Send in the troops?
Following the rioting that has now raged in London for three days, people have written to the BBC , the times and other UK newspapers. It is not a unanimous view being expressed by everyone, but some people are asking "why not deploy the troops, if that's what it takes?" At present, it must be said that the government has considered and discussed the option, and rules it out.
The argument is that this is 'unprecedented' on the British mainland. Well, not in living memory have British soldiers been ordered onto the streets, apart from in Ulster. And no Prime Minister would want their name linked to such a step. "it would send all the wrong signals to the rest of the world - we are not some third world military dictatorship" the argument runs. Well, the government is putting 16,000 police officers on the streets tonight - many drafted in from elsewhere at short notice - and I hope this will work. But what if it doesn't?
Back in the sixties, we in the UK shook our heads at the scenes of US National Guardsmen having to escort children to school, and the terrible race riots that erupted during the Civil Rights era. It would appear though, that many people in our country are lacking a hope for the future and a feeling that they have a stake in our society. For how else can we explain so many taking to the streets in an attempt to commit robbery and arson? It may be that the decline is due to the lack of political reform and to moral laxity in high places.
The government, the corporations and even the police have been shown in a bad light by recent scandals - everyone s on the make, so why should we behave, many may be thinking.
Yes, the government has made a big mistake in closing down so many social services and laying off so many people. However, it will take a long time to fix the damage. It would be awful to see soldiers on the streets, and to have martial law declared with a dusk to dawn curfew. But hasn't the 'unprecedented' line already been crossed? The Poll Tax riots of the 1980s were about a political issue, and they did bury the Poll Tax, according to many.
The rioting, though, was not marked by the widespread destruction of shops and private homes. The riots of the 21st century have hit a new low. It may well be that the troops are the last resort and that they will be needed. Last night, with 6,000 police on duty, the police were still outnumbered by 10 to 1 according to some officer's estimates, and the violence, arson and looting was the worst to date. What good will doubling the police numbers do in the face of rising lawlessness?
Nobody is seriously pinning the riots on social deprivation or political action - it is widely accepted as being criminal and not political in intent. I am all in favour of the terrorists being treated as criminals. We should not be declaring a 'war on terror' or suspending the civil rights and liberties of the civilian population. However, with a significant and serious number of the population determined to commit crimes that threaten people's lives, would we not be wise to accept the necessity of declaring a State of Emergency and using the troops to keep order on the streets?
The argument is that this is 'unprecedented' on the British mainland. Well, not in living memory have British soldiers been ordered onto the streets, apart from in Ulster. And no Prime Minister would want their name linked to such a step. "it would send all the wrong signals to the rest of the world - we are not some third world military dictatorship" the argument runs. Well, the government is putting 16,000 police officers on the streets tonight - many drafted in from elsewhere at short notice - and I hope this will work. But what if it doesn't?
Back in the sixties, we in the UK shook our heads at the scenes of US National Guardsmen having to escort children to school, and the terrible race riots that erupted during the Civil Rights era. It would appear though, that many people in our country are lacking a hope for the future and a feeling that they have a stake in our society. For how else can we explain so many taking to the streets in an attempt to commit robbery and arson? It may be that the decline is due to the lack of political reform and to moral laxity in high places.
The government, the corporations and even the police have been shown in a bad light by recent scandals - everyone s on the make, so why should we behave, many may be thinking.
Yes, the government has made a big mistake in closing down so many social services and laying off so many people. However, it will take a long time to fix the damage. It would be awful to see soldiers on the streets, and to have martial law declared with a dusk to dawn curfew. But hasn't the 'unprecedented' line already been crossed? The Poll Tax riots of the 1980s were about a political issue, and they did bury the Poll Tax, according to many.
The rioting, though, was not marked by the widespread destruction of shops and private homes. The riots of the 21st century have hit a new low. It may well be that the troops are the last resort and that they will be needed. Last night, with 6,000 police on duty, the police were still outnumbered by 10 to 1 according to some officer's estimates, and the violence, arson and looting was the worst to date. What good will doubling the police numbers do in the face of rising lawlessness?
Nobody is seriously pinning the riots on social deprivation or political action - it is widely accepted as being criminal and not political in intent. I am all in favour of the terrorists being treated as criminals. We should not be declaring a 'war on terror' or suspending the civil rights and liberties of the civilian population. However, with a significant and serious number of the population determined to commit crimes that threaten people's lives, would we not be wise to accept the necessity of declaring a State of Emergency and using the troops to keep order on the streets?