Tue 18 Mar 2008
Honey, we’re actually criminalising the kids on virtually no basis whatsoever!
Posted by Hannah under New media, Personal, Professional
The idea that badly behaved children could have their DNA placed on a database to monitor them before they become full-blown criminals, as it were, horrifies me.
It sounds like something out of Minority Report. DNA testing has proved a remarkable tool for solving crimes years after they took place. Leaps in technology have meant many people have been brought to justice who would have otherwise avoided detection. This is a good thing. But we must draw the line somewhere. This is a gross violation of civil liberties. Innocent until proven guilty? Anyone?
If you think someone is at risk of turning into a criminal, change their situation. Educate them, give them opportunities. Discipline them early so they get the message that bad behaviour is not rewarded. Anything but this.
Fortunately, it seems the comments were an individual’s personal views and not those of the establishment. But God help us if Gary Pugh ever gets into any kind of position to implement such crazy ideas. There are enough children on that database already, who have committed no crime and have no criminal record.
This wasn’t the article I originally wanted to link to, but I couldn’t find the one I read earlier. That article had some random statistic in it saying something like 72% of ASBOs were given to people aged under 21. I know nothing about the credibility of such a figure.. but in the light of my last post, I can’t help wonder, if that statistic is true, whether it reflects society’s general criminalisation of people under 21, rather than a genuine problem with potential young offenders.
2 Responses to “ Honey, we’re actually criminalising the kids on virtually no basis whatsoever! ”
Comments:
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
April 20th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Regarding your question of whether society is criminalizing young people, I’d like to offer up two anecdotes - traditionally the partial and biased ‘evidence’ of talk shows and other meaningless public debate. Both involve bus journeys in a large city in the south east, currently fighting a mayoral election where crime and in particular crime on the buses may be the central focus of one of the blonde candidates.
Case 1: ‘Screamagers’ (so named because of our [that is the each of us who are all responsible, ‘hard working citizens’ or hwc’s] reaction to them) engaging in horse play on the top deck. Gets a bit rowdy and one ends up clouting, accidentally, a gentleman in the head with his elbow. Gentleman looks at him then looks away and pretends it didn’t happen. Screamager notes this and realizes the guy is too terrified to say anything, about what is pretty unacceptable behaviour, so carries on with aforesaid horseplay and doesn’t apologise. Screamagers eventually alight and the gentleman turns to karatemuppet and says: “he hit me, but what can I do - he could have had a knife or something.” I respond sympathetically and reflect that the normal rules of social intercourse regarding an accident - repentance, apology, and acceptance – have been bypassed by the fear of the gentleman and unchecked self confidence of the Scream.
Case 2: Loud girls all dressed up for an area noted for its vibrancy, drugs and strange haircuts arrive on the top deck of the bus. They proceed to *sing*, talk loudly and generally be boisterous and over confident. Of course it must be stressed at this point that young people being overconfident and self unaware is a wholly new phenomenon. They leave and a gentleman turns to karatemuppet and says with anger: “what animals!?! But what can you say.” I nod noncommittally and ponder whether I must have been travelling on a different bus to the gentleman or sampling some of Camden’s finest.
My point, yes I had one somewhere. The second case is to back up what you argue about needlessly seeing teenagers as criminals and argue somewhat un-originally that perception of crime and image of youth is driving an irrational fear. Both cases together highlight the most worrying part of the problem. Criminalization of young people, whether real or perceived, is being accompanied by the self-victimization of the rest of us and they are mutually fulfilling. Both sides, and it is increasingly is a real not imagined divide, are really believing their own press. The Screamagers are revelling in the untouchable position of power, while the average hwc perpetuate their own fear to an extent where they won’t make even the most understandable of rebukes. We turn those acting unacceptably into more confident villains by our own reactions and we encourage or drive those that certainly aren’t into become criminalized. The problem for anyone tackling this is how to act without making this vicious circle worse. For instance, with the proposal for 400 extra officers on buses, one wonders what the average hwc will feel like on the buses where there are no good old British bobbies?
We might wistfully ask for more have-a-go-heroes but as karatemuppet must shamefully admit, he didn’t say anything when in the presence of the case 1 assault and generally doesn’t ask kids to turn there loud and annoying music down (This is in spite of the fact that he is a trained ninja and is well buff).
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:58 pm
I know what you mean… I keep resolving to ask people playing loud music to turn it down, but don’t. Just in case they start an argument with me, or worse. And distressingly, people have been stabbed for less and you can never guarantee that other public transport passengers will back you up.
On a similar topic, you might be interested in this.
You have even met the author. He is of another school of ninja training, though I can’t speak for his buffness, or otherwise.