Single Police caution must be removed from Enhanced CRB after 3 years

one- minor- single-first- mistake-misunderstanding and a police caution for life its completely unfair..this way caution becomes lifetime punishment..every day one has to live with caution…depression…humiliation…for single mistake for life..job prospect becomes limited lead to frustration and unemployment..UK police… Government must give positive chance for single -minor mistakes cautions and must not punish any one to suffer every day and night with it ..else caution is life time punishment not slap on wrist and ruining life for single mistake is not right – single caution must be removed from Enhanced CRB after 3 years to allow and support victim of caution to live normal life and not made them suffer for lifetime..its unfair if you don’t give enough support and chance to live normal life after single mistake

Why is this idea important?

one- minor- single-first- mistake-misunderstanding and a police caution for life its completely unfair..this way caution becomes lifetime punishment..every day one has to live with caution…depression…humiliation…for single mistake for life..job prospect becomes limited lead to frustration and unemployment..UK police… Government must give positive chance for single -minor mistakes cautions and must not punish any one to suffer every day and night with it ..else caution is life time punishment not slap on wrist and ruining life for single mistake is not right – single caution must be removed from Enhanced CRB after 3 years to allow and support victim of caution to live normal life and not made them suffer for lifetime..its unfair if you don’t give enough support and chance to live normal life after single mistake

Bring back the Death Sentence

In my opinion the death sentence should be brought back for premeditated murders, mass murderers, drug barons and peadophiles. There are many peadophiles who have ruined people's lives, not just the victims, but their families too.

Why is this idea important?

In my opinion the death sentence should be brought back for premeditated murders, mass murderers, drug barons and peadophiles. There are many peadophiles who have ruined people's lives, not just the victims, but their families too.

Education for Police Officers

Police officers need basic English literacy and basic numeracy in order to be effective in their work.

It should be the case that he police force is an 'investors in people' organisation, that new officers do not get on the basic pay grade until they are qualified (literate and numerate), until which time, they should be obliged to take day release classes in English language reading, comprehension, and writing, alongside classes in basic mathematics. Probably someone else will add some form of training in reasoning and mediation.

During this time they would be paid a reduced wage. These are fundamental and basic skills that should equip every school leaver to be gainfully employed, but in the police they are essential skills for an officer to be fully productive no matter how well an officer can hold and use a riot shield, most officers need written English skills daily.

One could add that police officers passing basic spoken language skills in foreign languages – let the exam boards decide this – could receive a one-off bonus payment to aid in policing our many foreign visitors and immigrant communities. Such payments would be higher for unusual languages, such as Russian, less for langugages of nations who generally speak English, such as German or Swedish, and nominal (perhaps to certify the officers skill) for languages that officers already speak as their second language but which are nonetheless useful in their police work.

Why is this idea important?

Police officers need basic English literacy and basic numeracy in order to be effective in their work.

It should be the case that he police force is an 'investors in people' organisation, that new officers do not get on the basic pay grade until they are qualified (literate and numerate), until which time, they should be obliged to take day release classes in English language reading, comprehension, and writing, alongside classes in basic mathematics. Probably someone else will add some form of training in reasoning and mediation.

During this time they would be paid a reduced wage. These are fundamental and basic skills that should equip every school leaver to be gainfully employed, but in the police they are essential skills for an officer to be fully productive no matter how well an officer can hold and use a riot shield, most officers need written English skills daily.

One could add that police officers passing basic spoken language skills in foreign languages – let the exam boards decide this – could receive a one-off bonus payment to aid in policing our many foreign visitors and immigrant communities. Such payments would be higher for unusual languages, such as Russian, less for langugages of nations who generally speak English, such as German or Swedish, and nominal (perhaps to certify the officers skill) for languages that officers already speak as their second language but which are nonetheless useful in their police work.

Misuse of Drugs Act 1971

The MDA1971 denies citizens equal property rights for certain people who use certain drugs.

The aim of the MDA1971 is to ameliorate the harms of certain drugs on individuals and society. An impact assessment of this Act has never been carried out. The Act remains rooted in historical and cultural precedents which bear no resemblance to the scientific reality. No law should ever be based upon such precedents.

The Act has caused untold damage to millions of individual's lives, communities and society as a whole. It has criminalised millions of otherwise law-abiding citizens for choosing to use certain drugs in a peaceful manner.

Drug users are afforded property rights over alcohol, tobacco, tea and coffee; yet these very same rights are denied to users of other drugs, purely for historical and cultural reasons. The current situation is one where 'legal' implies that a drug is 'OK', but 'illegal' equates to 'not OK'; within the context of comparing cannabis with alcohol the implication is extremely damaging. It undermines any important public health messages that need to be made. The prohibition of certain drugs places a blanket of silence over them, preventing any meaningful discussion or debate about the health implications of using these drugs either alone or in combination with others.

It also dilutes the most important message of all: that we must distinguish between drug use and drug misuse.

Why is this idea important?

The MDA1971 denies citizens equal property rights for certain people who use certain drugs.

The aim of the MDA1971 is to ameliorate the harms of certain drugs on individuals and society. An impact assessment of this Act has never been carried out. The Act remains rooted in historical and cultural precedents which bear no resemblance to the scientific reality. No law should ever be based upon such precedents.

The Act has caused untold damage to millions of individual's lives, communities and society as a whole. It has criminalised millions of otherwise law-abiding citizens for choosing to use certain drugs in a peaceful manner.

Drug users are afforded property rights over alcohol, tobacco, tea and coffee; yet these very same rights are denied to users of other drugs, purely for historical and cultural reasons. The current situation is one where 'legal' implies that a drug is 'OK', but 'illegal' equates to 'not OK'; within the context of comparing cannabis with alcohol the implication is extremely damaging. It undermines any important public health messages that need to be made. The prohibition of certain drugs places a blanket of silence over them, preventing any meaningful discussion or debate about the health implications of using these drugs either alone or in combination with others.

It also dilutes the most important message of all: that we must distinguish between drug use and drug misuse.

Crime and Punishment

The system for determining punishment for crime should have at its very heart the following bases for determining a sentence

Crimes against Human beings should carry stiffer sentences than those involving non-human crime.

i.e. a Rapist should get a longer sentence than a bank robber

It's basic, build into the system used by judges and magistrates when determining a sentence, the focus of the justice system is 180 degress wrong, it seems that if you steal something somehow the amount you steal determines the length of your sentence, this is patently wrong, the crime is theft, not how much did you steal. If the crime involved a crime against a human being, then that should be the deciding factor on length of sentence, not the fact you stole more than the guy who was in front of me earlier. 

Why is this idea important?

The system for determining punishment for crime should have at its very heart the following bases for determining a sentence

Crimes against Human beings should carry stiffer sentences than those involving non-human crime.

i.e. a Rapist should get a longer sentence than a bank robber

It's basic, build into the system used by judges and magistrates when determining a sentence, the focus of the justice system is 180 degress wrong, it seems that if you steal something somehow the amount you steal determines the length of your sentence, this is patently wrong, the crime is theft, not how much did you steal. If the crime involved a crime against a human being, then that should be the deciding factor on length of sentence, not the fact you stole more than the guy who was in front of me earlier. 

DELIVER JUSTICE, PROTECT THE PUBLIC: MANDATORY LENGHTY CUSTODIAL SENTENCES FOR UNPROVOKED VIOLENCE

Current sentencing policy for wanton violence & sex crime is shockingly lenient, a complete abuse of the civil liberties of the peaceful majority, especially the law-abiding poor in our inner-city communities whose lives are blighted by a culture of violence

Many dangerous violent thugs are given non-custodial or short sentences for heinous acts thus causing more torment and anxiety of victims and their communities whilst completely undermining faith in the justice system. It creates a culture of lawlessness

At the same time lots of harmless non-violent offenders are imprisoned for petty offences such as low-level fraud. It’s these that should be on community sentences wherever possible (unless they breach them) to create the necessary space in our prisons to ensure all dangerous offenders can be incarcerated & those that want to change can be rehabilitated in a controlled enviroment over a lenghty period of time.

At present, many violent offenders given short or non custodial sentences go on to re-offend and in some cases, kill. A lengthy period of incarceration combined with a programme of hard work, education, training and excercise stands a much better chance of rehabilitating an offender than a flimsy non-custodial sentence (whilst protecting the victims) If dangerous offenders don’t conform to this they don’t get released, simple

Mandatory sentences for violent crime (unless in cases of self-defence) will also serve as a firm detterent (it’s worked with Gun Crime – gun murders are down signifiantly) whilst protecting the public. Automatic early release should also be scapped, it deceives people

Violent Young offenders should not be exempt from this policy, in many cases it will nip their activity in the bud and put them on the straight and narrow, and give them the education they need.

Don’t forget a million kids were the victims of serious violence last year commited by young offenders, they need protecting from the violent kids – if you’re kind to the cruel, you’re cruel to the kind. If most youths know they’ll be punished for commiting a crime they’ll certainly think twice beforehand – it will help keep them out of trouble

Violent Women should be equal under the law, therefore they should be subject to the same sentences as Men, it’s completely sexist otherwise. If they’re a danger to the public it doesn’t matter what their gender is

The Mentally ill who commit unprovoked violent crime should be detained in secure units (not prison) indefinitly (with a minumum period specified) and only released if it’s safe to do so

Too many people have been maimed, raped and killed by people who’ve commited previous acts of violence and should have been in detention.

Why is this idea important?

Current sentencing policy for wanton violence & sex crime is shockingly lenient, a complete abuse of the civil liberties of the peaceful majority, especially the law-abiding poor in our inner-city communities whose lives are blighted by a culture of violence

Many dangerous violent thugs are given non-custodial or short sentences for heinous acts thus causing more torment and anxiety of victims and their communities whilst completely undermining faith in the justice system. It creates a culture of lawlessness

At the same time lots of harmless non-violent offenders are imprisoned for petty offences such as low-level fraud. It’s these that should be on community sentences wherever possible (unless they breach them) to create the necessary space in our prisons to ensure all dangerous offenders can be incarcerated & those that want to change can be rehabilitated in a controlled enviroment over a lenghty period of time.

At present, many violent offenders given short or non custodial sentences go on to re-offend and in some cases, kill. A lengthy period of incarceration combined with a programme of hard work, education, training and excercise stands a much better chance of rehabilitating an offender than a flimsy non-custodial sentence (whilst protecting the victims) If dangerous offenders don’t conform to this they don’t get released, simple

Mandatory sentences for violent crime (unless in cases of self-defence) will also serve as a firm detterent (it’s worked with Gun Crime – gun murders are down signifiantly) whilst protecting the public. Automatic early release should also be scapped, it deceives people

Violent Young offenders should not be exempt from this policy, in many cases it will nip their activity in the bud and put them on the straight and narrow, and give them the education they need.

Don’t forget a million kids were the victims of serious violence last year commited by young offenders, they need protecting from the violent kids – if you’re kind to the cruel, you’re cruel to the kind. If most youths know they’ll be punished for commiting a crime they’ll certainly think twice beforehand – it will help keep them out of trouble

Violent Women should be equal under the law, therefore they should be subject to the same sentences as Men, it’s completely sexist otherwise. If they’re a danger to the public it doesn’t matter what their gender is

The Mentally ill who commit unprovoked violent crime should be detained in secure units (not prison) indefinitly (with a minumum period specified) and only released if it’s safe to do so

Too many people have been maimed, raped and killed by people who’ve commited previous acts of violence and should have been in detention.

Abolish Joint enterprise law………..

This law is sending young people to prison for life just for being in the vicinity and not knowing anything about the murder.My Brother is serving 22 yrs for a murder he did not commit. There where Nine men convicted of one murder.No evidence and the judge decided to use this law in my brothers case. This law is 300 yrs old and has not been passed in the houses of parliament.Please Please Please can you look into this law that is ruining peoples life is is diabolical and the government need to step in and do something about it……. I know there are lots of others on here who feel the same about the joint enterprise law…..

Why is this idea important?

This law is sending young people to prison for life just for being in the vicinity and not knowing anything about the murder.My Brother is serving 22 yrs for a murder he did not commit. There where Nine men convicted of one murder.No evidence and the judge decided to use this law in my brothers case. This law is 300 yrs old and has not been passed in the houses of parliament.Please Please Please can you look into this law that is ruining peoples life is is diabolical and the government need to step in and do something about it……. I know there are lots of others on here who feel the same about the joint enterprise law…..

Atlas Shrugged (or Why We Need to Crack Down on Government Control Freakery)

Crime is a serious problem, right?

The fact is that the problem governments now face is that there is too LITTLE crime. THIS is what is threatening them. Not too much crime, as they tell you through their mouthpiece, the press.

Just imagine a paradisic country where everyone is living a happy moral life. There is no crime.

What need would there be for government? Perhaps to run the schools, transport, hospitals, clean the streets and a few other bits and bobs.

There would be no need, however, for a home secretary. You would not need police or prisons. And you would not need big government departments to oversee the police and the prisons.

Government would be significantly smaller. (And your taxes proportionately less.)

In short, if crime went down, large sections of government would have to go. Right?

Well, not quite. Both property and violent crime have been dropping steadily since they peaked in the early-to-mid 90s. These are now at the same level they were in 1980.

But we also have TWICE the number of people incarcerated than in 1980, despite property and violent crime having dropped back down to this level. (America has FOUR times its 1980 level.)

We also have 4000 new laws since Labour came into power.

And we have more prisons, far more police and massive government departments than we ever had in this area.

Government is thriving. (And your tax is high.)

Here is a rather chilling quote from the classic 1957 novel "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand:

 

<i>"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game…"</i>

Sound familiar?

Why is this idea important?

Crime is a serious problem, right?

The fact is that the problem governments now face is that there is too LITTLE crime. THIS is what is threatening them. Not too much crime, as they tell you through their mouthpiece, the press.

Just imagine a paradisic country where everyone is living a happy moral life. There is no crime.

What need would there be for government? Perhaps to run the schools, transport, hospitals, clean the streets and a few other bits and bobs.

There would be no need, however, for a home secretary. You would not need police or prisons. And you would not need big government departments to oversee the police and the prisons.

Government would be significantly smaller. (And your taxes proportionately less.)

In short, if crime went down, large sections of government would have to go. Right?

Well, not quite. Both property and violent crime have been dropping steadily since they peaked in the early-to-mid 90s. These are now at the same level they were in 1980.

But we also have TWICE the number of people incarcerated than in 1980, despite property and violent crime having dropped back down to this level. (America has FOUR times its 1980 level.)

We also have 4000 new laws since Labour came into power.

And we have more prisons, far more police and massive government departments than we ever had in this area.

Government is thriving. (And your tax is high.)

Here is a rather chilling quote from the classic 1957 novel "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand:

 

<i>"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game…"</i>

Sound familiar?

Anti-Social Behaviour – Diary Sheets

Abolish the need to keep formal ASB diary sheets for use as evidence against perpatrators.  E-Mails should be acceptable.  Firstly, it saves money (less paper and stamps). Secondly we have been completing diary sheets for 6 years now without anything much happening as a result to combat ASB in our neighbourhood wo what exeactly is the point of them?

Neither the Police nor any other organisations appears bothered when people have noisy parties etc at weekends, most authorities are shut and by the time you get to Monday the problem is over and you have had another sleepless weekend!

A call to the Police, Crimestoppers or any other involved organisation such as local authority or Housing provider should be cross-matchable and traceable.  We need a central point of contact and a database for noise abatement and/or Anti-Social Behaviours.  We need someone to contact every day of the week to help stop ASB, not jsut weekdays!

Why is this idea important?

Abolish the need to keep formal ASB diary sheets for use as evidence against perpatrators.  E-Mails should be acceptable.  Firstly, it saves money (less paper and stamps). Secondly we have been completing diary sheets for 6 years now without anything much happening as a result to combat ASB in our neighbourhood wo what exeactly is the point of them?

Neither the Police nor any other organisations appears bothered when people have noisy parties etc at weekends, most authorities are shut and by the time you get to Monday the problem is over and you have had another sleepless weekend!

A call to the Police, Crimestoppers or any other involved organisation such as local authority or Housing provider should be cross-matchable and traceable.  We need a central point of contact and a database for noise abatement and/or Anti-Social Behaviours.  We need someone to contact every day of the week to help stop ASB, not jsut weekdays!

Attestation of police officers

Police officers having completed their training, are required to make an attestation i.e. to swear an oath to be impartial and fair to all they deal with and to serve the HM the Queen. This oath is taken before a magistrate and also applies to Special Constables who are unpaid volunteers. Often for Specials attestations there is a charming ceremony with family and friends attending to watch a family member make this important oath. It is taken very seriously and only after it has taaen place do officers receive their all important warrant cards. The event is held on police premises and a local magistrate carries out their office with appropriate dignity; no cost is incurred.

In 2009 a petty piece of legistation was introduced which requires all attestations to be made and organised through the magistrates courts and a charge levied of £50 plus £10 per officer. The sums involved are so small as to be nothing but a nuisance to both the courts and the police. The money does not go to the magistrate who carries out the ceremony as they too are unpaid volunteers. This petty rule applies to all officers even those transferred from other forces. The charming ceremonies have to go as the courts decide where it shall take place and when.

Why is this idea important?

Police officers having completed their training, are required to make an attestation i.e. to swear an oath to be impartial and fair to all they deal with and to serve the HM the Queen. This oath is taken before a magistrate and also applies to Special Constables who are unpaid volunteers. Often for Specials attestations there is a charming ceremony with family and friends attending to watch a family member make this important oath. It is taken very seriously and only after it has taaen place do officers receive their all important warrant cards. The event is held on police premises and a local magistrate carries out their office with appropriate dignity; no cost is incurred.

In 2009 a petty piece of legistation was introduced which requires all attestations to be made and organised through the magistrates courts and a charge levied of £50 plus £10 per officer. The sums involved are so small as to be nothing but a nuisance to both the courts and the police. The money does not go to the magistrate who carries out the ceremony as they too are unpaid volunteers. This petty rule applies to all officers even those transferred from other forces. The charming ceremonies have to go as the courts decide where it shall take place and when.

Presumption of innocence with vehicle offences

Drivers or registered keepers of vehicles should not be presumed guilty after an alleged offence related to a vehicle. If they dispute the charges, they should not have to pay any money first and be forced to appeal in order to get their money back.

The person driving the vehicle is not necessarily the registered keeper or owner anyway, so if a vehicle is clamped or towed away, it is not right that the keeper should then have to pay a fee to be allowed their car back. This would remove any legitimate reason for clamping vehicles anyway, and vehicles should only ever be towed away if they are causing an obstruction that urgently needs unblocking.

Under this system, if a car is towed away, a fee can be requested at the time of retrieval, but payment at that time would not be compulsory. If the keeper refuses to pay, the case can then go to court and the driver of the car can be sued for the money, or the driver could pay at a later time. Compulsory payment first goes against the presumption of innocence. If the person driving is not the keeper, it should not be up to the keeper to pay up and get the money from the driver.

Vehicle offences (of any type) should relate to the driver at the time, not the keeper and there should be no presumption that it is the keeper that has committed an offence. The onus should be on the prosecutor to prove an offence had been committed and to prove who committed the offence.

Why is this idea important?

Drivers or registered keepers of vehicles should not be presumed guilty after an alleged offence related to a vehicle. If they dispute the charges, they should not have to pay any money first and be forced to appeal in order to get their money back.

The person driving the vehicle is not necessarily the registered keeper or owner anyway, so if a vehicle is clamped or towed away, it is not right that the keeper should then have to pay a fee to be allowed their car back. This would remove any legitimate reason for clamping vehicles anyway, and vehicles should only ever be towed away if they are causing an obstruction that urgently needs unblocking.

Under this system, if a car is towed away, a fee can be requested at the time of retrieval, but payment at that time would not be compulsory. If the keeper refuses to pay, the case can then go to court and the driver of the car can be sued for the money, or the driver could pay at a later time. Compulsory payment first goes against the presumption of innocence. If the person driving is not the keeper, it should not be up to the keeper to pay up and get the money from the driver.

Vehicle offences (of any type) should relate to the driver at the time, not the keeper and there should be no presumption that it is the keeper that has committed an offence. The onus should be on the prosecutor to prove an offence had been committed and to prove who committed the offence.

Reform ASBO’s but don’t get rid of them!

I think the Government has been misleading on the fact that ASBO's do not work, using Breach figures as the reason to abolish them. I have personally found ASBO's to be a wonderful Invention and i undertand that Conservertaves do not want to be associated with things that the Labour brought in, so change the name reform them but do not remove them.  in the aspect of child ASBO's more responsability should be on the parents and they should have some sort of punihment for letting this carry on.

 

ASBO's take too long to get, can be time consuming and make the many victims wait too long for Peace. But they do offer respite to the people who have to put up with the poor behaviour for a small few.

Why is this idea important?

I think the Government has been misleading on the fact that ASBO's do not work, using Breach figures as the reason to abolish them. I have personally found ASBO's to be a wonderful Invention and i undertand that Conservertaves do not want to be associated with things that the Labour brought in, so change the name reform them but do not remove them.  in the aspect of child ASBO's more responsability should be on the parents and they should have some sort of punihment for letting this carry on.

 

ASBO's take too long to get, can be time consuming and make the many victims wait too long for Peace. But they do offer respite to the people who have to put up with the poor behaviour for a small few.

Employment and Privacy on Convictions

Respect the privacy of citizens formerly convicted of an offence.

Most criminals are unemployed. And people in work seldom commit an offence. Indeed, there is nothing worse for reforming an offfender than them not being able to find work after their offence.

The EU recognises this and has put into place laws preventing employers discriminating against people convicted of something.

This is to help reform them. It is illegal for an employer, for example, to inquire in a job interview about convictions. It is illegal to request that information on applications.

And it works. Reoffence is scarce after steady employment is found.

But there's one crazy little country "opting out" of this ruling by forcing people to mention convictions on job applications.

In the UK, a former offender remains under State obligation to declare convictions on job applications (except in some cases).

Here's a Eures search on the word "conviction". Only the UK imposes self-destruction on its citizens by forcing many of those convicted of something to remain in unemployment.

http://ec.europa.eu/eures/main.jsp?acro=search&lang=en&catId=2590&parentId=0

Why is this idea important?

Respect the privacy of citizens formerly convicted of an offence.

Most criminals are unemployed. And people in work seldom commit an offence. Indeed, there is nothing worse for reforming an offfender than them not being able to find work after their offence.

The EU recognises this and has put into place laws preventing employers discriminating against people convicted of something.

This is to help reform them. It is illegal for an employer, for example, to inquire in a job interview about convictions. It is illegal to request that information on applications.

And it works. Reoffence is scarce after steady employment is found.

But there's one crazy little country "opting out" of this ruling by forcing people to mention convictions on job applications.

In the UK, a former offender remains under State obligation to declare convictions on job applications (except in some cases).

Here's a Eures search on the word "conviction". Only the UK imposes self-destruction on its citizens by forcing many of those convicted of something to remain in unemployment.

http://ec.europa.eu/eures/main.jsp?acro=search&lang=en&catId=2590&parentId=0

Immigration law madness

Why is it that an immigrant from the eu is allowed to remain in this country even if they have a criminal record from their own country and then commit further offences here? Britain should have the power to remove such individuals, regardless of eu laws on freedom of movement!!

Why is this idea important?

Why is it that an immigrant from the eu is allowed to remain in this country even if they have a criminal record from their own country and then commit further offences here? Britain should have the power to remove such individuals, regardless of eu laws on freedom of movement!!

Reform the Criminal Justice System to serve the victim

Change sentencing to prefer restitution to the victim, over prison and community sentences.

This would obviously not apply to extremely violent crimes i.e. rape or murder, in which case the public needs to be protected.

Why is this idea important?

Change sentencing to prefer restitution to the victim, over prison and community sentences.

This would obviously not apply to extremely violent crimes i.e. rape or murder, in which case the public needs to be protected.

Bullying should be a crime, wherever it happens.

At the moment, if bullying takes place in a school, students can bully another, including doing assault, GBH section 20, GBH section 18 (with malicious intent), ABH, Battery and all sorts of crimes again and again everyday, and because it happens in the school, it, by law, is not a criminal matter, therefore the Police Authority, and the Courts cannot prosecute bullies.

This causes students to take advantage of the law, by abusing others, and they will not be prosecuted and they will get away with it, only because it took place on the school grounds.

Also, at this time, there is only one thing which ensures the safety of all students in schools. This is the school's Anti-Bullying Policy. This is often a statement of what enforcement teachers and Headteachers will take with bullies to make them stop bullying. By law, every school must have one. However, a lot of the time, teachers and headteachers do not enforce it.

It is not right that if a crime happens on one part of the Earth, it is treated differently to if it had happened on another part of the Earth.

Officials, I would like you to delete the law which makes a crime such as bullying not to be treated as a crime if it happens in school, the workplace, university and so on, but make a law which makes bullying, wherever, whenever it happens into a crime.

As mentioned above, students, and very sadly corrupt teachers and headteachers do not enforce the Anti-Bullying Policies they write, and often encourage bullying and a victim can be suffering so long, and you must all know that there are too many (one is one too many) school bully victims sitting in Psychiatric Hospitals, in their teen years, on tablets, without their many years of memory and sectioned. Many young adults are sectioned. Why? Don't think they took drugs, or had no sleep and had a bad home life. No, they were bullied in school for years and no one did anything, so they ended up insane and with all of this stress, they break down. Bullying happens in every school. Don't leave it to the school, make all bullying a crime.

It is not fair that anyone is bullied, and teachers and headteachers encourage this. And those victims are then made disabled by being bullied, are not able to sit their exams, whilst the bullies have their sanity and take their exams, happilly and get away with it, with no prosecutions against them.

All parents must know, that their children have very sensitive minds, and need a healthy life at school to develop. Often this is not the case, and teachers sometimes bully the students as well. This is, by either backing the bullies or by bullying the victim themselves.

Insanity is a type of disability, whereby one stays sick for many decades. It is very sad, some people die whilst insane. If the Government Officials stop this, and listen to my proposal, our bully victims, including the working population (as it happens in the workplace too), school students, teachers, and so on will be protected and those who are the culprits will be punished. This must be so as it is fair on everyone.

I know too many cases, if you watch the news. People, some teenagers, and some younger than ten years old, take their own lives. How can this be fair? I can guarantee you, in these cases, that they were bullied and nothing was done about it. Put the bullies in jail, give the victim compensation. And that is that. Even if this does not happen, remember, there is another court, that NO ONE CAN ESCAPE, it is The Court Of The Lord Almighty, and will take place on The Day of Ressurection. I'll see you there.

Written by Faraha Mehmood

Aged 18.

Why is this idea important?

At the moment, if bullying takes place in a school, students can bully another, including doing assault, GBH section 20, GBH section 18 (with malicious intent), ABH, Battery and all sorts of crimes again and again everyday, and because it happens in the school, it, by law, is not a criminal matter, therefore the Police Authority, and the Courts cannot prosecute bullies.

This causes students to take advantage of the law, by abusing others, and they will not be prosecuted and they will get away with it, only because it took place on the school grounds.

Also, at this time, there is only one thing which ensures the safety of all students in schools. This is the school's Anti-Bullying Policy. This is often a statement of what enforcement teachers and Headteachers will take with bullies to make them stop bullying. By law, every school must have one. However, a lot of the time, teachers and headteachers do not enforce it.

It is not right that if a crime happens on one part of the Earth, it is treated differently to if it had happened on another part of the Earth.

Officials, I would like you to delete the law which makes a crime such as bullying not to be treated as a crime if it happens in school, the workplace, university and so on, but make a law which makes bullying, wherever, whenever it happens into a crime.

As mentioned above, students, and very sadly corrupt teachers and headteachers do not enforce the Anti-Bullying Policies they write, and often encourage bullying and a victim can be suffering so long, and you must all know that there are too many (one is one too many) school bully victims sitting in Psychiatric Hospitals, in their teen years, on tablets, without their many years of memory and sectioned. Many young adults are sectioned. Why? Don't think they took drugs, or had no sleep and had a bad home life. No, they were bullied in school for years and no one did anything, so they ended up insane and with all of this stress, they break down. Bullying happens in every school. Don't leave it to the school, make all bullying a crime.

It is not fair that anyone is bullied, and teachers and headteachers encourage this. And those victims are then made disabled by being bullied, are not able to sit their exams, whilst the bullies have their sanity and take their exams, happilly and get away with it, with no prosecutions against them.

All parents must know, that their children have very sensitive minds, and need a healthy life at school to develop. Often this is not the case, and teachers sometimes bully the students as well. This is, by either backing the bullies or by bullying the victim themselves.

Insanity is a type of disability, whereby one stays sick for many decades. It is very sad, some people die whilst insane. If the Government Officials stop this, and listen to my proposal, our bully victims, including the working population (as it happens in the workplace too), school students, teachers, and so on will be protected and those who are the culprits will be punished. This must be so as it is fair on everyone.

I know too many cases, if you watch the news. People, some teenagers, and some younger than ten years old, take their own lives. How can this be fair? I can guarantee you, in these cases, that they were bullied and nothing was done about it. Put the bullies in jail, give the victim compensation. And that is that. Even if this does not happen, remember, there is another court, that NO ONE CAN ESCAPE, it is The Court Of The Lord Almighty, and will take place on The Day of Ressurection. I'll see you there.

Written by Faraha Mehmood

Aged 18.

Rethink drug laws

The drug laws have failed. Use of drugs has soared under a regime of prohibition. Crimes of acquisition go up as a result. People feel less safe in their communities. Gangsters get rich. Disaster! We need to tell people the truth. Prohibition has failed. The 'war on drugs' is just a useless slogan. Another truth: 99% of people take  drugs recreationally WITHOUT immediately falling dead or becoming ill or commtting other crimes. Another truth: Drugs are not equally harmful. Some illegal drugs are safer then alcohol or tobacco. Another truth: Most people on the very dangerous drugs of heroin and crack want to stop. A few don't. We need to be able to help those who want to stop and lock up those who don't.  People are not interested in another lurid Daily Mail headline. They just want to feel safe in their homes and neighbourhoods – that's what really matters.

The solution? Small quantities of all drugs for personal use should be decriminalised IF there is no other offence being committed. If there is another offence then drug possession should act as an aggravating factor for that offence. By decriminilasing small quantiites for personal use we allow agencies and support groups to go to work to help those what want help. It has worked for Portugal so it will work for Britain if only we are brave enough to tell the public the truth.

 

 

Why is this idea important?

The drug laws have failed. Use of drugs has soared under a regime of prohibition. Crimes of acquisition go up as a result. People feel less safe in their communities. Gangsters get rich. Disaster! We need to tell people the truth. Prohibition has failed. The 'war on drugs' is just a useless slogan. Another truth: 99% of people take  drugs recreationally WITHOUT immediately falling dead or becoming ill or commtting other crimes. Another truth: Drugs are not equally harmful. Some illegal drugs are safer then alcohol or tobacco. Another truth: Most people on the very dangerous drugs of heroin and crack want to stop. A few don't. We need to be able to help those who want to stop and lock up those who don't.  People are not interested in another lurid Daily Mail headline. They just want to feel safe in their homes and neighbourhoods – that's what really matters.

The solution? Small quantities of all drugs for personal use should be decriminalised IF there is no other offence being committed. If there is another offence then drug possession should act as an aggravating factor for that offence. By decriminilasing small quantiites for personal use we allow agencies and support groups to go to work to help those what want help. It has worked for Portugal so it will work for Britain if only we are brave enough to tell the public the truth.

 

 

FACT – Black Market Cannabis Funds Organised Crime

There is a state of incredible uncertainty and disinformation regarding the Cannabis culture in the United Kindom with a vast number of people entirely baffled or repeating popular (albeit false) rhetoric on the subject while thousands of hard working and honest people are needlessly fined or jailed (at the taxpayers expense) every year. There is also the problem of a burgeoning criminal culture surrounding the plant which could be dealt a critical blow which could not be matched by 10,000 dedicated 'pot squad' police officers by simply removing its black market status!

This is not a call for total deregulation of the substance but a request to open a dialogue with the goal of establishing a controlled, regulated and ultimately taxable solution which will be amenable to users, law enforcement and relevant government agencies.

This could be achieved cheaply and efficiently with a digital solution (much like this website) such as a forum or messageboard. To improve the flow of discussion and encourage open debate, I would recommend allowing optional anonimity for government officials and members of the public so as not to put any 'professional reputations' in jeapordy.

Why is this idea important?

There is a state of incredible uncertainty and disinformation regarding the Cannabis culture in the United Kindom with a vast number of people entirely baffled or repeating popular (albeit false) rhetoric on the subject while thousands of hard working and honest people are needlessly fined or jailed (at the taxpayers expense) every year. There is also the problem of a burgeoning criminal culture surrounding the plant which could be dealt a critical blow which could not be matched by 10,000 dedicated 'pot squad' police officers by simply removing its black market status!

This is not a call for total deregulation of the substance but a request to open a dialogue with the goal of establishing a controlled, regulated and ultimately taxable solution which will be amenable to users, law enforcement and relevant government agencies.

This could be achieved cheaply and efficiently with a digital solution (much like this website) such as a forum or messageboard. To improve the flow of discussion and encourage open debate, I would recommend allowing optional anonimity for government officials and members of the public so as not to put any 'professional reputations' in jeapordy.

Thatcher’s Needle Exchange Was Revolutionary

In 1986, Margaret Thatcher initiated a scheme to prevent the spread of HIV and protect society. In its day, the Needle Exchange Programme was hailed as debauchery and was seen to condone drug use.

Margaret Thatcher, love her or hate her, took charge and did was right for the people, she took a brave step and stuck by her guns.

Regulation of drugs is the inevitable and logical conclusion to this "revolutionary" programme.

We are now 24 years into this programme, and the UK and Thatcher are hailed as flag bearers to a modern day stance on health related drug use. As cited in the source below, many countries still do not have such programmes and refuse to do so, the U.S and Russia being most notable. The evidence speaks volumes, there is not a single person that can argue the programme has not worked and is an overwhelming success. The UK has kept HIV rates in drug use down to a steady 1%- compared to Russia who have no interest in anything but judicial stance, they have a 60% HIV rate.

Regulating and controlling drugs in the UK is not revolutionary, it is a continuation of the exchange programme in its essence. We look to Portugal, Holland, Italy, Czech Republic, these countries have decriminalised; drug use has lowered, crime has dropped dramatically, HIV rates have plummeted, harms reduced considerably, and every area of society has benefited. Abuse in children has also seen a noticeable change for the better.

Continue Thatcher's legacy, her work remains unfinished. Clean up our country and take drugs away from cartels and gangs. Regulate, decriminalise, and control that which has been uncontrollable under prohibition.

Thatcher, for better or for worse, was a leader, not afraid of media bias. We need leading, we cry out for leadership:

http://stats.org/stories/2008/needle_exchange_drug_czar_dec03_08.html

Why is this idea important?

In 1986, Margaret Thatcher initiated a scheme to prevent the spread of HIV and protect society. In its day, the Needle Exchange Programme was hailed as debauchery and was seen to condone drug use.

Margaret Thatcher, love her or hate her, took charge and did was right for the people, she took a brave step and stuck by her guns.

Regulation of drugs is the inevitable and logical conclusion to this "revolutionary" programme.

We are now 24 years into this programme, and the UK and Thatcher are hailed as flag bearers to a modern day stance on health related drug use. As cited in the source below, many countries still do not have such programmes and refuse to do so, the U.S and Russia being most notable. The evidence speaks volumes, there is not a single person that can argue the programme has not worked and is an overwhelming success. The UK has kept HIV rates in drug use down to a steady 1%- compared to Russia who have no interest in anything but judicial stance, they have a 60% HIV rate.

Regulating and controlling drugs in the UK is not revolutionary, it is a continuation of the exchange programme in its essence. We look to Portugal, Holland, Italy, Czech Republic, these countries have decriminalised; drug use has lowered, crime has dropped dramatically, HIV rates have plummeted, harms reduced considerably, and every area of society has benefited. Abuse in children has also seen a noticeable change for the better.

Continue Thatcher's legacy, her work remains unfinished. Clean up our country and take drugs away from cartels and gangs. Regulate, decriminalise, and control that which has been uncontrollable under prohibition.

Thatcher, for better or for worse, was a leader, not afraid of media bias. We need leading, we cry out for leadership:

http://stats.org/stories/2008/needle_exchange_drug_czar_dec03_08.html

Criminals & Terrorists… Do they have to many rights ?

Everyone says… It would be Un-British to do this or do that?.. Would it really or is it me thinking that everryone is tip toeing around the problem and not just using common sense with these laws we have on the rights of criminals and terrorists.

Why is this idea important?

Everyone says… It would be Un-British to do this or do that?.. Would it really or is it me thinking that everryone is tip toeing around the problem and not just using common sense with these laws we have on the rights of criminals and terrorists.