R.E.S.P.E.C.T.
It seems that Tony Blair has decided that what society needs is a little more respect. Chief among these plans is to improve the quality of parenting in this country.
Now I'm no fan of the Supernanny state, but at the same I can't help but think he's right. Okay, I don't really think legislation is the answer, but it certainly seems that many parents no longer take any responsiblity for their offspring's actions.
My Dad once told me that if he got smacked by a teacher at school and then told his dad, his father's reaction would to give him a smack too. While not advocating the return of coroporal punishment in schools, I can see the point in this. These days parents are more likely to phone a lawyer and try to squeeze as much money out of a school as possible.
Ask old folks and you'll find they believe we should bring back national service. It's not quite the answer though, the reasons marauding packs of thicko teens weren't a problem in the past was that every generation would be packed off to some pointless war to thin out the numbers somewhat.
There's no way I'd like to see the British Army ruined by packing it full of chavs on national service, but there must be something society can do to get rid of the packs of pickeys roaming the street. Minefield clearance sounds like one possible solution. 
Having just read this shocking story I'm inclined to think that we need to lower the age from which criminals can be sent to prison.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Harry on 10/01/06 at 10:33 . Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. |
10/01/06 @ 11:23
The problem with sending young offenders to prison is that the reconviction rate is 75% (compared to 66% for adults). So unless you lock them away for a long time, you're making it more likely they'll make a career out of it. Personally I'm a fan of labour gangs- chain the hoodlums together and get them doing public works like litter clearing.
10/01/06 @ 11:26
I like that idea too. Get them picking up litter in bright pink high-vis suits so everyone knows who they are and why they are there.
10/01/06 @ 12:01
All I want you to do for me
Is give it to me when you get home
Yeah Baby
Whip it to me
When you get home
- whatever 'it' is
10/01/06 @ 12:07
"Whip it to me"
Perhaps you should be telling this to K and not me?
10/01/06 @ 12:27
ROFL!
I'm sick at the moment of all this soundbite politics, all good sounding ideas but no substance. On top of that I'm sick of Cameron coming out a week later saying "I've got a good idea...lets have setting in schools...lets have the real respect agenda...lets change our party colours red" [although the argument is that TB has turned blue].
10/01/06 @ 12:30
I agree, a lot of the blaim has to be laid at the media though. There's a lot less current affairs programming on mainstream primetime television these days.
Remember World in Action, sometimes rubbish, sometimes great, but it was on in primetime on ITV and tackled some big issues - most notably "Death on the Rock".
Can you imagine ITV putting a show on like that now? TV news has become a barage of pointless live linkups where the anchor talks to a colleague who is somewhere else for no discernable reason. It's no wonder that politicians have to condense detailed policy into a few words to get them on TV.
10/01/06 @ 12:34
24 hour news doesn't help, it's as if they are waiting for breaking news to come through, with filler inbetween until it happens. K makes me watch ITV News, it is a bit like being forcefed tabloid news in bite sized pieces.
10/01/06 @ 13:07
Most of the news budget goes on expensive outside broadcasts so correspondents can stand outside something relating to the story- for example a political corresondent standing outside the Houses of Parliment (in the dark and the rain) because he's doing a story on a debate that happened ten hours ago. It's madness.
23/01/06 @ 21:27
"every generation would be packed off to some pointless war to thin out the numbers somewhat"
The title of this post is respect, well please show some, great men died in these war and you are saying it was for little more than "thinning the numbers".
Second, the British army cant be ruined by a bunch of chavs, im a soldier, and people enter like a bunch of hooligans, and they leave much different, national service (or something similar) might just be what this country needs. For the record Im 17.
23/01/06 @ 21:31
Well Pete you didn't read the article right. Of course I don't think war was for thinning out the numbers. However no matter how important and honourable the sacrifice that our troops have made, only a fool would deny many of the wars the UK has been involved with have been completely pointless.
To say WWI was a pointless war does not show lack of respect to the men and women that died in the conflict. They can still be fully honoured, but those that started the war don't have to be. It's a sad fact that brave and honourable men and women are sent to die for self-serving politicians incapable of solving problems other ways.
I am not a total pacifist, I believe there are situations where force is needed. But also times when it is not, this is not the fault of soldier, sailor, airman - it does not make their sacrifice less honourable.
Thanks for your comment though Pete and I enjoyed visiting your Blog.