It is more often than not the adults who complain of the youth problem, it is found that ‘Frequently, police intervene to impose adult conceptions of proper behaviour over public space. Youngsters want to “hang out”, but adults find such behaviour intrusive and threatening’ (Page 46 Policing Citizens). Yet it is in these open spaces where the young have the chance to express themselves, they are no longer under house rules, this is where they can be themselves with their friends without having a watchful eye cast over them by a ‘rule setting’, ‘moral inflicting’ adult. This can be were conflict with policing nuisance may arise, because the guardians are not around to ‘police’ their children’s behaviour, it is down to police discretion as to how behaviour will be dealt with. The young fashionably rebel against rules, and when faced with a punitive stance to rebellious behaviour they rebel that bit more, it is what one could describe as a vicious circle, however, this does not mean that young people should be free to go about their business without prior thought for others, they need to be shown to be wrong when causing undue stress to others with their actions.
On the 31st March 2004, a 21-year-old male from Grimsby, North East Lincolnshire, was murdered whilst returning home from a night out. On his journey home he was involved in altercations with what has since been reported as a group of between 15 - 20 youths. Circumstances surrounding the murder remain undisclosed, however, what we may bring into question, is, what were this relatively vast number of youths doing, walking the public streets at such an anti-social time of the morning. Not only do we bring into the equation, what the youths were doing, but also the parent’s knowledge of their children walking the streets at such a time, has to be examined if public confidence in the young is to be improved. Parents set the example, they negotiate the rules, in which case they need to be held somewhat accountable for a child’s actions until that child reaches adulthood. This case is not an instance of nuisance in terms of this essay, but is a criminal offence, however, it amplifies the fine line to what can start out as deviant circumstances, i.e. a group of 15 - 20 youths walking the streets in the early hours of the morning, creating a nuisance in that residents would be somewhat fearful, into an altercation and penultimately, murder. The point here; if the intitial nuisance was policed, a crime may not have had chance to run its course.
In instances where behaviour is distressing fellow residents of a community, the adults need to show a cohesive dismay at anti-social behaviour, in order to show the youths that their actions are unreasonable; otherwise they may not see what they do as harmful to others. “Although not necessarily wrong or a crime, young people’s behaviour can still cause people to be annoyed, intimidated or live in fear of crime. Young people are not necessarily aware that other people can be affected by their behaviour” (http://www.renewal.net/Documents/Overview/Crime/Youthnuisance.DOC).
Some measures to tackle nuisance behaviour have been sought:
'Neighbourhood Agreements' to address anti-social behaviour by setting standards and targets are drawn up by some communities.
Voluntary and charity groups such as 'NACRO' may run mediation or advice services that can help communities sort out their problems with youth nuisance.
(http://www.renewal.net/Documents/Overview/Crime/Youthnuisance.DOC)
In Immingham (a small town in Lincolnshire), residents old and young were involved in an innovative meeting to discuss the social and economic regeneration of the town. The town has, like many others, been a victim to anti-social behaviour. The meeting brought about the establishment of a ‘Young Person’s Forum’ to allow the voice of the younger residents to be heard. This innovative measure is one of many, which draws on youth interaction with the problems in certain towns and counties. This could be something that other problem area's may look at adopting if proved successful, it gives the youth a sense of belonging, and with that comes self-pride, and one's own morals to uphold giving the community something positive in return.
Although measures are being sought to solve the problem of anti-social behaviour, punitive measures to deal with it are on the increase. Staying in the county of Lincolnshire, police in Grimsby are following up a “successful pilot scheme” (Grimsby evening telegraph mon mar 29 pg 3), enforced by a number of U.K. police forces, in dealing with anti social behaviour or as the local paper described it, “Instant fines for loutish acts in public” (Grimsby evening telegraph, Monday march 24th 2004, page 3). The police in these cases use their discretion to issue penalty notices, such fines include ‘Buying or attempting to buy alcohol for consumption in a bar or licensed premises by a person under 18’; ‘Consumption of alcohol in a designated public space’, both fore mentioned acts would carry a fine of £40, with the following carrying a fine of £80; ‘Using threatening words or behaviour likely to cause alarm, harassment or distress under section five of the Public Order Act 1986’.
So should we police nuisance? It seems through research that many attributable acts of nuisance has a lot to do with social conditions. The marginalized of society seem to come under closer scrutiny from the police than that of the bourgeoisie.
It may be argued, that nuisance can serve as a catalyst for crime, as has been demonstrated within this essay. To add further weight to this argument, we can look at how the broken windows theory applied by social psychologists can result in nuisance leading to crime. The theory is of the belief that; “A piece of property is abandoned, weeds grow up, a window is smashed. Adults stop scolding rowdy children; the children, emboldened, become more rowdy. Families move out, unattached adults move in. Teenagers gather in front of the corner store. The merchant asks them to move; they refuse. Fights occur. Litter accumulates. People start drinking in front of the grocery; in time, an inebriate slumps to the sidewalk and is allowed to sleep it off”. The theory has been strengthened, by looking at some of the most run down estates in the United Kindgom, when a deserted house has a window broken, it doesn’t take long before the building becomes more of a liability than a worthy residential property. The broken window theory is an example, of how letting such things as that, or in the case of this essay, a group of rowdy youths, can eventually lead to anti-social behaviour and ultimately crime.
Young people may feel victimised if they are constantly being watched, be it by local residents, or in most cases of nuisance complaints, the police. It is however, vitally important that residents be allowed to live without fear or intimidation, and whether the rowdy gang of youths on the street corner empathise with this or not, it needs to be sought to be implemented, not only for the residents but for the future of the youths too.
