Nanny Knows Best

Nanny Knows Best
Dedicated to exposing, and resisting, the all pervasive nanny state that is corroding the way of life and the freedom of the people of Britain.

Monday, July 14, 2008

Curfews R Us

Curfews R Us
It seems that, if reports are correct, Nanny is considering imposing a curfew on 16 year olds being on the streets after 9PM.

Police would take the children home or to a safe place, such as a community centre, where parents could collect them.

On the face of it I would guess that many people would raise a cheer to sweeping the streets clean of the feral yoofs that are rumoured to infest every corner of every town in the UK, striking fear into the hearts of anyone over the age of 20.

However, let us look beneath the surface here and see what Nanny really is proposing and really can do.

For starters the proposal is only going to be used in "hot spots"; ie where crime is considered to be above that which doesn't cause the police too much bother with local residents or the media.

Fine, except that this will simply disperse the "feral yoofs" elsewhere.

One might ask why is that a curfew in hotpsots is required, given that if the police wre really doing their job the criminal elements of these wild packs would have been dealt with and sat on by now.

Secondly, not every 16 year old on the street after 9PM is a criminal or indeed should be treated like one. For that matter not every person over 16 is entirely innocent, eg it has been rumoured that 17 and 18 year olds also commit crimes. What about them then?

Why 9PM, why not 8PM or 10 PM? What about the gangs that strut and loiter before curfew hour?

This is merely a gimmick to make it look as though Nanny is doing something.

I also read that the Sunday Times found that nine out of 10 parents wanted legal restrictions on their children going out after dark.

Here is where I instinctively reach for my sick bag.

Read the above bit again..."parents want legal restrictions on THEIR children going out after dark"!!!

What the fark is the matter with these people?

Their children are their responsibility, not the state's. Parents should not hide behing Nanny's bloomers to try to discipline their own children.

Are parents now so weak, stupid, lazy and fearful of their own offspring that they need the state to hold their hands when dealing with them?

It is hardly surprising some kids who are out of control, if parents are so weak and pathetic.

It is not the role of the state to clean the streets of kids, it is up to parents to maintain discipline and to ensure that they know where their kids are, and who they are with. I was never allowed to loiter and to hang around til the wee small hours, neither should these kids.

That being said, I am not so blind as to not see that there is a hard core element of useless, lazy, selfish parents who couldn't give a rat's arse where their kids are.

Given this, it is hardly surprising that there are wild packs of feral youths running wild in certain parts of Britain.

The solution to this is not a new wave of laws cufewing all kids, but using current laws (goodness knows we have enough of those) to target the criminal youths and their families.

Once you have found the hardcore of useless parents, you make them take responsibility by tagrtetting the things that they like; their housing benefits, and removing their favourite possessions eg pcs, TVs, DVD players, mobiles etc.

Having denuded the family of their toys, you impose a family curfew; forcing the entire brood to sit together night after night in their cave, and confront each others' failings head on (alone - no social workers - and undistracted by TVs etc).

Trust me, once you force them to sit with each other, nature will find the solution to their errant ways! One way or another.

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Celebrate the joy of living with champagne. Click and drink!

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

10 comments:

  1. Ken:
    Wise words indeed.
    We do have more than enough laws to overcome the problems of the ferral youth, however to enforce these laws, you need real police on the streets, in fact, you need a policeman that patrols the same beat everyday and knows what's going on, who the dodgy kids are etc etc......In the days of Dixon (Evening all) it was the norm but, when we relaced police officers on foot with police officers in cars, the information exchange fell down dead. The police no longer have links to local people, we need to return to the old bobby on the beat. I think also that senior policemen need to become policemen again instead of politically correct politicians in a fancy uniform.

    I share your horror regarding parents wanting legal restrictions on their kids going out after dark.....Of course, this would mean parents would have to meet their kids from school in the winter as it is dark at four o'clock.
    Parents need to (a) Take responsibility for their off spring and(b) Lay down rules for the said youth with real consequenses should those rules be broken.....It has always, until recently, worked like that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous11:12 AM

    "I also read that the Sunday Times found that nine out of 10 parents wanted legal restrictions on their children going out after dark."

    So, Nannythink efforts have been successful. Nanny now has control of 90% of the child rearing population. So extrapolating that into un-polled groups, perhaps more than 50% of the population desires that Nanny control all aspects of their lives. Maybe much more than 50%.

    That would explain a lot.


    Grant

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous11:30 AM

    Parents take responsibility for their own children, don't be silly. They produced the little darlings now EVERYONE has responisbility for them. Did you not read the latest garbage about no smoking in films. What was it the silly prat said, oh yes, we all have a duty to protect the children. NO we do not. We all have a duty not to actively harm children, not the same thing at all. Now, in addition to paying for parental tax breaks, schools, day care, maternity benefits, infra structure to make it easy to drive sonny wherever the lazy little git wants to go, health care and dental treatment for other peoples f***ing brats I am supposed to pay the sodding police to sweep them up off the streets in lieu of parental control and discipline keeping them indoors in the first place. God forfend that I should be allowed to give one of the little barbarians a talking to, oh no, only their parents can do that. It is no good blaming the police for their lack of a relationship with local youth, although god knows you can probably blame the yobs in uniform that make up Britains current police force for most things. Do the parents teach their children respect for the rule of law. Do modern parents teach their children ANYTHING.

    ReplyDelete
  4. number 611:51 AM

    I predict the 'uman rights lawyers/whores (hello Cherie Blair et al) will have a field day with this one.

    Nanny imposes idiot laws that may and would affect normal law-abiding citizens. The scum that get rounded up in this case, sue (using legal aid) and the legal whores make a killing.

    Another stroke of genius from nanny.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anon:

    I agree with what you say....Parents are responsible for their benefit cash cows....ooppppss I mean off spring, there does indeed seem to be a belief amongst some parents that once the kid emerges from it's mother, everyone else should look after it.

    I have just watched the PM banging on about parenting contrats etc for difficult families, in summary he said that, if the parent(s) do what they should be doing anyway, we (That means the tax payer) will reward them. This is where the system falls down, combine this type of attitude with the ban on parents disciplining their off spring physically, and you get what we have now;MAYHEM.

    The dogooders and state Nannies talk about kid's human rights not to be smacked, but what about the rights of rest of us? Am I the only one that has noticed that since Nanny prevented teachers and parents from using reasonable physical punishment on kids, so we have had these problems?

    I also feel kids are sent the wrong message in soaps when we see, gobby and badly behaved teens as the norm.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Lord of Atlantis12:16 PM

    "Their children are their responsibility, not the state's. Parents should not hide behing Nanny's bloomers to try to discipline their own children."

    I couldn't agree with you more, Ken. However, the problem is that political correctness, human rights legislation and liberal do-gooders have emasculated (can I use that word here, Ken?) the rights of those parents who wish to do that, in the same way that banning the cane in schools has resulted in teachers also being unable to punish behaviour that demands it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Lord of Atlantis12:19 PM

    Well said, Tonk. You've hit the nail on the head.

    ReplyDelete
  8. DocBud3:03 PM

    Curfews are fundamentally wrong, just like laws prohibiting drinking in public, they catch everyone, the law abiding majority as well as the law breaking minority. It is symptomatic of a police farce that is not prepared to do the job it is paid for.

    ReplyDelete
  9. What are 'parents'? A single mother and her social worker?
    Or maybe the local headmaster and the educationists.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ken, My kids have been under this curfew since before last christmas. The police say this is an antisocial behaviour hot spot ( her e in stoke on trent) which is laughable a best but after meeting some of the other parents in my street i find that not one but two 13 year olds where " taken into custody " and returned to their parents for breaking these rules in the last two months and in both cases the children where in or around their own front garden one result was a caution and the kid terrified byt he policeman with tazer and batten and pepper spray dressed like a soldier but without the camo gear he went on to explain the dangers of being antisocial outside after hours remember 9 pm own front yard. The other was a visit to the magistrate ( case pending)after the parent denied his son was being anti social playing with an actionman figure on the front lawn and was duely arrested for " being argumentative with a officer of the law" so now my kids cant go in the front garden of my own property after nine pm and i have no redress if they are caught outside after nine pm.. i even asked that nice Mp of ours when we joined palestine but aparently i was being anti jewish go figure? you just have to love the educated masses that get into parliment good site keep up the good work ..


    Cyan

    ReplyDelete