Many comparisons have been made between the 1981 and 1985 uprisings and the recent riots, and a consensus has developed that, notwithstanding the death of Mark Duggan, the relationship between the police and the black community has vastly improved. This is simply not true for young people, whatever their racial background. Young people have been locked out of the top-down multi-agency approaches to policing that have evolved since the 1980s. Stop and search and the guilt-by-association application of the joint enterprise laws (now subject to a justice select committee inquiry) are among young people's most pressing concerns. Students, too – incensed by vindictive and excessive prison sentences following the Gaza and fees protests – feel they have been subjected to rough justice. Young people who fall into a gang subculture often perceive the police as little more than another gang – albeit the biggest and most powerful. Justice must be restorative and not vengeful. But the language of politicians and police, and the actions of some magistrates (For stealing a £3.50 case of water … six months in jail, 12 August) do not augur well.
Liz Fekete
Executive director, Institute of Race Relations
• From "mindless criminality" we appear to have moved to mindless retribution. The government wants those involved in the former to pay in full for what they have done. Everyone is likely to be paying a high price for the latter. Surely the advice, given by Tariq Jahan, to "calm down" (Pressure to scrap police cuts as Birmingham mourns its dead, 11 August) should be taken by us all.
Joan Jenkins (retired magistrate)
Old Buckenham, Norfolk
• I see that the prison sentences for keeping a slave (HIV expert who kept woman as slave is jailed, 12 August) and for stealing Lidl mineral water are the same, that is six months. This makes a human freedom worth about £3.50.
Tony Hargreaves
Forton, Lancashire
• At some point during his crackdown on rioters, potential rioters and their families, could somebody remind the prime minister that he thinks that "everyone deserves a second chance"? Thanks.
Toby Moore
Liverpool
• The legal system is shifting gear. Of more than 1,800 people arrested in connection with the riots, more than 500 have already appeared in court (Fears of rough justice as courts rush to process riot arrests, 12 August). Magistrates have sat through the night and found people at short notice to write social inquiry reports. David Cameron said, "We are keeping under constant review whether the courts have the sentencing powers they need, and we'll act if necessary" and Juliet Lyon, director of the Prison Reform Trust, said the judicial system was going to be under strain but that it would cope. You can almost hear echos of Churchill – never in the field of human conflict …
And the IPCC report into the shooting of Mr Duggan? The IPCC hope to have the report in four to six months.
Graham Hodgin
London
• As always, Erwin James writes convincingly and from experience about the criminal justice system (Bang 'em up? Maybe, but at what cost to everyone?, 11 August). However, community payback schemes are run by the probation service, whose officers spend 75% of their time on paperwork, and which is in line for big budget cuts. These schemes are far more effective in reducing reoffending than prison, but will the government invest in them or go for "bang 'em up" populism? I think we know the answer to that.
Steve Fletcher
Otley, West Yorkshire
• I am as much of a liberal lefty as most Guardian readers, but one thing I fail to understand is the non-use of water cannon in this country. Summer after summer we suffer from an overdose of testosterone in young men who seem incapable of any understanding of the lives and livelihoods of others. Yet we don't use technology widely used for riot control in some of our very civilised neighbouring European countries. Our police have to accept having bricks thrown at them and cannot retaliate because the press is watching their every move. Train them in the use of water cannon. It might involve the odd broken bone, but how about innocent people's lives and livelihoods?
Christina van Melzen
Laxfield, Suffolk
• Television news showed 15 police, all in body armour and helmets, pouring into a tiny London flat to arrest a suspected looter. Is this what David Cameron means when he talks about police inefficiency (Too few, too slow, too timid – Tories attack police over riots, 12 August)?
JES Bradshaw
Southam, Warwickshire
• Senior Met police officers have said frontline police were discouraged from undertaking "robust" policing in the riots because of concerns about being subject to investigation by the IPCC and possible prosecution for "human rights violations". No one objects to "robust" policing, or indeed to lethal force when truly justified by circumstance, and most are happy for police officers to be cut a lot of slack, particularly when operating in very stressful situations. But there is a distinction between legitimate policing and the prejudice, bullying, harassment, verbal abuse and dispensation of rough summary justice that characterises the behaviour of some members of the Met. There is also an incomprehensible reluctance on the part of Met management to enforce acceptable standards of behaviour. Even-tempered, polite, professional, tough enough when the situation demands it, and transparently accountable – that is what the Met should aim for.
Andy Smith
Kingston upon Thames, Surrey