The Day Will Come (sooner than later?)

None of us, not one single upstanding citizen should ever be satisfied with glorious defeat. I do not wish to be here in a few years time saying well done to everyone if we are still stuck on this culture of soft on pet sadists, pandering to paedophiles. No matter how much sweat and toil is put it we cannot be sitting in the present position we are in in a few years.

Freaks have been getting away with abusing animals and children in this country since before we were all born. And every single generation either kept silent about it or failed to attack the twin issues (which are related) aggressively enough to effect change. Like it or not our ancestors have allowed the current set of circumstances to be the reality by way of the accumulative effect of their failures.
This is why you should see no glory in failure and refuse to ever meekly accept it. Failing is okay so long as you learn and keep going at the issue until its cracked, but ultimate failure with pats on the back all round is not acceptable. The stakes are too high and too many generations have waited too long.

I would love to think that in a democratic society that the Government and all of Parliament would be engaging and compliant when it comes to public demands to finally get real and deal with these freaks properly.

Nothing would give me more pleasure if by way of the democratic process we can transform the present culture of pathological leniency to one of righteous punishment. Maybe that is possible. I certainly think it is, they are like a brick wall but I have always believed that the accumulative effect of high profile public actions + a political figure on the inside + a body of academic research can lead to what would be a far better place than where we are at today.

But it would be amiss of me to fail to at least mentally prepare for a situation in which no matter what the Government steadfastly refuse to start locking up these abusers and predators as standard – and for far longer. Or they may make some cosmetic changes that do not tilt the balance back in favour of the people and fail to send a zero tolerance message out.

What if they adjust a few child abuse laws but ignore the pet abuse laws or vice versa? This is no good since there is parallel and overlap between the two. There is no use going after bits and pieces of a disease that has taken hold. You have to go after ALL of it and not relent until every trace is purged. That is logically the only way to transform any nation to one which currently tolerates this evil manifest to one that does not.

The reason why you should have high expectations is that its your life and your family and your community that is being blighted by this disease. Its your country and you do not have another one.

High expectations means never accepting any slithering excuse offered out by anyone in public office as to why these freaks cant be locked up as standard. All of their ‘reasons’ are lies and cop outs.
High expectations simply means that you think you and your family have a right to live in a country where feral freaks and sexual predators aren’t given a free pass by the state to destroy your country and put people you love at risk.

Its ridiculous even calling them high expectations but it shows how far we have sunk. It also means simply taking it on that those convicted of abhorrent offences against children and animals MUST be caged. You cannot entertain the idea of any sort of alternative sentence, no home curfews, no tagging, no mere pet bans. Its not good enough.

I have also lost count of the instances in which a convicted child sex offender has been relocated to a house not far from primary schools and public parks. Not to mention the numerous examples of them just upping sticks and moving without bothering to tell anyone.

What we are tolerating and accepting right now are a set of circumstances that are objectively wrong and possible to change dramatically. What we are living in right now is a set of circumstances which are the definition of insane.

This is so much bigger than two guys and one tragic story with a dog. This is bigger than pet abuse taken in isolation.

I don’t think a good enough word really even exists for this but what we are dealing with here is a diseased culture in which (for too long), the most twisted abusers of animals and children have been given an all too easy time of it socially and legally.

This seems to have culminated in this mass of total deviants whose actions are off the scale extreme and disturbing.

Many of these apparently different types of abuser almost seem to have morphed in as one entity, at least to some degree. Here’s what they all have in common – they are routinely set free and you’re placed at risk when it was possible for you not to be.

However, I personally believe there is probably even more cross over between different types of abuser than even the most recent studies show. I think there will come a time when the consensus will be that the the sort of mind who could batter a pensioner could just as easily batter a pet and if he could do those he could just as easily batter or sexually abuse a child.

I think there is going to come a day when I might be faced with no choice but to take this out into the streets but in a meaninfful way. As you can see I have my own style of doing things so it would stand to reason that if I were going to take this out into the public domain that I’d only do so if I felt the components were in place, and a meaningful style could be fashioned.

I see a difference between a protest and a rally. They really amount to the same I guess, but with a rally the emphasis tends to be on a more bolder front. A protest could be ten people outside a church hall. That could never be a rally.

I suppose you could say that a rally is more a stylised protest with the emphasis placed on being on the front foot, as opposed to a protest which starts out on the back foot.

The difference is subtle but there is a difference.

If you are organising a rally then you need a clear idea of what you are rallying against or for. The clearer and simpler it is the better. The more you pigeon hole it or make it too obscure the less of a success it will be in numbers and coverage.

A ‘save the wood pigeon’ rally just isn’t going to speak to the general public as a rally that was themed around a zero tolerance stance against child and pet abusers. I’d definitely fuse the two things together because of that cross over and due to the fact that both are a corrosive phenomenon which weak people in power just aren’t dealing with. I think you could build a fairly sizeable presence around that.

Once you have that determined in your mind you’d then need a location for it. This would require some thought but I think it should be done in such a way that doesn’t default to the tired “What about London” thing. I’d be far more inclined to do some research and find out the towns where those types of abuses are most frequent, per head of the population. I’d ideally bring it down to just one town or city that has unusually high instances of both. That would then be the location.

West Yorkshire and then Greater Manchester recorded the highest % of animal abuse according to polled figures.

rebel3

rebel2
Birmingham appears to lead the way when it comes to child abuse.

rebel4
The next thing you need are people. Lots of people. This is where things often fall down for those who attempt such things. For all their good intentions when they finish up with ten people on a rainy day then my heart goes out to them, but that must be deeply disappointing.

If I thought that was going to be all that could be mustered I just wouldn’t bother. It would seem like far too much effort for no pay off. And in some ways it can look a bit demoralising, because what people may take from it is that ‘no one cares, the world has gone bad’.

I’d only want to run with it if I thought that (through a combination of means), I could get 2,000 people into that town or city. Ten people on that rainy day are easily ignored. Two thousand on a clear summer day are not. The sight of a handful of people does not cause a chill to run up the spine of abusers and get them thinking their easy life days are numbered.

A strong presence of 2,000 absolutely would.

Do I think it would be plausible to generate a presence of that number? Probably. I’d have to put my mind to it and I’d have to develop ways and means to not only promote it but persuade people they have a moral duty to show face. Most if it would be in the promotion though. If promoted properly and creatively then yes, it would be plausible to attract a number in that region. Especially if you have a proper plan and lead in time.

Its a big enough number to create a big splash but not so large that its totally unmanageable. One plus point in this case is that you’d have zero opposition from any political group or movement. Wanting to throw those who burn dogs, sexually abuse kids and beat up old people is not really something that either the left or right tend to turn up to oppose.
These are social and moral issues, they cut across artificial constructs like political parties.
There are some issues that are so clearly and obviously wrong on a human level that left/right is redundant. This is one area where anyone can put that stuff to one side and just be fathers, brothers, sisters etc who definitely want to see a change of direction in which abhorrent and obviously dangerous individuals are properly punished and the public made safe from them.
A paedophile doesn’t ask your politics before he grooms your child. A zoosadist doesn’t ask your politics before he steals your dog.

Most political discourse in this country centres around the economy. While a strong economy is key and worthy of discussion at the right time, far too much discussion is afforded to it and very little to moral issues. A nation is NOT a business and it cannot be run as one. When a nation tries to operate as a corporation it loses all incentive to pursue that which is moral and right in favour of that which is financial.

This is why you’ll see someone hit prison for a tax dodge faster than for child molestation. In a nation run like a corporation the former is effecting their bottom line. The latter becomes an irrelevance to them.

But if a nation were not run as a corporation but as a thriving body of thinking people and to serve their interests, then while a strong economy would still be desirable, these moral matters would be right at the top of the list of priorities.

The fact that there wouldn’t be any sort of counter reaction would work in our favour, as it tends to be those most likely to attract a large counter reaction that the police get their pants in a knot about. They don’t want the risk of fights and injury so with many such things they will slap a public order label on it and ‘shut it down’. Or they will place a huge number of insane restrictions that include making the people walk off the beaten path.

However, all of this is usually done to try to avoid fights with opposition groups. This would not apply here. You are not going to get Dog Abusers United or Child Rapists Lives Matter showing up, lets be honest (these groups aren’t real!). So long as the police didn’t think we’d chimp out and start hanging paediatricians from lampposts in error, then there is really no good reason for them to piss on our freedom to assemble.

You’d need some sort of structure to it. You can have the place, the date, and you can have a strong and appealing rallying call. You can even have your 2,000 people. But something still needs to ‘happen’. You cant just sort of meet up and mill around.

There are several ways to do it that, in their own way, would work very well. I’ll explain two ways here. The first way is to actually have a fixed location within that town. This could be a public park or some other open space. You can then go about building a platform, inviting guest speakers to each talk for half an hour.
Nothing to stop you adding on some other features, so long as you get a location that you have the freedom/permissions to do it on. You then invite the press along to attend (which they would, for at least some of it).

The benefits of this way are that you are doing well to inform and inspire if you get good guest speakers, you get your press write up (on some level), and I suppose it has opportunities for people to network etc. I would probably regard that as the most conventional way to do it.

Then you could choose a way that wasn’t conventional, did away with the need for a fixed location, permissions, guest speakers and over heads.

This unconventional way definitely wouldn’t be a place for dogs or children to be around (just not practical).
An example of an unconventional (but unquestionably visually spectacular) way would be to take your 2,000 people, you have your pre selected town and when you arrive you have to stay split up for a time. Just filter into different pubs across the town centre. You cant have one mass of 2000 people in one pubs so you just filter out across a range of places in the city centre.

Then you wait until its dark and at a pre agreed time everyone spills out of their meeting points to form one spontaneous looking mass. Get some amazing looking banners made up and since its dark (albeit there is always electric lighting), why not go for the really bold visual and make it a torch lit deal.
These can be bought and held entirely legally from here (among other places)
http://www.glow.co.uk/procession-torch-candle.html
And here
http://www.hfmgroup.com/n-wax-torches.html

rebel1
The benefits of this are its unexpected and seemingly sudden nature, together with unlimited photo op’s which can be taken and Tweeted anywhere in real time. It could be filmed, live streamed,you name it, its all pretty easy with equipment that most have.
Even if it lasted much shorter than the conventional approach, there is an argument for saying it would have greater Internet potential, and from that Internet potential the press pick it up anyway. Besides – you can be sending live video to the local press as it happens.

rebel

So that’s two very different ways with very different benefits explained. Perhaps with the latter named there is also more of a visual implication that the days of abusers having the easy life are at end.

Let me know in comments…

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s