Monday, August 08, 2011

London calling...

It is unusual for Brixton to be the calm epicentre in the middle of a massive riot storm—for this night at least (so far)—but I ascribe our relative tranquility to that fact that we are at the top of a hill that the rioters cannot be arsed to climb.

I don' think that I would be misrepresenting Blue Eyes to say that he points out that these bastards should stop being indulged.
What the champagners cannot seem to grasp is that the people who involve themselves in this kind of thing are not indulging in a fight of principle against oppression but are acting simply and rationally in their own self interest. They know that they could not normally get away with ram-raiding Currys, but while the CCTV cameras are pointing at the kids with bricks and burning stuff they can chance it. If they get caught the courts will only give them a slap on the wrist anyway. What’s another suspended sentence amongst friends?

Of course the statists will be telling us that the way to keep everyone happy is to redistribute yet more money from the productive part of the economy to the unproductive sullen ill-educated scum. It’s like a modern form of Danegeld where the opinion-formers of the local Labour and Co-operative Party and their friends fall over themselves to buy the peace of an ever-growing band of people who know they will always be looked after by the people with the keys to the till. One vox-pop quoted a resident of Broadwater Farm saying that last time we rioted we got a new swimming pool. QED.

I am sick and fucking tired of people telling me that I should sacrifice more money and—most insultingly—sympathy for those who are "disenfranchised".

You know what? If you call yourself "disenfranchised", I know that you are a triple-dyed cunt who would not be worth pissing on if you were in a Croydon fire (that you'd started).

You are not "disenfranchised": you are a lazy cunt who believes that other people should be raped so that you can live your life in the kind of luxury that your slaves cannot.

Your slaves?

Yes: your slaves—those people who have the reward for their production stolen from them in order to support your feckless, useless lifestyle. Do you really have so little pride in your life that you are happy to be supported by the work of others?

I despise you.
No, the only additional public funding which should result from this latest example of Britain’s total lack of institutional organisation should be channelled towards building prisons, beefing up the courts and getting the police out of their offices and onto the streets. Anything else is just a sop to the criminals.

Quite.

I still don't support the right of the state to murder its citizens—are you listening, Guido?—but by all means beat the living shit out of them. And then make the cunts pay for their own treatment.

That may not be feasible: the NHS could never cope with the administrative strain. However, I fully advocate the following: that anyone convicted of any criminal offence is unable to claim benefits of any sort for the rest of their lives. And if the offenders are under 18, then their parents should have all benefits removed too.

The single biggest problem in this country is that criminals do not pay for their acts: this would be bad enough, but even worse is the fact that we—the productive citizens who are forced to pay for them in the first place—are also required to pay for them even when they have attacked us.

This must stop.

So, your humble Devil intends to start a number of e-Petitions in the next few days, but the most important is the withdrawal of all benefits for criminals and their families.

After all, if they are spending every single waking hour attempting to earn enough money to live, then they are not going to have the leisure to smash our shops, our businesses and our homes.

We have tried the carrot, and it has failed: it is time to lay on the stick in massive doses.

14 comments:

mongoose said...

I do have a great deal of sympathy - and the fuckers should indeed be banged up - but removing benefits from these people means that they would do more crime. Benefits should be reduced towars "bread and water" not 48" plasmas and jolly hols in Benidorm. Benefits should keep body and soul together in dignity and a roof over one's head and no more than that. This is the answer to it all.

Bemused Wolf said...

Oh, the sleeping Devil has awoken!

Welcome back Sir!

Twenty_Rothmans said...

mongoose
There is a certain type of person who'll resort to larceny only to fill the bellies of his children and his wife when he cannot find work.

There's another, and although this transcends race, I think we all know where the bias lies, who'll do it to get want he wants, as opposed to what he needs.

Food stamps, as anathemaic to a libertarian as they might seem, are a move in the right direction. It's my fucking money, not theirs, and I'll decide how my charity is spent.

If you believe that it will stop the element of society hell-bent on taking from others, you're wrong. Y'see, they've had years of being given cash, very useful when you want some cider, fags or a wrap, but you cannot use food vouchers for that.

On the other hand, I think that it is worth bringing in a food voucher system, because it was good enough for my grandparents during the war. If they feel shame, then good. they should. They are taking food from my table.


On the pair of occasions I've met you, you've come across as an engaging and sensible man. When it comes to executing people, can you not see the dichotomy in opposing capital punishment, but willing the Bobbies to go in hard? You can just knock over an old drunk and he snuffs it. Does good cop become bad cop?

Ultimately, the only thing that stands between the middle classes and these subhumans are the cops. We're too chicken and do not have the wherewithal to take these bastards on ourselves.

It therefore has to be accepted that there will be collateral damage. If that's the case, then the State must have the right to kill, even if it's just an accident.

If we wish to fall short of the execution mark, we should simply outsource degenerates to Vietnam, thereby saving a great deal of money and helping a country in need. Win-win.

A year or two in a Vietnamese prison might make you wish for the Magic Needle. But you won't get it :-)

Twenty_Rothmans said...

Eek, sorry Devil, everything after table was for you.

Anonymous said...

Not one of your best ideas DK.

Firstly I don't really think most of these people have the intelligence or patience to work out where their benefits come from. A lot of them hate everyone else so they probably see it as ok to rob by any means.

You made a very good post on immigration once. The problem, as you pointed out, was not that EU immigrants are allowed to get British benefits, but that benefits are too high anyway. Your solution was that British citizens could be required to pay in for X years as well, and still treat EU immigrants as locals.

I am not one to deny a former criminal who has served his time benefits if he needs them. But obviously these should be at a bare minimum required to survive. And I wouldn't deny benefits to people convicted of minor crimes. What about someone who is found to have drugs on them? It's all linked, the problems can't be fixed by focusing on just one area.

Twenty_Rothmans:
Police should be armed to protect themselves, just like all ordinary people. The state (acting through the police) should never threaten anyone with death, only with jail. If you resist jail with a gun, then the policemen, as ordinary citizens, have a right to defend themselves in the course of their job. Any policeman who uses a gun, when an ordinary person would not get away with a claim of self-defence, should be tried for attempted murder.

Devil's Kitchen said...

Anon,

Quite right: view it as one of my "angry but not trying to make logical sense" posts.

The proposal you refer to—that everyone must pay in—is still my preferred option and I shall reiterate it in the next few weeks.

DK

Twenty_Rothmans said...

Anonymous
>Police should be armed to protect themselves, just like all ordinary people.
They have to be tooled (not necessarily with firearms) up because they're a magnet for trouble. I do not want my agent for good being harmed in the course of his duty. He is acting as my right arm.

I do not mind the death penalty that much but as a compromise I suggested something that would assuage the people who say that custody is too dear and still give a certain amount of satisfaction.

>Any policeman who uses a gun, when an ordinary person would not get away with a claim of self-defence, should be tried for attempted murder.
And if the copper is trying to bring somebody with a weapon down or prevent somebody else being injured?

Mr Ecks said...

20 Rothmans

"Ultimately, the only thing that stands between the middle classes and these subhumans are the cops. We're too chicken and do not have the wherewithal to take these bastards on ourselves."

Speak for yourself mate. I want weapons, to deal with rioting scum OR the state's own overweening thugs who have spent the last 20 years throwing their weight about with ordinary hardworking people
(on the orders of leftist govt scum)and now are powerless and useless against these rioters.They can turn up, five strong to attack someone accused of dropping litter but when they meet up with those who don't care and will fight them it is another story.

This is a sea change, we are not going back to the pc shite anymore. The people of this country have had enough, both of these rioters and the political scum who created the conditions for them commit their crimes. It's time the ordinary people went out into the street, not to loot or attack first, but to make it clear that we have had enough of both the lawless and the establishments version of the law that pisses on and robs ordinary people of the wealth and their power over their own lives.

Blue Eyes said...

Thanks for the link :-)

You did not misrepresent what I was trying to get across.

JuliaM said...

"I don' think that I would be misrepresenting Blue Eyes to say that he points out that these bastards should stop being indulged. "

I'd love to think so. But I fear the response is going to be to throw more resources at them...

Twenty_Rothmans said...

Mr Ecks

I agree that _some_ of us can look after themselves, I'm big and ugly enough to do so.

But what of the petite Mrs Twenty? I can hardly chaperone her, especially when I'm out of Britain a lot.

I think that you're wrong; things won't change. Look at Mary Riddell in the Telegraph, blaming the middle classes for this. Stupid bitch. It's whack-a-mole. Another hand-wringer always shows up.

microdave said...

"That anyone convicted of any criminal offence is unable to claim benefits of any sort for the rest of their lives"

Oh come on...you can't seriously mean it? A blanket statement like that is just crazy. Whilst I fully agree that the sort of scum you're discussing here are not worthy of a continued existence, would you be happy for this same principle to apply to yourself (for instance) if you had the misfortune to get a speeding conviction? Hardly an unusual situation in this camera infested shithole of a country...

Millions of hard working people who are being "raped" by the taxman to pay the "disenfranchised" lazy cunts you (and I hate), find themselves with criminal records for petty offences, most of which are the result of the overbearing, interfering nanny state we now have.

It's a good idea in theory, but needs a lot more thought before I will ever be likely to sign your petition.

Chalcedon said...

I still think looters should be shot on sight though.

ENGLISHMAN said...

The administration,that has engineered this state of affairs,must be rubbing its hands in glee,since its entire aim is to break the middle class,and here you are those same people,screaming for more repression,more police power,more eussr fascism,you are the target,because you stand in the way of total tyranny,be careful what you wish for,the euro-scum would be delighted to provide it.