my school. No one in the place ever got suspended, or excluded, because that would have looked bad when the Ofstead inspectors came to make sure everything was ok at the school.

Fact is, the educational establishment, and the representatives of that establishment on the ground, the teachers and administrators at the school were deliberately oblivious to the barbarity that occured there every day. Its a damned miracle I can even spell my name, so utterly enveloping was the risk posed by other students at the school, and so distracting was that danger.Learning? I got dumber every year I was there! After a year it became clear that someone you have just shared your chocolate bar with, may try to break your nose a moment later, just to be seen to be hard. Thats pretty much gang culture right there. By the time I left that place , you couldnt tell a disruptive, dangerous pupil , from the rest of the class, because near on everyone would play up, just to appear to be one of the gang.

I didnt show up at school violent and sadistic, and Im still not sadistic, or needlessly violent. But that place taught me that some people start out in terrifying circumstances,and use thier own anger to ruin everyone else. You can spend about ten minuites a day , when actually living and attempting to learn, in a school like that, lamenting the awful truth, that these kids mostly do what they do as a cry for help, but when you have to get through a day in the place without needing to mop your own life blood off your face, you have to forget all that and break something to stay safe.

If the government had asked me, when I was six, who I thought was most likely to be in a gang when they were older, I would have turned to the government and said:

"Whats all this, when they are older?? They are already in a gang! Dont believe me? Ok sirs, these are the different bootprints pulled off my nuts after they recieved a serious kicking from a group of thugs in my year... count them... does that look like one set of boot prints??No it doesnt. Thanks for forcing me to go to this crap school, and for not protecting me from sociopathic scum like them."

I knew from a young age who the proper savages were. If a young , frightened little boy could identify these people, I really cannot understand why the question of prevention in early life hasnt been raised more often, or more progressively before.

Dont get me wrong, needless intervention in the lives of families is WRONG, we all know that. But there are some circumstances, in which intervention is not only acceptable but absolutely VITAL. Look at the case of the Bulger killers, Robert Thompson, and Jon Venables. They werent even gang material, but they were more dangerous than bullets for the toddler they killed, and yet the smallest observation of thier lifestyle and family would have lead even a cloth eared, half blind psychologist to call for a wagon and a tranquiliser gun and the preparation of a padded cell.

In moderation and fairness, the governments new plan might actually improve the lot of the kids involved in gangs, or who may join them, and (more importantly in my veiw, since the pack mentality is something I personally would SHOOT people for having) keep innocent parties from having to deal with psychopathy in the classroom, and prevent shootings and stabbings by the thousands a year, IF done properly.
edit on 4-11-2011 by TrueBrit because: Bad grammar, which is probably still terrible. Reasons as outlined above.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars

Originally posted by kneverr

Originally posted by Maxmars

Of course, in America we don't ship our kids off for part of the year, which I guess is more common in the UK.


Parents in the UK allow their children to be shipped-off for part of the year?

Would you kindly clarify for those of us not familiar with this subject, thank you.


Perhaps that was an ignorant way to express the idea. I had thought that many children in the UK go off to schools where they stay through the school year and go home for vacation.... sort of like "Hogwarts" but without the magic....
edit on 4-11-2011 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)


We do have Boarding Schools, but they are incredibly expensive and mostly used by the rich.

The Majority of children in the UK go to a bog standard Primary and Secondary School.

All i have to say about the article at the moment is; Good grief, whatever next


Edit: What was that study they did where kids had specific chromosome structure that they believed is related to psycopathy or antisocial and criminal behaviour? This kind of reminds me of that.

The poor kids don't have a chance being condemned so soon.



edit on 4-11-2011 by skitzspiricy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   
I can tell you without mumbo jumbo if a child will become a gang member from comception.

Look at the area they are born in and life chances they have and where they are rock bottom you will find gang members.

How many street gangs are their in the rich areas?

As usual the politicians and the tories in particular blame the victims or more precisely blame their victims.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 06:06 PM
link   
So I bring that child over to my villiage in UK and he becomes a gang member? Err we have no gangs.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by TheMindWar
 


Exactly. This is just a new take on you can tell a criminal by the shape of his head. Utter nonsense.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 06:15 PM
link   
Reply to post by CosmicEgg
 


Ideally, we would treat the whole family. But often times parents either dont see a problem within themselves or are so stuck in their ways its a lost cause. I mean I dont really see cognitive behavioral therapy as turning kids against their parents. The only way I could see that happening is if the parent has some sort of negative pattern that could infect the child. But in that case its breaking the cycle. But if we could get the idiot box to show things with more substance thought would probably have a huge impact on these things.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join