When we speak about poverty the tendency is to always think of it in terms of economic poverty.
There is economic poverty in the UK, but relative to the rest of the World even our most economically impoverished aren’t eating rat.
Here in Scotland anyone can get homed by declaring themselves homeless. It may not be a mansion that a person gets, but they will be given a roof over their head. If they genuinely have no money there are systems in place to help. No one here pays for or has to worry about medical bills.
I’d like to talk about another kind of poverty – moral poverty. It is entirely possible for a nation or society to have a veneer of wealth and civility and yet, under the surface there is an acute poverty of morality.
In Britain today I do not consider economic poverty to be as big of a threat as the moral poverty that I see all around.
You can have as many holidays, take away, alcohol and hedonism as you like. None of it means a thing if there’s moral decay underneath it.
There is clearly a moral poverty at the top of society. If that were not so then we wouldn’t routinely see the judiciary pander and bend over backwards to accommodate the animal torturers, the child rapists and the collectors of material in which both are systematically abused.
We would not have judges refusing to send a convicted offender to prison because he ‘could be at risk’. We would not have a case of a judge letting a man convicted of the possession of the most serious abuse material walk free on the grounds “he plans to start a family”. We would not have a perverse situation where just about any sick and twisted little punk can get a free pass by simply claiming he or she is needed to “help look after a relative”.
It has gotten to a point where the judgements and the comments by judges are like something from a satirical magazine. You almost have to check to ensure what you are reading isn’t a parody.
Our public officials are so lacking in the most basic morality that a cabal of social workers and police officers chose to turn a blind eye while kids were being groomed and raped in one small English town – for over 15 yrs.
If they are capable of that then you can surely see how such people need replaced root and branch OR literally forced into doing that which is clearly moral.
With that being, you get the public servants that you merit. If you tolerate low standards then there are no shortage of those prepared to take a nice salary from the public purse and provide you with the lowest of standards.
They don’t mind if you later moan at their incompetence, so long as generic moaning is as far as it goes. Once they have their feet under the table and their hand in the public purse, it often takes a scandal of seismic proportions to shift them from their well paid role.
It would be all too easy to point to the general establishment and accuse them of low moral standards.
The most widespread and common moral poverty exists among the general population itself.
I’m no dreamer and understand there is no perfect world. But I absolutely and steadfastly believe that there are things that go on in our country TODAY which we could push back against and as a result we’d be left with a much better society – for everyone.
Its irrefutable. There is absolutely no reason why we “need” to accept present sentencing limits for examples of psychopathic sadistic cruelty. We’re not dealing with a fact of physics or a command from God here. Its only paperwork and legislation. The only reason why you have the limits that you have is a person(s) must have sat down at some stage and settled on the figure. Therefore, what can be written can be rewritten.
How does the justice system attempt to form a semi cohesive sentencing system based on a huge spectrum of actions? Its very simple. They broadly base it on what they consider to be the public consensus on how serious a given action is. Most of us would agree that pre meditated murder is probably the ultimate transgression which is why this is reflected in law. Most of us would also agree that smoking a joint in public wouldn’t be worthy of a prison sentence which is why almost no one would ever be sent to prison for it.
Thus, if you hold the view that the justice system itself isn’t fully getting the gravity and violence involved in actions like those of those brothers then the most obvious explanation is that the justice system and the establishment do not yet believe or accept that the general public themselves consider it worthy of much harder and more immediate action.
The same can be said of the leniency shown to those convicted of possessing and distributing child abuse material. If there exists a culture in the justice system of leniency then, at least in part, it may be taken from the perception that there’s not the visible public demand for it to be treated more severely.
This then throws up an interesting question. If the justice system relies on a visible public consensus to shape law and to shape sentences for given offences, where are they able to see it?
If they do not see a relentless and highly visible public demand for animal sadism to be treated by way of much stronger sentences then the legal system has no incentive to initiate change, they may even get the false perception that change is not required.
Indeed, that is what Government departments would presently tell you – that change is not required.
They’ve decided that by themselves, but if there is visible public push back then what they consider sufficient very soon becomes a hot potato for them, they get the message that the public have decided its not sufficient.
We have to keep in mind that those in high office are not necessarily all evil in some way, but they are absolutely detached from most of us on an economic level and a social level. They simply cannot always relate to what it means to mainly working class communities to permit leniency toward sadists, psychopaths and predators. Its not as if those they are lenient on are likely to spend a million and move in near them. Its not as if their children are liable to come into contact with them. And if they are in high office then they live in gated communities with a hot line to the police.
The bottom line is this. If ordinary people like you and I want to ensure that offenders like Frankish pay the price for their actions in the future then its down to us as people to cause as much of a public storm as we can with that aim in mind.
This is about far more than what they did to the poor dog, the dog is long dead and there’s nothing than be can done to reverse that. This is about forcing those in high office to open their eyes and LOOK at the level of sadism and violence involved, this is about forcing those in high office into publicly admitting that those who engage in such acts are by definition a danger to people. This isn’t an emotional argument as such, since there is enough facts, evidence and research that would fully inform anyone in high office how much of a danger such people are. This is about building that which can hold those in high office to account if they fail to act upon the evidence presented.
This is about changing the near future by our actions of today. If we broadly accept the meme that ‘those who do this to animals often go on to do it to people’, do we not then have a moral obligation to do all in our power as men and women to do all that we can to ensure that our public servants are forced to take it WAY more seriously at the point it is an animal? That seems a logical first step.
Come down hard on those convicted of extreme sadism to animals, send them to prison, and from that stage on at least the authorities would always taken such a person far more seriously than now – they’d lose many more rights as well, even after they had been released.
We are not financially in poverty as a society right now. I read today that the average adult spends £50k on drink in their lifetime. We spend huge amounts weekly on fast food, entertainments, things we don’t need or use, we even buy and totally waste vast amounts of groceries.
What we do have is a moral poverty.
Perhaps one could say that the more a society declines into moral poverty the more they try to substitute it with entertainments and buying stuff.
We need to set a far higher moral bar, we need to press reset and start over.
It is simply not acceptable to me on a profound level to see people of this type treated with such wanton leniency, knowing that they are a constant danger to the unsuspecting or vulnerable.
It should not be acceptable to you either. You have one country. Be the boss of it and don’t fold and meekly give in to those whose entire reason for living is to destroy and cause suffering to the vulnerable.
It should not be acceptable for you to be subjected to having these people thrust into your communities. Your safety and quality of life should not be undermined just to accommodate the safety and quality of life of those who want to burn your pets alive or rape your kids.
You shouldn’t be made to feel so utterly demoralised by reading case after case in which the offenders put two fingers up to victims and justice.
But you are going to have to fight, work and battle for better if you want better.
Its no longer enough for us to be good people in our own life, our own little bubble. Times are too dangerous. There are far too many people out there today who will ultimately ruin the very fabric of the nation you rely on to be a good person in your own life. Your streets and neighbourhoods will be more dangerous and as they grow more dangerous, so dos the threat to your family (unless you want to start putting bars on windows and locking yourself in).
There are already neighbourhoods in which good people are virtual prisoners, terrorised as they are by groups of little violent yobs who are only tough in odds of 10-1 and, even then, with weapons. Why is this accepted? The police will often go down, but they are limited to what they can do and these little bastards know it. If the fire services are called they are often subjected to stones being thrown and their officers being attacked.
Why do we put up with and tolerate this as a norm? Weakness. Everything stems from weakness or softness. The bully will always target that which appears weak and soft, testing it out first, before finally findings full confidence and they take total charge.
I want people who feel sick at the weakness as much as they are sick of the deviant actions. The more sick someone is of the weakness the more readily and willing they will be get take action and demonstrate some push back.
I want people who are tired of being trampled on by a justice system that routinely permits utter freaks to be free and at large to live among us with almost zero punishment.
I want people who are so sick and tired of it they simply refuse to accept it and who take the view that’s its down to us, the ordinary people, to push for a radical change in several areas.
By doing that, by pursuit of that aspiration, we can rediscover the dormant morality and take our nation back from those whose only goal is destruction.