|
6/8/01
The
Damage to Society from False Accusations
A
BUSINESSMAN is suing Surrey police for sending to a school information from the
force computer that wrongly suggests he could be a danger to girls.
The policy of allowing the police and other government employees to
spread, what are, effectively, nothing more than damaging rumours about someone,
just because they happen to have suspicions about him (and, of course, the
victims of such malicious suspicions are almost invariably males) is such an
appalling corruption of any decent notion of justice that it has to be opposed
vigorously.
It might also be well worth reminding these arrogant and
malevolent government employees that Thomas Hamilton, who eventually killed 16
children at Dunblane, was persecuted in just such a manner, and, further, he,
himself, claimed that his murderous actions constituted nothing less than direct
retribution for the way in which he had been victimised and harassed on account
of persistent and unfounded malicious rumours about his intentions toward the
children with whom he worked. Indeed, just prior to his infamous actions he had been protesting his innocence
in writings to the press, to the police, to Members of Parliament and even to
the Queen.
He was ignored.
The argument is, of course, that
'it is better to be safe than
sorry' when it comes to the welfare of women and children and the possibility
that they might be sexually interfered with, but this is almost always at the
expense of innocent men. (And ALL men should be considered 'innocent' until
proved otherwise, or, indeed, until something has actually happened!)
However, this argument is completely false.
For example, the result
of treating adults with unwarranted suspicion whenever they have anything to do
with children is that they withdraw from having much to do with them.
Indeed, it is
precisely because of this that, for example again, the two year old James Bulger
was able to be led openly to his death by two young boys along a route that was actually being
traversed by hundreds of adults.
Quite simply, if the two young boys who killed him had been at
school that day, the shocking murder of James Bulger could never have happened.
And it is only because adults now turn away from the children in their midst
that these two boys were able to wander around the streets and the shopping
centre for most of the day without anyone demanding why they were not at school,
and doing something about it; such as reporting them.
There is no doubt that the
rumour-mongers and
those who espouse the view that 'stranger' adults are not to be trusted around
children are the very ones who cause much of the child abuse that actually does
take place in our society today.
To appreciate this, try to
understand the following.
Imagine, for example, that there is only one potential child
abuser throughout the ENTIRE country.
Yes; just ONE.
Now, ask yourself this question.
How are the potential victims of this
single potential abuser more likely
to be protected?
1. By discouraging the general adult population from having
anything to do with children?
OR
2. By encouraging the general adult population to get involved
with children and to keep their eyes on them?
Well, 1. would clearly be preposterous. After all, there is only
one potential abuser in the entire country.
Would we really want to alienate the entire adult
population from having anything to do with children when the chances of a child
being abused is so unimaginably tiny?
And think of the horrendous
consequences of allowing all our children to do pretty much as they wish
because the adults surrounding them are too fearful to intervene in their
activities.
Further, of course, with all the adults generally 'looking the
other way', it is much easier for our single potential abuser to target the
children - just as the Bulger killers were allowed to do as they wandered
aimlessly about the streets - completely unchecked - and then walked off - completely
unchallenged - with the little boy.
And so, surely, with only one abuser in the entire nation, it
would be far better for our society to have even its 'stranger' adults involved
with the children - and keeping their eyes on them. After all, 99.99999% of them
will have a good influence and, indeed, provide an amazing amount of PROTECTION
against our single potential abuser.
Now, imagine that the number of potential child abusers starts
to increase dramatically. And the number reaches 500,000. There is now a
potential child abuser, or two, in every shopping centre - every day.
Which option (1. or 2. above) would provide the greater
protection now?
Well. It's the same one, isn't it?
Of course it is. There's no real difference. Just think of the
Bulger scenario again.
If people are looking the other
way, then there is a far greater likelihood of a child being abused, or, in this
case, killed.
And if there are thousands of
abusers around (rather than just one) it is sheer madness to make people 'look
the other way'.
Indeed, WHATEVER kind of 'criminality' is under consideration,
it is surely the case that the MORE of it that there is, the MORE policing that there
needs to be!
And this means that MORE people need to be involved in policing.
Not fewer!
If you have any remaining
doubts about this, just consider the situation where, for example, your very own
children are being taken on a school trip for two weeks along with, say, 100
other children. Which would make you feel more comfortable; a situation where
five of the school teachers were also on the trip, or where twenty such teachers
accompanied the children?
The reality is that the more
adults that there are to look after the welfare of the children, the safer it is
for them.
But the hysteria-mongers, who keep flaming the issues around
child abuse, and who keep successfully portraying normal adults as potential
abusers, are achieving the exact opposite! They are frightening the MILLIONS of
civilian 'policemen' into looking the other way!
And so it is that the argument that it is better for society to
trip easily into making unjustifiable false allegations on the grounds that 'it
is better to be safe than sorry' quickly backfires because the consequence is
that MILLIONS of 'civilian' policemen begin 'to look the other way' for fear
that someone might just 'trip' into the belief that they are abusers themselves.
And, if this wasn't bad enough, the resulting increase in the
anti-social behaviours of our children - that occur precisely because of the loss of so much adult
policing - heaps horrendous additional burdens on to our society in terms of
massively increased crime, poorer socialisation, lost education and, hence, EVEN
MORE ABUSED CHILDREN.
It also creates a
climate in which many more children end up being vulnerable to abuse.
Financially, these
hysteria-creators cost the nation MANY BILLIONS of pounds annually.
Socially, they tear up the very fabric of society and decrease
significantly the well-being of the entire population.
Psychologically, they are a
permanent and mighty curse on the nation's psyche, as most of its citizens
scurry around in constant fear of being abused, or of falsely being labelled as
an abuser.
And, to top it all, they actually
do far more harm to the very children that they claim to be so concerned about!
Fundamentally, the child-abuse
hysteria causes nothing but misery both to adults and to children.
And the same occurs when
the 'justice' system knowingly and willingly foists injustice upon its citizens
- by, for example, allowing the child-abuse hysterics to damage severely the
lives of innocent others merely on the basis of their 'suspicions'.
The public realisation that
there is, basically, an unjust, uncontrollable, hysterical witch-hunt being
undertaken undermines nearly all our relationships - especially those with
children - and it increases, therefore, the vulnerability of us all - and that
particularly includes the children - to those who might, in fact, abuse us.
Indeed, with regard to child
abuse itself, while such media hyperbole and deceit, together with the corruption of our
justice system and its officials, might well, in the end, result in more severe punishments for
genuine abusers who are actually caught, they do so by increasing enormously the amount
and severity of child abuse that actually takes place within the country in the
first place.
(For different angles on this topic,
also see Tea
Abuse)
Finally, in order to ram the
point home with a simple example, just imagine that your child was going on a
school camping holiday next week with 20 other children.
With regard to the specific issue of
sexual abuse, which would make you feel safer?
One teacher accompanying the
children?
Two teachers accompanying the
children?
Or ten teachers?
Surely, the children would be much
safer from sexual abuse if there were ten teachers accompanying them.
The more teachers the better.
Well. The same is true for
society as a whole.
But what the child-abuse
hysterics are doing is to make the vast majority of adults (the teachers) look
the other way.
|
