If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Aged 16-25? Share your experience of using the discussion boards and receive a £25 voucher! Take part via text-chat, video or phone. Click here to find out more and to take part.
Options
Comments
You said it's ok to discriminate because of age. That's a shitty attitude towards young people. What about homeless drunks lying on the street who give hassle, should they be "moved on"?
You make it sound as though every young person hanging outside a shop is looking to cause trouble, and don't come back with this "you don't know where I live or grew up" shite. I grew up in a rough area, if you keep yourself to yourself then you'll be fine.
Which doesn't solve crime but moves it on somewhere else. You're the one who's missing the point.
You're absolutely right, however looking at it from another perspective, it prevents someone who has been a victim of crime, becoming a victim again.
At the end of the day, we all look out for number 1. People, for whatever reason lose faith with the police's ability to control the problem or to prevent it.
They see an advert for a device that discourages youths from hanging around outside, so they buy it.
Overnight, the youths are no longer there. The last thing on that person's mind will be "I wonder where they went", and they certainly won't be giving a shit about the poor sod who now has to live with them.
People are selfish, and I suspect a few people here, if they'd been having the same problems would be feeling the same way as the hypothetical example above.
On the contary, I can visualise youths who are not too pleased about the infernal device putting the windows through of anyone who has it installed on a regular basis as revenge. Can't you?
That's a strange outlook. Not all people are selfish, in fact there's an argument to be made that humans are altruistic beings. The very fact I'm against this and advocate long term solutions to anti-social behaviour will show this.
I thought that as well. In my experience of unruly teens, they don't take too kindly to being targetted like this. It probably won't be long till we start hearing about people being targetted themsevles for using these devices.
My one year old isn't a yob, neither did she do this to that man.
Why should she be subjected to this noise?
She cannot walk by, because she cannot walk, and as I cannot hear it I can't move her away. If I don't know that there is a problem apart from her distress, how can I affect it? So tell me what she has done which deserves such a punishment?
You thinks it's acceptable to discriminate against all youths in an area where most of the anti social behavoiur is committed by youths.
So by that very same logic you must think that it's acceptable to discriminate against all blacks in an area where the majority of crime is commited by blacks?
No more waffle and bullshit about hypothetical questions. There are areas in the country where a disproportionally high amunt of crime is commited by blacks.
You answer is that the end justifies the means. Why you think that is applicable to age but not to race? Why is ageism OK and Race wrong?
EVERYBODY else understands the question. Either you have a seriously hard time understand such a simple concept or you are dodging the question because you know you lack the ability to answer it properly. Which is it?
What thread have you been reading? Those two points have been made numerous times in the first few pages.
It's a repeat of what's been said becauswe you havn't addressed the question that's been repeated a dozen times now. You won't get far in debate if you can't explain why you think what you do?
Again a simple question. Why is agesim OK, and racism wrong?
I would if my Xbox wasn't with microsoft gettign repaired. :mad:
I get the distinct feeling he is avoiding the question because, quite simply he feels you are all trying to twist it and accuse him of being a racist.
Aladdin, the devices do work very effectively in their limited capacity, in that they cause the youths to stop hanging around near them. Yes, they move on and cause problems elsewhere, which leads me on to Yerascrote.
Yera, I'm not going to post pictures of victims of so called mob-rule, or the results of yobs getting the upper hand over people, you've all seen them. And I agree, that most people are altruistic.
But, in my day to day duties I talk to all sorts of people who are just like you and me. They aren't all old grumps, they aren't miserable people. They are normal, hardworking people who for whatever reason have started to be targetted in their home.
What i'm driving at is, yes you can claim to be altruistic and to love your fellow man or whatever, but if push comes to shove, you've been kept a virtual prisoner in your own home for months on end, you've had windows broken, someone has tried to set your home on fire and threatened to kill you, you will do whatever it takes to protect yourself, your family and your property.
If that means installing a box that irritates people then so be it, but that is what people will do, regardless of where the problem will move to.
I'm not going to begin advocating the widespread use of these boxes, or that they come anywhere close to being a long-term solution to the problem as a whole. But, when you've been subjected to some of the shit i've seen people subjected to, you won't give a hoot about long term solutions to a community wide problem. You'll care more about stopping your windows being done in again.
I very much doubt it's racism, rather than hypocrisy.
Well he's wrong. I'm relying on the hope that he isn't a racist and that he understands why racism is wrong.
If he can see the wrong in descriminating against skin colour, I'm hoping he can see the wrong in discriminating aginst age.
If he believes that a curfew implemented against blacks even in areas where a disproportionally high amount of crime is commited by blacks is unacceptable how can he believe this is acceptable.
Matt, do you understand why discrimination against race is wrong? Or are you just against it because you don't want to be called a racist?
Can you explain why it's ok to single out the youth, but not ork to single out race?
this is a really good point
Oh for crying out loud, they're not saying it's 'ok'. It's obviously not 'ok'. They're saying that in a lot of areas it is necessary because our government is failing in it's most fundamental duty which is to protect us. If your hypothetical race situation were real then it would be racist. You're trying to connect the negative feelings attached to racism with 'ageism', and it's a flawed analogy because they are not the same thing. They don't carry the same weight. You're just going to have to accept that people do not think that the one is as bad as the other, and they're valid in thinking that because one is indeed worse than the other. This device discriminates on the basis of age alone, which means people of all races in that age range. To discriminate against a race, would mean discriminating against people of all ages within that race. Which is worse. A race is a class of people in its own right, an age group is only ever a subclass of ALL peoples. Race is more fundamental, and it is static, it does not change. I'm not saying that this therefore means that the one kind of discrimination is not 'ok' whereas the other one is, but you all keep going on about it as if they're the same bloody thing, as if they're of the same class, and as if to insinuate that therefore Matt and Whowhere are pretty much, more or less, basically as bad as racists for seeing that this device is by no means desirable, but is in some cases necessary. Althought neither is a good thing, the two are not equivalent.
I don't think these devices should be used, because they are indiscriminate - in the sense that they target the innocent as well as the ones causing the trouble - not because they're 'ageist'. However they shouldn't have to be used in the first place. People shouldn't have to take the law into their own hands like this, because the government should be protecting them, because fathers ought to be with their families and parents ought to teach their kids right from wrong. Your anger should be directed in that direction, not at the people who have been forced to protect themselves. You should understand the fact that they've been pushed into it by the circumstances they find themselves in. Do you think they would actually resort to this if they had a viable alternative?
Aye, it is. And what have the people being terrorised by yobs done to deserve the punishment they're getting? They cannot be blamed for thinking about themselves when they've been given no other option but to do so. Atleast you can walk away. If she's distressed are you going to just stand there in the middle of the street? No, you'll move away, and she'll no longer be distressed. The people being terrorised can't move away, not half as easily anyway.
I'd be a total idiot if I even thought that a way to keep Albanians stop standing in a place for too long would be a good idea.
It's not hypothetical though. Black people are six times more likely to be stopped than white people, according to Home Office figures. That's a racist policy.
They're both forms of discrimination. It's a perfect anology for highlighing your hypocracy. I don't see how you can't grasp that.
Not with you. But they should. It's only because people are more afraid of being called a racist.
No I don't. What an absurd thing to say.
What a load of crap. They are as bad as each other.
It's only the fact that racism has been such a bigger issue throughout history that you believe it to be worse. Discrimination is discrimination, and it's as bad for everybody at the end of it - whether they be black, young, old, ginger, muslim etc etc.
No their anger should be directed at the police and appropriate authorites if nothing is being done. It's not for the public to set up devices that target all youths because a minority of them behave badly.
Do you understand why it is wrong to discriminate by race?
I don't think you do.
Maybe you should ask all of the people in their late 50's who are looking for jobs whether they're as bad as each other. The only difference is that ageism is more likely to be highlighted by the media if old people are the victims, sexism is more likely to be highlighted if women are the victims, and racism is more likely to be highlighted if minority races are the victims. Don't assume that because certain issues are covered more in the media, people care about them more, because anyone with two brain cells to rub together would be just as disapproving of racism against white people, sexism against men and ageism against young people.
You know, as a member of our law enforcement agencies, you should be on here telling us how you feel ashamed that people will go to those lengths rather than defending them.
And here's another one. Why is it okay to discriminate? Whether that is on grounds of age, race, religion, hair colour, weight whatever... why is it okay to treat a whole sector of society in a lesser way because of who they are rather than what they have done?
Perhaps you can tell me why my one year old deserves to be treated like this?
As a Tory supporter you really aren't on steady grounds when talking about "family values" are you - didn't you learn anything from the Major years?
These lengths? They're not installing gun turrets, bit of an exaggeration there I feel.
As for ashamed, it's the wrong word. People SHOULDN'T have to feel the need to want to install them, the problems shouldn't exist in the first place, and the places where they are installed indicate that the police haven't exactly been doing a first rate job (btw we don't have any on our area....;))
But, some people are obviously desperate enough to want to install them, and like I said if they are given a choice between protecting themselves, or not, despite the problem being forced elsewhere, they will do so.
And no, they shouldn't make a device that distuingshes on race, because when it comes to comitting crime, race is not an issue. Black people aren't any more likely to commit a crime than a white person.
In some areas they are.
Why is it wrong to discriminate by Whowhere?
None of you have. Do you actually understand why discriminating on basis of race wrong Matt? Answer it ffs!
Within the answer you'll find the same reasons as to why it's wrong to discriminate on the basis of age.
I can hear it click on and off but nowt in between!
So in areas where the majority of crime is commited by black people, targetting stop and searches is acceptable?