Barely a week goes by now without news that another teenager has died on Britain’s streets, their killers armed with guns or knives.

Sometimes the victim was targeted because of gang rivalry. Often it was an argument that simply got out of hand. Or, as in the case of 16-year-old Jimmy Mizen, murdered in a London Baker’s shop, it was simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

“We really, really, have to do something about carrying weapons on the streets of London,” said Assistant Commissioner Tim Godwin, who is in charge of territorial policing in the capital. “This is the time to say enough is enough.”

Godwin is planning to crack down on those carrying knives, with widespread use of stop and search powers targeted at areas where suspects are thought to be carrying weapons. He said it would be “in your face policing”.

Since the issue of youth violence became prominent last year, following the fatal shooting of 11-year-old schoolboy Rhys Jones, there have been many promises of action from polticians. But, if anything, the situation seems to be getting worse.

More police, tougher sentencing, better facilities for young people, and targeting vulnerable families have all been suggested as remedies.

What do you think is needed to stop the bloodshed?

The problem of yobs causing misery for their neighbours and local communities is a daily reality for many people.

Be it from gangs of drunken teenagers to more serious cases of vandalism, assaults or even murder, stories of problems involving young louts are rarely out of the newspapers.

However, coming up with an effective plan to deal with the troublemakers has proved difficult for politicians, police and local officials.

Anti-social behaviour orders (ASBOs) have probably been the best-known antidote the authorities have used. But experts say these have their limits and some serial offenders just view them as a “badge of honour”.

The latest initiative to get the backing of the government is a scheme to turn the tables on the yobs with the police hounding them to make their lives uncomfortable.

Residents in Essex, where the Operation Leopard idea was first introduced, say it was a great success.

But it is likely to alarm some civil rights groups, who have expressed concern about the use of ASBOs.

Is it time to get tough on those who refuse to abide by the rules the rest of us adhere to? Or is this just a headline-grabbing announcement? Send us your comments

A senior detective has questioned the effectiveness of CCTV, saying it helps solve only a tiny minority of street crimes and that its use has been an “utter fiasco”.

Detective Chief Inspector Mick Neville, head of the Metropolitan police’s division on visual images, identifications and detections, wants better training for police officers in using CCTV, more sophisticated technology and a national database to allow offenders to be tracked and identified.

Britain is the surveillance capital of the world, with one camera for every 14 people according to civil rights groups, and billions of pounds has been spent on setting up systems.

Last year the Home Office, which has ploughed millions into CCTV projects, itself questioned the effectiveness of some systems as the footage they provided was not good enough to be used as evidence in court.

CCTV has always proved to be a divisive issue with some people believing they represent the growth of a “Big Brother” society. However, many communities have welcomed them with open arms, hoping they will deter criminals and vandals.

Are the cameras a waste of money and an infringement of civil liberties? Or are they a vital deterrent? Send us your comments.

Ofcom says millions of children who use social networking sites are exposing themselves to potential danger by leaving their privacy settings on “open,” thereby allowing all and sundry to peruse their personal details.

Its figures show a no less than a quarter of all children aged 8 to 11 in Britain, are registered with a social networking site.

It is the latest in a long series of warnings about Internet danger to children — which may suggest that either the children or their parents do not seem to care too much.

Do you think users are being too blasé, or are the dangers being exaggerated? Have you ever had any personal experience of the dangers Ofcom and others warn us about?

Two initiatives have focused the mind on badly behaved children this week and how to deal with them.

Under the first, Children’s Secretary Ed Balls proposes that trouble-makers as young as 10 should sign a good behaviour contract . The “most challenging” among them will have to stick to the order or risk a criminal record.

The second, more extreme, suggestion comes from Gary Pugh, forensic science director for the Metropolitan Police, who was quoted in The Observer as saying trouble makers as young as five should be recorded on the national DNA database because future offenders can be picked out an early age.

The idea has been widely criticised, both by those who dislike the idea of stigmatising children at such a young age and those who bemoan what they call the government’s obsession with compiling databases — and its embarrassing tendency to lose personal data. The government has been non-committal but says it is listening to all views.

Do you believe law enforcement authorities need more tools at their disposal to deal with unruly children?