Please Sign the Government partition

[ban-all-sheds]

"If you smoke cigarettes then in twenty, forty or sixty years time you may die a horrible and lingering death from cancer or emphysema"
Doesn't work.

Oh.

I was unaware that not one person had ever given up smoking having been informed of the health risks.

"If you don't wear a crash helmet, you may be killed or suffer horrible brain damage and have to be fed and changed for the rest of your life"
Doesn't work.

Oh.

I was unaware that nobody ever wore a crash helmet until compelled to do so by law.

"If you steal tools from a van, the 99 times out of a hundred, you will not be caught. If you are caught, the 80 times out of a hundred you will just get a caution. If you go to court, 50-50 you will get off. If you are found guilty, you will probably get a fine or suspended sentence. If you go to prison it might be for 99 years"
Doesn't work.

Ah.

Try

"If you steal tools from a van, the 99 times out of a hundred, you will not be caught. If you are caught you will go to prison for 99 years".

 

[JohnD]

not one person

If I had said that, it might have been relevant.

I didn't.

Why did the fag companies sponsor sport and motor racing, and smother yachts in their logos?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Sorry, John - I thought for some unaccountable reason that you were replying to this:

So it is often said.

But I'm not sure that the prospect of life imprisonment with a minimum term of 99 years might not make some people decide that stealing tools isn't worth it.

 

[winston1]

If someone is serving a 99 year prison sentence he can't be put there breaking into vans. It works.
Likewise no one given the death sentence has reoffended. It works.

 

[JBR]

I applaud your optimism

but unless it is something the government wants to do, they will ignore it even if you get 700,000 supporters out on the streets.

Certainty of getting caught is a deterrent

The prospect of severe punishment isn't.

But Theresa will tell you, the number of police officers and PSOs has no effect on crime.

I think both certainty of conviction and severity of punishment would have an effect.

Unfortunately, May has (when HS) cut police numbers and has still not reversed her decision. There is also the present policy, presumably from police chiefs and/or commissioners, to concentrate what resources they do have on piddling matters like calling people names on Twitter.

Punishment is a joke and most criminals seem to find it extremely funny. Judges are accused of leniency but there is also the matter of maximum tariffs and these, as I understand it, are set by the government.

So our crime problem can be placed directly at the door of the government.

Unless we find a distinct improvement in our governments' (all of them) policies, I'm afraid I cannot see any hope of things improving.

 

[mattylad]

Unfortunately for any tradesmen this petition is going to be ignored like many others do.
The police have not got time to spare to be able to give van thefts any more time than ordinary car thefts or household burglary.
IMO neither should they, they should be able to investigate all thefts equally - but they cannot.

 

[JBR]

Unfortunately for any tradesmen this petition is going to be ignored like many others do.
The police have not got time to spare to be able to give van thefts any more time than ordinary car thefts or household burglary.
IMO neither should they, they should be able to investigate all thefts equally - but they cannot.

They seem to have time and resources to investigate name-calling on Twitter, though!

 

[JohnW2]

I think both certainty of conviction and severity of punishment would have an effect.

It's hard to see hoew severity of punishment will have an appreciable effect on those who do not think/believe that they will be caught and convicted (or those who haven't even considered that possibility!). To the best of my knowledge, the abolition of death penalties did not result in appreciable immediate increases in the incidence of murder in any country.

Judges are accused of leniency but there is also the matter of maximum tariffs and these, as I understand it, are set by the government. ... So our crime problem can be placed directly at the door of the government.

Legislation certainly does dictate maximum sentences, I think for any crime. However, what some judges are accused of is often not going anywhere near the maximum sentence that the legislation would allow.

Unless we find a distinct improvement in our governments' (all of them) policies, I'm afraid I cannot see any hope of things improving.

To get a bit philosophical/sociological, we seem to have been through some sort of 'honeymoon period'. Throughout most of our lives (even of us oldies!) crime seems to have been 'getting worse'. However, turn the clock back a bit further, to Dickensian times or earlier, and crime, particularly violent crime, was rife. I therefore wonder what caused things to seemingly improve, temporarily, in the early/mid parts of the 20th century - military service and wars, perhaps?

Kind Regards, John

 

[Adam_151]

As you say its Rife and more severe action needs taking, I did get a letter to attend an open day from the police of recovered gear but unfortunately none mine.
The amount of power tools was unreal, but what confused me was some had postcodes marked on in Permanent marker, so with a bit of effort i am sure the owners could have been traced.
I now put the firms postcode inside the battery housing, just in case, probably not a good idea to put your home postcode as the theirs may come to your house and nick your new replacement tools.

Or register serial numbers on here: https://www.immobilise.com/

One would hope that all forces check serials of recovered items against the database, but I guess evene if they dont have the resources to it can help in other ways such as proving whats yours at a later date, or for repair shops, second hand shops to check against etc

 

[ban-all-sheds]

To the best of my knowledge, the abolition of death penalties did not result in appreciable immediate increases in the incidence of murder in any country.

I don't think you can equate the mindset of people prepared to kill and those who decide that stealing is an easy way to make a living.

 

[JohnD]

Very few people are now hanged for stealing a loaf of bread, or transported for stealing a hankerchief.

Good.

It wasn't severity of punishment that reduced these crimes.

The poor, sick, unemployed and destitute are not so widely viewed by the ruling class as vermin of a different species, so punishment can be less brutal, and Socialism has done more in a hundred years than Christianity did in two thousand, to ameliorate poverty, starvation and ignorance.

I have never needed to steal a loaf of bread. I have never had a starving child. I have never had a wife dying of disease because I couldn't pay the chemist or the doctor. I don't know what crimes I might have committed if I did.

There is still more than enough crime, and causes of it, but we have reduced some of the causes that drove honest people to extremes.

Is there anyone who shares Theresa's fierce denial that removing Community Policing and cutting Police numbers has any effect on crime?

 

[ericmark]

The problem is those who make a living from stealing will still get lighter sentences to those who normally don't, I knew a guy who stole cars, when caught he would have 30 cars taken into consideration and a £30 fine as not working, OK in the end he did go to prison and he did then stop.

Other friend came out of dance walked to what he thought was his Morris Minor (shows how long ago) used his key to get in and drive home and only realised it was not his car next morning, he phoned police saying he had made a genuine error asking to be put in touch with owner so he could give him the car back, Owner was understanding and both got their own cars back, but the police took him to court for driving a car without insurance so he got a £200 fine and points on his licence.

Nothing has really changed, most the cars stolen by first guy was down to the Police, there was a corrupt policeman who having caught him was getting him to steal to order or he would arrest him for theft, he really could not stop stealing cars or he would be arrested, while he was in prison the policeman got caught, so on his release he was rearrested just outside the jail for all the cars he had stolen which had not been taken into consideration.

I suspect the body cameras worn by police now reduces corruption, but end of day it is the Judge who hands out the sentence, not White Hall, and fixed fines make it worse not better, Judges need to be free to use their judgement and not have their hands tied.

Maybe the late Terry Pratchett had it right, if your going to have crime it may as well be organised crime, so a small annual donation to thieves guild and you can walk the streets in safety!!!

I do remember having soap stolen, seems petty, but I was in Algeria and their soap was it seems made from sand, so I would bring soap from home, so I reported the theft telling the camp boss in front of some locals it must be an expat stealing the soap as it contains pig fat, not a single bar went missing after that. Wonder if there is a way so looking through darkened windows in back of van it looks as if van is empty? 3D picture behind the glass?

Not sure good locks work, unless fitted as standard, all they say is there must be something worth pinching look at all those locks, I got in trouble for keeping charged capacitors in my soap draw. Mega charges them up nicely.

I get really upset when people want to leave hand bags or phones in my car on view, may as well put up a sign pinch me. All my valuable stuff was in a tool chest locked to the van, OK they could pinch whole van, but most of my losses were actually while working from inside the premises.

I lost a load of spanners, all marked, and one day spotted a guy working with my spanners, got the foreman and pointed it out, spanners were returned, however it turned out the guys brother had stolen them, and when his brother was killed in a road accident he got his brothers tools, I really wish I had kept my mouth closed.

So although I may not like the sentence handed down by a Judge, I also feel he should be free to do his job and Judge what is appropriate and not be told by government for this crime mandatory sentence is XYZ.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The problem is those who make a living from stealing will still get lighter sentences to those who normally don't, I knew a guy who stole cars, when caught he would have 30 cars taken into consideration and a £30 fine as not working, OK in the end he did go to prison and he did then stop.

If he had gone to prison the first time would he have stopped sooner?

If he had known that going to prison was a certainty on being caught, even if being caught wasn't, would he have been less likely to have started?

 

[JBR]

To get a bit philosophical/sociological, we seem to have been through some sort of 'honeymoon period'. Throughout most of our lives (even of us oldies!) crime seems to have been 'getting worse'. However, turn the clock back a bit further, to Dickensian times or earlier, and crime, particularly violent crime, was rife. I therefore wonder what caused things to seemingly improve, temporarily, in the early/mid parts of the 20th century - military service and wars, perhaps?

In those days, of course, poverty was commonplace and severer, and people had a real need to commit crime for their own well being. Also, in those days, there was no properly organised police force. Neither was there any really effective health provisions and social support.

I believe that in the early 20th century, things were a little better and, of course, after 1950 we had the welfare state supported by numerous charities and since then real poverty has become almost unheard of.

I believe that the present surge of crime is as a result of the factors already discussed: lack of police and lack of meaningful punishment; both things that the government could easily rectify if it had the will.

 

[ericmark]

If he had gone to prison the first time would he have stopped sooner?

If he had known that going to prison was a certainty on being caught, even if being caught wasn't, would he have been less likely to have started?

What he did know if he stopped stealing he would get caught, he it seems was not stealing cars, he was only taking without owners permission! In law there is a big difference, so I know my mate well and know if I ask him he will lend me his car, so I borrow it to nip to shops, he does not know it was me, so reports it, and court sees that as same as some one stealing a car taking it until fuel runs out and dumping it minus stereo and other bits and pieces.

So to van scenario guy steals your van takes it to some where quite empties it and leaves it, that's taking without owners permission, can't prove he took tools, could have been some one else, or guy opens your van and runs off with some tools but leaves you with the van so you can still get home. Technically theft so should he really be fined more that guy who stole your whole van?

The account give of tools found in hedge was not theft, OK criminal damage to remove the tools but not theft, Judges are not thick, they know what is really theft and what is really borrowing, but there have been so many knee jerk reactions to crime they have had their hands tied, what we need is for Judges to be actually allowed to Judge, and not have their hands tied as to what sentence they can give.

I remember in the Falklands a council wagon driver got caught drunk driving, his licence was endorsed so he was only allowed to drive at work, so could no longer drive for pleasure, but did not lose his job so was not a burden to the government paying unemployment benefit. The Judge used common sense, OK may not work here, but sure there must be many times Judges are forced to give lighter or heavier sentences to what they think should be handed out.