I agree with a lot of the anger and frustration in this thread. The thing I don't fathom is the popular truth that do-gooders are somehow the cause (by driving unbalanced human rights in the favour of the badly behaved) or obstructing change (by opposing more robust interventions).
Do these popular truths really bear up?
Haven’t the First World War (mass shared experience of ineptitude and inhumanity by leaders) and the coincidence of anti-ruling class Marxist theology been identified as significant factors in the erosion of deference in UK society? Legacy effects amongst unsuccessful families seem at least as likely as an outbreak of “inappropriate” human rights.
The other idea that do-gooders are somehow obstructing a good solid response, because they advocate inappropriate namby-pamby responses is also odd. Who are these people? Social workers, probations officers, teachers, community workers? Can't say I recognise any reality to this popular idea. I have, however, seen a lot of good work done by individuals in the most pressing of circumstances and with very little in the way of resources. But how would anybody ever know this when popular media and opinion generically disparages such work? I dread to think how bad things would/will be without it.
Whirly, your point about there being no necessary connection between poverty and criminality is a good one. It makes me wonder if your area is in better shape socially if not financially; perhaps a stronger community structure and higher levels of life competencies are still in place? Poverty is about much more than money. I’m not so sure about your confidence in the end delivery of health and education as part of an essentially fair Britain though. There are grave problems in many parts of the UK and that post WWII shared sense of nation is gone. Throwing rocks at air ambulances and fire engines is not one-off behaviour but occurs quite often throughout parts of the UK. This isn’t so in most other northern European nations, and they have broadly the same judicial processes, human rights and don’t have corporal punishment (as either a deterrent or cure). Why is Britain different?
Before I'm mistaken as a liberal: I think kids who throw rocks at helis, fire engines etc should be punished significantly and promptly... At the same time, I think changing such behavioural problems - as opposed to punishing their expression - is a broader sociological question. The level of public debate and a haste to satisfy justifiable anger does not begin to reflect the scale of the problems at hand. But I am glad the moderators have so far allowed it to be thrashed out here. And that most people have managed to avoid being rude about issues that make us all hot under the collar.
TT