:00:09. > :00:13.In the week, two unarmed woman police officers were gunned down in
:00:13. > :00:23.Manchester. We ask, is it time to arm all police officers or would it
:00:23. > :00:37.
:00:37. > :00:43.moved to an escalation in gun Good morning. Welcome to Sunday
:00:43. > :00:47.Morning Live. Following the killing of two unarmed WPCs in Manchester,
:00:47. > :00:52.shot Balfe -- shot while following up a routine enquiry, there are
:00:52. > :00:56.calls for all police to be armed. Would it help protect the public or
:00:57. > :01:01.would it encourage criminals to carry guns and lead to increase in
:01:01. > :01:09.gun crime? The violent reaction worldwide to the anti- Islam film
:01:09. > :01:12.Innocence of Muslims shows no signs of abating, igniting the debate.
:01:12. > :01:16.Should Ms Lin's learn to ignore inflammatory attacks or should they
:01:16. > :01:22.have the right to protest? Ajmal Masroor thinks they should rise
:01:22. > :01:28.above it. Muslims should lighten up and laugh at the stupidity of those
:01:28. > :01:38.who mop -- those who criticised the profit Muhammad. Love and marriage
:01:38. > :01:40.
:01:40. > :01:46.used to go together, but have the wheels fall off? Is the institution
:01:46. > :01:52.of marriage no longer relevant or is it more important than ever? A
:01:52. > :01:58.warm welcome to my guests this week, Mohammed Ansar is a visiting
:01:58. > :02:01.lecturer at Winchester University, and was the south-east England yo-
:02:02. > :02:07.yo champion at the age of 11. Jon Gaunt is a broadcaster and
:02:07. > :02:16.columnist. He describes himself as a working class educated person
:02:16. > :02:19.with a right-wing agenda. Douglas Murray is the author of Neo-
:02:19. > :02:24.Conservatism: Why We Need It, and has written for the Telegraph, the
:02:24. > :02:30.Spectator, the Wall Street Journal and the Sunday Times. We want to
:02:30. > :02:40.know what you think so call in to challenge the guests. Phone calls
:02:40. > :02:45.
:02:45. > :02:48.challenge the guests. Phone calls The killing of two women police
:02:48. > :02:53.officers in Manchester during the week has reopened the debate about
:02:53. > :02:57.whether she we should arm all members of the force. A significant
:02:57. > :03:02.number of the public backed the move, according to surveys, but is
:03:02. > :03:07.it wise to copy the American model with its high level of gun crime?
:03:07. > :03:15.For the first time in British history, two British police
:03:15. > :03:19.officers lost their lives in the field of duty whilst unarmed.
:03:19. > :03:23.a despicable act, one of pure evil. The cold-blooded murder of two
:03:23. > :03:27.female police officers doing their job. Another reminder of the
:03:27. > :03:31.incredible risks and great work the police are the stars. With the
:03:31. > :03:32.exception of Northern Ireland, the vast majority of police officers in
:03:32. > :03:37.vast majority of police officers in vast majority of police officers in
:03:37. > :03:43.the UK do not carry firearms. But do the police officers want to be
:03:43. > :03:50.armed? According to the most recent survey carried out in 2006, 80% say
:03:50. > :03:55.no. But the survey preceded a spate of gun crime. In 20th June 10,
:03:55. > :04:01.Derrick Bird went on a shooting spree, killing 12 people. The
:04:01. > :04:07.following month, Raoul Moat shot and blinded David Rathband as he
:04:07. > :04:17.sat unarmed in his patrol car. Would the public feel safer with an
:04:17. > :04:22.armed police force? According to a poll, yes. It could serve as a
:04:22. > :04:27.deterrent against criminal behaviour, but critics including
:04:27. > :04:31.the current president of the Association of Police officers say
:04:31. > :04:34.that carrying guns could put officers in more danger,
:04:34. > :04:39.encouraging hardened criminals do routinely carry firearms and
:04:39. > :04:44.breaking the covenant of policing by consent. Critics also claim it
:04:44. > :04:49.could leave to -- could lead to fatal mistakes. In the United
:04:49. > :04:53.States, many innocent people have been killed with police weapons.
:04:53. > :05:00.Could it exacerbate an already volatile situation or do we have
:05:00. > :05:04.the duty to call for the protection of our protectors? Do we have a
:05:05. > :05:09.duty to routinely armed police officers? I think it is right that
:05:09. > :05:14.we are on the police officers. We need to stop comparing it to
:05:14. > :05:21.America. We are in Belfast today, the police here all carry guns. Why
:05:21. > :05:31.don't we have it on the mainland as well? That is the question for
:05:31. > :05:35.
:05:35. > :05:42.today's vote. If you agree, text yes. You can also vote online or on
:05:42. > :05:48.the website. For full terms and conditions go to the website.
:05:48. > :05:54.Douglas Murray, Jon Gaunt says we should not look to America, is
:05:54. > :05:57.there a case for going down that line? It is always tempting to call
:05:57. > :06:02.for that option, everyone is still horrified by the tragedy earlier
:06:02. > :06:07.this week and people want an answer. You can never stand powered human
:06:07. > :06:11.wickedness entirely, in the same way you cannot stamp out violence.
:06:11. > :06:18.As much as we wish nobody ever carried a gun, there still will be
:06:18. > :06:27.people who do. What do you do about that? My own experience is that it
:06:27. > :06:33.is a highly specific skill having the skill to fire in crowded areas,
:06:33. > :06:38.the places where gun crime happens most often. Just to fall for the
:06:38. > :06:42.cliche of the American comparison, in the summer there was a shooting
:06:42. > :06:47.on Fifth Avenue in New York where a man shot his colleague outside the
:06:47. > :06:52.Empire State Building. Two police who were armed like most New York
:06:52. > :06:56.police pursued demand, he to get the gun again, there was a fire
:06:56. > :07:03.fight. Nine members of the public were winded, a number of them
:07:03. > :07:08.severely. None of them were winded by the gunman, they were winded by
:07:08. > :07:13.the two policeman, who started firing off the bullets. I do not
:07:13. > :07:18.think that is a happy situation, and it shows there is a level of
:07:18. > :07:22.amateurism that enters this if it is not specific. We need specific
:07:22. > :07:27.units trained in the use of firearms. We cannot discuss the
:07:27. > :07:31.Manchester case in any detail because of legal proceedings.
:07:31. > :07:38.Mohammed, what do you make of it? You can train the police but the
:07:38. > :07:42.morning you bring guns into officers lives, it becomes
:07:42. > :07:47.difficult. We need to shine a light on it. There is a strong case for
:07:47. > :07:57.arming the police, the estimates are there are 2 million licensed
:07:57. > :07:58.
:07:58. > :08:08.guns on the streets, and unlicensed guns, anywhere between 200,005
:08:08. > :08:09.
:08:09. > :08:13.million. We know that there could be quite a lot of guns. -- between
:08:13. > :08:17.200,000 and between 5 million. There is clearly a strong case for
:08:17. > :08:21.arming the police, but one thing I would say is we need to look at the
:08:21. > :08:29.track record. I'm a big fan of the police, they do great work, they
:08:29. > :08:36.have looked after my family on regular occasions, but when we look
:08:36. > :08:42.at various cases where people have been shot mistakenly, Hillsborough,
:08:42. > :08:45.is the police force ready and able to hold firearms? This is why it
:08:45. > :08:49.should not be a knee-jerk, it should not happen when there has
:08:49. > :08:53.been a terrible incident. There is need for a reasoned debate and it
:08:53. > :09:02.should have happened years ago. We need to look at what happens here
:09:02. > :09:07.in Northern Ireland. Nobody cares about it here and it works. At the
:09:07. > :09:13.same time, there is a need for police reform. The people we never
:09:13. > :09:18.ask this at to it is the police. There was a survey where 70% of
:09:18. > :09:21.police officers said they did not want to get armed. We also need to
:09:21. > :09:24.look at the criminal justice system. The reason there is 5 million guns
:09:24. > :09:29.on the streets is there is not enough punishment and severe
:09:29. > :09:34.punishment for people who carry firearms. The structure needs
:09:34. > :09:39.looking at and the police need to be given the necessary resources.
:09:39. > :09:43.If they do not want to be armed, that is fine. My personal belief is
:09:43. > :09:49.they should be, but we need debate. We need to stop the revolving door
:09:49. > :09:55.when people are out of prison too quickly. The criminals have already
:09:55. > :10:00.tooled up. You do not think it will encourage them to carry it more
:10:00. > :10:05.routinely? It is already happening. You can hire a gun in Manchester
:10:05. > :10:12.like that as if you were buying fast food. It has moved on, we have
:10:12. > :10:19.not moved the debate on. I want to get some police perspective. Darren
:10:19. > :10:22.Rathband is a serving police officer in Australia. He joins us.
:10:22. > :10:27.It was too late brother, PC David Rathband who lost his sight after
:10:27. > :10:35.being shot by Raoul Moat. I understand Australian police
:10:35. > :10:42.officers carry guns, what is your view on that? I have not
:10:42. > :10:48.experienced a barrier between the public. The communities are blind
:10:48. > :10:52.to the fact that police officers are routinely endured. The old
:10:53. > :10:56.approach is outdated, it is ill- informed and Iraq fatal
:10:56. > :11:06.consequences, not only for the police but the public, who know the
:11:06. > :11:07.
:11:07. > :11:11.police are there to protect. -- there could be fatal consequences.
:11:11. > :11:20.There is no reticence to approach police officers even though we have
:11:20. > :11:23.side arms. The public expect protection. If an officer is armed
:11:23. > :11:30.he can respond effectively. They would certainly think twice about
:11:30. > :11:33.confrontation, although the use of firearms here is extremely rare.
:11:33. > :11:37.have so much sympathy for what happened to your family, but one
:11:37. > :11:40.cannot help wondering, some of these cases which promote the
:11:40. > :11:50.discussion, whether it would have made any difference if your brother
:11:50. > :11:55.
:11:55. > :12:05.had been carrying a weapon? Would it have made a difference? When my
:12:05. > :12:08.
:12:08. > :12:13.brother was shot he was undertaking a normal incident. Would a firearm
:12:13. > :12:17.have saved him? Maybe not. It would have certainly given that deterrent
:12:17. > :12:24.to the person who crept up on him and shot him and gave him the
:12:24. > :12:32.catastrophic injuries that he got from being shot with an unlicensed
:12:32. > :12:35.illegal firearm. More officers are killed by the use of screwdrivers
:12:35. > :12:43.and nights. They need to be given the opportunity to protect
:12:43. > :12:49.themselves. Thank you for joining us. I want to bring in Andy Redhead,
:12:49. > :12:55.former firearms officer for the police here. Darren Rathband feels
:12:55. > :13:02.it is important police officers are given access to firearms. Is it
:13:02. > :13:08.correct? I can understand exactly where family members come from on
:13:08. > :13:12.every occasion that an officer loses their life in a situation
:13:12. > :13:19.where a firearm is used against them. There are several things here
:13:19. > :13:23.and debate is good and timely, however, we need to respect the
:13:23. > :13:27.fact that the latest poll shows that 80% of police officers do not
:13:27. > :13:33.want to be armed in the UK. That needs to be respected. That was
:13:33. > :13:40.some years ago. Absolutely, and a new port should be conducted.
:13:40. > :13:50.However I suspect it would not be massively different. We need to
:13:50. > :13:51.
:13:51. > :13:55.think about various things. Firstly, how many experienced police off as
:13:55. > :14:05.as would leave the service if they were forced to carry a firearm and
:14:05. > :14:06.
:14:06. > :14:13.how long would it take to recover that expertise? -- police officers.
:14:13. > :14:17.Secondly, like anything else in the police service, they have needed to
:14:17. > :14:21.learn new skills. If we want to routinely arm the officers, not
:14:21. > :14:31.everybody would be competent and proficient to be signed off as
:14:31. > :14:33.
:14:33. > :14:40.qualified. One weapon is one set of training, so firearms officers
:14:40. > :14:44.carried different sets of firearms. The ability to put 100,000 police
:14:44. > :14:52.officers into firearms training would take years. Yes, there is a
:14:52. > :14:55.debate but it is not something that would happen overnight. Yes, that
:14:55. > :15:01.is the practicality. There is the argument about whether officers
:15:01. > :15:06.would want to do it. Do you accept that? Yes, and the police need to
:15:06. > :15:11.be consulted. There is a massive reform going through, thousands are
:15:11. > :15:19.going to get rid of. What kind of police force do we want? We're
:15:19. > :15:24.going to get crime commissioners. Will that bring more
:15:24. > :15:27.accountability? The police need to be involved in these. We need to
:15:27. > :15:31.recognise the realities. I'm not sure it is accurate to compare
:15:31. > :15:38.Britain to the United States, but we should compare to other European
:15:38. > :15:43.countries. In 2003, there was a study done between Norway and
:15:43. > :15:48.Sweden, which have similar circumstances. In Norway they do
:15:48. > :15:53.not arm the police and in Sweden they do. There were significantly
:15:53. > :15:59.more shootings in Sweden. When you routinely arm the police, you see a
:15:59. > :16:03.massive up Spike in use of the firearms. -- a massive up turn.
:16:03. > :16:07.Norway has had one of the worst mass shootings in history, and
:16:07. > :16:12.there is no direct connection between officers carrying guns and
:16:12. > :16:21.obscene crimes like this. cannot stop human evil. Everything
:16:21. > :16:26.in this discussion needs to be how you limit crime. There is a
:16:26. > :16:30.terrible tendency in this country, when something terrible happens,
:16:30. > :16:35.you have an immediate reaction of how it is sorted out. In this
:16:35. > :16:39.situation, it is about things at every step of the way, about the
:16:39. > :16:44.criminal justice system, building prisons to imprison people. We
:16:44. > :16:50.cannot put people in prison more often because there is not enough
:16:51. > :16:53.I want to bring in Jenny Jones who stood for London Mayor for the
:16:53. > :16:56.Green Party and is well known as deputy chair of the London
:16:56. > :17:00.Assembly's police and crime committee. I wonder what your view
:17:00. > :17:03.is in this debate, particularly in the light of the terrible public
:17:03. > :17:06.order issues where the police have committed errors, whether it's in
:17:06. > :17:11.the riots or other situations. What do you think of the idea of adding
:17:11. > :17:14.guns into the mix?: I think it would be an absolutely disastrous
:17:14. > :17:19.idea, although we can't compare exactly the same to the States. In
:17:19. > :17:27.a ten-year period, 500 police officers were killed on duty, 10%
:17:27. > :17:30.had their own guns turned against them. So if you think, 120-1250,000
:17:30. > :17:35.guns added to the street, you are going to have less safety that.'s
:17:35. > :17:37.less safety for everybody, police officers included. John, you
:17:37. > :17:41.disagree, why? You can take that around the other way. When they
:17:41. > :17:46.flooded the streets of New York and had a zero tolerance policy, crime
:17:46. > :17:51.went down, didn't it? So, you know, this is nonsense. But that wasn't
:17:51. > :17:55.all about carrying guns, it was about graffiti as well? No, but it
:17:55. > :18:00.was about a more visible police presence which goes back to what
:18:00. > :18:04.Douglas said. We need a holistic debate about this. You are
:18:04. > :18:09.highlighting in typical BBC fashion, if you don't mind me saying, that
:18:09. > :18:15.somehow the police are gun Toteing gangsters. Not saying that at all.
:18:15. > :18:19.What about the riots? There were issues where the policing tactics
:18:19. > :18:24.are sometimes criticised. There will be dreadful mistakes. That
:18:24. > :18:27.isn't a reason for not having the grown-up debate and we shouldn't be
:18:27. > :18:30.having a debate now about the tragic killings. We should have had
:18:30. > :18:33.it ages ago, we need to involve the police and the general public in
:18:34. > :18:38.this. I certainly think at this moment in time when we have gon
:18:38. > :18:41.Toteing gangsters on our streets and over five million weapons, one
:18:41. > :18:45.thing we shouldn't do is cut the police force by 16,000 people
:18:46. > :18:50.that.'s the real debate. You don't think it would add to the stpres of
:18:50. > :18:53.the police officers to rearm them when you could bring in specialist
:18:53. > :18:57.police officers? The issue isn't whether you add to the stress of
:18:57. > :19:01.the police officers, it's about whether they are able to police
:19:01. > :19:03.effectively. We are very reactive about this. There is seen to be a
:19:03. > :19:09.police overreaction and suddenly everybody says the police need to
:19:09. > :19:12.be pulled off, then they are pulled off and then, as we saw a couple of
:19:12. > :19:17.years ago with the student protests, they go in and smash up a building
:19:17. > :19:20.and people say, where are the police, it can't go on like this.
:19:20. > :19:26.The Hillsborough allegations, the police should be put before the
:19:26. > :19:30.courts, just like senior politicians should be as well. The
:19:30. > :19:34.result of this is not that the police are baddies. No, that's not
:19:34. > :19:40.suggestion. Last word to you, Mohammad? There is very little
:19:40. > :19:44.evidence to show that permanently arming the police would cut crime.
:19:44. > :19:47.There is evidence that targeted use can reduce tensions and hate crime.
:19:47. > :19:49.Thank you. I want to get in a couple of comments. A serving
:19:50. > :19:53.police officer says punishments need to be harder and tougher in
:19:53. > :19:57.the first place to deter criminals. You said that, Jon. Protection by
:19:57. > :20:01.the courts is what we need. Another police officer says, I think a
:20:01. > :20:05.firearm would create a barrier between police and the public in
:20:05. > :20:15.this country. That's pour poll question today. Should all police
:20:15. > :20:23.
:20:23. > :20:31.officers carry guns. If you think You have 20 minutes before the poll
:20:31. > :20:34.closes. The violent reaction worldwide to the anti-Islam film
:20:34. > :20:37.Innocence of Muslims shows no sign of cooling down. Since the
:20:37. > :20:41.appearance of the low-budget film on the Internet and the publication
:20:41. > :20:44.since of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed in the French satirical
:20:44. > :20:47.weekly, scores of people have been killed in violence linked to the
:20:47. > :20:52.film which has renewed debate over freedom of expression. Should we
:20:52. > :20:56.tolerate the publication of such provocktichtive views however
:20:56. > :21:00.distasteful and simply choose to ignore them, or should we try to
:21:00. > :21:06.understand why so many people have taken to the streets to protest?Age
:21:06. > :21:11.mam Masroor thinks Muslims are overreacting and should rise above
:21:11. > :21:17.the insults. This is his stand. Muslims should lighten up and laugh
:21:17. > :21:22.at the stupidity of those who mock the Prophet Mohammed.
:21:22. > :21:28.I've been disgusted by the violent response from Muslims across the
:21:28. > :21:33.globe to a ridiculous trailer made about the blessed prophet. The film
:21:33. > :21:38.is pathetic and amateurish, but the Neanderthal and irrational response
:21:38. > :21:43.from the Muslim masses have left me feeling extremely embarrassed.
:21:43. > :21:50.When the prophet walked the earth, he was constantly mocked, insulted
:21:50. > :21:55.and called all sorts of terrible names. He never responded to any of
:21:55. > :22:00.those taunts or insults. He did not ask his companions to
:22:00. > :22:06.take action to protect his honour. He simply won their hearts and
:22:06. > :22:12.minds through his gentle character. Killing innocent people, burning
:22:12. > :22:17.properties and rioting is not acceptable to being. This is the
:22:17. > :22:20.hallmark of ignorance and backwardness. But I must also
:22:20. > :22:26.emphasise that our Muslim societies failure to understand in respect
:22:26. > :22:30.the value -- and respect the values that Muslims have.
:22:30. > :22:36.Non-Muslim societies have every right to criticise the prophet, God,
:22:36. > :22:42.Islam and Muslims. No-one should ever take that right away. But you
:22:42. > :22:48.could be critical without the need to ridicule. Respect is a two-way
:22:48. > :22:53.street. I believe that the legacy of the Prophet Mohammed will far
:22:53. > :22:58.outlive all forms of mockery. If you have a webcam, you can make
:22:58. > :23:04.your point on Skype or join the conversation on Twitter, text or
:23:04. > :23:08.email. The details are on screen. Ajmal Masroor who made the film
:23:08. > :23:10.joins us now. He's an Imam and a member of the Muslim Council of
:23:10. > :23:13.Britain and he stood for the Liberal Democrats in 2010 in the
:23:13. > :23:17.London constituency of Bethnal green and Bow. Welcome.
:23:17. > :23:21.I want to start with you, Mohammad, Muslims have chosen to make a very
:23:21. > :23:26.big deal out of a prototy rubbish film and it has been an
:23:26. > :23:31.overreaction, hasen it? There's no doubt it's a rubbish film but this
:23:31. > :23:35.isn't film 2012, we are not here Tori teeck the artistic value of
:23:35. > :23:41.the film. Most people I speak to, one of the things they are clear
:23:41. > :23:46.about is that they don't understand the context of the hate of the pain,
:23:46. > :23:50.of the suffering that Muslims feel in response. Now, Muslims should
:23:50. > :23:54.never go beyond the limits and the boundaries of Islam in terms of
:23:54. > :23:58.peaceful protest and... They've done it, haven't they? Some have
:23:58. > :24:02.and the question we should be asking is, some, not all. Yes.
:24:02. > :24:08.seen the film. It was not very funny, it was pretty disgusting, it
:24:08. > :24:11.was awful in some places. We do have a right to freedom of
:24:11. > :24:17.expression in this country. However, even the European convention on
:24:17. > :24:21.human rights in article 10-2 sets limits on that. It needs to be used
:24:21. > :24:25.responsibly and in a measured seasons. What is interesting is
:24:25. > :24:28.that in the sense in the West we have lost the understanding of the
:24:29. > :24:32.depth of offence that things luke this cause to Muslims. Is that a
:24:32. > :24:36.problem of our own make something That's true in a way. The thing
:24:36. > :24:39.with Muslims is that in most countries, there is a small
:24:39. > :24:41.minority of people and also we should bear in mind that a lot of
:24:41. > :24:48.political people with using this for their benefit. In Australia,
:24:48. > :24:52.the riots would seem to be led by organisations like Muslim groups.
:24:52. > :24:56.The small amount of protesters seem to have been afilliated with groups
:24:56. > :25:02.like that, so let's not think this is Muslims as a block taking
:25:02. > :25:05.offence. But, there is a correct perception I think that Islam, as a
:25:05. > :25:09.religion, is more brutal and feels these things more woundedly and
:25:09. > :25:18.there is a reason for that. In a couple of weeks in London, the
:25:18. > :25:20.musical by the creators of South Park, that musical will begin.
:25:20. > :25:24.Hillary Clinton Secretary of State said she was so offended by this
:25:24. > :25:31.film on the Internet. One of the things about that is that most
:25:31. > :25:37.religions by now have realised that being satirised and critiqued and
:25:37. > :25:42.ridicule and criticised, let's face it, just criticised or looked at in
:25:42. > :25:46.a historical manner as happened on a Channel 4 film, ethen these
:25:46. > :25:50.things are felt woundedly. All religions apart from Islam have
:25:50. > :25:54.been through this period of criticism and have, as it were,
:25:54. > :25:58.coming up to some extent the other end, Islam's not been used to this
:25:58. > :26:02.process, it's not used to the idea that your deepest filings can be
:26:02. > :26:05.trodden upon on the that that is a right that not people who do not
:26:05. > :26:13.share your faith have. What on earth are you talking about? How
:26:13. > :26:16.can Islam, it's a faith, a vel June, an idealogy, a way of life, --
:26:17. > :26:21.religion. You cannot talk about it like that. Islam doesn't feel
:26:21. > :26:24.things, individual Muslims do, mothers, fathers. If I could
:26:24. > :26:30.quickly respond to that. It's an important point. There are lots of
:26:30. > :26:34.different strands of Islam, but in every Islamic Society, and in the
:26:34. > :26:40.world today and historically... you mean Muslim majority? Let him
:26:40. > :26:44.finish. Societys that have Islam within the rule of law, countries
:26:44. > :26:48.like Pakistan where Islam law is very important, these places all
:26:48. > :26:51.put an effort sis on the fact that the rid ruling of the Prophet
:26:51. > :26:57.Mohammed or all sorts of claims asking about whether he existed and
:26:57. > :27:01.so on is pwhas femy and that should be punished -- blasphemy. It's all
:27:01. > :27:04.very well for the West to say rise above it, but in Pakistan, Yemen
:27:04. > :27:09.and places where there's been violence, they can't, can they?
:27:09. > :27:13.Three points to make on this particular discussion. There's one
:27:13. > :27:17.correction for Douglas's information. Islam has been through
:27:17. > :27:20.1400 years of critique, discussions and debates internally and
:27:20. > :27:23.externally and it's gone through it without a problem and it will go
:27:23. > :27:29.through it without any issue. I have no issue with that. There is
:27:29. > :27:31.an element of truth in what we are saying here to do with Muslims'
:27:31. > :27:35.disproportionate response. The reasons they are particularly
:27:35. > :27:39.prominent in countries like Pakistan, Yemen and Bangladesh has
:27:39. > :27:45.more to do with politics than religion. Let me give you an
:27:45. > :27:49.example. Most countries are ruled by despots. Corruption is rampant,
:27:49. > :27:53.poverty is acute, no opportunities for people to make a better for
:27:53. > :28:01.chur for themselves tomorrow and don't forget, the drones attack
:28:01. > :28:05.that's dominated Yemen and Pakistan has also exasperated frustrations -
:28:05. > :28:10.- better future. The Prophet Mohammed, let me put it clearly,
:28:10. > :28:13.doesn't need our defence and God doesn't need our defence. Let him
:28:13. > :28:17.answer that. The second point you make I think is perfectly valid.
:28:17. > :28:21.The first I think is not. For this reason. You say that Islam has been
:28:21. > :28:25.through this process for 1400 years. A part of that is true, there has
:28:25. > :28:28.been debate within Islam, but on the fundamentals of Islam, about
:28:28. > :28:33.the nature of Mohammad, about whether or not he existed even,
:28:33. > :28:38.whether the Koran was created by him or created by God, whether he
:28:38. > :28:44.invented it, these things Islamic Societys tended to and Muslims feel
:28:44. > :28:49.very brute alabout that. Do you want me to name you a scholar, a
:28:49. > :28:52.Muslim... Let Douglas just finish please. Many have suffered for
:28:52. > :28:55.raising these questions. The fact is, an all singing all dancing
:28:55. > :28:59.Mormon musical is a threat to nobody, nobody thinks that Mormon
:28:59. > :29:03.mobs are going to kill anybody or threaten to. But there is a risk
:29:03. > :29:08.and it's an acute risk that an all singing all dancing Mohammad
:29:08. > :29:12.musical in the West End might not... If I keep insulting you and keep
:29:12. > :29:16.offending you, there is a limit to what I call freedom of speech. You
:29:16. > :29:20.cannot keep insulting me and offending me. I will turn around
:29:20. > :29:24.and say, Samira, your joke is not funny, stop it. You will stop it
:29:24. > :29:26.because you would be kind to me and stop me. This is about belief and
:29:26. > :29:31.not individuals. I want to pause it there for a second. A billion
:29:31. > :29:35.people are saying, what is wrong with accepting that we have the
:29:35. > :29:39.right to reveer and follow our prophet in the way we do, but you
:29:40. > :29:44.have the right to criticise our religion. Be critical but not
:29:44. > :29:47.ridiculing. We are joined by Miriam who is a freelance journalist. You
:29:47. > :29:52.have been hearing the discussion here. I wonder if we could go back
:29:52. > :29:57.to the point about how far it's politics picking up on an excuse to
:29:57. > :30:00.stir up trouble for their own ends. Is that what this is really about?
:30:00. > :30:08.I certainly think on looking at the internationals I mentioned, we have
:30:08. > :30:13.tolike at the places where the - there has been the most violence.
:30:13. > :30:16.There have been periods of upheaval, be they wars, revolutions. We spoke
:30:16. > :30:20.about drone attacks in Pakistan, Yemen where some of the most
:30:20. > :30:25.violent protests did occur. So I think if you like, I would
:30:25. > :30:30.interpret the film as being more of a focal point which has allowed
:30:30. > :30:34.broader popular anger about a wider range of issues including concerns
:30:34. > :30:38.about local government corruption but also US intervention in the
:30:38. > :30:44.region and the impact the American War on Terror's had on many
:30:44. > :30:49.innocent civilians in the region. All of that anger and frustration
:30:49. > :30:54.which has been fermenting has expressed itself then has been
:30:54. > :30:58.politicised by parties, more extreme in the region for their own
:30:58. > :31:04.ends to destabilise Local Governments. I want to bring in a
:31:04. > :31:08.stand up comedian. You have done comedy about Islam and Christianity
:31:08. > :31:14.and performed Jesus in Pakistan I understand. What do you think about
:31:14. > :31:24.this idea that we can't ridicule Muslims, are they too easily
:31:24. > :31:25.
:31:25. > :31:34.My experience was the audience in Pakistan were extraordinarily open.
:31:34. > :31:42.Islam is a much wider religion, 1.2 billion in the world, so even if
:31:42. > :31:46.there were one million that would only be 1%. What you think about
:31:46. > :31:50.the idea that we should censor ourselves in case people make
:31:50. > :31:55.political capital out of it? There is no connection between the spell
:31:55. > :32:01.man the drones, but it seems to be a reason given not to allow any
:32:01. > :32:07.films like this to be made? -- between this film. There is a
:32:07. > :32:11.political context for this, and in the countries that saw the worst
:32:11. > :32:17.violence for this, the government controlled all the media. If
:32:17. > :32:23.something was in the newspapers, the government said it was OK. It
:32:23. > :32:30.is as if you had been reading gossip magazines and then suddenly
:32:30. > :32:35.it said something else, you would as soon it had been legitimised.
:32:35. > :32:39.There is an underlying point of anger against the West, arming
:32:39. > :32:45.dictators and stealing oil. That can be tipped over using religion
:32:45. > :32:48.as the touchpaper to light that attack. I was hugely encouraged by
:32:48. > :32:54.the attacks yesterday on the militia at that killed the
:32:54. > :33:00.ambassador, Libyans actually rose up and said they wanted him out. --
:33:00. > :33:06.wanted them out. This is extraordinary, in Benghazi. Can I
:33:06. > :33:09.bring in Benjamin Lazarus, a freelance journalist? It may be
:33:09. > :33:13.frustrating, but is it reasonable to say that we know what happens
:33:13. > :33:18.when these are films are made and we need to compromise to avoid
:33:18. > :33:28.fuelling more violence? Absolutely not, that would be to camera in the
:33:28. > :33:36.face of sado-masochistic Rach. -- rage. It would be abhorrent,
:33:36. > :33:39.policing society so that backwater clerics became the thought-police
:33:39. > :33:44.who could monitor what elements of history we were permissible to
:33:44. > :33:51.study, what novels could be written, what we could watch on the Internet
:33:51. > :33:58.and so on. I do not see how that could be acceptable, and we should
:33:58. > :34:08.not be intimidated by violence. We went through the Enlightenment so
:34:08. > :34:13.
:34:13. > :34:17.that no fundamentalist gang could push their idea of the truth on us.
:34:17. > :34:22.As scholarly documentary about them in -- about the origins of Islam,
:34:22. > :34:28.the maker of that is getting death threats, from people who are quite
:34:28. > :34:32.important in the Islamic community. Has it gone too far? I am a friend
:34:32. > :34:40.of him, I have been outspoken in the media, they have a history
:34:40. > :34:44.festival, which is like Glastonbury. Answer the question. His book was
:34:45. > :34:50.an academic -- academic discussion about the origins of Islam, and it
:34:50. > :34:53.was roundly set upon by Muslim and non-Muslim academics. Do you accept
:34:54. > :35:01.the idea that death threats are completely wrong? Of course they
:35:01. > :35:09.are. Nobody sensible would condone that kind of behaviour. However,
:35:09. > :35:18.the documentary, he throws away balance in the discussion, and he
:35:18. > :35:25.produces a very prejudice and biased opinion. In your opinion.
:35:25. > :35:31.Another professor came out very strongly and he said this was so
:35:31. > :35:37.shocking. Tom Holland has the right to say what he wants, that is not a
:35:37. > :35:43.problem. Death threats are abhorrent, they are not Islamic.
:35:43. > :35:48.Forget about that, that is simple. The issue is, it Tom Holland to a
:35:48. > :35:55.good job of an objective programme? I believe he did not. It is like
:35:55. > :35:59.the cartoonist, we know from good sources that that magazine was
:35:59. > :36:06.financially struggling, let's make a bit of money by putting in a
:36:06. > :36:10.cartoon like this. Everybody has an interest in stirring up trouble.
:36:10. > :36:16.comes down to a fundamental point. Most people in this country and
:36:16. > :36:20.France are not Muslim. We do not believe Muhammad, if he existed,
:36:20. > :36:27.heard any angels. It is the opinion of those people that he either made
:36:27. > :36:35.it up or something else. Atheists believe the same thing about Jesus.
:36:35. > :36:39.Nobody has a problem talking about making up a film about Moses,
:36:39. > :36:44.watching a film saying that Jesus made it up. When they do have a
:36:44. > :36:50.problem, and we have a problem, censorship and self-censorship
:36:50. > :36:54.because people are afraid to say that more Hamed made it all up --
:36:54. > :36:59.Muhammad made it all up, because they will pretend that they are
:36:59. > :37:05.sort of believing Islam, they will talk about the profit Muhammad.
:37:05. > :37:11.They will try not to cause any offence. The only thing I would say,
:37:11. > :37:19.it is interesting that 23 years after the Satanic Verses, we're
:37:19. > :37:22.still embroiled in this. Thank you for your contributions. A new study
:37:22. > :37:28.has indicated that cohabitation will soon be the preferred way to
:37:28. > :37:36.raise a family, so has marriage become an outdated institution? You
:37:36. > :37:39.can join us by wet ham or e-mail. Remember to keep voting in the poll,
:37:39. > :37:49.Remember to keep voting in the poll, Remember to keep voting in the poll,
:37:49. > :37:53.
:37:53. > :38:03.You have about five minutes before it closes. You can vote on line by
:38:03. > :38:04.
:38:05. > :38:10.Time for the moral moments of the week. We have had a few already. I
:38:10. > :38:15.want to start with Mohammed. You are concerned about the impact of
:38:15. > :38:22.Michael Gove's exam change and the impact that will have on dyslexic
:38:22. > :38:27.students. I work in education, and clearly there is a need to review
:38:27. > :38:31.and over all the way we examine in this country. We are falling behind
:38:31. > :38:35.our partners across the world in terms of education and achievement
:38:35. > :38:38.levels. The difficulty is that Michael Gove and the coalition
:38:38. > :38:43.government have overstepped the mark by not consulting with
:38:43. > :38:50.individual groups and organisations. The dyslexia Association has said
:38:50. > :38:56.moving to a single examination format is going to affect lots of
:38:57. > :39:01.people. What do you think of that, Douglas? There are all sorts of
:39:01. > :39:06.problems. We are slipping in the world. I think one of the things
:39:06. > :39:13.that should be stated is that anyone who defends the status quo,
:39:13. > :39:20.as a lot of the unions do, should know they are defending a status
:39:20. > :39:27.quo that is failing. 20% of children are leaving school
:39:27. > :39:30.illiterate, and if you defend that... On the dyslexia issue?
:39:30. > :39:38.are home-school link our children because I believe the schools are
:39:38. > :39:46.failing. It needs and revision. -- it needs revision. But in terms of
:39:46. > :39:52.dyslexia, we need to overhaul that. The exams do not work. I do not
:39:52. > :39:56.like exams, I like coursework, support given. Extraordinary talent
:39:56. > :40:06.needs extraordinary support. Many of the senior ministers were
:40:06. > :40:12.dyslexic. Can you imagine what they would have become with support?
:40:12. > :40:18.want to go on to this campaign to ban Page Three. We have a very
:40:18. > :40:24.tasteful graphic. It does not sure what we're talking about, topless
:40:24. > :40:31.women in the Sun newspaper. When I saw the report I thought it was a
:40:31. > :40:36.very good thing. A Lib Dem MP has tabled and is leading the campaign.
:40:36. > :40:46.Imagine I am sitting on the train and somebody has left the newspaper
:40:46. > :40:46.
:40:46. > :40:54.open. my children will ask me about it. How do I give a moral
:40:55. > :41:03.justification? I cannot. We're not demeaning women. I do not want
:41:03. > :41:07.newspapers sold by this. It is freedom of speech versus events.
:41:07. > :41:14.does come back to that, and I think we agree in some ways on this one.
:41:14. > :41:20.The thing is, I do not like it, I do not like the idea of it. I do
:41:20. > :41:27.not like sexual lies in the society even further. -- sexualising
:41:27. > :41:35.society. I do not like the children see it as a normal thing. My
:41:35. > :41:40.response is not to ban it, but do not buy the paper. Your choice is
:41:40. > :41:47.interesting. It is Nick Clegg's apology that has been set to music.
:41:47. > :41:52.It has been released on the Internet. He apologised, but then
:41:52. > :41:58.he said he was right to trouble them. This is interesting, because
:41:58. > :42:02.we are used to people saying sorry, and often they get applause for it.
:42:03. > :42:06.But it is easier to do things when you are not responsible for it, and
:42:06. > :42:10.one of the things about the Clegg thing is he has not even said sorry
:42:10. > :42:17.for breaking his promise, he said sorry for making the promise. That
:42:17. > :42:21.is a very different thing. But there is a good thing, when he went
:42:21. > :42:24.into the last election, he was promising something he knew he
:42:24. > :42:28.could not deliver. The money needs to come from somewhere and there is
:42:28. > :42:33.not sufficient money to send people to university without rising
:42:33. > :42:37.tuition fees. I hope he learns the lesson and the electorate learned
:42:37. > :42:42.the lesson that impossible promises are something we should lose from
:42:42. > :42:49.political debate. We need honest politicians just as we need other
:42:49. > :42:53.honest public figures. Thank you for your choices. You have been
:42:53. > :42:57.voting this morning about British police officers carrying guns, and
:42:57. > :43:07.the poll is closing now so please do not vote any more. You could
:43:07. > :43:12.
:43:12. > :43:16.still be charged will stop -- could still be charged...
:43:16. > :43:22.A new study has found that the same proportion of couples are choosing
:43:22. > :43:32.to live together as get married. Sociology iss say that it could be
:43:32. > :43:39.even more popular. -- a sociology experts. For the first time,
:43:39. > :43:44.cohabiting couples with children are the same as married couples.
:43:44. > :43:47.According to a YouGov poll, the majority of us now believe you do
:43:48. > :43:54.not need to be married to have children. So has marriage had its
:43:54. > :43:58.day? Perhaps not, as the same study reveals a greater likelihood for
:43:58. > :44:04.break-up between couples who do not tie the knot. Lawyers also say
:44:04. > :44:10.marriage offers the best protection. Many religious groups believe the
:44:10. > :44:16.decline of marriage is not good for the fabric of society. The Church
:44:16. > :44:23.of England regards it as the best way to provide a stable all my four
:44:23. > :44:29.children. But people argue that many children would be happier with
:44:29. > :44:32.unhappy parents separating rather than growing up in an unhappy house.
:44:32. > :44:40.So his marriage the best environment to raise children and
:44:40. > :44:50.ensure stable society? You can join in by web cam, or make your point
:44:50. > :44:53.
:44:53. > :44:57.by phone or Web -- online. We are joined by Marilyn Stowe, an adviser
:44:57. > :45:02.for the Law Commission. I understand you have counselled
:45:02. > :45:07.thousands of people. His marriage on the way out? Absolutely not, it
:45:07. > :45:14.is not. But I think people drift into cohabiting relationships. It
:45:14. > :45:19.is easy to do. People think about sharing, and then they may even
:45:19. > :45:23.have children. Statistically, they are as likely to have children out
:45:23. > :45:31.of marriage as in marriage, but I do not think that make marriage
:45:31. > :45:37.irrelevant, some people then go on to marry, some do not. Jon Gaunt,
:45:37. > :45:43.you waited seven years. It was not just my decision. We lived together
:45:43. > :45:48.for seven years then we decided to start a family so we got married.
:45:48. > :45:52.So having children was the key thing? Absolutely, and I do believe
:45:52. > :45:56.in a lifetime commitment. I believe it changes your relationship and it
:45:56. > :46:01.is important. It is important for your children as well. I have
:46:01. > :46:11.nothing against people cohabiting but I think the best way his
:46:11. > :46:14.
:46:14. > :46:20.marriage. Think about it for a long time, then make the decision.
:46:20. > :46:27.You're through thick and thin. The good times and the bad times.
:46:27. > :46:32.really about raising children? most important thing is for the
:46:32. > :46:37.sake of society, families and communities and children, we need
:46:37. > :46:44.to have people in a loving, committed, long-term and moral
:46:45. > :46:54.relationship. I was unfortunate be watching television the other day
:46:55. > :46:57.
:46:57. > :47:02.and I saw a programme, Geordie Shore. There is a view that living
:47:02. > :47:06.a hedonistic lifestyle, people end up together by default, and it is
:47:06. > :47:10.easy to get into these relationships. One of the things
:47:10. > :47:20.the study showed his over the last 10 years, we have had roughly the
:47:20. > :47:21.
:47:21. > :47:27.same number of cohabiting family's increase, and 300,000 less married
:47:28. > :47:32.family unit. 30% married and cohabiting in the current state of
:47:32. > :47:42.play. What it also showed his cohabiting families are less stable
:47:42. > :47:43.
:47:43. > :47:47.Can I answer this? Not every person is in a position to get married.
:47:47. > :47:51.There are single parent families and they do a great job, so let's
:47:51. > :47:55.not forget that. What the problem is, as far as I'm
:47:55. > :47:58.concerned, with a cohabitation relationship, is that people
:47:58. > :48:02.actually don't understand that legally they are worse off than if
:48:02. > :48:06.they were married. They don't have the rights? Absolutely not. My view
:48:06. > :48:10.would be that we do need Cohabitation legislation such as
:48:10. > :48:16.they have in Scotland to redress the balance. Explain to me why are
:48:17. > :48:20.we in a situation where people are willing to sign rental or mortgage
:48:20. > :48:24.agreements together, then they are not married and they break up and
:48:24. > :48:29.they end up in a pickle People don't appreciate that they have
:48:29. > :48:32.very few rights at all if they are not married, they have made a
:48:32. > :48:36.mistake, they are under a false impression that common law marriage
:48:36. > :48:39.exists when it doesn't. Is it because a lot of men keep putting
:48:39. > :48:42.it off, they are waiting for, I don't know... Some friends say to
:48:42. > :48:47.me, it's only a bit of paper, I don't need to get married and my
:48:47. > :48:51.answer is, if it's only a bit of paper why don't you get married.
:48:51. > :48:54.People get marry ford protection but I wanted to get married because
:48:54. > :48:58.I wanted to stay with this woman for the rest of my life and I
:48:58. > :49:05.wanted to show my kids that that's the best way to behave. I think
:49:05. > :49:10.there should be more tax incentives as well. Instead of equalising it
:49:10. > :49:14.down to married couples, we should be encouraging them to get married
:49:14. > :49:19.because it's the best way to build a family and a society. We talked
:49:19. > :49:24.about the positive reasons for getting married. I want to bring in
:49:24. > :49:30.Vanessa, a divorce lawyer. You have dealt with a lot of women who've
:49:30. > :49:32.had long traditional marriages. What is the reality for you about
:49:32. > :49:38.problems with cohabitation versus marriage? Fpblts we have seen a lot
:49:38. > :49:42.of social change over the last 50 years. The most important change we
:49:42. > :49:46.have seen in the last 50 years is the silver splitters, women in
:49:46. > :49:49.their 40s, 50s or 60s who're bailing out at the rate of knots
:49:49. > :49:52.because the children are leaving home. Instead of consolidating and
:49:52. > :49:56.saying we want to stay many the marriage, they are saying we are no
:49:56. > :49:59.longer prepared to put up with what we see as controlling overbearing
:49:59. > :50:03.behaviour from their husbands. They are saying to us that the big lie
:50:03. > :50:07.appears to be that previously we were told we could only stay in
:50:07. > :50:11.these marriages because we had no way of getting out of them, we
:50:11. > :50:15.didn't have our own finances but now that's all changed. We have
:50:15. > :50:19.seen enormous changes. Women are saying, we are very happy to have
:50:19. > :50:25.our freedom and we are very happy not to be in marriage any more.
:50:25. > :50:28.It's a very sad development but that is because if we can't have
:50:28. > :50:32.Relate or other immediate things that control the behaviour that we
:50:32. > :50:38.are seeing in these marriages or resolving it, more and more women
:50:38. > :50:43.are bailing out. It's interesting, you see the two
:50:43. > :50:53.extremes, traditional marriage when you didn't have an option to live
:50:53. > :50:53.
:50:53. > :50:58.together, then people who live together. We haven't discussed
:50:58. > :51:01.love? Love makes the world go round, or is it money. I'm asked to do
:51:01. > :51:06.Islamic marriages and young couples want to do it in English. It's not
:51:06. > :51:10.just a bit of paper for them. Many the Islamic system, you go through
:51:10. > :51:14.effectively a pre-nup. It's very interesting, it's formal as a
:51:14. > :51:17.contract? I sit down with a couple and go through the terms and
:51:17. > :51:20.conditions of their marriage because it's a social contract. So
:51:20. > :51:25.they agree before they get married what they expect from each other,
:51:25. > :51:29.almost the terms and conditions of the marriage and it gives a
:51:29. > :51:33.fantastically stable and moral frame work for their future lives
:51:33. > :51:37.together. The issue about romance - the thing about Islam, whatever the
:51:37. > :51:40.reality of couples intimidated or bullies - but divorce is
:51:40. > :51:44.acknowledged as something that can happen because the marriage breaks
:51:44. > :51:50.down and in the West we have a romantic notion of marriage, it's
:51:50. > :51:55.got to be perfect and you spend �30,000 on the wedding, is that a
:51:55. > :52:00.proper marriage? I don't think marriage has become irrelevant.
:52:00. > :52:04.has it been romanticised and that's the problem? Extremely commercial
:52:04. > :52:08.and exopinion sieve and it's easier to live together, to agree to share
:52:08. > :52:13.expens, to have a child and then those people who really do want to
:52:13. > :52:21.get married will do. But it's the instability of cohabitation that
:52:21. > :52:25.worries me and the lack of legal remedies when that does happen, a
:52:25. > :52:28.relationship breakdown. It's not all going to be roses around the
:52:28. > :52:32.cottage door. Because there is no social stigma about living together.
:52:32. > :52:35.Myself and my wife lived together for seven years which you wouldn't
:52:35. > :52:39.have been able to do before, you would have been ostracised in
:52:39. > :52:45.society. Maybe some people just drift into long-term relationships
:52:45. > :52:48.and don't get married. I think it's very commercial, marriages, and
:52:48. > :52:51.it's something else people just chalk off. It's a long-term
:52:51. > :52:56.commitment and being married and saying you are going to commit to
:52:56. > :53:00.one person, you know, for the rest of your life, bring your family up
:53:00. > :53:03.- and it's sad what Vanessa said, the women bailing out and the
:53:03. > :53:06.relationships being too dominating and whatever it is. It's sad
:53:06. > :53:10.because after having your children and bringing them up and children
:53:10. > :53:13.going off into the world, isn't it great that you can have the last
:53:13. > :53:18.part of your life together. have given me the perfect
:53:18. > :53:22.opportunity to bring in Stan who has been happily marry ford 56
:53:22. > :53:25.years. I don't know if we have your wife with you or it's just you on
:53:25. > :53:29.the line, but can you tell us what your view is on the idea of
:53:29. > :53:34.cohabitation. If you could have lived together without the social
:53:34. > :53:38.stigma, would you not have been tempted to do it? Well, that's the
:53:38. > :53:43.$64,000 dollar question, you can't separate one from the other, we
:53:43. > :53:46.were living and courting in the '50s where the stigma was very
:53:46. > :53:53.strong and cohabitation wasn't a word that was used then. People
:53:53. > :53:59.were said to be living in sin. You just wouldn't do that. When I was
:53:59. > :54:03.courting my wife, if we sat and held hands on the sofa, my mother
:54:03. > :54:06.would frown. Wow. Jean, you are there as well,
:54:06. > :54:09.you've chosen to make this bond last, you are still married 56
:54:09. > :54:14.years later. What do you think is unique about your relationship that
:54:14. > :54:21.some other people perhaps haven't got? Well, we have great friendship
:54:21. > :54:27.and we are quite content with simple things. We live our life
:54:27. > :54:30.really through our family and companionship with each other.
:54:30. > :54:34.briefly, I understand some of your children have chose tonne cohabit,
:54:34. > :54:41.rather than marry, what do you make of that? Well, they are all married
:54:42. > :54:46.now, so the thing about it is that we lived our lives and grew up with
:54:46. > :54:50.society growing up and if our children chose to cohabit, it was
:54:50. > :54:55.their business and not ours and we certainly wouldn't have felt bad
:54:55. > :54:58.about it. It's up to them. We would support them whatever they did.
:54:58. > :55:02.Stan and Jean, thank you very much and congratulations on your
:55:02. > :55:07.wonderful marriage, an example to us all I think!
:55:07. > :55:11.I wonder, I mean what's interesting is that they don't have a judgment
:55:11. > :55:16.about people that cohabit. that's society that's changed, it's
:55:16. > :55:20.no longer living in sin, it's acceptable. The thing about family
:55:20. > :55:24.breakdown, the concern is a real one because children in cohabiting
:55:24. > :55:28.relationships are more likely to break down? Unhappy kids make more
:55:28. > :55:31.unhappy kids and so many of our difficultys in society today and
:55:31. > :55:35.our social problems and whether it's prison population, the
:55:35. > :55:38.children in care, the problems come from unhappy children. It's about
:55:38. > :55:42.having children and men. We often talk about women and single parents
:55:42. > :55:46.but it take twos and offn the men get awhich with it and I always say
:55:46. > :55:50.this. In my column, there are a lot of mean who have a lot of questions
:55:50. > :55:53.to answer -- men who have a lot of questions to answer. Enyou are
:55:53. > :55:57.younger, fine, cohabit, but we should condemn more the idea of
:55:57. > :55:59.people who then actually go on to create children and don't tear
:55:59. > :56:01.their responsibilities seriously, whether they are men or women
:56:01. > :56:06.that.'s where we should be judgmental because that's where we
:56:06. > :56:11.get unhappy children. A quick line to Marilyn, what would be your
:56:11. > :56:14.advice to those who're cohabiting and aren't happy, what should they
:56:14. > :56:17.do? Take immediate legal advice about what would happen if the
:56:17. > :56:21.relationship breaks down and above all what will happen in relation to
:56:21. > :56:25.the children. OK, thank you all very much indeed. We have to end it
:56:25. > :56:32.there. Your text and online poll votes are in. We asked: Should all
:56:32. > :56:37.British police officers carry guns and here is what you told us. 34%
:56:37. > :56:41.said yes and 66% said no. It's interesting, Jon, it perhaps wasn't
:56:41. > :56:44.the result we expected with an overwhelming response in favour.
:56:44. > :56:50.What are your thoughts? It's good that you are having a debate, I
:56:50. > :56:54.want us to have the wider debate in society, it shouldn't just be after
:56:54. > :56:58.tragic events and we need a wider debate about the criminal justice
:56:58. > :57:00.system and about how we want our police to police this country.
:57:00. > :57:04.That's the debate we should be having at the moment. We have
:57:04. > :57:10.algaiss against this minister about what he said or didn't say --
:57:10. > :57:14.allegations. This is an true Mitchell's alleged insults to the
:57:14. > :57:18.police in Downing Street? Yes, the coalition isn't in the way at the
:57:18. > :57:23.moment they are treating them clear, I say get the police involved and
:57:23. > :57:27.have a fit and proper police force for the 21 century and we shouldn't
:57:27. > :57:31.be cutting it. It's interesting isn't it, the respect for the
:57:31. > :57:35.police officers by our leaders as well? Absolutely. The police do a
:57:35. > :57:39.phenomenal job. I don't think they should be armed. Mohammad? I think
:57:39. > :57:43.it's the very sensible and fair and reasonable British public saying
:57:43. > :57:47.what we think should be said. We need to make the decisions with
:57:47. > :57:52.cool heads, we need to have a grown-up debate about this, I agree
:57:52. > :57:56.what's been said. I don't think I would have expect add society which
:57:56. > :58:00.in their 1800 society that we want an unarmed police to police by
:58:00. > :58:03.consent would change that much over some really tragic events and I
:58:03. > :58:06.think the British public have spokeen.
:58:06. > :58:10.Very interesting in the light of some serious concerns about the
:58:10. > :58:14.police but very briefly give us a sentence? Policing by consent will
:58:14. > :58:18.disappear, if we cut the police we'll go to a paramilitary style
:58:18. > :58:23.and that would be difficult for the police. Brian Paddick mentioned
:58:23. > :58:28.that last year after the ries. Thank you all very much. -- riots.
:58:28. > :58:33.Thank you to Marilyn, Mohammad and Jon and to Raj mall Masroor and