Andy_W
Well-known member
In this instance, you can greatly reduce it though, if the criminalisation or banning becomes enough of a deterrent, and the scale of the deterrent will reduce the instances. Of course it will never stop though, not with just that and open-sided pitches.In a nutshell
We haven't yet worked out you don't 'stop' something by criminalising it.
I know what you're saying though about criminalising things doesn't stop anything, of course it doesn't. America has the same issue with guns.
Punishment and criminalising doesn't really work in that instance as the guy who gets shot is still dead, the only chance they have is prevention, deterrants don't seem to work so in that instance there needs to be a barrier, which is removing the guns and preventing access.
Same with drugs, criminalising doesn't work with that, as they're just so far in demand that due to the price which can be demanded for them, and the profit available, there's always going to be money available to convince people to take risks importing them. The only way to stop these is at the source, which is practically impossible. Barriers don't work as things will always get through, due to volume.
It's horses for courses though, like with football, people don't want barriers, and people were still going on the pitch when there was no banning order (just a telling-off) so that deterrent didn't work, so all you have is increasing the deterrent from a telling-off to a ban. It won't solve the problem fully, but will reduce it as much as possible, without physical restrictions. Nobody wants barriers and I can't imagine people would be up for stopping people with existing criminal records or a history of trespass from going to games.
