To the Letter…

30 05 2008

Dictionary.com, the only dictionary I currently have to hand provides me with the suitable starting point for this post. The site offers 27 different defintions for the word ‘law’. I will not elaborate any further on what these definitions are, feel free to look it up. The point that I am interested in is actually an amalgamation of the following two definitions:

“the principles and regulations established in a community by some authority and applicable to its people, whether in the form of legislation or of custom and policies recognized and enforced by judicial decision”

and

“any rule or injunction that must be obeyed”

I thought this was reasonably clear. The law, as far as I’m concerned, is something that, if broken, should be punishable to some degree or other, whether it be a slap on the wrists, a fine, or a jail term. Except that it no longer is such a thing. There are though, it seems, in society various degrees of the law. Some adhere to the rebellious ‘laws are made to be broken’ phrase. Others, who consider themselves ‘law-abiding citizens’, endeavour to lead a legal life. Those of the first camp seem keen to convince those of the second camp that they are boring or uninspired. Then there are those who float between the two trawling out the phrase ‘the law’s an ass’ to justify breaking it.

My personal pet hate is cyclists on the pavement. Clearly, in the law, cyclists should not be on the pavement (and they should wear helmets, but that’s a different matter), yet they bomb down pavements with scant regard for those walking on them. Maybe this is just in Birmingham, I somehow doubt it, but maybe. However this is one of those laws that people either a) don’t know, or b) choose to ignore, after all, the law’s an ass, right? A little bit of innocent law-breaking is fine, as long as no-one gets hurt. Right?

I’m not convinced. I know that in many places the law is probably dated. I know in many places it can be a pain to stick to. Yet I return to the notion that it is there for a reason. Someone, somewhere, has decided that we need such a law to prevent something happening. If you break it there deserves to be consequences.

About a month ago, I got a letter telling me that I was being charged for jumping a red light. I do not really remember the incident, and was not aware, at the time, that I had done it. Apparently I had. What I do remember is that the road was deathly quiet on the day. There were no other cars nearby. There were no pedestrians or cyclists either. My action hadn’t affected anybody, it hadn’t had an affect on anything, other than getting me to my destination slightly quicker. Yet I was, correctly, charged £60 for breaking the law. I accepted this. I had broken the law, and deserved my punishment.

Yet it seems that people are happy to break the law if they know that they can get away with it. I know I’m being idealistic here, but I think this is the wrong attitude to start with. It’s easy, for example to break the law in relation to drinking underage (it was this post that made me consider this whole point), because, apparently, it isn’t hurting anyone apart from the people who break it. It is after all, something small, not worth worrying about in relation to bigger problems of society. And the police cannot monitor all underage drinking everywhere. Therefore it is fine to break the law.

Now I realise I am being too much of an idealist here, but I maintain that it is the wrong attitude to have, the law is there for a reason and as much as anyone disagrees with it, it must be adhered to if we are to help maintain a society which does not collapse on itself. Perhaps that is the problem at the moment, perhaps we are too willing to turn a blind eye to people breaking the law on a small scale, and can do little when this escalates? Perhaps. I don’t really know. I do know that laws prevent anarchy and rebellion, and go a long way to aiding our own democratic system. That is why I believe they should be taken seriously. Right the way through. It isn’t just the ‘bigger’ crimes which should be a concern, everything, ranging from not having a bus ticket, to buying alcohol underage, to stabbing someone, to burglary should be punishable. The more mundane crimes should still be punished. Even if it is just a slap on the wrist.





To the letter… of whiteness…

7 03 2008

There have been two pieces of news that have rung with me recently. I am more concerned about the second piece of information, but this first one still annoys me.

Pub landowner Tony Blows has been told to pay almost £12000 in fees and charges for flaunting the smoking ban rules. Tony, speaking on Midlands Today this lunchtime, vowed to fight the charges, and claimed that such an amount was indicative of ‘big bully’ type action from the government. Now I’m usually critical of the government, as and when they deserve it, but to me, Mr Blows hasn’t got a leg to stand on here. He got caught breaking the law. He must pay the price. To me, it is that simple. If you see someone littering in public, you expect them to have to pay the fine. If you get a parking ticket, you have to pay the fine. If you break the law, there should be consequences. And most importantly, there should be no exceptions.

Mr Blows now has been forced to sell his pub in Herefordshire to cover the fees, and has pledged to leave the country, but continue the fight. To me this is a case of ‘if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen’. Tony will claim he has little choice but to leave because the government has come down on him like a ton of bricks for breaking the law. If he wants to leave, so be it.

Linking on from this in a roundabout sort of a way, last nights Newsnight programme was a really interesting one. To launch a series of programmes detailing white working class Britain, the programme had Culture Minister Margaret Hodge facing off against three outspoken men who felt that the government had let the working class down. I agree that the label ‘white’ working class is wrong, and that the problems go further than race or colour, but it is the one that the wise BBC decided to use. Nor did they define what the ‘working class’ actually was, a serious fault of the report I feel.

However, it showed many things, the results of which are here. The overall feeling of abandonment though shows something much more serious, and something I have already mentioned on this blog. Politicians are not doing enough to engage with the people. Especially the working class people. The Joe Normal Briton is not feeling satisifed with the current government. But that is only part of the tale. They aren’t satisfied with other options either, most agree that the Tories and the Lib Dems are equally bad. They also seem to think that the BNP is too extreme, and would not engage with the rubbish that Nick Griffin spouted on about in the programme last night (immigration of Pakistanis correlates to increased drug use? Are you actually kidding?). The overall feeling of frustration was the most telling point of the whole report, 58% felt under-represented. 88% felt they couldn’t talk about the subject for fear of being labelled a racist. The qualification “I’m not a racist but…” seems highly applicable here.

Now I am not part of the working classes. I would put myself in the upper-middle class bracket of society. But I too agree that there is something wrong with not being able to talk about immigration without being labelled a racist and having the slur hanging over me.

I also embrace multi-culturalism. I have no problem with people from various ethnicities in Britain, but I would like to see more of an effort made to embrace British culture. That does not mean go to the chippy every friday. It does mean do not hide behind religion or race. Do not use that as a reason you didn’t get a job for example. I feel if people come over here they must play by our rules. The trouble from my point of view is that the government are changing these rules to fit the people coming over. There is so much more I could say more about this subject, but for fear of boring you, I will refrain. All I would do is encourage you to watch the programme (it’s on the BBC’s IPlayer for the next week). And then read the website and the information. And then tell me that there is not something wrong.

The working classes are becoming more and more disenchanted with Britain, and are looking to jump ship. Just like Tony Blows.





Impossible Jobs…

12 02 2008

As far as impossible jobs go, the defence lawyers at the ‘fair trials’ for the six men accused of planning 9/11 must be pretty high up. To some extent here I agree with the human rights campaigners, how can these men who are accused of inflicting so much damage on one day, plus the subsequent wars, ever be expected to have a fair trial? The prejudice against them due to the allegations of the acts they may have done will surely hamper any trial conducted against them on American soil?

For me, the whole issue of torturing someone is a confusing middle ground. I can understand both sides of the coin, and could easily, if asked, argue the other ground. I am a critic of the American judicial system, especially local level stuff. Which is why I feel that if you are going to torture the information out of someone, you better be damned sure you are getting the truth.  A story made up simply to end the torture and appease the torturers is no good to anyone, least of all the defendant, for whom it may cost their life.

For me, the outcome of these trials is a foregone conclusion. These men will be convicted, the only issue is whether they will be given the death penalty, or simply jailed for life. Then again, I’ve been wrong before. Rewind a couple of years, and I confidently predicted that Saddam Hussein would not be killed, instead his trial would last a long time and nothing would get sorted. And we all know how that ended up don’t we? Either way, these six will not be walking free for a very long time, if ever again.