The Bloke On Who Wants To Be A...
Film, Media & TV0 min ago
Would You Dare To Confront Some Of Today's Yobs?
119 Answers
http://
What causes 'some' of the youth of today to be so violent, I say 'today' because no matter what some of you might say, it never happened when I was a youth?
What causes 'some' of the youth of today to be so violent, I say 'today' because no matter what some of you might say, it never happened when I was a youth?
Answers
Well....for what it is worth.....I lived through the late 40's was a student in the East End of London in the 50's (Kray era) and was never scared of walking through the backstreets of Whitechapel and Hackney.....
12:49 Thu 14th Mar 2013
Canary42
/// The fact that you didn't avidly scan the Daily Mail in your youth doesn't mean the violence wasn't there. ///
That is not only quite frankly all rather pathetic, but very boring.
How many times are you and some others going to blame the Daily Mail for all this countries ills, instead of praising them for making us aware of what some would wish to remain hidden?
/// The fact that you didn't avidly scan the Daily Mail in your youth doesn't mean the violence wasn't there. ///
That is not only quite frankly all rather pathetic, but very boring.
How many times are you and some others going to blame the Daily Mail for all this countries ills, instead of praising them for making us aware of what some would wish to remain hidden?
"it never happened when I was a youth?"
It most certainly did, and has happened throughout history.
The main difference today, is the way in which certain newspapers seek it out and report it.
-----------------
Not in mine. As a youth, the very thought of confronting an adult in the street over anything was unthinkable and don't even mention the Police!
I remember playing 'Jack Knock' as a youth and was caught by the Police. I was fearful of being given a hiding by them but if it were to happen (it didn't thankfully) I'd have taken it over the far worse alternative of being taken home and presented to my parents!
My last confrontation with a youth was in the pictures a year or so back. A young lad next to me kept spitting pieces of wet paper through his straw at other cinema goers as they took their seats. The lights went down and I leant over and said:
"You can either pack it in or grow up. Do one or both before the film starts or I will get very p*ssed off with you".
I'm lucky in that my physical stature generally gives those in such situations food for thought and they tend to comply.
It most certainly did, and has happened throughout history.
The main difference today, is the way in which certain newspapers seek it out and report it.
-----------------
Not in mine. As a youth, the very thought of confronting an adult in the street over anything was unthinkable and don't even mention the Police!
I remember playing 'Jack Knock' as a youth and was caught by the Police. I was fearful of being given a hiding by them but if it were to happen (it didn't thankfully) I'd have taken it over the far worse alternative of being taken home and presented to my parents!
My last confrontation with a youth was in the pictures a year or so back. A young lad next to me kept spitting pieces of wet paper through his straw at other cinema goers as they took their seats. The lights went down and I leant over and said:
"You can either pack it in or grow up. Do one or both before the film starts or I will get very p*ssed off with you".
I'm lucky in that my physical stature generally gives those in such situations food for thought and they tend to comply.
youngmafbog
/// AOG, not sure quite how old a 'Git' you are but you must have seen the Teds or if older then realized the youth were heavily engaged in directing their violence at the Hun. ///
Yes I remember both the Teddy Boys and the Hun, and believe me has I have said before some Teddy Boys were no angels, but they wouldn't resort to this kind of behaviour, taking it out of a few cinema seats with their 'nail cleaning' flick knives was about as bad as it got.
Your reference to not having a good war (if any of them are good) so as to get rid of the cannon fodder, is at the least very discourteous to all those young brave 20 plus year old heroes, who laid down their lives so that we may live.
That remark was more fitting to our Leftie friends than an ardent Right Winger such as yourself.
/// AOG, not sure quite how old a 'Git' you are but you must have seen the Teds or if older then realized the youth were heavily engaged in directing their violence at the Hun. ///
Yes I remember both the Teddy Boys and the Hun, and believe me has I have said before some Teddy Boys were no angels, but they wouldn't resort to this kind of behaviour, taking it out of a few cinema seats with their 'nail cleaning' flick knives was about as bad as it got.
Your reference to not having a good war (if any of them are good) so as to get rid of the cannon fodder, is at the least very discourteous to all those young brave 20 plus year old heroes, who laid down their lives so that we may live.
That remark was more fitting to our Leftie friends than an ardent Right Winger such as yourself.
I agree with you AOG. I'm only in my 30's, but my parents are elderly and they often say that the violence today is far worse than when they were young. Yes, there were thugs, always have been, but today they just attack for no reason at all and seriously injure people (just look at that poor man's face) and I live in Warrington and remember Gary Newlove well. I firmly believe it's because there is very little discipline today with all the do-gooders saying children can do what they like. This, sadly is the price we are paying.
'My day' I guess was the 80s
There was regular apalling football violence then - bystanders were regularly caught up in it, people were hospitalised
In fact it was even called 'the English disease'
At one point a 14 year old boy died
I'm sure many of you remember how bad it was.
Isn't it a good thing that that is now a rare occurance and not a weekly event?
There was regular apalling football violence then - bystanders were regularly caught up in it, people were hospitalised
In fact it was even called 'the English disease'
At one point a 14 year old boy died
I'm sure many of you remember how bad it was.
Isn't it a good thing that that is now a rare occurance and not a weekly event?
AOG, no offence was meant to those brave people that fought.
However my observation that perhaps the youth (those who are of that ilk) were able to direct their violent attentions to a 'lawful' end still stands. As does the fact that war(all big wars where we get not too fussy on who fights, not just WWII) does attract those that just want violence as well as those that bravely fight for a cause.
However my observation that perhaps the youth (those who are of that ilk) were able to direct their violent attentions to a 'lawful' end still stands. As does the fact that war(all big wars where we get not too fussy on who fights, not just WWII) does attract those that just want violence as well as those that bravely fight for a cause.
jake-the-peg
/// 'My day' I guess was the 80s ///
Yes one could also class the 70s, the 90s and the 00s as 'my day also', since I have lived through them all, (well at least some of the 00s).
But I was referring more to the 30s, the 40s, the 50s and the 60s more as 'my day' and I have witnessed a steady decline since the early 60s.
/// 'My day' I guess was the 80s ///
Yes one could also class the 70s, the 90s and the 00s as 'my day also', since I have lived through them all, (well at least some of the 00s).
But I was referring more to the 30s, the 40s, the 50s and the 60s more as 'my day' and I have witnessed a steady decline since the early 60s.
jake-the-peg
/// and when you've conscripted so many young men and sent them overseas it would be pretty amazing if you didn't see a drop in violent
crime ///
So we can put the increasingly violent crime down to the fact that we no longer send our young men out of Britain in large numbers.
That may be obviously statistically correct, the more males you take off the streets the less males to cause trouble, anyone can see that, but they were only missing in great numbers during WW2, but then also some were added to by foreign troops stationed in Britain.
/// and when you've conscripted so many young men and sent them overseas it would be pretty amazing if you didn't see a drop in violent
crime ///
So we can put the increasingly violent crime down to the fact that we no longer send our young men out of Britain in large numbers.
That may be obviously statistically correct, the more males you take off the streets the less males to cause trouble, anyone can see that, but they were only missing in great numbers during WW2, but then also some were added to by foreign troops stationed in Britain.
I've always thought that violence seems more common today simply because it receives more coverage and more information gets out than ever before. There were surely plenty of such cases in days gone by that never really broke into the national and international papers, so nobody really heard about it and therefore assumed that life "back in the day" was less violent with children always respecting their elders. Is this really just a rose-tinted view of the past? I think that's more likely anyway.
In answer to the original question, past experience has led me to avoid confrontations with people who are stronger than me (and outnumber me) and who clearly need little excuse to start swinging. Sad, but better to let the police deal with it rather than try to deal with it myself.
In answer to the original question, past experience has led me to avoid confrontations with people who are stronger than me (and outnumber me) and who clearly need little excuse to start swinging. Sad, but better to let the police deal with it rather than try to deal with it myself.
jim360
/// I've always thought that violence seems more common today simply because it receives more coverage and more information gets out than ever before. There were surely plenty of such cases in days gone by that never really broke into the national and international papers, so nobody really heard about it ///
Do you really believe this often used excuse for today's violence?
Why do you think that news of such brutal happenings never got out, that might have been the case in the days before the printing press, but even Jack the Ripper's relatively small numbers of murders reached the press.
No the local press would have been quick to catch on to a story such as this innocent man's battering, in fact it would be headline news.
Oh and WW2 was widely reported on, even though some bad news would have been censored, should we then revert back to censorship?
/// I've always thought that violence seems more common today simply because it receives more coverage and more information gets out than ever before. There were surely plenty of such cases in days gone by that never really broke into the national and international papers, so nobody really heard about it ///
Do you really believe this often used excuse for today's violence?
Why do you think that news of such brutal happenings never got out, that might have been the case in the days before the printing press, but even Jack the Ripper's relatively small numbers of murders reached the press.
No the local press would have been quick to catch on to a story such as this innocent man's battering, in fact it would be headline news.
Oh and WW2 was widely reported on, even though some bad news would have been censored, should we then revert back to censorship?
"Oh and WW2 was widely reported on, even though some bad news would have been censored,"
That's kind of the point.
The wartime government (quite understandably) chose to quite extensively censor the information available to the public - a task much easier in the days of newspapers, radio and newsreels. So the thousands of persecutions for looting which are all now a matter of public record, the reports of plucky Londoners stealing from their dead neighbours' bombed-out homes, and the testimonies of shopkeepers who said they feared looters more than they feared the Luftwaffe, were understandably left out of the public domain because it was felt they would damage morale.
What the past few decades has demonstrated is that they were right, because exactly that has happened. Now that the information reaching the British public is relatively unfettered (in fact often dangerously so given the vast number of stories in the British press that Nick Davies and his research team at Swansea found were unverified), the public has lost morale in much the same way that the wartime government thought it would.
That's kind of the point.
The wartime government (quite understandably) chose to quite extensively censor the information available to the public - a task much easier in the days of newspapers, radio and newsreels. So the thousands of persecutions for looting which are all now a matter of public record, the reports of plucky Londoners stealing from their dead neighbours' bombed-out homes, and the testimonies of shopkeepers who said they feared looters more than they feared the Luftwaffe, were understandably left out of the public domain because it was felt they would damage morale.
What the past few decades has demonstrated is that they were right, because exactly that has happened. Now that the information reaching the British public is relatively unfettered (in fact often dangerously so given the vast number of stories in the British press that Nick Davies and his research team at Swansea found were unverified), the public has lost morale in much the same way that the wartime government thought it would.
Some of AOG's contemporaries, absent from his somewhat selective memories:
http://
http://
http://
http://
http://
This last one should be of particular interest, given AOG's choice of subject matter and contention that it 'never happened when he was youth.'
http://
"During the 1930s, the gang was among many who struggled for control of racetracks and "protection" rackets and, in June 1936, around 30 gang members attacked a bookmaker and his clerk with hammers and knuckle-dusters at the Lewes racetrack before police arrived, with at least 16 gang members being convicted at Lewes Assizes and sentenced to serve over 43 years."
http://
http://
http://
http://
http://
This last one should be of particular interest, given AOG's choice of subject matter and contention that it 'never happened when he was youth.'
http://
"During the 1930s, the gang was among many who struggled for control of racetracks and "protection" rackets and, in June 1936, around 30 gang members attacked a bookmaker and his clerk with hammers and knuckle-dusters at the Lewes racetrack before police arrived, with at least 16 gang members being convicted at Lewes Assizes and sentenced to serve over 43 years."
Latest Posts
News10 mins ago
ChatterBank10 mins ago
Film, Media & TV17 mins ago
Crosswords19 mins ago
Assisted Dying, Here's Where It...
News20 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.