• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

SIN BINS FOR WORST FAMILIES (aka the end of liberty in Britain)

How do you know that warrants and/or court findings were NOT pursued in these cases? You're speculating wildly in lieu of facts.

But, hey, let freedom ring.

Prove that there are warrants. All this talk of putting cameras and surveillance up requires proof itself. The burden of proof is not on me, it's on those wishing to infringe upon the rights of the individual...you. You have to supply the proof. The only way to justly (and it's not always just, it's merely the only way which can yield a just result) infringe upon the rights of the individual is through the courts. Someone being on welfare doesn't qualify, someone being maybe suspicious doesn't qualify. Someone maybe abusing a system/person doesn't qualify. You have to have proof and provide it. Otherwise you're engaging in treason and tyranny against the People.
 
Instead of a knee jerk reaction, research is always helpful:

Respect - Members - What is a family intervention project?

What is the problem?
In some communities there are a small number of highly problematic families that account for a disproportionate amount of anti-social behaviour. They are well known to many service providers and enforcement agencies. Some families have up to twenty different organisations involved with them.

The effect of their behaviour on communities cannot be under-estimated. Those living around these families often move home themselves if they can, many end up keeping their children indoors and changing their daily routines. Their behaviour corrodes community spirit and reduces a community’s capacity to deal with problems. These families can also have problems themselves – physical and mental health problems, domestic violence, substance misuse, poor basic and life skills. Children often have behavioural problems and are not regular school attendees.

However, services struggle to resolve these cases. Lots of different agencies are usually involved with different family members (such as children’s services, education welfare, voluntary organisations, housing departments as well as the police and criminal justice agencies). While families need help and support, they may not want to engage, or reject the help, or are offered it as an option to take up if they choose. Enforcement action has been sometimes been threatened but is not followed through.

So despite months and years of intervention from agencies, they continue to damage themselves, their children and the community around them. Tackling problems in a way that meets both the needs of communities and of the families themselves is critical to resolving problems but these needs have sometimes been seen as mutually exclusive

These are court-ordered projects.

Respect - Members - YOT applications for parenting orders
 
Instead of a knee jerk reaction, research is always helpful:

Nothing was knee jerk reaction, that's spin on your part to try to take away from what I said. Everything I said was that everything has to go through the courts first. And I still am iffy of 24/7 surveillance of a family in their home. But previous people were saying that by accepting money from the government, such as welfare, you've abdicated your rights and the government may do as it likes including spying on you. Whereas I said that is not true, it's a legal system and the only way to infringe upon the rights of the individual is to go through the courts first.

Instead of knee jerk reaction, reading is always helpful
 
Nothing was knee jerk reaction, that's spin on your part to try to take away from what I said. Everything I said was that everything has to go through the courts first. And I still am iffy of 24/7 surveillance of a family in their home. But previous people were saying that by accepting money from the government, such as welfare, you've abdicated your rights and the government may do as it likes including spying on you. Whereas I said that is not true, it's a legal system and the only way to infringe upon the rights of the individual is to go through the courts first.

Instead of knee jerk reaction, reading is always helpful

Oh, stop pouting.
 
Back
Top Bottom