Tuesday, February 19, 2008

You can lead a horse to water...

Our moronic leaders are at it again, attempting to criminalise yet another section of society.
Thousands of children face having a criminal record if they are caught holding a can of beer, under plans being considered by ministers.

The proposals would mean that any under-18s found by police with alcohol would receive a criminal conviction, which would have to be declared to future employers.

It comes just a day after The Daily Telegraph revealed that people who are caught with a joint of cannabis face being fined and having their names recorded in the Police National Computer.

This is just getting silly now. Look, one of two things will happen here (or possibly both will). In the first situation, a young man has to declare that he was caught holding a can of beer in the street, and both he and his employer will laugh their fucking heads off. This will bring the law into disrepute.

In the second situation, employers will take this conviction seriously. The young man then won't be able to get a job and will be forced to live on benefits, at the taxpayers' expense. Eventually, he may get bored and turn to criminality. Who knows?

Neither situation is ideal or even desirable.
Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, said earlier this month that ministers were looking at tightening confiscation rules which allow police officers to remove alcohol from teenagers.

However, yesterday Vernon Coaker, the Home Office minister, took the move further by saying that officials were examining whether to make "possession of alcohol by someone under 18 a criminal offence". Mr Coaker revealed that a review of how police deal with problem drinking would consider whether children caught with alcohol should get criminal records.

"It's something we are not saying we are going to do, but it is something that has been raised with us," he said.

"However," the ironically named Mr Coaker continued, "Jacqui got so excited at the idea of yet more bansturbation that the amount of juices pouring out of her foetid hole made it look as though she had pissed herself. Naturally, I was deeply excited too and started stroking my wrinkly little cock. Eventually, Jacqui leapt on me and we dry-humped, frotting ourselves to orgasm.

"We didn't shag though; Jacqui's married and we wouldn't want to do anything inappropriate."

Actually, I think that I have just made myself feel slightly nauseous...


Lee Griffin said...

The shame is this wasn't the worst of it all as when reading on Dizzy Thinks she also intends to work out who among us are criminals before we actually commit a crime.

It's clear now why they need the national DNA database, because without it they can't find our personality traits and work out which of us are potentially "not the right sort".

Kay Tie said...


Anyway, you can't get a conviction unless an independent court is convinced (geddit?) of your guilt. Very unlikely that the magistrates, who as a whole hate the current Home Office, will play ball on this.

The term "criminal record" is meaningless and not defined in law: the police keep records on all kinds of things. No employer has the right to see the data anyway (thanks to the too-often derided data protection laws). In fact, no employer has the right to see spent convictions (unless you are working in "won't someone think of the children" type industries), and such convictions would be spent by then.

Put this down to more NuLabour bansturbation spin. At least in Blair's day, they'd follow through with this tosh (half-baked to be sure), but these days it doesn't survive much longer than the paper on which the press release is written (the Home Office being poor at producing PDFs).

I'm therefore tempted to say "nothing to see here" except, of course, it's an example of the nauseating fag end of the authoritarian Labour Government, and we should make sure people do see it.

Kim du Toit said...

No man should...

rantovani said...

Nice one DK but not a pleasant vision you've conjured up...

Kay tie: unfortunately, a mere caution is a conviction, it's just that the police, the sneaky little buggers, use it in such a way that it makes you feel that you've got away with it...but they've got you ...oh yes...they've got you...and that conviction will be lurking, waiting until you've forgotten all about that time when you were 16 years old and you had a can of cider with your mates, until such time you have a CRB check at which point it'll jump out and bite you on your criminal arse. Bansturbation. Good word that.

Jules said...


i love it. first resort of another useless NuLabia cunt out of their depth. home secretary? where did they dig up this shocking waste of oxygen?

no apologies for the bad language. whatsoever. god, these dreadful people make me fit to puke.

Kay Tie said...

"unfortunately, a mere caution is a conviction"

No, it's not. A conviction is:

conviction |kənˈvɪkʃ(ə)n|
1 a formal declaration that someone is guilty of a criminal offense, made by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law

A caution is an admission of guilt (i.e. a confession), but one made without legal advice (and indeed under misadvice from the police as you point out). It counts towards a clear-up (i.e. Sanctioned Detected Crime targets), which is why the police offer them so often: much quicker than getting the CPS and magistrates involved. Cautions are not disclosed under standard CRB disclosures and there is no requirement to tell employers about them.

Mark Wadsworth said...

They're really joining the dots on this one.
1. Ban smoking in pubs, pubs shut, people drink at home.
2. Issue scare stories about dangerous drinking at home.
3. Allow 24 hour boozing in the street (where you can smoke at least).
4. Rail against people drinking bottled water (and no doubt soon, anything in a container)
5. Criminalise under age drinkers (who'll drink at home instead).
6. Criminalise people who buy alcohol for under 18s to drink.
7. Their ultimate aim seems to be that everybody stays at home drinking tap water (everything else having been banned) ... which they are going to poison with fluoride, just for the hell of it.


Kay Tie said...

"7. Their ultimate aim seems to be that everybody stays at home drinking tap water (everything else having been banned) ... which they are going to poison with fluoride, just for the hell of it."

Fluoride, yeees, that's it. Fluoride. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Is it me, or is New Labour really a front for Stewie Griffin in his attempt to take over the world?

Jules said...

you now what word springs to my mind? "flailing". this government is flailing. an illusion of activity that conceals spite, intertia, control freakery and naked incompetence.

socialism never changes it's spots. the tories should be kicking seven bells out of them. that they aren't really gives me the willies.

Jules said...

my grammar has fallen apart.

Mr Free Market said...

My children might only be 10 & 5 years old, but reading this, I am going to get them pissed just for the hell of it