Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: General Discussions (Read 1017154 times) previous topic - next topic
Baggers and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2325 –
Quote from: Lods – on
I think there's an element of truth in what you say, Thry.
I haven't had a look but I suspect the number of young offenders in detention are probably lower than they were when I started 50 years ago.

Just as an aside, i think its folly using that as your measure. People locked up.
It takes a lot to put 'someone away' nowadays. Plenty of horrific crimes ends in kids walking free.
There was quite an emotive facebook post recently MIO who highighted some of this.

Thry is right though. People were mushrooms previously - kept in the dark. Nowadays its the opposite. Scare tactics from everyone from the news to your neighbours to everyone on social media.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2326 –
Numbers are lower because there is an emphasis on rehabilitation rather than punishment and allowing young people who commit adult crimes a free pass back into society and often to re-offend again because of their age.
Young criminals have the law on their side, you have limited power to defend yourself, your dog isnt even allowed to defend you especially certain breeds and offenders and their legal counsel know how to play the system.
Its got worse over the years not better and I put that down to population increase ,increased poverty and lack of resources for policing plus the " do gooder mentality that refuses to punish criminals" which has led to less resources.
 Data collected by the ABC from each state and territory shows there are more than 4,500 vacancies for police officers across the country....27 Sept 2024. I read a protest sign recently  on the back of a Divvy Wagon that it was 1000 vacancies in Victoria.
In the Western suburbs its even worse in terms of unchecked crime, in one outer suburb in the West I was told that one in nine people are known to the police....must be like living in a Yakuza district in Japan.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2327 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: Lods – on
I think there's an element of truth in what you say, Thry.
I haven't had a look but I suspect the number of young offenders in detention are probably lower than they were when I started 50 years ago.

Just as an aside, i think its folly using that as your measure. People locked up.
It takes a lot to put 'someone away' nowadays. Plenty of horrific crimes ends in kids walking free.
There was quite an emotive facebook post recently MIO who highighted some of this.

Thry is right though. People were mushrooms previously - kept in the dark. Nowadays its the opposite. Scare tactics from everyone from the news to your neighbours to everyone on social media.

It's always taken a lot to put kids away Kruddler.
Even back in the day kids would go before a magistrate several times before being incarcerated
Six months was probably the norm for young offenders in the seventies.
And recidivism was rife.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2328 –
I’m sorry for your experiences Thry but they are alien to me.
I know the world is becoming more forked but it doesn’t really touch my life.
Let’s go BIG !

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2329 –
Quote from: northernblue – on
I’m sorry for your experiences Thry but they are alien to me.
I know the world is becoming more forked but it doesn’t really touch my life.
Lucky!

Dont be sorry for me, its just what happens.  My assumption is that what you have experienced might be the outlier.  I was once threated with a knife by a guy on a tram in hawthorn.  He and his friend was drunk, I was 13 with my cousin middle of the day.  He was indigenous by background, and perhaps had been villified himself by people who looked like we did, and the result is he threatened to kill us.  We stayed quiet enough for them to realise that we werent acting up, and that we were just kids, got off the tram, and we moved on with our lives.

Not all people are bad, not all people have bad experiences.  Sometimes life comes at you.  All you can do is meet the challenge head on, and navigate it as best you can. 
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2330 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Thry is right though. People were mushrooms previously - kept in the dark.
I don't think it's right to claim we were kept in the dark, it's just that the structures weren't in place to report this stuff, there was no network.

I worked for the newspapers for almost 15 years, News Ltd, Fairfax, etc., despite being massive organisations with thousands of employees they typically had just a couple of court reporters covering all of what would now be routinely reported via social media. They probably reported on just two or three stories a day selected by an editor as the most valid or relevant.

Like @DJC, I have a number of relatives working in law, bureaucracy and politics, I'm not sure the real traditional physical crime has changed all that much, but the fake coverage is clearly different and that influences society. The valid / invalid filter no longer exists.

The modern equivalent of court reporters are not reporters, they are nothing more than bloggers publishing for clicks, and everything that is valid or invalid gets published in some form often with AI scripted commentary. The media use an A/B system, posting multiple variants until one becomes dominant to get promoted to the front page / lead. It's the same system the big search engines use to keep you hooked on platforms like Youtube or Instagram.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2331 –
Quote from: northernblue – on
I’m sorry for your experiences Thry but they are alien to me.
I know the world is becoming more forked but it doesn’t really touch my life.
I don't think that basic crime is fundamentally worse than before, it's just the perception of worse comes from being bombarded with so many replicated or fake versions. If people are heavily involved in social media, they can still live largely oblivious to these effects, it is a choice.

Petty crime might be on the rise, driven by drug related issues, but it's not a new phenomenon. Crooks have always patrolled building sites and pinched stuff like tradies tools, the motivations were largely the same, debt, addiction, greed, etc., etc., it's just that it wasn't reported.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"
 

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2332 –
Quote from: LP – on
Quote from: kruddler – on
Thry is right though. People were mushrooms previously - kept in the dark.
I don't think it's right to claim we were kept in the dark, it's just that the structures weren't in place to report this stuff, there was no network.

Directly or indirectly, there was no coverage like there is now. Whether there was no light to turn on, or they just refused to turn it on. Point remains.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2333 –
Technology has given us access we didn't have in the past.

A kid gets attacked walking home from school, the perpetrators, accomplices or bystanders film it on their phones and wack it up on a social media platform.

Someone's security camera is activated and all of sudden it's all over the facebook community page saying "look at these low-lifes checking out our house."

A couple of kids walk out of Woolies with  handful of lollies, without paying and it illicits a hundred responses about how the suburb is 'going to the dogs'.

If these things had happened in the past the only ones who would know about it were those directly involved and those they told.
Nowadays the 'world' knows.
Is it happening more. Crime figures will no doubt indicate it is , but is it just more visible, recordable and able to be passed on to the community.

Offenders are under increased scrutiny
In reality it's probably raised awareness and information regarding offending activity, making those responsible more easily traced.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2334 –
You could argue given how little we see and hear on social media that things are actually better than they used to be. My sister lives in box Hill.  My brothers car was broken into twice by a guy with mental health issues out front. 

The cops actively chased a perpetrator over their fence and down the driveway for a seperate incident about 10 years ago.  They felt less safe as a result.

When stuff like this happens on your doorstep its a human reaction.

Again not to paint us as victims maybe im just unlucky but the suburbs I grew up around were deemed safe.  I've moved to greensboroough about 14 years ago.  Neighbours said someone got stabbed in their home 2 streets away.  They built their home here.  So maybe im a magnet but arguably things arent that bad.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2335 –
Yeah nah, it's way worse.
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2336 –
We were confronted by an intruder in our house about a year ago now. Long story but my partner was traumatised at the time and has only recently begun to get back to normal. We must get these thugs out of society but we have little confidence in our present state government.
Reality always wins in the end.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2337 –
Phil Cleary is writing a book about growing up in Coburg in the 1960s and 1970s and one of the key issues he is addressing is the routine violence that we experienced way back then.  We had a long discussion about schoolmates and neighbourhood identities who were murdered or committed murders, and who were involved in senseless acts of violence.  Of course, Phil's sister, Vicki, was stabbed to death by an ex-partner in 1987.

Unfortunately, it's not easy to find crime statistics going back to the 1960s. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), the number of victims of homicide and related offences (eg attempted murder) in Australia has decreased from 697 recorded victims in 1993 to 416 victims in 2019.  The ABS says "the victimisation rate for homicide and related offences remained relatively low across the time series and ranged from about 4 victims per 100,000 persons to about 2 victims per 100,000 persons. This means that after accounting for population change, the victimisation rate for homicide has halved."

Assault victimisation rates are not published for Victoria, Queensland or the ACT but the other States and the NT recorded increases from 1993 to 2019, except for SA which remained stable.

Over the last ten years, on a national level, there has been a decrease in the victimisation rates for physical assault (from 2.3% to 1.7%), face-to-face threatened assault (from 2.7% to 2.1%), and robbery (from 0.4% to 0.2%).  Over the same period, the victimisation rate for sexual assault (persons aged 18 years and over) increased from 0.3% to 0.6%.

So, yeh, nah, it's not way worse!
"Negative waves are not helpful. Try saying something righteous and hopeful instead." Oddball

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2338 –
Not trying to make light of anything there DJC but a decrease in homicide rates could simply be down to better medical knowledge and care as well.

Less people dead, doesn't necesarily mean less people attacked.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2339 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Not trying to make light of anything there DJC but a decrease in homicide rates could simply be down to better medical knowledge and care as well.

Less people dead, doesn't necesarily mean less people attacked.

Yes it does, because the figures relate to "homicide and related offences" and that includes unlawfully killing another person, attempting to do so, or conspiring to do so.  There doesn't have to be an attack, let alone a death, to register as a "homicide and related offence".
"Negative waves are not helpful. Try saying something righteous and hopeful instead." Oddball