Michael
Oct 19th 2008, 07:22 PM
'Have-a-go heroes' an increasing rarity in a Britain that has developed Robocop justice system, says report
Published Date: 02 September 2008
By Tanya Thompson
Social Affairs Correspondent
BRITAIN has become a nation of "passive bystanders" with fundamental changes needed on policing and criminal justice to tackle the issue, a report warns today.
The study, by the independent think tank, Reform, finds that the public are uninformed about crime and unlikely to participate in maintaining justice.
According to the report, Britons believe antisocial behavior is a matter for the police, where as other countries see it as the role of parents, teachers and the community.
In a 36-page report entitled The Lawful Society, Reform says Britain has the most expensive criminal justice system in the world but that over-centralization is failing to deliver results.
It also says the "have-a-go hero" is an increasing rarity, with Britons the least likely in Europe to intervene when a crime is taking place.
Research found there has been a shift in responsibility away from the individual towards centralised institutions, demonstrated by 76 per cent of Britons believing that the police and courts are responsible for controlling antisocial behaviour, compared to around 45 per cent in France and Germany.
The report found that six out of ten people in Britain would be unlikely to challenge a group of 14-year-old boys vandalising a bus shelter, more than Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, France and Spain. In Germany, six out of ten would challenge the group.
...
Counting 33 "tough on crime" initiatives between June 2001 and May 2003, the authors call on politicians to avoid building policy around rhetoric that is perceived to be vote-winning.
...
Source (http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/39Haveago-heroes39--an-increasing.4447278.jp)
This brings all sorts of questions to mind, from the personal "would you challenge a group of 14-year-old boys vandalizing a bus shelter?" to the more philosophical "Where is the line between responsible citizenship and vigilantism?" To what extent should private citizens step in to confront anti-social behavior? To what extent should they stand by and trust the authorities to take care of matters? Personally, I'm more interested in the philosophical issues than in the specific situation in Britain.
I also think the Brits deserve some credit here for being brilliantly clever in their identification of who is responsible here.
That is to say, the majority of the Brits have clearly pin-pointed the apparent 'cause' of the malady and are quite rightly trying to hold that party responsible for those 'effects'.
I can't say I'd blame them. I'd be afraid that if I stood up to defend 'liberty for all' my own government (and their corporate allies) would be my worst enemy. I certainly didn't create the world the way it is. Our governments bear much more responsibility for creating/perpetuating the mess than I do personally.
Published Date: 02 September 2008
By Tanya Thompson
Social Affairs Correspondent
BRITAIN has become a nation of "passive bystanders" with fundamental changes needed on policing and criminal justice to tackle the issue, a report warns today.
The study, by the independent think tank, Reform, finds that the public are uninformed about crime and unlikely to participate in maintaining justice.
According to the report, Britons believe antisocial behavior is a matter for the police, where as other countries see it as the role of parents, teachers and the community.
In a 36-page report entitled The Lawful Society, Reform says Britain has the most expensive criminal justice system in the world but that over-centralization is failing to deliver results.
It also says the "have-a-go hero" is an increasing rarity, with Britons the least likely in Europe to intervene when a crime is taking place.
Research found there has been a shift in responsibility away from the individual towards centralised institutions, demonstrated by 76 per cent of Britons believing that the police and courts are responsible for controlling antisocial behaviour, compared to around 45 per cent in France and Germany.
The report found that six out of ten people in Britain would be unlikely to challenge a group of 14-year-old boys vandalising a bus shelter, more than Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, France and Spain. In Germany, six out of ten would challenge the group.
...
Counting 33 "tough on crime" initiatives between June 2001 and May 2003, the authors call on politicians to avoid building policy around rhetoric that is perceived to be vote-winning.
...
Source (http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/39Haveago-heroes39--an-increasing.4447278.jp)
This brings all sorts of questions to mind, from the personal "would you challenge a group of 14-year-old boys vandalizing a bus shelter?" to the more philosophical "Where is the line between responsible citizenship and vigilantism?" To what extent should private citizens step in to confront anti-social behavior? To what extent should they stand by and trust the authorities to take care of matters? Personally, I'm more interested in the philosophical issues than in the specific situation in Britain.
I also think the Brits deserve some credit here for being brilliantly clever in their identification of who is responsible here.
That is to say, the majority of the Brits have clearly pin-pointed the apparent 'cause' of the malady and are quite rightly trying to hold that party responsible for those 'effects'.
I can't say I'd blame them. I'd be afraid that if I stood up to defend 'liberty for all' my own government (and their corporate allies) would be my worst enemy. I certainly didn't create the world the way it is. Our governments bear much more responsibility for creating/perpetuating the mess than I do personally.