« Britain still on course for hung parliament | Main | Any questions for you? »

Comments

high-profile initiatives

I believe that the phase you are looking for is "cheap gimmick". It is disgraceful that headline-seeking stunts such as this 'amnesty' are still able to dominate the newspaper headlines when there is a huge underlying problem in our society which we need as Conservatives to address.

We need to be more vocal on social issues. As part of the 'happiness' agenda, I'd suggest that we include the pleasure of not getting knifed.

Actually, they reckon 40,000 weapons were handed in at the 1995 knife amnesty, and knife-related crime figures fell in some areas.

Knives, like guns, are not the problem in themselves. The problem is that gangs of poorly educated and fatherless feral youths are left to roam the streets with impunity. Liam Fox's analysis during the leadership election about a broken society was right - and IDS' compassionate response to the problem is sensible too. The government has lost the will to do anything about this issue (or indeed anything at all, it seems!) but we need DD and the Cameroons to show that what the media perceives as the new fluffy Tory Party is more than "just warm words and positive PR" and that it will tackle tough issues such as these. Not only will it keep the Right onside, it is the right thing to do as well.

Sam - I am not too convinced by knife amnestys. The fact has to be that if you are intent on carrying a knife you aren't going to hand it in.Plus how can you legislate for what are frankly the law abiding minority. We all have knives in our house for legitimate use in the kitchen which quite frankly would be lethal in the wrong hands. Can you stop selling these implements - I don't think so.

As a starter we need to have sentencing which reflects the seriousness of the offence of carrying a concealed weapon.

Its a wider problem. My own kitchen contains enough really sharp cooking knives to dispatch a human being. I am cutting up meat. I do not want me to join the steak on my board. So it goes back to values in the home? The cultural background of the knife wielding thugs? These huge knives, like machetes, also have a benign use. My best mate is a Trinidadian. When I go over there, the gardner is weeding with one, the water melon seller is deftly slicing one for you with one, the fresh coconut seller is bisecting one for "de coconut water" with one, and darkly, the abusive husband attacks his wife with one. They were stamping down on that when I was last there a few years ago however. But they are everywhere.
The trick is, to change the culture of knives, and that means draconian punishment for misusing one.

Well indeed, and it is not like a 3-inch blade wouldn't do any damage if used in certain ways - why stop it at that length?

When I lived in the Caribbean until recently men were frequently carrying machetes around to tend to the foliage by the side of the "roads". I don't recall anyone going nuts with the machetes. It is, as Annabel says, a matter of the values of the machete or knife wielder.

Annabel 9:54

Raises an interesting point. I know of one middle aged woman who in a fit of rage went for her adulterous husband with a kitchen knife when he provoked her whilst they were actually in the kitchen, thankfully he put his hand in the way so all that I had to do when he ended up at my front door was take him to hospital to be stitched up, rather than call the police to what could have easily been a murder. The wife was absolutely shocked by what she had done and couldn't really recall what had gone on.

So it just goes to show that not all knifings are carried out by "feral youths" and the like, indeed there are probably many such cases as the one that I have described.

As we say in Latin:

Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

For those of you who didn't do to Eton: "When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults"

Knife amnesty, eh? There is nothing new under the sun.

British culture is traditionally very anti-knife, even amongst those inclined to violence - you see that in the relative lack of stabbing deaths when football hooligans battle, or in pub brawls. Knife culture as such is a relatively new thing here, partly the result of immigration - in many parts of the world knife-carrying is routine; here men don't even carry 1" utility knives, at work I once had to lend an electrician my pocket knife (a gift from my American wife) so he could cut some gaffer tape! I don't know if political leadership can change the new knife culture, but that's where the problem lies.

I did not go to Eton but did do Latin at my comprehensive. I think "proscript" looks incorrectly declined.

Shoes with metal toecaps can be quite effective weapons too. Why not an amnesty for handing them in? Also cans of beer. One was flung at me once from the top of the roadbridge that crosses Charing Cross in Glasgow, and would have killed me had it made contact with my head.

I despair of this government. It will never move on from eye-catching gimmicks. What is needed is a deep and serious conversation, first about *who* is committing these appalling crimes against the person; why has it risen so dramatically in recent times? The Observer had a fascinating article yesterday disproving the oft-repeated Home Office claim that violence against the person has been going down. I have ideas but they are evidence-less, suffice to say that they are more to do with zeitgeist than any particular weapon. The teenager who attacked me on the Regents Canal towpath on a sunny afternoon recently, while I was doing nothing more threatening than jogging between London Fields and Angel, was acting because he was permitted to do so, and something in his culture must be encouraging that. Hearing from people who work with young children - like that fantastic woman from Kidscape - would be a more worthwhile use of Civil Service time than prattling on about where to put the red wheelie bin for the knife amnesty deposits.

Our culture is dying, all around us. You can't even call it an underclass anymore, because it's so endemic. A tiny proportion of non-violent people are left, and we timidly and nervously pooter about on buses and pavements, desperately trying not to make eye contact with anyone under 30 or with anyone in a group of more than two children.

Graeme

Well said. People only behave in the way in which they feel they will be permitted to behave. The appalling robbery and violence we see in our society today has had a very long period of gestation. Politicians, academics and the media have consistently undermined what a civilsed society can expect of its citizens. Even if it is possible, remedying this situation will take years.

Esbonio, you are entirely correct: 'proscripti'. My apologies.

Graeme Archer raises a very valid point. The government is cynically playing on the politics of fear. There are residential no-go zones for the police now - partially through local intimidation and partially because it is much easier to arrest middle-class people when their compost heap breaks EU regulations. This must stop.

We need an end to these amnesty gimmicks. I really hope that IDS has some good ideas up his sleeve because encouraging social inclusion is a big part of our way forward. However we also still need to be hard on law and order - it's been good to see some strong comments in the media on this front recently.

Forgive me for having a Simon Heffer moment here, but surely this problem should be addressed by working to tackle the long-term root cause of it - namely, the ongoing breakdown of social order in this country?

Short-term initiatives like knife amnesties are all very well for grabbing the headlines and producing another set of statistics that Tony Blair can chant at PMQs (insert rounded-up number here knives have been handed over, etc) to maintain the false impression that Labour is tackling crime.

However, if this problem is to be tackled properly, we could do worse than addressing the two key causal factors in the breakdown of social order:
- the constant watering-down of British laws (and the sentencing of those who break those laws) to pander to hand-wringing liberals;
- the erosion of discipline in schools and in the home.

You only have to listen to any of the local radio stations to see how crime isn't under control. This weekend - another 3 stabbings in Nottingham (that we know of). I just remain to be convinced that a knife amnesty would have meant these incidents wouldn't have happened

Many very good points have been made but unfortunately mending a broken society is going to take time, especially as it is going to be a while before we are back in power.
We can however demand now (i) that more police are put on the beat in inner city areas, (ii) that people selling knives to the under 16s be sought out and prosecuted and (iii), as there have been several high profile knifings outside the school gates in recent times, police be put on duty there with scanners, so they can confiscate knives in addition to the existing amnesty.

Graeme:
"Shoes with metal toecaps can be quite effective weapons too. Why not an amnesty for handing them in?"

I think knives are different, in the ease with which they can often inflict lethal wounds. You can be completely unarmed and still kill someone, if you're determined enough, but many knifing deaths are from a single stab wound to eg the thigh, where it's unlikely the assailant was seriously trying to commit murder. And knives create fear in the law-abiding majority (and it is a majority) in a different manner than beer cans and steel-capped boots. I'm a 5'9" male, I'm not going to be seriously scared of two 5' tall 13 year olds with boots or even beer cans, but if they have knives I will have a legitimate worry about being stabbed.

What price anyone now being willing to intervene in a fight - or remonstrate against anti-social behaviour on a train, for instance - when the person you confront may pull a knife on you?

It is time to re-arm the population, permitting the licensed bearing of small-arms. Obtaining such weapons is no problem for the criminal fraternity, so one can hardly justify the situation where only the law-abiding and responsible are deprived access to them.

Certainly, the average toe-rag might then be less inclined to pull a knife when the consequence could be an acute case of lead poisoning.

Esbonio:
"Politicians, academics and the media have consistently undermined what a civilsed society can expect of its citizens."

I agree with this. The Economist had a piece recently which showed that the big difference between the UK and other countries in regards anti-social behaviour, such as a group of 14 year olds vandalising a bus stop, is that in Britain we the citizenry will not intervene to stop it when we see it, because we are scared. We are scared of two things:

1. Those committing the ABO will attack us.

2. The authorities will not support us.

We feel that if we take a stand we're in as much danger from the State as from the 'feral kids'. The feral kids know this too, that their 'rights' (to vandalise free of interference) are what the State gives precedence to. Who's going to risk getting stabbed to make a citizen's arrest of a vandal if you think that when you get to the police station the police will arrest _you_ for assaulting a minor? This is a relatively new phenomenon, in about 15-20 years we have created a society where it's believed that State authority is basically on the side of the criminal against the citizenry. Until that can be reversed Britain's enormously high level of street crime will continue.

ABO - should have been ASB for Anti-Social Behaviour.

"Who's going to risk getting stabbed to make a citizen's arrest of a vandal if you think that when you get to the police station the police will arrest you for assaulting a minor?" 13:02

Very valid point, not to mention the possibility of being violently assaulted by the parents.

Following on from my 13:27 post, it will be interesting to see if and when somebody is found guilty of the Virgin Train knife murder, what the Judge's recommendation for time in prison will be, as that will send a message.....of sorts.

"Very valid point, not to mention the possibility of being violently assaulted by the parents."

Good point - feral parents are as much a problem as feral kids, and this is generally not the single mother, but the biological father threatening anyone who intervenes with his child's right to vandalise property.

This is one of those problems that is hugely difficult to get a grip on. So, the Government decides to throw the amnesty gimmick at the problem. I can't say I'm surprised

It is not possible to restrict the supply of knives so it is pointless declaring an amnesty. If someone wants to stab someone or simply carry a knife, then I am sure that everyone has an ample stash of kitchen knives to choose from.

People in favour of an amnesty point to the fact that we ought to be getting the most dangerous knives off the street. But with the availability of weapons such as these at such cheap prices, what is the point. (see link)http://www.blades-uk.com/view_items.php?cat_id=81

"This is one of those problems that is hugely difficult to get a grip on."

Not it isn't, when you diagnose the problem correctly. What we are suffering from is the misapprehension that the police are responsible for law and order and that we "civilians" are merely passive bystanders.

It should be recognised that it is the duty of everyone to engage, to which effect the police are merely our paid servants in a joint endeavour. That is why, without flippancy, I advocate the re-arming of the population.

Weapons should not be the monopoly of either the police or the criminals - we have a duty and a right to protect ourselves and our own and, similarly, have a right to the means to achieve this.

I disagree with you on this Richard.

Step 1 must be for the government to make the public safe, not arm the public and shift the responsibility onto them.
Step 2 is to tackle the root causes.

I am a big supporter of respect camps (combining the 'boot camp' harshness with educational/respect elements too - see a US camp here) for offences that currently receive the 'blind eye'. It is punishment without criminal conviction, but it gets progressively harder and for those who do not learn, then it will progress to criminal conviction.

I would simply make possession of an offensive weapon an instant respect camp punishment.

Thatcher acted tough to save the economy, but the tough challenge now is society. We need to act fair but tough to make Britain a thoroughly unpleasant place to commit crime in.

So who will rise to the challenge? We have a totally incompetent Labour party and, well, anyone who would be prepared to entrust law and order to the LibDems needs locking up themselves

Only conservatives have the backbone to address these issues, but I can't see the backbone to rise to the challenge with Cameron as he tip-toes towards the LibDems.

I know 'discipline' and 'punishment' sound terribly old-fashioned but we need strong doses of them right now to stop the rot in its tracks.

No amount of liberal rhetoric will achieve step 1 of protecting the public.

"It should be recognised that it is the duty of everyone to engage, to which effect the police are merely our paid servants in a joint endeavour. "

I couldn't agree more but that is precisely why I feel this is a tough issue to get a grip on. Part of the problem is that people feel no longer able to engage in the protection of their communities. This is why I say the problem is so difficult to get a grip on. People are frightened to "engage." This has much to do with the relationship that the the police now enjoys with the civilians of this country. The police are no longer seen as the protectors of ordinary law abiding people, but are now seen as more akin to neutral umpires saddled with bureaucracy. This has been this major attitude change as a result of the policies of sucessive governments. People are now frightened of being arrested themselves if they challenge criminals. People have lost faith in a system that they see as having more regard for the human rights of criminals then for themselves. You can argue about whether this truly is the case, but at the end of the day this is very much how a lot of people feel. This has so much to do with the reason people increasingly look to the protection of their communities as the sole responsibly of the police, rather than a shared task of their community at large with the police as the supportive enforcers of the law. These changes have occured slowly over time, to the point that the criminal justice system has become a laughing stock. The reason I say that this is an incredibly difficult issue to get a grip on is because it is incredibly hard to get people to engage in the protection of their communities because of what the CJS has become and has been seen to become. This "joint endeavour," to which you nobly refer, is a thing of the past. I wish it wasn't, but it would require more than a simple attitude adjustment of the public, as you imply.

When I was a kid we all had knives but we would never have dreamt of using them to stab or kill people. Usually we wittled bits of wood with them or in the case of my sister tried to collect rubber from an apple tree (she read about rubber trees in a book). No I'm sorry none of this is to do with knives or guns or matches or baseball bats or bricks etc etc....it is about what is in the heads of more and more people,

Matt

I remember when I was on my university year abroad in Russia about three years back, the streets felt and were dangerous, and my instinctive reaction was to go to the local market and buy a big pen knife. I remember being extremly concerned about being able to open it rapidly with mitts on.
Why was my instinctive reaction to buy a knife? I had done two years of Aikido at university, a martial art which among other things concentrates a lot on disarming people with knives.
The point is that streetwise people from working class backgounds in britain would have the sort of knowledge which I acquired in a more theoretical sense in Aikido: namely that no one messes with someone with a knife. In fact no one who knows anything will mess with you if you have a knife even if he has three mates with him. Knives are the ultimate deterrent: they are right B*****ds to deal with.
What I am getting at is that as long as our young live in such an agressive school culture, they will carry knives because they are the ultimate life insurance against multiple attackers. They then get carried away and use them offensively. If you ban knives they will carry razors, in fact young girls in comprehensives already do from what I hear.
What we have to deal with is the extremely aggressive culture: taking out the knives/blades will be impossible otherwise. In my humble opinion.

"Part of the problem is that people feel no longer able to engage in the protection of their communities. This is why I say the problem is so difficult to get a grip on. People are frightened to "engage.""

Less frightened if they have a 45 cal on their person. One should not fall for the police propaganda that fighting crime and disorder is best left to the "professionals". We have let them have their head for decades and look where this has got us.

Neither is it a "noble sentiment" to argue that crime-fighting is a joint enterprise. Look up Peel's nine principles of policing. The "sentiment" I offer is core to this.

If we want to get crime under control we have to get our laws back under control. That means repealing the HRA and leaving the ECHR. Cameron says he is unwilling to contemplate that. So where does that leave us?

William:
"If we want to get crime under control we have to get our laws back under control."

Interesting that Clive Anderson on his Radio 4 show this morning actually raised (albeit weakly) the question of the incompatibility of our legal tradition with that of the Civil-law based ECHR. Of course this was poo-poohed by most of the panel, only Lord Hoffman seemed to have any insight, but at least it was good to hear this finally aired in public.

"That means repealing the HRA and leaving the ECHR. Cameron says he is unwilling to contemplate that. So where does that leave us?"

Of course, because all the countries of Europe are suffering from crime in exactly the same way we are... oh... wait a minute...

Mike:
"Of course, because all the countries of Europe are suffering from crime in exactly the same way we are... oh... wait a minute..."

As I've said before, the HRA & ECHR have a deleterious effect on our adversarial Common-law legal system in a way which doesn't apply in other, Civil-law, jurisdictions.

The comments to this entry are closed.

#####here####

Categories

ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:
      Name:
      Email:
      Subscribe    
      Unsubscribe 

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker