Planking and drugs- in whatever order you like.

It was hard not to mention the many blog posts about planking.  I share the sentiments of many doing this assignment that the idea of planking is pretty stupid. Good luck to whoever wants to do it. I personally lie down for about 8 hours while I sleep so I feel confident that I can find better things to do whilst I’m awake. BUT. And there is a massive ‘but’ surrounding these activities. To outlaw the practice and make it illegal? What a ridiculous idea. How about criminalising laughing or making it illegal to meet up with your mates at the pub: oh hang on, the bikie laws came close to doing that last one.  The government has done well to outlaw fun in this state. It’s hard enough to park your car in a spot that won’t incur a fine. You can’t smoke at the beach anymore. You have to drink beer out of plastic because a few idiots think it’s fun to stab each other in the face after a couple of sherbets. Anyways, my point is that the governing authorities appear all to eager to criminalise an act once the media get their hands on a topic that people want to read about. I don’t like dickheads who talk about themselves and how good they are really loudly on the phone. Should that be made a criminal act? I’ll leave that in your hands.

 

Going on a tangent, I want to bring up the topic of criminalisation and de-criminalisation. In particular, the decriminalisation of drug possession in Portugal. You may wonder how I got from planking to drug crime, but I think a few lines about planking is more than enough. In 2001 the Portuguese Government decided to decriminalise any acts previously seen as criminal relating to personal possession of drugs, including marijuana, cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine. The results of this policy implementation are impressive. A report commissioned by the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank in April 2009, found that in the five years after personal possession was decriminalized, illegal drug use among teens in Portugal declined and rates of new HIV infections caused by sharing of dirty needles dropped, while the number of people seeking treatment for drug addiction more than doubled (CATO,April, 2009).  The numbers speak for themselves, and I have included a link for any interested in further results of the study.

This approach was seen as radical at the time- it still is – but those responsible for being bold enough to tackle a severe problem with an approach that was instantly going to draw mass criticism ought to be commended for actually trying to solve the problem; not just to be seen to be doing the right thing.

The Macquarie Dictionary defines a ‘crime’ as “an act committed or an omission of duty, injurious to the public welfare, for which punishment is prescribed by law, imposed in a judicial proceeding usually brought in the name of the state”. (in Goldsmith et. al, 2006).  In my opinion, all laws need to be reviewed regularly and amended appropriately in order to reflect the wants and needs of contemporary society. I don’t for a second suggest that all laws are too strict and everything needs to be decriminalized. I just feel that certain laws, although necessary to maintain public safety, need to be reviewed and updated to achieve real results, such as those seen by the radical policy changes implemented to drug users in Portugal.

 

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html#ixzz1P3BlXlRD

state election

NSW STATE ELECTION- TOUGH ON CRIME AGAIN?

Another year, another year of putting up with a rubbish state Government.

What is it that we expect from the state Government anyway? I believe it is the main role of the respective state governments to take care of the people of those areas in the departments of roads and transport, health and hospitals and education. We here in NSW seem to be getting rather neglected on these fronts- has been the case for as long as I can remember.  Oh, and as always there is crime. As we all know, one of the major playing cards for parties wanting to be in power is the assertion that crime will be reduced, making us the people safer and happier. Haha. How about responsibly spending some valuable resources on housing and education to attempt to reduce the need or want for people to commit crime. Hey what am I saying? That’s a crazy idea that’ll never work. Instead we get the old     “we’re gonna be tough on crime” spiel.  Since Bob Carr in 1995 we have heard the same old gas bagging about how the Government will be - and needs to be-  tough on crime and tough on criminals.  Carr also floated the idea of minimum mandatory sentencing, stating that if minimum sentences were more severe, the deterrent factor would be more prominent and help to reduce crime levels. Never mind the fact that measures such as these will inevitably overcrowd our already overcrowded prisons and put further budgetary strain on the tax-payers.

I (very studiously) stumbled across an article from The Sydney Morning Herald from 2002 on this exact topic that I happen to agree with wholeheartedly. The author, Adele Horin (2002), suggests that, as I stated earlier, the Government might be better off diverting time and money to education in order to create a better and less crime ridden society.  She makes a point that echoes my sentiments directly, “Educated, well-parented and much-loved offspring from good neighbourhoods can be found in jails, true, but they are the exceptions. If a state wants to cut crime it has to be serious about tackling its causes - neglectful, inadequate or abusive parents, school failure, "toxic" neighbourhoods, alcohol and drug abuse and long-term unemployment.” This election we were promised from both sides 500 new cops on the streets in an election that saw a much more toned down approach to the issue of crime than has been evident on years gone by. Turns out we’ll be waiting longer for those police officers than had been hoped anyway.  

Why not for once take a long term approach to any and all issues of governance instead of these ‘band-aid’ fixes to the situations and preying on the vulnerability (or perhaps ignorance bordering on stupidity) of voters that genuinely do want to see a reduction in crime and the causes of crime?

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/09/06/1031115934715.html

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/06/25/watching-the-detectives-nsw-kept-waiting-on-promised-new-police/

an eye for an eye

CRIME IN THE MEDIA- LET’S BE THANKFUL.

Firstly, I must note that I do not intend to offend anyone from Iran or any country with laws that I will refer to in this piece in my words as ‘backward’. This is purely my opinion and as always I expect that many will disagree with me.

There was recently mass coverage in both the print media and television surrounding the case of a woman in Iran that had been attacked with acid to the face by a man from whom she had rejected several marriage proposals. This attack left the poor woman severely disfigured and in extreme pain.  What comes next is almost as, if not more, shocking. The punishment for the attacker was set be blinding by acid to the eyes. An eye for an eye. The woman who was attacked requested that she be the person to administer the punishment, as if this act would somehow help her to cope with the senseless act that left her life no doubt in a state of ruin.  The sentence was later postponed, prompted by intervention from the Amnesty International agency for human rights.

ISNA reported on its website just hours before the appointed time for the punishment to be applied, "The execution of qesas (retribution in kind) of Majid (Movahedi)... has been postponed to an unknown date,". (AAP, 14/05/2011).  

I find the fact that the Government of Iran would even consider this course of ‘justice’, let alone enforce it, absolutely astonishing. These laws are implemented through the act of sharia law that is held up in many Islamic governed nations. I feel that these laws (I don’t know all the practices involved with sharia law and am not completely denouncing the whole affair) are completely backward and am surprised and shocked that in this day and age such acts continue to be entertained.  

The media in Australia had a field day with this particular story. I believe that the case for this coverage is because of the issue we have discussed throughout the CRIM2027 course, being people’s fascination with crime and in particular those acts that are far removed from their day to day lives.  Relating to this case, I think that mass media coverage can only be seen as a positive step, allowing for more people to gain knowledge of the oppressive conditions under which many people are forced to live and hopefully encourage action against such governments that practice in such an inhumane way.

Also, let’s be thankful that we don’t live in a country where acts like this are all to common.

http://www.muscatdaily.com/Archive/Stories-Files/Iran-eye-for-an-eye-acid-attack-punishment-postponed

Moral Panic

MEDIA MADNESS- CRONULLA & LESSONS STILL NOT LEARNT

Although the Cronulla riots of December 2005 were (thankfully) quite some time ago now, there are still many important lessons to take from the awful events that took place in Sydney around that time. The media has been blamed by many for inflaming the situation and creating even further social unrest long after the riots themselves had finished.  

The Muslim community at large was persecuted after the actions of a few people from within that community. Not only is that wrong, but it is also most definitely not the role of the media to influence people’s thoughts or behaviour. Of course the blame cannot fall solely on the media- the people who take vigilante actions into their own hands are ultimately to blame. However, the focus of this post is to assess the role of the media: what the media does do and what the media should do.  

Stanley Cohen wrote in his 1972 publication “Folk Devils and Moral Panic: the creation of the Mods and Rockers” about the media’s ability to influence the public through the articles it chooses to publish and the events it chooses to cover. As has been said time and again, Cohen’s words are as relevant today as they were in the 1970’s. the power of the media is undeniable. The Cronulla riots are the perfect example of such a moral panic being whipped up by mass media irresponsibility. Sydney tabloid paper The Daily Telegraph as well as 2GB radio’s Steve Price and in particular Alan Jones were seen as somewhat accountable for inciting violence and unrest in the community due to the irresponsible nature of their coverage of the events.  Alan Jones as we all know needs to be taken for what he is- an idiot. Unfortunately there are people out there who listen to him and respect his views. Even worse, there are people out there who act upon his suggestions. On December 7, 2005 Jones said on air; “It seems the police and the council are impotent here. All rhetoric, no action. My suggestion is to invite one of the biker gangs to be present in numbers at Cronulla railway station when these Lebanese thugs arrive...It’d be worth the price of admission to watch these cowards scurry back onto the train for the return trip to their lairs...Australians old and new shouldn’t have to put up with this scum.”

This is surely not responsible reporting and there need to be more strict guidelines put into practice in order to stop such outrages comments being thrust upon the public. As I stated earlier, it is up to the individual to decide how to act, however it is also completely inappropriate to let the media get away such cowboy antics unscathed.

The lessons of Cronulla riots media coverage were not headed either. This was evident in the case of the media’s favourite paedo Dennis Ferguson. The media coverage of Ferguson’s release from prison, and subsequent daily movements was nothing short of sensationalist. Lynch mobs arrived at his house carrying a pine coffin for poor old Denny. I don’t for a second like the bloke or anything he does. The point here is though, that the media ought not to be allowed to cause a frenzy in the public due to extended and overtly opinionated coverage of any events.

COPS

COPS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgYnmN1zwx0

What better place to begin with crime and the media than the classic television show that is COPS. COPS has made a return to television on the channel ONEHD in a new prime time slot. A show such as this, with all its violence, foul language, drugs and general portrayal of seedy crime related activities being broadcast during family viewing time speaks volumes about the public’s insatiable appetite for crime that we have been discussing during this course.  What is it that fascinates us all so much about seeing a cat fight between to crack head hookers or a father pulling a gun on his drunken son for taking his car without asking? Sure it’s hilarious to watch these stories unfolding from the safety and comfort of the couch, but would any of us really like to be involved in these scenarios in our real lives? I highly doubt it. That is the thing with the ballooning popularity of crime in the media: it is (in general) a life that most of us don’t actually live, rarely even see I would imagine, that makes these seemingly crazy lives so interesting to delve into for a half hour or hour at a time. 

I started really watching COPS about ten years ago when I finished work late at night and nothing of note was on television to drag me away from Cops. I was fascinated by the general stupidity of the shows subjects- I still am. The only other crime shows of note that were around at the time were basically the original aw & Order and The Bill. There were other British murder mysteries but they were a lot less frequently aired and seemed to target a much older demographic of viewers.  However, the thing that has me really interested the more I learn about the world of crime and criminal proceedings is the way in which the criminals are treated by the police officers on COPS. The other week whilst watching the show I saw a set of events that astounded me. A man was pulled over whilst driving simply for being in a part of town that is known for substance abuse and prostitution. That alone makes me mad. Sure, it did turn out that he was in possession of crack cocaine, but to not even be allowed to drive around a certain suburb in the safety of ones own car without the fear of being arrested seems ludicrous. What happens next was even stranger. When the man was removed from the car he was immediately handcuffed- a practice that seems commonplace in the States, and may not be that absurd given the love of firearms in that country- then had an officer stick his hands in the man’s mouth to retrieve drugs that the cop suspected the man of carrying. Surely this is far too much an invasion of privacy and human rights neglect than is necessary. Now I understand that many of you will completely disagree with my viewpoint, so I pose this question for you- if the drugs were in the mans mouth, and therefore within his body, should the police not require a warrant to search him?  If the drugs were up the man’s ass and not in his mouth would the officer just as happily gloved up and headed in there too? All I can say is that although I find Cops ridiculously entertaining I hope to God that Australian police never end up with the invasive powers that the cops in the US appear to possess. 

crime and the media

MY CONSUMPTION OF CRIME MEDIA

I think my fascination with crime began as a child watching gangster films. I was fascinated with the lives the characters in films like Scarface and Goodfellas lived- they were seemingly above the law and lived the life they wanted to, regardless of "the rules". Needless to say I thought this was pretty cool. Fortunately though, I was able to leave my fascination with crime to watching films and documentaries and reading books about the topic, although I do still have somewhat of a creepy fascination with serial killers. This is not always the case for kids who show an interest in the area of crime, which leads me to my more recent interests regarding crime. I became more and more interested in the views people hold on crime and criminals and particularly in the views of those people who take the approach that 'the rules are the rules and shouldn't be broken' - if someone commits a crime they ought to be punished, regardless of the circumstances preceding the event (more often than not completely unknown to these onlookers).

The naivety that is demonstrated by some people I have spoken to in the past really has ground my gears on occasions.  Some people do choose a life of crime out of reasons other than necessity or lack of options, however that is a whole different topic that requires it own discussion. What I am referring to in this post is the issue of accessibility to life options (or lack there of) and the effects this can have on the path people take and their subsequent involvement in actions that are perceived to be of a criminal nature. A phenomenon known as social inequality does actually exist and the disregard of this matter by many people both in positions of power and authority and in the wider community in general really pisses me off.

The bulk of crime media on television these days focuses on the more ‘glamourous’ side of crime. CSI, CSI Miami, CSI New York, Law & Order, Law & Order SVU, Law & Order CI, NCIS, Criminal Minds etc. tend to portray the life of crime fighting as one big party chasing crooks who for  peddling drugs or killing a girlfriend for looking at a bloke the wrong way. We all know that in reality this is not the case. Much of the time spent by police officers on duty is filled with paper work or routine operations. More recently these side of crime fighting have been shown through domestic productions such as RBT, The Force, Send in the Dogs and the new AFP show.

I personally tend not to watch all that much television, however during the undertaking of this course I have forced myself to view more and more of these shows to get a feel for exactly what the media is doing by pushing all this crime related junk on us.

I must admit however that whenever I see a crime related story in the newspaper I am drawn to it and I suppose my consumption of this crime media is fuelling the fire of crime stories published day in and day out in all types of media.  

Maybe with the push in the US of a squeaky clean image of pop culture being chased by people like Justin Beiber all this fascination with crime will dissolve and ill soon be watching shows that teach me how to straighten my hair. Let’s hope so!

just started blog

Just started blogging.