In a few days time we will know the outcome of this totally pointless snap election. I’ve yet again refused to cast a vote for any of our establishment parties. I’ve only voted once but that was for a single issue and not a party in an election. Anyway, barring a surprise of massive proportions the ‘new’ Government will be the present one. Its only important to me in the sense that at least after its formal we will all know who we are meant to be mainly lobbying.
With that being said its not going to be easy to get whoever the Government are to move quickly on this. For one thing it is way down their priority list, esp now, with evil events going on all over England. For another thing, those at the sharp end of the abuse cannot advocate for themselves. Obviously.
There isn’t what you’d call much of a visible push from within politics itself. With some issues the push very much begins from within a given party or Government. There also isn’t much push from the established animal charities, SSPCA, RSPCA et all. Its for those reasons and more that its definitely not going to be a simple stroll. You need only look at the fact that the laws haven’t changed much in a century to see that this will be no stroll.
We can and must win punishments that better fit the crime. Without that solid foundation in place all else is secondary. However, to suggest that it will be extremely easy and done without resistance or hindrance would be a lie.
Its going to take a great deal of endeavour, resolve and conviction from people that the goal resonates with. If our collective will to put these offenders away is greater than the will of offenders to be free – then the outcome is inevitable. My own will burns as brightly and as strongly as ever.
If the single biggest obstacle is that Governments have collectively never seen it as much of a priority so (they) kick the can down the line then the logical solution is to change that – you must force the issue further up the priority line.
Think of it like a Top 40. The Government may have 40 issues that they would consider a priority. Its not necessarily that all 40 are there on moral merit or anything. The issues that make the Top 40 will be those that directly and clearly have the people who make the most noise, who organise best and who fund their chosen issue until it breaks into the Top 40.
The reason why little wankers like AF and DF weren’t locked up decades back is no puzzle. The issue and goal simply hasn’t had sufficient advocacy that was well enough organised and funded. I assumed it would be something the RSPCA would have dragged over the line in the past century – but they haven’t.
Some of the issues that drift into the Top 40 might have well off backers behind them, I mean very very well off. Its not everything but everyone understands it does make a vast difference to .. anything. Not having it just makes the task a great deal tougher, because you are then aiming to effectively change the course of the judicial future in this regard with very little in the way of resources.
No use lamenting the fact that we might not have rich backers like some PR group representing a big corporation that wants Government to bend laws to suit their clients.
I’d sooner appreciate the fact that at least we have managed to get most events done that we wanted to do. We may not have the human resources of a lobby group like … AIPAC. They have 7,000 full time lobbyists whose sole goal and aim (in the USA) is to get Washington and Congress to bend to their will – and they do.
We are and always have been purely voluntary. Anyone that ever works with us always understands that. There are definitely times it would be great to know you could hire a person to do this thing or that, but that’s just not remotely possible. Other than contractors all we have to offer is knowing that you are doing a good thing, the right thing, and that while this may not be the only worthy thing that needs addressed in this country – its definitely one of them. We all have a duty to convince the next Government of that – once and for all. We’re not going through another election after this one with the status quo as is. Its not acceptable. Its not moral. Its long overdue.
We don’t have financial resources on our side and we don’t have large human resources. We cannot pay off politicians by proxy as representatives of big companies can do. We cannot use corruption to achieve what we want to achieve – and if it was done by corruption it would feel like a fake win to me.
Here is what we do have going for us.
I think we have a fairly civilised population who want to do the right thing. I also think they are flat out unaccustomed to anyone bothering to invest the time and energy to advocate for issues that matter to them.
They’ve been depraved of it so long that it can take them a while to fully wire themselves into the grid so to speak. Having a fairly civilised and relatively well off population is naturally a better starting point than a nation where the people were culturally less civilised and extremely poverty stricken.
An Operation Frankish in Romania would first have to get around the small fact that much of the population hold a totally different perspective toward dogs and cats than you do. It would be an erroneous task. On the flip side, an Operation Frankish in the US of A would be very liable to flourish. That’s why the nature of the people and their level of income is a positive in the fight.
We have truth on our side. This is a golden egg because there are lots of very monied pressure and lobby groups whose intentions are not built on any sort of objective truthful objective. The truth we have on our side is that every time a Frankish type goes free then its a perpetual miscarriage of justice. The truth we have on our side is that such people are without question dangerous and far more deserving of their actions and their pathology being taken seriously in law. And it is also true that unless you take a zero tolerance approach that evil like this festers and spreads.
We see this with all things. Think of the problem neighbours who move in to a previously quiet street where everyone got along. The longer you leave it to correct their anti social behaviours and the more you turn a blind eye (or even appease them), the more liberties they will take.
In pretty short order they will have destroyed your community.
This is similar(but) on a macro scale. There is a problem. It has been allowed to fester under the radar for decades. And now its destroying everything. It will go on doing so unless it is stopped.
The first thing you do to stop it is rule with an iron fist. No more sissy sentences and lets have the expectation of big time jail time. The deeper lying stuff can certainly be looked at in due course but you build a strong house by laying a solid foundation – this must be the solid foundation as many other things will then sprout from it.
We may find a new set of issues in the very near future and those issues will be less freedoms to do stuff due to all this red alert terrorism. Doing things in parts of London was problematic enough last year. Two evil terrorist incidents there and one in Manchester isn’t going to give us more freedom, lets put it that way.
Look forward to more regulations and bureaucracy which, while not designed to get at us, will somehow end up curtailing some of the things we could have once done. Time will tell, but we will just have to evolve and work around it.
On the way to getting those long overdue reforms I do think there is practical merit to occasionally picking out an offender and making an example of them.
My reasons for doing it or wishing to do so are probably a bit different to the mass. Mine aren’t really born from anger or hate. My reasons are anchored in the practical merits. The results speak for themselves. We did it with those brothers and we literally turned them into the most infamous pet abusers in British press history.
This then sparked its own organic panic among both cowards who were never permitted to settle. This then shone a big old light on important factors – how they were enabled to change their names by the state, how the police failed to act when very extreme material attributed to AF was sent to Cleveland police (not the video), it was like peeling back the layers of a diseased onion.
I think that it also serves to lend a little more measurable justice to a clearly paltry and frankly offensive sentence. It keeps the target on edge and on their toes. There are probably a ton of other practical gains to this tactic but those are enough good examples.
I’m in favour of deploying it as a special and exceptional tactic – because its proven to work and work extremely well.
The problem with it? Simple. To do is properly and to do it well takes far more thought, planning, risks and resources than the average person might imagine.
Its for those reasons that its a tactic that can only real be deployed for those that truly merit being on the wheel of misfortune. There’s no use us doing it half cocked with a target. If I couldn’t do it in the way we filleted them then I’d sooner wait until we could.
In an ideal world we’d be able to do it with all of them and at any time, and with the same level of intensity. Obviously this is not viable.
We get links to abuse cases often. We may on occasion put one out for public information. We’d love to be in a position in which we could order a series of actions how we did with the F brothers. But, as I say, it takes a great deal more thought, risk and planning than may seem apparent.
You cant just go crashing in with no thought behind it because it only back fires. That’s what I mean when I say I don’t do these things and I don’t give up my time driven by anger or hate. I think if it was hate that drove me then I’d probably have driven this cause over some sort of really stupid legal cliff by being too reactionary and emotionally driven.
I simply see these ‘people’ as a serious problem. I view them as sub human or anti human. I think I’d only have anger or true hate for that which I considered fully human. I see them (and I am serious) as … a virus.
That’s my own perception of them when I think of them, they are a virus, they can spread, they cannot be allowed to spread.
There’s lots of viruses I’d love to fight off if I had one, but I don’t know that I can consider something a virus and then credit it with human currency of hate or anger.
I see it more clinically.
The virus must be removed, reduced, and, if not eliminated entirely then at least shrunk to a level that is no longer an on going danger.
(Smallpox Virus – Once considered a deadly burden on the planet. Reduced to being a near non issue in a few decades. It used to kill approx 1 in 3 worldwide. Hating it did not good. Isolating it and negating it did. People like Frankish and Frankish are a virus in human form. Isolate and negate.)
The first thing to do with a virus is isolate it. No use shaking your fist at the virus on your device, right? You isolate the virus. And then you quarantine the virus. Your device works as it should once more.
That’s how clinical I am in my perception of the issue and the enemy. I hate their actions. I have felt anger. But hate and anger don’t drive me on.
If anything its a form of love that drives me on. A love of the idea of a nation that was the World leader in dealing with such sicko’s. A love of the idea that we can have a new generation born into a society in which the new norm would be to see this offence as a very serious thing that could cost you years of your life. A love of the thought that our efforts might spare many thousands of pets in the future, and, who knows, perhaps other related abuses as well. And a love of the people that have believed in what we are sincerely trying to achieve for everyone’s eventual benefit and who have never wavered. Don’t confuse love with soft. The love of something can be just as, if not more of a motivation than a hate of something. There is nothing soft about OF and not when it comes to our perceptions of these ‘people’.
All things that aren’t currently in existence can be brought to pass. By the same token, all things that exist that shouldn’t can be beaten back. Not by themselves. But by creativity and force of will. Today such offenders generally don’t see the inside of a cell and if they do its for weeks. But what exists today does not need to exist in your tomorrows. One day in the not too distant future its absolutely viable that we will be measuring their punishments in years.
As things stand they would be put in with the general prison population, even with much longer sentences. Paedophiles are kept separate, albeit they do get reached and they have even been murdered in prison. No loss.
I’d be okay with leaving them in the general prison population, but what I would prefer in the long term is that they were kept in isolation for the length of their sentence. All of it. We don’t have that facility today. But this isn’t physics. These are just man made laws and guidelines. If they are too weak or if they have proven to have failed the victims and society – then of course man made laws can be changed.