THE appearance of anti-racist protesters in large numbers on the streets of so many large conurbations must have served somewhat in restoring our faith in the essential goodness and integrity of what we have always called the silent majority.
There were visible signs of the dawning of the realisation, after several of the riots which saw so much damage done to local communities, that community cohesion was a factor seen as vitally important when so many of those who lived in the areas under siege came out to clean up the mess the rioters had inflicted upon their localities.
That resolution that united we stand and divided we fall was stiffened and became more evident with the numbers who flocked to the streets in their neighbourhoods to present a united front against the rioters. That those who had threatened more violence and more vandalism did not show up when they saw the hordes opposed to their nefarious actions underlined the truth behind the old tried and tested truth that for evil to succeed good people must look the other way and do nothing.
When good people stand up to protect their communities, that is the greatest deterrent for wrongdoers who will always find themselves outnumbered in those circumstances where a united front is presented against those whose sole aim is to wreck and ruin what communities value most dearly.
That backbone which served our country so well in the dark days of the Second World War is still very much in evidence today to push back the feral barbarians who like to think that they own our streets because they think no one will stand up to them.
That dark underbelly, where hatred is ever simmering, just waiting for an opportunity to burst forth, can be kept under control when good people join forces to work together instead of looking the other way.
Denis Bruce, Bishopbriggs.
READ MORE: Enough is enough: time to crack down on the rioters
READ MORE: It's clear that Scotland's ferries system is broken beyond repair
There is hope
MY sincere thanks to John Gilligan (Letters, August 8) for his kind comments regarding my letter of August 7 and while Mr Gilligan rightly points out that he and I often disagree, it is good that we can also find common ground and I do agree with the sensible points he made in his own letter.
Thus far there have been no riots in Scotland, thank goodness, and hopefully that will continue to be the case. John Swinney was absolutely right to invite faith leaders and leaders of all the political parties at Holyrood to a meeting at Bute House ("FM’S ‘concern’ violence may spread to Scotland", The Herald, August 8) and hopefully that will have provided reassurance to many people who feel vulnerable following events in England and Northern Ireland over recent days. That a former SNP leader and First Minister, and a Labour MP should question whether it is safe for them to continue living here should be a wake-up call for all of us (" Scots Labour MP backs Yousaf’s warning over leaving country", The Herald, August 8). Politicians of all parties need to work together on this issue, and the positive statements following the Bute House meeting suggest that they will. Welcome news indeed.
Ruth Marr, Stirling.
Case for the death penalty
ON what is literally a matter of life or death, allow me this brief response to George Smith (Letters, August 7), who argues against the death penalty on the well-understood statistical risk of a miscarriage of justice. What about the lives saved by the deterrent effect of the death penalty? Should that be dismissed as irrelevant because there can be no statistical evidence of it?
If polling confirmed a sustained and sufficient majority in favour, a referendum should follow to decide the matter for a generation, after which it could be revisited if there was sufficient demand.
Alan Fitzpatrick, Dunlop.
Dynamic pricing is nothing new
REBECCA McQuillan draws to a conclusion in her piece (“Is ‘dynamic pricing’ going too far?”, The Herald, 8 August) by stating: “It’s hard to judge any more what’s a reasonable price to pay for things. Dynamic pricing makes it even harder.”
There is a straightforward definition of a reasonable price. It is the amount that a willing purchaser is content to pay to a willing seller.
Of course, if there is a limited supply of what is being sold and a large demand, the price goes up; the reverse is also true. We can see this play out in auctions every day.
Technology has allowed this basic economic mechanism to be applied to the purchase of goods and services online and called it "dynamic pricing".
In an auction, the seller sets a reserve price which is the minimum they will be willing to accept. Similarly, using dynamic pricing, a seller may set a maximum price in order not to jeopardise customer loyalty based on perception of value.
Individuals make a choice - often an instinctive one - as to whether or not to buy something based on how much they want that thing combined with an assessment of whether they can afford it in the context of their overall financial situation.
To suggest that there is a problem with this approach, is to challenge the basic tenets of economics and of human nature.
Dynamic pricing has not changed the judgment Ms McQuillan refers to other than it becoming necessary to be increasingly vigilant as to the value of every transaction. The alternative is to lazily assume a particular supplier consistently delivers best value, which is defined as the desired quality at the lowest price.
George Rennie, Inverness.
Red alert for speeding
REGARDING Bob MacDougall's letter on observing speed limits (August 7): there is a clever method of speed control which I see more and more in France. Traffic lights placed in random strategic places have speed cameras attached to them. If you approach above the speed limit they turn red, and keep you (and others) waiting for a period. It works every time, and busting a red light is, of course, a more serious offence.
John Jamieson, Ayr.
A blinking nuisance
I CAN'T help but think that after 52 years of driving, technology has reached the level where the more expensive the car, the less likely it is to have indicators.
Brendan Keenan, Glasgow.
Keeping children safe in sport
THE NSPCC is calling on sports and activity groups across the country to take part in this year’s Keeping Your Child Safe in Sport campaign.
This annual campaign, run by the charity’s Child Protection in Sport Unit, raises awareness of safeguarding practices in sports and activities across the UK and aims to help clubs build strong relationships with parents and carers as well as children.
We’re looking to bring people together to play, chat and connect at Team Huddles throughout the summer. Whether hosting watchalong parties for the Olympics, community fun days, fundraisers, or inviting the NSPCC to present safeguarding workshops, these social events are fantastic ways to help build connections and communities.
Free downloadable Team Huddle activity packs can be used as part of any event that parents and clubs already have planned. These packs will help open conversations about safeguarding and suitable supervision to ensure the welfare and protection of young athletes, making sport a safe and enjoyable experience for all.
We’d love local clubs to share details and photos of their events with cpsu@nspcc.org.uk and also with local news and sports reporters. Spreading the word and highlighting the work done by grassroots clubs to protect young athletes is what the campaign is all about.
These stories serve as powerful testimonials of community involvement and the collective effort to keep sports safe, help us reach a wider audience, encourage more clubs to participate, and create a safe sporting environment for all children.
To find out more about Keeping Your Child Safe in Sport, go to cpsu.org.uk or to book an NSPCC visit to your club, email localcampaigns@nspcc.org.uk.
Michelle North (Head of CPSU, NSPCC), London.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel