Mandatory civil service in uk

  charmingman 13:15 04 Jun 2007

just been looking at my local news & theres a constant flow of hooliganism from ages mainly around 12-25 years old,

few months ago a group of 15 year old's was getting drunk near some local shops & decided to pick on a young man aged 16 who was minding his own business & about to go into one of the shops,

they kicked him that much in his head he got a blood clot & since died one of them was also caught on CCTV jumping on his head which fractured his skull whilst another hit his body many times with a large wooden post & when they went to court there reason for doing this was "They was borred"

two of them got 10 years whilst a third got 6,the young man who was killed was very much a homeboy who didnt go out much & was quiet..

is this due to lack of youth clubs or activities for them to do,i can remeber when i was 13ish we had youth clubs where i live now there more or less all closed,

also the reason the youths had beer is that one of them was 18 so he was getting the money off the others & buying powerfull cheap cider/larger

so my question is: should kids be put into the military for a year or so when they leave school to help them be more aware of what life can offer them.

personaly if it was made mandatory in the uk i would be more than happy to have my kids go.

  smokingbeagle 13:26 04 Jun 2007

National Service.

You may end up with fitter and better trained hooligans / criminals.

  donki 13:57 04 Jun 2007

I believe National Service would be a good thing. I dont think it will sort out the problems we have in the UK. The problems are difinitely getting worse and the children involved getting younger. The truth is its going to be very hard to change wots going on, when kids see life to be as cheap as are it will take a very long time and some very big law changes for a difference to be made.

  Cymro. 14:12 04 Jun 2007

I doubt very much if the sort of young hooligans that we are talking about would last a day

in the forces, that is if they could even be persuaded to cooperate in the first

place. To begin with they would just refuse to join up preferring to go to jail
rather than join the army. The once that would be willing to join would be so much

hassle to even the most ferocious of sergeant majors that the army would be more

than glad to be rid of them. They would probably spend more of their time in the glass

house than on the parade ground. With so much talk of human rights these days I don`t

see such legislation getting through parliament anyway. It sounds a good idea but

I don`t see it working. Many of the youngsters we are talking about are beyond help.

  tullie 14:18 04 Jun 2007

Your right Cymro,it wouldent work.Stand by for a few "When i was a lad...."

  wee eddie 14:31 04 Jun 2007

The idea of Conscription is that the Armed Forces needed loads of Grunts. That is no longer the case.

What you are suggesting is a huge "compulsory" jail for all and sundry between 16 and 18. Not really a very useful thought.

  spuds 14:31 04 Jun 2007

We had what was called Borstal institutions. Depending on where you were sent (if convicted) then the regime could be very harsh. Whether this was successful, I couldn't really say. But I did see the evidence of a birching, which wasn't a pretty sight.

What ever happened to the American type Boot Camp's that were all the talk about a few years ago!.

Regarding Mandatory civil service, isn't this called Service in the Community nowadays, with possibly an ABSO attachment!.

  TopCat® 14:36 04 Jun 2007

turn out to be beneficial in straightening out a few of these youngsters. They certainly wouldn't be bored at the training camps. In some cases I also think a few anti-social parents should get a rude awakening by being called up alongside them too. TC.

  Cymro. 16:09 04 Jun 2007

Yes TopCat i think you have a point when you mention that something must be done about the

parents. But packing them all of to the army just would not work. I don`t think the army

would even want them. The army has mare than enough problems as it is.

  Jak_1 16:12 04 Jun 2007

Why should the armed services have to put up with the hooligans just because society can not deal with them. I for one would not have been best pleased if one of them was on a ship that I was serving on and then refusedf to co-operate, in the forces your life may depend upon the co-operation of the person next to you!

My question is: What were the parents of those concerned doing?

The sentence should have been 'At Her Majesty's Pleasure'. I take it that the charge was manslaughter and not murder, the difference being one is pre-meditated the other isn't.

  Bingalau 16:12 04 Jun 2007

Why should the forces be saddled with all these sad people? Surely it is down to the parents and the police to modify their behaviour. The youngsters who were allowed to go wild in the 60's are now the proud parents of even worse youngsters. There is no doubt the parents should be held responsible for them. They should be made to pay for their offspring's wrong-doing.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Dell XPS 13 9370 (2018) review

The art of 'British' pulp fiction

Best password managers for Mac

TV & streaming : comment regarder le Tournoi des Six Nations 2018 ?