I'm not excusing any violence, but I'm saying that I don't think it's particularly different today. The only difference is that you get to hear about it more today, bcos the less scrupulous papers know it sells. You think that, back in the 50s or whenever, a knife-fight in Govan, London, Manchester, Newcastle or any other significant industrial city would have got the attention of the national press? Somehow I don't think so. And I don't think this makes it particularly "localised", except in the sense that the criminals didn't move around much bcos they didn't have cars.

Policing-wise, I don't think the kind of "respect" that the police force had in the Thatcher strike-breaking era, or in Divis' personal experience in NI, is the kind we want. No more repeats of baton charges on unarmed protesters, or innocent men beaten up in cells until they confess to things they never did. I don't say that they all did that, but there was never any sanction against those who did. I don't doubt that they thought they were defending society, but plenty of mobsters (like the Krays) took protection money and said they were defending their own too. Having the police as just another gang using the same methods is not what I'd call a good thing.

As for treatment of women and children, it's a well-documented fact (I'll do the research and find a link, if anyone wants) that the most frequent source of assault and rape today if you're female or a child is a family member or family friend. This in spite of our supposed "knife culture" and the very real problem of drugs. And it's only *very* recently that rape and abuse victims had anything like a chance of getting the abuser put away - look back only 20-30 years, and the women and children didn't have a hope of doing anything about it, they just had to sit there and take it.

Yes, I have left out drugs. That certainly *is* worse - no question about it. But I don't think the results of drugs are the cause of the supposed "knife culture". Most drug-related crime is against property, which makes sense since most people don't carry much cash any more. And again, the "lock'em up and throw away the key" approach does nothing to help that - the most important thing is to get addicts off the drugs and give them a chance of making a straight life.

I'm sure there's plenty of parents who don't look after their kids properly. Again though, I'm not necessarily sure that this is worse than it used to be (although I've got nothing to go on here). Let's assume it is, though. In that case, how is locking up the kids for the sins of their parents a good thing?

Graham.