I have to agree with jpantera - anyone caught "bricking" (odd verb, but you know what I mean) should be hit with attempted murder, because that's what it is.
I fail to believe that most of these incidents are from people setting out to KILL other people. In my view they are mindless acts of vandalism with no regard for other people. Im not saying that there is no one out there that is set on killing or hurting and Im not saying they deserve light sentances (They clearly dont) but classing these incidents as attempted murder is a bit of a stretch (IMO)
Daniel
I think, and I'm no lawyer, that murder can be where a deliberate act causes death.
This is topical... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4918462.stm. This nurse wasn't attempting to kill anyone, but since 2 people died as a result of his deliberate actions, he's been convicted of murder. The scum that drop bricks onto trains are acting deliberately, and hence I believe attempted murder is an appropriate description.
Having said that, if they managed to kill the driver and/or passengers, they'd probably be convicted of manslaughter.
I have to agree with jpantera - anyone caught "bricking" (odd verb, but you know what I mean) should be hit with attempted murder, because that's what it is.
I fail to believe that most of these incidents are from people setting out to KILL other people. In my view they are mindless acts of vandalism with no regard for other people. Im not saying that there is no one out there that is set on killing or hurting and Im not saying they deserve light sentances (They clearly dont) but classing these incidents as attempted murder is a bit of a stretch (IMO)
Daniel
The scum that drop bricks onto trains are acting deliberately, and hence I believe attempted murder is an appropriate description.
Having said that, if they managed to kill the driver and/or passengers, they'd probably be convicted of manslaughter.
But you have to think are they actually trying to kill, or just having "Fun " You also have to remember alot of these scrots are kids of 12/13/14 etc etc
I would imagine manslaughter charges would be they way to go (If someone dies) Tho I do fully agree if someone is out to kill then atempted murder it shoul be.
alexnick wrote:I don't think being ultra-harsh helps the problem - alienating our teenagers only seems to make them more aggressive. You're quite right about hobbies, though - they really need to be given something to do. Personally, I don't understand the appeal of "hardness", but alienating the teenagers will not solve the problem.
But how on Earth do you dis-alienate them? The whole reason they do what they do is to rebel against the older generation. As a teenager myself I've seen the attempts made by adult-run organisation to look "cool", which generally involve graffti-style logos and the inseration of words like "wazzup!" and "big it up for da crew!". The results, whilst somewhat homourous, will not appeal to chavs-partly why they do not seem to take advantage of some of the leisure opportunities that are availible to them.
As for punishment-cautions or warnings mean nothing to them, they're just bits of paper handed out by the establishement they want to rebel against. If a punishment's going to sink in, it needs to have a tangible effect that will actually give them a motive to avoid a repeat offence. This is why I think community service is a good idea-it's dull, boring labour, it makes them repair the damage they do and gets them away from their "crew" while they do it. But at the end of the day, if violence is the only language they understand then they should be talked to in it-in the days when caning was allowed at schools, pupils showed some respect for their environment and superiors....
As a teenager, I agree entirely with the comments made about society being indescriminate towards teenagers. In my home town chavs hang around an area called the Market Square, and create a nuisance. So, the bright sparks at the local council are going to fit a high-pitched siren there that is only audible to teenagers and young children, thus driving them away. So, due to this:
1) Every single teenager, good or bad, can't walk through the Market Square in the evenings.
2) I have to take a lengthy diversion to get home if I have gone past the Market Square.
3) As the Market Square plays host to the town's bus stop, any young people waiting there are going to be half-deafened.
4) Even babies and small children can hear the siren, so you can't go past it without upsetting them.
However this does not, by any means, mean to say that I think no action should be taken against these people. Recently, a gang hurled a water bomb at a moving van, causing the driver to lose control and ram up the back of another van. Thankfully no-one was injured, but things could have been a lot worse.
As for what action to take, I have no idea. Phoning the Police to report incidents is a waste of time. The Police come and drive past the scene of the incident to see if anyone's around, and then leave. My Grandparents were driven out of their home by continuous pestering from chavs. Things got so bad that they, with dad, had a meeting in the house with Cumbria's chief constable. His excuse for not being able to catch the idiots was: "They run off down footpaths". How pathetic. In other words, the policemen couldn't be arsed to get out of their cars and give chase on foot.
As a result of this, chavs have no respect for the police. Two local chavs were arrested once, and then proceeded to argue about whose turn it was to sit in the front of the police van!
So, the council are indiscriminate, the Police are as much use as a chocolate fireguard, and the chavs and most of the town's residents think the pair of them are useless.
Two South Wales miners were jailed for life for the murder of taxi driver David Wilkie during the miners' strike in 1984.
Mr Wilkie was killed when a block of concrete was thrown down on his car from a bridge as he drove a miner to work in South Wales.
Passing sentence, the judge Mr Justice Michael Mann acknowledged the miners' strike had "engendered a climate of violence" that had led to the killing of Mr Wilkie. But he concluded: "You performed the ultimate act of violence and for it you will go to prison for life."
During the trial the jury had heard that in the early hours of 30 November 1984, Shankland and Hancock had planned to disrupt a police escort and taxi taking miner David Williams to the Merthyr Vale pit.
They hurled a 46lb concrete block and a concrete post weighing 65lbs from a bridge over the Head of the Valleys Rd at Rhymney.
It fell on the taxi and its driver was killed within seconds from head and chest injuries. The passenger, Mr Williams, was unhurt but deeply traumatised.
A third defendant, Anthony Williams, who was on the bridge with the two men was cleared of all charges.
This was the most serious trial arising from the bitter and violent miners' dispute of 1984.
Political leaders united in condemning the killing - Labour's Neil Kinnock called it an "atrocity" and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher said it was "an utterly despicable deed".
But the Left regarded the sentencing as too harsh, a statement of victory over the miners rather than an act of justice.
On appeal, the convictions were reduced to manslaughter and sentences reduced to eight years.
After a fierce campaign for their release led by the NUM's Arthur Scargill and Labour MP Tony Benn, the men were released on 30 November 1989 - the fifth anniversary of David Wilkie's death.
----------------------------------------------------
Brick thrower jailed over death
Michael Little was praised by police for keeping his lorry under control
A man has been jailed for six years for throwing a brick through a lorry driver's windscreen, causing him to suffer a fatal heart attack.
Michael Little, 53, was driving along the M3 on 21 March 2003 when the brick was hurled at his 40-tonne lorry.
Craig Harman, 20, of Glamis Close, Frimley, Surrey, admitted manslaughter at the Old Bailey.
Mr Little, from Hornchurch, Essex, managed to steer his vehicle to safety off the motorway but died later.
Harman, a shop assistant, had denied Mr Little's murder at an earlier hearing, but pleaded guilty to manslaughter.
The Old Bailey was told Mr Little was between junctions three and four of the M3 near Camberley, Surrey, when the brick was thrown from a footbridge at about 0030 GMT.
Mr Little, who drove for Ford for 26 years, was commended for his actions in steering the lorry to safety, managing to save other drivers from harm.
Mark Dennis, prosecuting, said: "Death would have occurred within moments, which makes Mr Little continuing to control his lorry and bring it to a halt even more commendable."
The court heard Harman had drunk at least eight pints of lager during the evening and was walking home with a friend.
They tried unsuccessfully to steal a car before Harman threw the brick from the bridge, the court heard.
Harman's not guilty plea to the murder charge was accepted by the court after he admitted throwing the brick to "annoy drivers and interfere with traffic flow".
His sentence will be served in youth detention until he is 21.
Mr Little's partner and sister both said outside court they were disappointed with the leniency of the sentence.
His sister Beverley Little said: "I suppose in a way we were hoping that, because of the seriousness of the attack, that some sort of example would be made.
Attempted murder charges? It would be very difficult to make them stick, probably would hinge on some degree of premeditation to actually kill the driver, not just damage the train. 'Bricking' trains should carry a far heavier sentence, as should leaving old fridges etc on the track, but there are a lot of things you could say that about, unfortunatly. I really wouldnt criticise the police either, they do a very tough job that I would struggle to do, and there are few enough of them.
Military service? Been there, done that...not really the answer I'm afraid. Being in the military requires quick decisions, yes, but if its a question of relying on a teammate, or even shooting another person I would prefer someone who wants to be there rather than someone who is there for punishment. When I was in the Royal Navy the ones who suceeded were the ones who were serious about it. Those there for a laugh soon fell by the wayside, and once they were going downhill they started a vicious circle, some even ending up as alcoholics just to escape the daily reality.
It strikes me that most of these b*ggers dont really see that what they are doing is very wrong, and thats the basic problem. We joke about social workers blaming everyone else, but its true, and it fosters a false perception where there are no such thing as consequences and no-one is to blame for their own actions. Its always someone elses fault. These stone throwers just dont think about someone's mum or dad not coming home that night. If there is a solution it will surely be to get the young off the streets into youth or sports clubs etc, and start them young maybe 8 or 10 years old so they learn the habit. But councils are cutting youth services, and now reaping the whirlwind.
allypally wrote:if they were to fit one of those sirens in my area I think I would forgot my antivandalism stance and smash it myself.
I would too.
As I live in a retirment town (not for much longer when I have the moolah) we get these catalogues aimed at the elderly tucked into the papers, the latest big thing (after mock antique record and cd players) is anti teenager sirens. This really annoys me - I'm 22, not long since I was a teenager, its sheer stereotyping!
Last year a letter like this appeared in the local paper
"I used to love Budleigh but now it has been spoilt by the addition of a skate park, this will attract undesirables and increase vandalism/crime. It is a blot on the World Heritage site and area of outstanding natural beauty, I was planning to move to Budleigh but not now - Disgusted of Surrey"
For those that don't know my town (ie all of you) the skatepark is situated at the edge of a carpark, between a sewage pumping station and a bottlebank.
Was amusing to see the normal moaners about the 'youth of today' actually defending the skaters (who had raised the money to build the park themselves) in the next paper
Last edited by enotayokel on Tue Apr 18, 2006 9:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
MuzTrem wrote:But how on Earth do you dis-alienate them? The whole reason they do what they do is to rebel against the older generation. As a teenager myself I've seen the attempts made by adult-run organisation to look "cool", which generally involve graffti-style logos and the inseration of words like "wazzup!" and "big it up for da crew!". The results, whilst somewhat homourous, will not appeal to chavs-partly why they do not seem to take advantage of some of the leisure opportunities that are availible to them.
Well, trying to assume their culture is never going to work, I agree, and just reduces otherwise respectable institutions and people into looking like idiots. However, we are giving too much for the chavs to react against by demonising them. If we ignore them, they'll start to lose interest in violence, as chuxn2005 pointed out, they are only doing this to show off to others. If they are ignored, they'll have to find something else. That's the only way to change what is essentially a cultural thing; make people lose interest.
Sorry to go on, but I wanted to talk about stereotyping teenagers too.
I'm 17, and as far as I'm concerned, I do not ressemble a chav in any way - I don't look like one, I don't act like one. Yet adults will avoid me in public, just because I look young - and presume that all teenagers are bad. I think society is very bad at separating groups within the label "teenager" from one another, and consider all to be the worst type around. It is frustrating.
alexnick wrote:Sorry to go on, but I wanted to talk about stereotyping teenagers too.
I'm 17, and as far as I'm concerned, I do not ressemble a chav in any way - I don't look like one, I don't act like one. Yet adults will avoid me in public, just because I look young - and presume that all teenagers are bad. I think society is very bad at separating groups within the label "teenager" from one another, and consider all to be the worst type around. It is frustrating.
Nick
I agree, Im nearly 16 and when i walk down the street i try to be fiendly towards adults. I dont resemble a chav in anyway but when i smile at them most just turn away.
And if you have a hood up, even when its raining you get parcualar looks, did the older generation not have hoods?¬!
" You also have to remember alot of these scrots are kids of 12/13/14 etc etc
*Feels inspired and dons balaclava*
