Michael Noonan's hoodie ban

[Macy]

I really can't decide on ASBO's. My lefty heart says they're bad, but then the local shops in Manch used to be plagued by, eh, plagues of little townie shíts. Petty vadalism aside, their main role was to intimidate people walking past, particularly older people, and particularly again women (and not so young women at that). For example me mam, and her neighbours would drive the 3 minute walk as the late opening shop was the other side of them. This has been significantly reduced in recent years since the introduction and threat of ASBO's.

I am obviously worried about the blatant abuse of them by some police forces, but it's hard to argue that they've worked in some situations.

On the hoods up on hoodies - I'm not sure what the problem is. It's only in the shop you have to have them down, not the whole time. If the stats are correct it's hard to argue if it's purely not to have hoods up inside shops. As has been said, no different from making bike riders take off their helmets.

[John83]

I am obviously worried about the blatant abuse of {ASBOS} by some police forces, but it's hard to argue that they've worked in some situations.
Sure they'll work. So would tagging everyone, tracking our movements continually, and thus getting a 100% detection and capture rate. The problem with that is exactly the same as with ASBOs - potential abuse. I don't think anyone here needs to be reminded of what crooked policemen are capable of, or that they exist. I also have a problem with the government having that kind of authority and power, no less with that than with the Patriot Act. I just don't trust those people.


As has been said, no different from making bike riders take off their helmets.
I tend to agree with that.

[Lionel Ritchie]

Sure they'll work. So would tagging everyone, tracking our movements continually, and thus getting a 100% detection and capture rate. The problem with that is exactly the same as with ASBOs - potential abuse. I don't think anyone here needs to be reminded of what crooked policemen are capable of, or that they exist. I also have a problem with the government having that kind of authority and power, no less with that than with the Patriot Act. I just don't trust those people.

I tend to agree with that.

The highlighted bit is sensationalist in fairness John.
Again I'd agree and have concerns on the likelihood of ASBOs being abused -but the concept, fairly applied, is sound.

[John83]

The highlighted bit is sensationalist in fairness John.
Again I'd agree and have concerns on the likelihood of ASBOs being abused -but the concept, fairly applied, is sound.
Sure, it's an extreme example - that's the point. Why would you object to being tagged though? Got something to hide? :p What's so much worse about being tagged than being wrongfully arrested and charged on insufficient evidence? Go on, tell me, what elements of ASBOS do you think are better than tagging?

[pete]

Again I'd agree and have concerns on the likelihood of ASBOs being abused -but the concept, fairly applied, is sound.

Don't judges have to approve these just like search warrants?

[dahamsta]

I'll come back to the stuff I was tackled on earlier later (if you catch my drift), I just don't have the brainpower for it at the moment. I just want to add this:


Cops on the beat are widely recognised - particularly by the police themselves - as not being a significant source of crime-busting. Without gettign all Dvaid Brent, that is a fact.It may well be Steve, and I can't argue with that because it is a fact that that belief or opinion exists (note emphasis). But here's another literal example: CCTV is widely recognised - particularly by the police themselves - as being a significant source of crime-busting. This is despite the fact that:

in many cases, crime has simply moved off-camera; and
in some cases, crime has become more violent as a direct result, because of the increased risk involved.Further, there is zero evidence - zero - that CCTV is better at solving crime than policemen on the beat. Zero because the two have never been compared properly. Zero because they can't, because politicians have cut the arse out of the budgets for beat policing.

Further more (futhermore!), where do we stop? Crime has moved off camera, so by the police's logic, we need to keep adding cameras -- until they're in your street, your driveway, your living room, your bedroom. Yes, I'm exaggerating, but really: Where does it stop?

Actually I will cover the policemen on the beat thing now, because I'm on a roll, but I won't quote anyone because I'm in the middle of this post. :)

No, I wasn't suggesting that we should have a policeman for every retail outlet, etc out there, and with respect, that's a bit of a silly conclusion to draw because it's illogical, and I rarely make illogical statements. (Ok, sometimes I do. But not that illogical.)

Policemen on the beat is a numbers game, that in an odd way is very, very like gambling, casinos in particular. Calculating the number of policemen required on the beat is very like running the numbers for the roulette wheel, or the Blackjack table. It's all about calculating and managing risk, crunching statistics.

It's like that because beat policemen tend to come across crime randomly: because they happen to be passing when a crime is being committed; because they're nearby when someone calls in a crime to the call centre; because someone spots them in the next street and shouts for them.

At a certain point in the numbers game, the police will hit a sweet spot where a very large proportion of crime is being tackled in this way. Any less policemen and they won't catch enough; any more and it's not cost-efficient. It works very well when the numbers are crunched properly, and the only reason we're not seeing it work today is because of cost-cutting.

I'd give good odds - while we're on the subject - that if they stopped surface cost-cutting and actually spent a bit of time tallying the cost of all that CCTV, and the cost to the community of bad policing (and the lack of community policing, which is hugely important socially), beat policing would win hands-down.

With all that in mind, I tag CCTV as the same kind of garbage policy that I talked about earlier: bad political decision made by bad politicians, all done in the name of budgeting my security. I don't know about you, but I don't want my security budgeted, I want it examined properly, considered carefully, and implemented in a way that makes me secure. If it costs more to do it right, I don't mind paying for it.

It's too late to take the cameras down now, but it's not too late to stop putting up more and more, and it's not too late to get back to good, old-fashioned, community beat policing. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. And it wasn't broke. It was just considered too expensive. By morons like Michael Noonan*.

adam

PS. By beat policing I'm not just restricting myself to plod. I'm talking about plod, community policing (i.e. liasons), cruisers, etc.

* Of course Noonan isn't a moron. He's obviously a very clever man, or he wouldn't be a politician at all. But you wouldn't think it to look at this garbage.

[dcfcsteve]

Is it? I'm not talking about having a cop on every corner. I'm talking about the police responding to reports of crime. The force is undermanned as it stands, and that impacts on their ability to deal with "petty" crime.


Hence, they need more staff. Are you suggesting that we ignore those crimes? That would make them effectively legal. Where's your car parked?

ASBO's are a suggested solution to petty crminality that blights the lives of people in the areas in which they occur. they are not a perfect solution - but in the context of the ongoing budgetarey pressures faced by the Police and governments, they are an efficient way of dealing with thse problems.

Look at it this way - employing more Gardai/Police in sufficient numbers to make a significant dent on anti-social behaviour would cost an absolute bloody fortune. Societies in most Western countries (with the exception of the Scandis) are increasingly tax averse. No-one will want to pay the many, many millions needed each year to recruit, train, pay and service a large increase in Police numbers. We can all pretend that that isn't the case, but it simply is.

Therefore - we have the reality of a situation where Police resources are limited. They should therefore sensibly be prioritised towards the activities that will have the greatest impact and be of the gratest importance. Chasing spides with spray cans around council estates are sadly not the greatest priorities - even if it does make the lives of those who live near those spides hell.

ASBO's offer a very cost effective solution to this problem. For a miniscule fraction of the cost of placing many additional officers randomly around, or dragging them away from serious work to visit the scene of petty crimes, they effectively force the individuals responsible for anti-social behaviour to self-police themselves, under threat of action.

The key thing with ASBO's is to ensure the requirements for their granting is fair - in particular with regards the weight of evidence required. You can't just slap an ASBO on someone for no reason, you know - there has to be evidence, often gathered from local residents who are being extremely brave to come forward to report instances, and a judge is involved in granting it. I can honestly say I've yet to hear of anyone served an ASBO who has been widely regarded as innocent. Given we often hear of innocent people being caught by other laws, I'm sure that sooner or later if someone entirely innocent got one, we'd hear about it through the media. This hasn't happened because the weight of evidence required helps insure that, beyond reasonable doubt, you are targetting someone who is guilty of behaving in such a way.

In summary - society doesn't want to pay the significant increase in taxes necessary to fund a sufficiently large boost in Police numbers to ensure the manpower is there to tackle anti-social behaviour directly. Given this reality, the option is to either let such anti-social behaviour continue in the face of greater police priorities - or seek a solution that will tackle it in an effective, cost-efficient and in-the-balance fair way. I have yet to hear of any alternative to ASBO's that will do that.

[Peadar]

Just to expand on this a little further, I think everyone convicted of any criminal offence, should have their DNA stored on a central database for a minimum of 3 years.

I also think that driving licenses and passports should contain biometric data.

If you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear.

[dahamsta]

I think everyone convicted of any criminal offence, should have their DNA stored on a central database for a minimum of 3 years.The big stuff, yes. But not "misdemeanours", i.e. posession of soft drugs, petty crime, etc.

(I could have retorted with "you want traffic offenders in a DNA database Peadar?", but I've decided to be entirely logical and passive today. :))


I also think that driving licenses and passports should contain biometric data.Possibly. But not RFID, because it's too dangerous, even with encryption. (The american administration doesn't want any!)


If you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear.Rubbish.

(Oops, there I go again. But you are talking rubbish. If you have nothing to fear, you'll have no objection to walking around in the nude, with the aforementioned tag attached to your ankle, and CCTV in your bedroom. After all, you have nothing to hide, right?)

adam

[John83]

Possibly. But not RFID, because it's too dangerous, even with encryption. (The american administration doesn't want any!)
I've read a bit on that. Frightening prospect.

[WeAreRovers]

Simple fact is that ASBOs criminalise young people. If they are guilty of crimes, then find the evidence, charge them and convict them. ASBOs are yet another example of the criminal justice industry gone mad - like CCTV and extra police powers. What happens in the UK now, happens here soon. Just look at Noonan's idea cogged from the Brits.

Bare in mind that we have an election looming with the added fact that the Daily Mail will be published here from January. Then we'll see the Noonan's and McDowells trying to outdo each on being "tough on crime" for the Mail and Irish Indo readers.

Also, both main blocks (FF/PD and FG/Lab) are right-wing and this is only going to get worse. As I said yesterday Blair lost his 90 Days vote but it has still been increased to 28 days. Scary stuff, and personally I put individual liberty way, way ahead of dealing with "skangers" or "chavs". BTW It's not a criminal offence to fall in to either of these categories.

As Adam says put more cops on the beat, Steve's point about high vis cops actually proves Adam's point. They are meant to be high vis to deter crime not to catch criminals. Deterrence works far better than anything else but it seems to have been left behind in the rush to criminalise large sections of society and to hand draconian powers to untrustworthy police forces.

KOH

[anto1208]

Simple fact is that ASBOs criminalise young people. If they are guilty of crimes, then find the evidence, charge them and convict them. ASBOs are yet another example of the criminal justice industry gone mad -
KOH

well you dont get an asbo for helping old ladies across the street , you get it because you break the law , people who break the law are criminals , its not the asbo criminalising them its there own actions ,


the whole point of asbo's is to stop young kids having to be sent to jail which is just a criminals college ,and in most cases finding the ring leader and taking him out of the situation does actually work .

[Dodge]

I also think that... passports should contain biometric data.

Ours will within a couple of years. Its an EU thing


[quote]If you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear.
Unless databases can be hacked?

[John83]

Unless databases can be hacked?
Or sold.

[Peadar]

you'll have no objection to walking around in the nude

Adam, if you went outside every once in a while, you'd see that it's bloody freezing! Besides, other men get penis envy when I'm nude. :D

[WeAreRovers]

well you dont get an asbo for helping old ladies across the street , you get it because you break the law , people who break the law are criminals , its not the asbo criminalising them its there own actions ,


You're not getting me - if you break the law you are punishable under the law. ASBOs are outside the normal criminal justice system. Obviously people who break the law are criminals but they should be dealt with under the ordinary statues of the law.

KOH

[Lionel Ritchie]

correct by the word of the law Rovers but well off in real terms and of no comfort to people who's lives are made a misery and an expensive misery at that by these people.

Given a choice between preferring to see some chavs and waahs made prisoners in their own homes by their own actions -or my 70 something parents, my wife and my 7 month old kid made prisoners in theirs by having to surrender the streets to them -I know which option I'll take thanks.

[WeAreRovers]

Given a choice between preferring to see some chavs and waahs made prisoners in their own homes by their own actions -or my 70 something parents, my wife and my 7 month old kid made prisoners in theirs by having to surrender the streets to them -I know which option I'll take thanks.

Without being facetious - First they came for the chavs and I did nothing.......

KOH

[dahamsta]

Ours will within a couple of years. Its an EU thingActually it's not Dodge, it's an American thing; or rather it's driven by America, and the EU isn't complaining very loudly. The US administration is requiring certain countries to implement biometric passports by a certain date if their citizens want to visit there. Ireland is one of those countries being bullied, both directly by America, and indirectly via the EU.

Bulliying and blackmail, pure and simple. This is what our friends are reduced to.


Besides, other men get penis envy when I'm nude. Funny, they laugh their holes off when I'm around. But it's not the size of the wave that counts, it's the motion of the ocean. :)

KOH, you should edit that with the rest of the quote, most people won't get it as is and it's a very telling quote.

adam

[John83]

KOH, you should edit that with the rest of the quote, most people won't get it as is and it's a very telling quote.

adam
I think the original was by Niemoller, referring to the Nazis:
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak for me.

You'd better hope Godwin's Law doesn't come into this Adam. ;)

[Lionel Ritchie]

Without being facetious - First they came for the chavs and I did nothing.......

KOH

I'll do better than nothing -I'll tell them where they are. And when they're done they can come back for those lovable rogues who think local authority estates provide a legitimate forum for them to indulge their equestrian, rallying and motocross pursuits.

[Macy]

Without being facetious - First they came for the chavs and I did nothing.......

KOH
It is a bit facetious. What's the next line, "Then they came for the drunk drivers and I did nothing"

[WeAreRovers]

It is a bit facetious. What's the next line, "Then they came for the drunk drivers and I did nothing"

Macy, Macy, Macy!!!! Drunk-driving is illegal, being a chav isn't. This FG/Lab coalition's going to be very friendly altogether. ;)

John 83 - Cheers for fishing out the Pastor Niemoller quote.

KOH

[Dodge]

Actually it's not Dodge, it's an American thing; or rather it's driven by America, and the EU isn't complaining very loudly. The US administration is requiring certain countries to implement biometric passports by a certain date if their citizens want to visit there. Ireland is one of those countries being bullied, both directly by America, and indirectly via the EU.

No the EU started it way before the Americans. Its actually been an EU law the past few years but we (ane evryone else) are way behind. The visa waiver requirement of a MRZ on passports and now the biometric stuff came later. Helped speed it up maybe but the Eu was miles ahead of the US in this field...

[Bald Student]

Drunk-driving is illegal, being a chav isn't.I think the 'v' in chav stands for violent, so it probably is.

The point of ASBOs is that there are a lot of things which are annoying but you'll never be up in court for them. If you're harassing an elderly neighbor by kicking a ball up against her door all day or throwing eggs at her house it's perfectly correct that the guards have some means of stopping you without locking you up.

[dahamsta]

No the EU started it way before the Americans. Its actually been an EU law the past few years but we (ane evryone else) are way behind. The visa waiver requirement of a MRZ on passports and now the biometric stuff came later. Helped speed it up maybe but the Eu was miles ahead of the US in this field...I did not know that. Can you point me in the direction of some docs about this please, I'd like to read up on it.

Cheers,
adam

[A face]

No the EU started it way before the Americans. Its actually been an EU law the past few years but we (ane evryone else) are way behind. The visa waiver requirement of a MRZ on passports and now the biometric stuff came later. Helped speed it up maybe but the Eu was miles ahead of the US in this field...

There was a piece on Today FMs Last Word about a month ago on all of this, cant remember who spoke on it but was fairly good, .... the piece ... not the actual passports !!

[dcfcsteve]

Simple fact is that ASBOs criminalise young people. If they are guilty of crimes, then find the evidence, charge them and convict them. ASBOs are yet another example of the criminal justice industry gone mad - like CCTV and extra police powers.

It is nonesense to say that ASBO's criminalise young people ! It's like saying drink-driving laws criminalise drivers - when clearly they only criminalise those drivers who are doing something wrong.

ASBO's are just a legal document that says 'a judge has agreed that there's evidence of you acting anti-socially. Stop it, or you'll face stipulated legal actions'. Some ASBO's come with restrictions built-in based on previous misdemeanours, some are merely warnings of restrictions for any future such misdemeanours. They are therefore a means of forcing uncontrollable people to self-discipline/control/police *themselves*. Something that they appear unable to do without such drastic measures.

They are also not outside the law - they are an intrinsic part of the criminal justice system in England and Wales (and, I believe, Scotland). If they were outside of it, they would be legally unenforceable.

The evidence required to secure an ASBO *shows* that these people are guilty of crime. Evidence is required to grant one - and it often involves their terrified neighbours having the bravery to come out with evidence/witness statements. Evidence that the neighbours wouldn't provide for isolated individual low-level criminal acts under the usual laws, as they know nothing will happen to the perpetrators - who would then make their life an even greater misery for grassing on them. The law is completely ineffective at dealing with ongoing low-level criminality - particularly by those under 18. The perpetrators get nothing but endless cautions. If the law was made more robust on this, then you'd be complaining about criminal scentences and incarceration being handed out for graffiti. The Police have better things to spend their time on than chasing petty criminals who get away with ongoing crime because it is relatively trivial.

No-one here has suggested a workable alternative to tackling petty anti-social behaviour. Demanding extra police is simply not workable - as society does not want to pay the increased taxes required to hit DaHamsta's 'sweet spot' of effectiveness (which could require tens of thousands more Police nationwide). So without ignoring political realitieis - what is the alternative ???

You bemoan the "criminal justice industry going mad". Most people bemoan the fact that society is falling apart, personal security is worse now than it has been for years, and areas that were once pleasant to live in have been reduced to no-go zones in the hands of gangs of feral kids. Perhaps the increase in criminal justice is merely a reflection of increase in low-level criminality, and society's exasperation at it ? Cause and effect...

[WeAreRovers]

It is nonesense to say that ASBO's criminalise young people ! It's like saying drink-driving laws criminalise drivers - when clearly they only criminalise those drivers who are doing something wrong.

ASBO's are just a legal document that says 'a judge has agreed that there's evidence of you acting anti-socially. Stop it, or you'll face stipulated legal actions'

And that sir is effectively my point. Drink driving laws protect us against drink drivers. The Guards must have a reasonable suspicion to stop a driver, they must then either breathalyse or take a urine sample. The next step is to charge the individual (that's Garda talk for person. ;) )

Then the individual is summonsed to court where a judge listens to the Guard's evidence - if he or she shows up - and the judge then decides on a punishment if appropriate.

On the other hand, with ASBOs, a guard asks a judge to deem that an individual is acting in an anti-social manner and the judge slaps an ASBO on them. No court case, no due process, no right to appeal and the end result is that little bástard is now criminalised - in other words they have a black mark against them without the normal process having taken place.

Here's another bleeding heart liberal site I found which explains what I mean.
http://www.asboconcern.org.uk/

KOH

[dcfcsteve]

So let's assume for the moment that ASBO's are bad, wrong etc.

How then do you suggest low-level anti-social activity is tackled ? Beforeyou say 'through the usual procedures' bear in mind thatanti-social beaviour is incredibly difficult to tackle through the established legal process (which is wny ASBO's were dreamed-up) for the following reasons :

- The perpetrators are often very young, and therefore fall outside of most of the serious penalties within the criminal justive system. This fact is often well known to the perpetrators, who are well aware of the limitations of the Police's rights and the appropriate penalties.
- It is incredibly difficult to secure prosecutions when key witnesses are afraid to come forward, or where the 'crime' does not involve tangible evidence (e.g. hintimidation/harassment, racial, homophobic or sectarian abuse)
- The perpetrators are often in large gangs, with their identities obscured, so identifying the culprits accurately at the scene of the crime is very difficult.
- The Police do not have the resources to adequately tackle such low-level crime and thuggery, nor realistically will society accept paying for them to do so.

As I said at the very start, I don't like ASBO's. But I'll ask again - what is the viable alternative to make the uncontrollable element within society develop the required self-control ? What other realistic measures will tackle this problem ??

[Macy]

Drunk-driving is illegal, being a chav isn't.
No, being a chav isn't and simply being a chav won't get you an ASBO. Being a little dick causing trouble in your neighbourhood (or more often than not someone elses) and intimidating people going about their normal business is.

[anto1208]

On the other hand, with ASBOs, a guard asks a judge to deem that an individual is acting in an anti-social manner and the judge slaps an ASBO on them. No court case, no due process, no right to appeal and the end result is that little bástard is now criminalised - in other words they have a black mark against them without the normal process having taken place.

Here's another bleeding heart liberal site I found which explains what I mean.
http://www.asboconcern.org.uk/

KOH

yea but they have a black mark because of there own actions , if they were nt causing trouble there would be no problem , asbo's dont criminalise you for life anyway because as soon as you turn 18 or dont reoffened for a certan time ,it is wiped from your record . its only if you continue to reoffened does it matter .

and by the way some one that is continually reoffendeing should be kept on record .

all asbo's do is impose a curfew on the person really, and in most case's actually save the young person from entering the downward spiral into a life of crime .

[John83]

Here's another bleeding heart liberal site I found which explains what I mean.
http://www.asboconcern.org.uk/

KOH From that site:
"This has allowed asbos to be used to ban activity that is not in itself criminal, such as begging, prostitution and even playing football or being sarcastic."

Since when is prostitution not a criminal act? :confused:

Has there really been a case of someone getting an ASBO for sarcasm? That'd be just great.


all asbo's do is impose a curfew on the person really, and in most case's actually save the young person from entering the downward spiral into a life of crime .
Not true. It publicly advertises that you can get this guy jailed on hearsay. Would you like your neighbours to have that power?

The site above claims that almost half of them are broken, meaning that the kid in question goes to jail, that wonderful school where he can learn lots of nice tricks and pranks. Oh, what a joker he'll be when he gets out.

[Peadar]

I remember before I left England that they were talking about an ASBO being a badge of honour for kids. Anyway, I lashed "ASBO Badge of Honour" into Google and the page lit up!

Try for yourself and take your pick of the articles.
Here's just one example... (http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_13-6-2005_pg3_3)

[Dodge]

YOu can anything with the internet....

[pete]

So let's assume for the moment that ASBO's are bad, wrong etc.

How then do you suggest low-level anti-social activity is tackled ?


Canning? :)

I'm as liberal as the next person but amazing the amount of people here defending scumbags rights.

[Dodge]

Its not that Pete. Its more a "If we let them do this, where will they stop" concern that some have.

My own concern is that this is total band aid measure and does not tackle the problem at all. Have they any figures for the amount of criminals who have not been caught or convicted because they wore hoods?

[Lionel Ritchie]

Canning? :)

I'm as liberal as the next person but amazing the amount of people here defending scumbags rights.

:eek: Yeah ...feed the fcukin' waahs to the dogs I say!!!

Oh ...maybe you mean Caning;)

[dcfcsteve]

Its not that Pete. Its more a "If we let them do this, where will they stop" concern that some have.

My own concern is that this is total band aid measure and does not tackle the problem at all. Have they any figures for the amount of criminals who have not been caught or convicted because they wore hoods?

*** NO-ONE IS ANSWERING MY QUESTION !!!! ***

GIVE ME A VIABLE, WORKABLE AND REALISTIC ALTERNATIVE TO ASBOS's ???

Here's a few quotes from that article Peader posted :

"This administrative device was introduced a couple of years ago to halt the growing level of minor crimes that now threatens to engulf large swathes of urban Britain".

"In the recent general election, this lack of respect for elders, and the street violence now blighting so many city areas across the country emerged as a major area of concern".

"This debate underlines the extent to which petty crime is sweeping Britain."

Theres the issue that needs tackling ! There are serious problems with anti-social behaviour in many parts of England and Ireland. The guts of the existing criminal justice system dates back decades (nay centuries) to a time when gangs of very young feral kids didn't make the lives of large numbers of their neighbours a living hell. However - part of the nature of urban crime has changed - perhaps irrevocably. Like everything else when faced with change, if the law doesn't adapt to reflect this it will fail/die.

ASBO's weren't just dreamed up as some Orwellian conspiracy, as some of the "where will this all end" theorists on here would have you believe. They are an attempt to adapt the criminal justice system to reflect the changing nature of crime. It isn't perfect - but it's the best solution anyone appears to have come up with to-date.

So the question still stands :
*** WHAT IS THE VIABLE, WORKABLE AND REALISTIC ALTERNATIVE ??? ***

[Dodge]

BTW I didn't say I was against ASBOs. I'm against the hoodie ban as it is total reactionary politics.

Like Macy I'm against the ASBOs in principle but when its close to home...