Police warn parents after mob attacks

#21
I was recently involved in a fracas. 3 chavs mugging a teenager and I stopped to intervene. One gobby little shiit started taunting me with, "Go on hit me and I'll sue" after beating up said teen. He soon changed his tune when 3 other guys came round the corner and evened things up :roll:

Morale of the story, when I gave my evidence to the desk Sgt, he said just as well I didn't hit him as the Super would ensure I was done for assault. He agreed with me about smacking the git but his super would charge :evil:

So where do we go when the law is seen to support these little feckers :?

Now I carry a collapsible baton and will use it next time the little feckers offer me to "Go on hit me!"..SOD THE CONSEQUENCES
 
#22
MrPVRd said:
It's A Clockwork Orange 2005!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1634945,00.html

I do not have the desire to be either a victim of harassment or violence and I am fortunate enough to live in an area that sees little trouble.

However, in the unlikely event of any trouble, I keep to hand a 3 foot long section of wood that handles very much like a baseball bat and that has a legitimate and prominent household function.

And, if placed in an unpleasant situation, I will have no compunction in swinging it with great force and furthermore, in the event of an unsympathetic hearing from the local bobbies, I will refuse to give them any co-operation beyond my name and address and will use all necessary efforts to smear the force (and divisional officers) in the press as soft on crime and tough on householders, whilst waiting for prosecutors to drop the case because of a lack of co-operation and general hassle.

Paranoid or realistic?

Police warn parents after mob attacks
By Lewis Smith

POLICE have urged parents to take greater responsibility for their children’s upbringing and behaviour, after two gang attacks — one of which left a householder needing surgery to rebuild his face.
The man and two neighbours were attacked by 40 youths outside their homes. They had gone to talk to the teenagers, who had begun throwing objects at cars and houses. A row ensued and the men were savagely attacked by members of the group.

Two boys, aged 15 and 16, were arrested on suspicion of violent disorder on Saturday and were released on bail pending further inquiries.

The attack, in Dunston, Northamptonshire, prompted the senior investigating police officer to urge parents to take greater responsibility for their children.

“It is unacceptable that residents should have to put up with this behaviour,” said Superintendent Simon Blatchly. “At least some of the young people in this group have now been involved in serious offences and parents must tell their children in the strongest possible terms that they should not gather on the streets in this way.

“We will be working closely with the agencies involved and using all the powers available to us to deal with these issues, but parents must take on board their key role.”

The 48-year-old man who required facial surgery was taken to Northampton General Hospital. The condition of the other two victims was unclear yesterday. Foot patrols in the area have been increased.

In East Sussex last night detectives were questioning a group of teenagers over the murder of a 40-year-old father of two who was beaten to death outside his home at the weekend.

Police in Hailsham said that this was not a random attack. They believe that the victim, whom neighbours named as Gary Rae, had been in dispute with up to six youths. One police source said that it was believed that he knew his attackers.

The victim was beaten to death but police were still searching a graveyard close to the scene for a weapon used in the attack. He was found bleeding and slumped at the back of a shop near to his home.

The main street in the market town remained sealed off as forensic teams continued their search.

Local families have complained that groups of youths have turned the high street of the town into a “no-go” area after dark. Martin Tillman, 55, a teaching assistant, said: “There are so many gangs of lads around of an evening and there is always vandalism taking place. It is a no-go area and people keep out of town.”

Mr Tillman said that the police presence was not high enough to deter rowdy gangs of youths from congregating in the town centre.

GANG VICTIMS

April 23 Mi Gao Huang Chen, a takeaway owner in Wigan, died after he was hit with metal pipes when confronted by 20 youths

April 30 Saad Ilhim Mohiuddin, 24, was attacked by a gang in the West End of London and left to die

May 14 Teenagers beat David Douglas, 25, to death with a plank of wood in Edinburgh

May 16 Phil Carroll suffered severe head injuries after confronting youths who threw a stone at his car in Salford

May 19 Alan Irwin, 72, was battered to death by two youths while walking home in High Wycombe

May 21 A policeman was beaten unconscious with an iron bar by a gang of youths in Leeds

It seems Britain and its way of life, our security and the very fabric of our society is under threat by this mindless gangs of thugs. I'd venture to say that incidents like these have been going on for a long time... right back through numerous administrations. Ok, it's got worse gradually, but what's the root cause of it? Don't let's pin all the blame on the present incumbent, Bliar. He is only partly responsible. These thugs ARE out there causing chaos, but let's get a focussed plan of action, because this needs careful targetting. We need to actually collar the ringleaders and bring them in for serious questioning - something along the lines of:

Why do you fill your newspapers with these sorts of stories?
Why do you gang up on and make scapegoats out of minorities and people who are less able to defend themselves?
Why don't you report the news in a responsible and more accurate way?
Why do you focus on 'news' that only succeeds in promoting your newspapers' circulation?

This has to be the only way forward, surely?
 
#23
These 'people' are only "less able to defend themselves" when faced with violence. Until then, they are most definitely not the victims. Even bearing in mind that these scum are currently a minority, does that mean that their effect should be ignored, for fear of rocking the boat? That is exactly why these little buggers can literally get away with murder.

Oh and 'we' don't report news. In fact, the attitude of this site to journalists is openly hostile, as far as I have seen.

P.S, why is it "our society," "our way of life" at the beginning of your post, (suggesting that you are British), and "Why do YOU gang up on..blah blah whine moan...?" (suggesting you aren't British) Just curious - your post seems to make little sense. The only way forward is for people to stop worrying about the 'feelings' of minorities in spite of blatant guilt, and get on with bringing them into line.
 
#24
frenchperson said:
Why do you fill your newspapers with these sorts of stories?
Why do you gang up on and make scapegoats out of minorities and people who are less able to defend themselves?
Why don't you report the news in a responsible and more accurate way?
Why do you focus on 'news' that only succeeds in promoting your newspapers' circulation?

This has to be the only way forward, surely?
And what about those victims whose stories do not find the headlines? Telling the papers to "stop"; this, IMHO, will not deter these so-called feral yobs carrying out these acts of mindless violence
 
#25
Morale of the story, when I gave my evidence to the desk Sgt, he said just as well I didn't hit him as the Super would ensure I was done for assault. He agreed with me about smacking the git but his super would charge

So where do we go when the law is seen to support these little feckers
A suggestion:

Try contacting the local rag to generate a story with the headline "zero tolerance for the law-abiding".

The police will be required to supply the details of the Sgt who took the evidence and the Super can be identified.

When the Super gets it in the neck from the police authority and the Chief, he might rethink his approach.

Local journos love any local story that may prove controversial.

Also: if violence is required, give no evidence beyond the name and address. Chances are the CPS/procurator will drop it, especially if the case is dragged out. This happened to someone in uniform I know, whose lawyer knew how to play the system!
 
#26
sarnian said:
These 'people' are only "less able to defend themselves" when faced with violence. Until then, they are most definitely not the victims. Even bearing in mind that these scum are currently a minority, does that mean that their effect should be ignored, for fear of rocking the boat? That is exactly why these little buggers can literally get away with murder.

Oh and 'we' don't report news. In fact, the attitude of this site to journalists is openly hostile, as far as I have seen.

P.S, why is it "our society," "our way of life" at the beginning of your post, (suggesting that you are British), and "Why do YOU gang up on..blah blah whine moan...?" (suggesting you aren't British) Just curious - your post seems to make little sense. The only way forward is for people to stop worrying about the 'feelings' of minorities in spite of blatant guilt, and get on with bringing them into line.

It doesn't make sense because you're not quite reading it as I'd intended - It tends to spoil it somewhat when you explain it, but the gang of thugs I was referring to in my post is Murdoch, Associated Newspapers, Rebekah wade et al.

I think I've been reading Private Eye far too long.
 
#28
MrPVRd said:
Vigilante groups, armoured land rovers, black nomex suits, scary helmets, batons. Break some of the little $hits, and scare the rest into spending their time playing chess and crocheting tea-cosies.
In my more misanthropic moments, I have considered the feasibility of petrol-bombing large and intimidating gangs of youths.

Points in favour:

1. These weapons can be employed for shock value without causing significant risk to life, if thrown at an appropriate spot (ie downwind and not close enough to splash).

2. The evidence will largely destroy itself.

3. Everyone has bottles and most people have access to petrol.

4. If a Buckfast bottle is employed and the grenadier is appropriately garbed (disposable "hoodie") then another gang will be blamed.

5. It will scare the living daylights out of anyone on the receiving end!

Points against:

1. It is really not the sort of thing I would want to do.

2. If the police got wind that it was the action of a "concerned citizen" rather than a local thug, then no effort would be spared to find the culprit. Conversely, if it was suspected to be the work of a thug, then the cops would't give a t0ss!

3. If caught, the sanctions could be severe and a policy of non-co-operation and evidence destruction might not prove sufficient.

The verdict: A weapon of last resort, if life is really being made miserable and dangerous.
Funny you should mention that, MrPVRD, because I was thinking of improvising a flamethrower out of a nine litre fire extinguisher and taking it down the park.. :twisted:
 
#29
Du Lai,

''Sod the consequences'' will put you in Gaol, plain and simple.

It is wrong, I agree, but if you carry a baton, and worse still, use it, then these w'anchors will put you in Gaol.

They have nothing to lose, being scumbags who have most likely been in prison and their lives are already fcuked.

and then when you get out, you'll have to find a way to pay the money you owe them for compensation.

but if you do hit them (not with an illeagal weapon) it needs to be justified e.g. preventing the attack on the other kid, protecting yourself

and if the 'Super' at the local nick wants to charge you, well let him, it'll fall down at court and he'll look a prat.
 
#30
hogspawn said:
Du Lai,

''Sod the consequences'' will put you in Gaol, plain and simple.

It is wrong, I agree, but if you carry a baton, and worse still, use it, then these w'anchors will put you in Gaol.

They have nothing to lose, being scumbags who have most likely been in prison and their lives are already fcuked.

and then when you get out, you'll have to find a way to pay the money you owe them for compensation.

but if you do hit them (not with an illeagal weapon) it needs to be justified e.g. preventing the attack on the other kid, protecting yourself

and if the 'Super' at the local nick wants to charge you, well let him, it'll fall down at court and he'll look a prat.
Totally agree. If it is a Casco type baton, they actually can be quite lethal.
 
#32
frenchperson said:
It seems Britain and its way of life, our security and the very fabric of our society is under threat by this mindless gangs of thugs. I'd venture to say that incidents like these have been going on for a long time... right back through numerous administrations. Ok, it's got worse gradually, but what's the root cause of it?
Because IMO there seems to be more laws and rules for the protection or benefit of the offender than the victim. There has even been cases reported of prisoners launching a civil case against their victim for injury sustained! (Prisoners! The cheek!) One being the Tony Martin incident for example. Someone here has already quoted that on approach to one chav, they said 'hit me and I'll sue' :roll: They knowtheir rights!! And if it had happened, I bet evens that it would have at least been brought to court. I recall that I had to look in a property on a notorious estate and in my report after I mention to the local authority that (having been a victim of crime before) I had to carry a 'type of spray' with me for my own protection to which they responded that they wouldn't allow in their buildings anymore if I continued! So they would rather me to get knocked about instead!!

With regards to leaving the post-activities of a crime to the police, you tend to either find pointless plods coming to your aid long after it has been committed or on the other hand (and a rarity in regards to my own area) sympathetic plods who have their hands tied by superiors or the task of mountains of paperwork to look forward too for the most 'minor' incidents and do not wish to indulge further with investigation when they know they'll be stuck behind a desk for hours.
You also have to look at the criminal court judges who only now seem to make an example of an offender whereas before they too at times are restricted by statute law for the length of sentence they can give and only if it fitted a particular circumstance (like death by dangerous driving cases). I hope the latter will develop into definite precedent for other judges to follow suit.

If its says tough on crime, and it looks tough on crime, then it getting tough on crime. Bliar says it but adopts a softly softly approach. Apart from parental responsibility, laws need made stronger to incorporate the many activities these ba$tards are getting away with - which will not happen if the government is headed by someone who wants to be seen as backing everyone's argument or innovation including treehuggers, dogooers, social services etc. Unless you know criminal law, or any of the laws for that matter, you won't know of the half of rights and loopholes that can help you.

Pity something couldn't be enacted as in a similar timing as the terrorism bill, I suppose it isn't such an urgency. Yet.
 
#33
Rubber mallet in each car and baseball bat by side of bed.

Defence for mallet will be 'if I had intended to kill him it would have been metal'

Defence for baseball bat would be ' in my house with my wife and child and they get everything they deserve'

Youngsters no longer play by the rules. Notice how most who are being attacked are seriously hurt when scroats get them on the floor. The pack mentality sets in then and the group attacks.
 
#34
Not_Whistlin_Dixie said:
There would be fewer of these outrages if the young monsters had a well-founded dread of being shot by their intended victims.
I'm reluctant to agree with you, since the average gun-owner I know is NOT an informed, responsible, registered NRA member. I abhor gun violence...and there's too much of it in my neck of the woods.

However. It seems like there is less British-style random group violence in the States because of the gun factor. Chances are pretty high that kindly Mr. Cho at your corner convenience store has a loaded sawed-off behind the counter, so the average punk kid doesn't go there. And there's something like a 70% chance that a felon will be killed attempting a home-invasion robbery. There aren't any real consequences attached to shooting an intruder in your home or place of business, either.

On the other hand, there are far fewer gun-related mass murders or accidental child deaths in the UK... :?
 

Top