Jump to content

London Riots


bowdy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Maybe - but then you and your brother might not have had the chances you have created for yourselves.

However, lazy is not an excuse on its own.

I am lazy. I am honest enough to admit that I wasted my good upbringing and background and the natural talents with which I was blessed. I have a mediocrely paid job and my wife and I together earn significantly less than a single national average wage: yet, we have a nice house in a good area (although still in Newport!), I pay the mortgage every month, have had a job every day since I left university, raise my child well enough to know that he wasn't looting last night. Why don't I feel the need to start a riot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


That's fine as long as that line is a legal one, but it isn't in this case.

Legality or otherwise is merely a point of deterrence. If it were legal then there would be even less resistance to doing it.
As far as 'sending those out best suited' goes, are you suggesting that these kids have been sent out en masse by their parents?
Clearly not. I am saying that those who are not suited to it are not doing it, and those who are suited to it are.
And as for their options being removed - that's entirely different from having 'no option'. All of our options are being removed - well most of us anyway. Just because you have less options, doesn't give you licence to loot and riot.
Which takes us back to where I started - it's all about taking an opportunity and getting away with it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards

The right (i.e. correct) option is the one you get away with - it's as simple as that.

I'm not arguing about the morality of what they are doing, I'm talking about the reasons. The reason isn't simply "they're bad people".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards

Maybe - but then you and your brother might not have had the chances you have created for yourselves.

That is precisely my point. There are opportunities out there for everyone. You just have to want it enough, you can make your own opportunities.

To give you an example, in the finance industry, all financial advisers are having to undergo new Chartered Institute qualifications. The books can be bought off ebay for £30. There are 4-5 exams you need to pass to be diploma qualified. To do them all would be approx £600 (not cheap i'll admit) Anyway, anyone can sit and take those exams. Once you have diploma status you can easily, very very easily, command a 50k job in the finance industry.

Why spend 6 months doing that when you can sit around dossing about watching Jeremy Kyle though?

And Hobnail, don't beat yourself up about what you do. If you can live well enough with a stress free job then more power to you. My wife hates me being stressed with my job, and hopefully the hard work will let me retire at 55, it all be worth it then *dreams*

Link to comment
Share on other sites


That's fine as long as that line is a legal one, but it isn't in this case.

The problem is that, in the long run, the legal options will in best case, give them about the same result as the illegal option will in worst case. The majorty of them will stay in poverty. This removes the legal line.

In yours, mine or Dode's case, we got things to lose, atleast we think we do. They have, from birth, to look forward to live in a dumpster for the next 70 years, atleast they think they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Don't worry Bob - I don't beat myself up about it.

I was just making the point that it's all about choice. I choose to have a less stressed job, to allow my wife to work a few hours so she can bring up our son properly, to not piss my wages up against a wall. I am happy, so I obviously made the right choices and took the correct options. For me. I just didn't make the choices that others wanted me to.

@dode. By "right", I didn't mean correct. I meant morally right or decent if you like. That does not equate with that with which you can get away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


In yours, mine or Dode's case, we got things to lose, atleast we think we do. They have, from birth, to look forward to live in a dumpster for the next 70 years, atleast they think they do.

Why do they? No matter who you are, you have the ability to aspire. It is an option that cannot be taken from you, unless you allow it to be.

Most of us never become that which we aspire to - but it helps drag you up by the bootstraps along the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Why do they? No matter who you are, you have the ability to aspire. It is an option that cannot be taken from you, unless you allow it to be.

Most of us never become that which we aspire to - but it helps drag you up by the bootstraps along the way.

well for starters, they got a smashing nice example drunk in the sofa :P

There is a multitude of reasons to why they fail to see the oppertunities that we see. We are older (some of older then others) and wiser, we have a much firmer grasp on reality. We know that "it wont happen to me" isnt true. We manage to calculate risk contra gain. Point is, they do not see/find a viable legal rout to a better life and the community isnt suportive in that search.

I might be going into this arse first...

If what several states, this is a result of a group of people being lazy. Wouldnt this happend everywhere? Wouldnt Swedes/French/German/New Zeelanders/Belgians/Dutch/etc people be revolting/rioting from time to time as well? Or are Britons a particulary lazy kind of ppl?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


@dode. By "right", I didn't mean correct. I meant morally right or decent if you like. That does not equate with that with which you can get away.
I know, that's the distinction I was making by clarifying with "(correct)". Your "right" is predicated on a set of morals which you may or may not share with others. While you see the law as something which should not be broken, many (and I don't only mean rioters in this case - see phone hacking for an obvious example) see it as an obstacle to be overcome or bypassed en route to that which we wish to achieve. The law is a deterrent, not an inviolable rule, and if the easiest/best course of action includes breaking the law then that is what they will do - risk vs reward (which brings us uncomfortably close to the world of Blood Bowl!).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards

well for starters, they got a smashing nice example drunk in the sofa :P

There is a multitude of reasons to why they fail to see the oppertunities that we see. We are older (some of older then others) and wiser, we have a much firmer grasp on reality. We know that "it wont happen to me" isnt true. We manage to calculate risk contra gain. Point is, they do not see/find a viable legal rout to a better life and the community isnt suportive in that search.

@Perkalov - We might do now, but we sure as hell didn't know those things when we were their age. And I for one have never rioted or looted. Being young and lazy are piss-poor excuses if you ask me.

@dode - as I am currently ranked 647(ish) in the ELO team rankings and therefore am poor at making that calculation of risk vs reward, does that mean I should go out looting? Or does it mean that I would get shot whilst doing so?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


@dode - as I am currently ranked 647(ish) in the ELO team rankings and therefore am poor at making that calculation of risk vs reward, does that mean I should go out looting? Or does it mean that I would get shot whilst doing so?

Maybe ;)

Strongbad - funny article :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards

I have to say I'm with Dode and Perkalov on this one. You can't just take the riots and looting at face value and say "how horrible, lock up and repress them all"! It's imperative to look at the causes and reasons as to why it's happening in the first place. That does not equate to "making excuses" for this blatantly unacceptable behaviour, but rather it equates to trying to prevent it from happening again by understanding why it's happening in the first place.

If the solution is to just lock them all up and no-one is interested in improving conditions in order to prevent this from happening in the future, what will that solve? It will mean that loads more Tax funds get pumped into prisons and the justice system, rather than into other programs that can improve the quality of people's lives for a start. All that prisons seem to be good for anyway, is for putting criminals together, so that they can scheme and organize themselves for when they get out again. A lot of them probably have a better quality of life in prison than out of it too!

That doesn't mean you don't punish people for stepping over the line. Of course that has to be done all the same, but more emphasis needs to be placed on the root causes. Unfortunately when you have a government that bends over backwards for the financial sector and is only interested in maintaining the status quo, then it's unlikely much progress is going to made in that direction either!

The problem is the broader system and what is happening now is a symptom of that. Does that make it ok? No it does not, but that does not mean it is not true either!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards

hehe.

Mostly it would be difficult because I have never sat behind the wheel of a car in my life.

Wowzers! You should try it, i quite like driving around for no reason. Drove to Poland two years ago, was a lot of fun nearly crashing every two mins driving on the wrong side of the road!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


@Perkalov - We might do now, but we sure as hell didn't know those things when we were their age. And I for one have never rioted or looted. Being young and lazy are piss-poor excuses if you ask me.

I'll just drop it for now.

I know I am right :)

Problem is that you have exactly the same knowledge (thou you know wrong, that much I know) and we could easily go on for weeks.

Besides, Danton sums it up rather nicely. I'd only ad that I wouldn't blame the current government alone. I would blame every government from Thatcher and forward. The pros and cons of a society isn't created in a few years.

We are to some extent all trying to relate to our own upbringing. But honestly, did you grow up in the same society as your parents and uneder the same terms as your parents. If not, why do we then assume that the teenagers of today has the same terms options as we had 30 years ago?

An example from old Sweden... When I grew up in the late -70s early -80s we had 0 (registered) homeless in this country. Being homeless where never an option to me, because the society I lived in didn't allow that to happen. Today its a reality to plenty of ppl in Sweden. What was an utopia to me is an reality to our teenagers.

And I agree, being lazy aint an excuse to loot your next door neighbor. Nothing is, but there might be explanations to why, and imo "Lazy crocks" isn't one, since I fail to believe that Britons are inherently more lazy or dishonest then any other nationality :P Witch leaves a flaw in the society OR we would have this behavior in all countries at all times.

Look now, I couldnt just drop it :=/

Btw, Pwnzor article Strongbad :lol:

Ohh, I've never Rioted or looted (well cept that one time I needed a 5' of an garden-hose and in my intoxicated state found that getting it from the next door neighbor was a brilliant idea. Didn't riot thou, was more like a ninja or atleast I believed I was :ninja: ) but I have done a few things that our authorities disagrees upon. It hasn't stopped me from growing up to become a more or less law abiding citizen (More or less due to the fact that I do have a drivers licens) working relatively hard etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Interesting debate.

Some seem to offer sympathy to the riotiers like they are the victims. What about the vast majority of people who are being effected by this. The main casulties/fatalities from this have been in the normal public. I would happily swap a few rubber bullet wounds to bring those normal people back.

The role of the police and the state in this to provide the best social environment for the citizens of this country and protect Mr Public. If that means that a focus is put on a minority group that is fine as long as if it serves the purpose of the majority ,the needs of the few cannot outweigh the needs of the many.

What is for sure is that no matter what social model is used there is a level of imperfection that has to be accepted. That is why I take the view that a robust and agressive response was appropriate in this case. We a talking 100s in maybe a dozon cities. If there were 10s of thousands on the streets protesting I think my view would be different but these are the idiots driven by greed and should be treated accordingly. My sympathy is with those people who have lost love ones businesses and jobs.

Just my thoughts

Best

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...