Sunday, 22 December 2013

Lowlife charities

Do you consider violent, drunken yobs to be "victims"? No, I don't either -

"A front-line team of volunteers has been confronted with the aftermath of assaults, drug abuse and too much to drink as the Christmas festivities for some got out of hand in Norwich. Sky News spent the night following staff on board the city's SOS bus and medical unit as they coped with one of the busiest party nights of the year. It was not until after 1am that the trouble really started. The police called the bus to say a woman was intoxicated nearby. It emerged she had not only drunk too much but had also taken drugs. She was taken in a minibus back to the main bus to be checked over. Shift leader Holly Brown said: 'People can go unconscious, choking on their own vomit, they can be incontinent. We need to judge what has happened. We need to make sure they are OK as we want them to get home safely'."

Didn't the police use to nick drunks and druggies - making sure to call out the police doctor to tend to them in their cells, if their lives were at risk? 

And if they were just a bit the worse for wear, didn't the police direct them to the nearest bus stop or taxi rank, or ferry them home if they were young - and give their parents a stiff talking to? Unless they were injured, in which case the police would call the ambulance out? The boys in black are reneging on their responsibilities and dumping their workload onto a victim-culture charity. And similar outfits are being set up all over the UK. I don't suppose Robert Peel thought it would come to this when he set up the world's first modern police force.


  1. Or announce, around 8 p.m., that they'd use taxpayers' money to help anyone 1. genuinely in need 2. not intoxicated but no one else. They're the parents' responsibility then.

    1. Why did your comment bypass Google Mail for verification, and end up hiding in Blogger admin, as if you'd given your name as "Anonymous"?

  2. whatever happened to being responsible. I never ever went out and got so roaring drunk I was unable to get myself home, but then I never took drugs and vomited or became incontinent in public either, I never even got arrested ...God what a boring pleb I must be.
    But I don't see it that way, in my world it's called moral responsibility and my children now aged 26 21 and 19 have never ever done these things either, admittedly their father (my ex husband has, hence why he is my ex) but my children had me to steer their moral compass and although we all like a drink we also like to remain dignified and more importantly alive after a night out. I thought nights out were meant to be fun not some sort of self punishment, Why do people not seem able to enjoy themselves and think it's only a good night out if they can't remember what the hell they got up to???
    It confuses me beyond measure.
    Self inflicted I have no sympathy.

    1. I think they're rebelling against an increasingly mad society, but in a stupid way.

      BTW, your comment went the same way as James' did.


Keep it clean.....