I’m at work. I’m bored. Make me laugh.

Trawl Rockall for:

War over the War on Crime™ and the causes of crime rages unabated

The three main political parties took time out last week from vying with each other over who would take the toughest line on terrorists to vie with each other over who would take the toughest line over common-or-garden crime.

Labour got in the first blow with tougher laws on knife sales, random drug testing for prolific criminals and town centre bans for drunken violence. The Tories quickly counterattacked by claiming that Labour were engaged in blatant electioneering whilst themselves pledging 40,000 more armed police in helicopter gunships — if elected. For their part, the Lib Dems promised marauding packs of dogs trained to attack anyone looking a bit shifty.

Charles Clarke was quick to respond saying that, if Labour win a third term, a new violent crime bill will be one of the first measures introduced after the general election. "We plan to make this one of the most violent crime bills anywhere in the world," he explained. "As far as we are concerned the police know who did it, whatever it was, and the only thing standing between solving crimes and the police are the courts. Our bill will short-circuit the system by allowing the Bobby on the beat to administer 'summary justice' on his own authority. These 'short sharp shocks' can be offset against reported crimes thus raising the clear-up rate and saving on expensive prosecutions."

The Tories countered with proposals to replace trial by jury with a simple reader poll in the Daily Mail. Michael Howard said: "We envisage a daily poll with the pictures of twelve suspects, a list of eleven crimes (plus an innocent verdict) and a range of punishments. Readers would use their skill and judgement to match the options." The Shadow Attorney General, Dominic Grieve, commented: "In my experience you can always tell if they are guilty, just by looking at them, so this proposal is simple common sense. It will save time and ensure criminals get what’s coming to them." A Tory spokesman hotly denied there would be prize draw amongst winning entries to allow one conscientious citizen to win a delightful, rose-clad cottage in Dorset: "This is a civic duty, it would be entirely wrong to offer any form of inducement," he snapped.

Civil rights campaigners were outraged by the Tory proposals, but have since been mollified by a "Double or Quits" clause. Liberal Democrats, meanwhile, explained how in their plans packs of fox hounds — now facing execution following the shameful banning of their livelihood — could use their transferable skills and register as "Community dog-packs". Trained to attack anyone smelling of clothes pegs, lucky heather or tarmac, these dogs would report directly to beat officers to whom they would bring pieces of suspects for DNA fingerprinting, identification and burial. "We see this as a neat blend of old and new crime busting technologies," enthused Charles Kennedy.

As this report goes to press the debate continues. Summary execution for dropping chewing gum on inner city pavements and a sort of robotic judge which would administer cybernetic justice on the streets in a post-apocalyptic 21st century New York are among the more plausible proposals under discussion.

Previously

• Champagne corks pop as crime figures plummet
• Home Office to challenge basis of British law
• British public ordered to stop and search each other

 Email an enemy  Pub-friendly printable version  ‘Politics’ index page