The Conservative Cave
Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: Chris on August 07, 2009, 03:20:00 PM
-
The Children’s Secretary set out £400million plans to put 20,000 problem families under 24-hour CCTV super-vision in their own homes.
They will be monitored to ensure that children attend school, go to bed on time and eat proper meals.
Private security guards will also be sent round to carry out home checks, while parents will be given help to combat drug and alcohol addiction.
Around 2,000 families have gone through these Family Intervention Projects so far.
But ministers want to target 20,000 more in the next two years, with each costing between £5,000 and £20,000 – a potential total bill of £400million.
Ministers hope the move will reduce the number of youngsters who get drawn into crime because of their chaotic family lives, as portrayed in Channel 4 comedy drama Shameless.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/115736/Sin-bins-for-worst-families
The Secretary's name is Mister Balls. :whatever:
-
The Secretary's name is Mister Balls. :whatever:
Nickname "Buster."
-
Anyone get the feeling this could be an idea the left tries to bring over "for the children"?
Seriously, can you imagine them requiring home-schoolers to set up surveillance cams to "ensure proper time spent on educational work"?
-
If they tried it with my household the only thing they would see is my ass. :bird:
-
Talk about 1984!! :banghead:
-
If they tried it with my household the only thing they would see is my ass. :bird:
And if they tried it in mine, the only time they would see THAT would be if the damned camera was waterproof, and somehow survived the sudden impact with the bowl of the toilet.
-
The Secretary's name is Mister Balls. :whatever:
First name Blue ??
This has to be true desperation on the part of the Government to find a way to controll not the kids but their parents.
A little experiment in the 1980's in the projects of Chicago showed how to work with the system and cost little to nothing.
New rules in place, any family with a child that did not go to school or broke the law more then twice in one year meant the intire family had to move out of subsidised housing. Any adult living at that residence Arrested for drug possession, or visitors that had a police record for drugs in any residence meant the renters had to leave in 30 days.
For about 8-9 months stunned people found themselves on the streets and if lucky could move in with family else where.
After a few hundred people were given the boot, the school system began to complain about all the "EXTRA" kids that were now attending class every day.
The crime rate began to drop and fewer police were needed to patrol the area.
This led to bail bondsmen, public defenders and social workers having less of a case load in that area.
Things were really looking up for these people, placing the onus of the family on a teenagers behavior or their own behavior, It became a family affair to keep a roof over their head.
.Alot of parents could now relax and take a part time job with no fear of gangs in the neighborhood.
The hookers, drunks and druggies had to leave the building in order to ply their trade. Little kids could now move about the building to visit friends without stepping over passed out neighbors or men waiting to visit a hooker.
Beautiful, it works, sure some will have to go due to their own actions but the majority were able to life with less fear of neighbors or even their own family.
Along comes the Calivery with the bannor of the ACLU, on to rescue the rights of the down trodden.
Once they challenged the rules, Rather then fight a costly court case, the rules were rescinded.-------YIPPIE--- A huge victory for the dredges of society.
Every chance the good people had to live a life of no street gangs, hookers in the hall, druggies banging on doors at 2 AM, kids that were being educated one way or the other, all [ GONE---] due to the rights of a minority's criminal fringe group.
Some things like what could have been and what has prevented a new beginning for himans make me feel like I just ate fried clams that were harvested during a red tide,
-
I wonder how many of those 20K "problem families" live in taxpayer provided homes and exist entirely on the taxpayers dime.
-
Anyone get the feeling this could be an idea the left tries to bring over "for the children"?
Seriously, can you imagine them requiring home-schoolers to set up surveillance cams to "ensure proper time spent on educational work"?
Euro-weenies have been conditioned to be compliant for a long time. For the minions of Lord O to do this in America? He would need to disarm us first. I doubt any self respecting family would allow govt cameras in their homes.
The 2nd amendment ensures against govt abuse. They cannot do everything they want.
-
Does anyone know if England has drug and alcohol testing for those on the dole?
-
Does anyone know if England has drug and alcohol testing for those on the dole?
You're kidding, right ?
-
And if they tried it in mine, the only time they would see THAT would be if the damned camera was waterproof, and somehow survived the sudden impact with the bowl of the toilet.
And if they tried it in mine, it would have to be able to withstand the impact of a 9-pellet load of 00 Buckshot fired at point-blank range.
-
I wonder how many of those 20K "problem families" live in taxpayer provided homes and exist entirely on the taxpayers dime.
My guess, 100%
-
My guess, 100%
Here we reach the core of the problem. If someone is living in a property provided by welfare and on funds provided through welfare - and have come to the attention of the government enough to be in the lowest 20K families - Then they really aren't in a position to complain about this.
Should they not like it, it's pretty easy to get out of, by not being a lowlife welfare sucking scumbag.