Leading article: British society is not breaking down, despite this awful murder

The Leader of the Opposition has made some progress with the argument that British society is broken. "A solution to this disintegration doesn't simply lie in legislation," he admitted. "It must come from the rediscovery of a sense of direction as a country and most of all from being unafraid to start talking once again about the values and principles we believe in. If we do not learn and then teach the value of what is right and what is wrong, then the result is simply moral chaos which engulfs us all."

Yes, it is that old trick again. Those words were spoken by Tony Blair, and they date from before he became Leader of the Opposition. He was speaking as shadow Home Secretary 14 years ago about the murder of James Bulger. Today, Labour politicians no longer accept the idea that the fabric of British society has disintegrated. Mr Blair, before he stood down as Prime Minister, grew quite indignant about it. Gordon Brown has, we understand, described David Cameron's slogan "the broken society" as "a strange phrase". He has told ministers not to accept the idea that British society as a whole is broken, but to stress that there are specific problems with some families.

Related articles

• Teenager arrested as parents visit scene of son's murder
• The real question: why are our children prepared to kill one another?
• Letters: Gang crime

The roles have been reversed. Governments play down problems and seek to present them as manageable. Oppositions play them up and suggest we are all on our way to perdition, and in something speedier than a handcart.

Yet the point of quoting Mr Blair's words from 1993 is to suggest that the continuities over the past 14 years are more striking, in the long view, than the changes. The truth is that Mr Blair was wrong then, and Mr Cameron is wrong now. Wrong, that is, to suggest that rare, atypical killings are symptoms of a general malaise.

We do not yet know the full story of the tragic death of Rhys Jones, the 11-year-old boy, in Croxteth, Liverpool. But we can be sure of one thing: it was quite out of the ordinary. There is most unlikely to be any connection between it and the other two big stories of the week: the agonised debate about whether it is safe to intervene when young people are behaving badly; and the outcry over the Learco Chindamo case. One was prompted by two killings of concerned citizens earlier this month; the other by a court ruling that the murderer of head teacher Philip Lawrence could not be deported when he completes his sentence, probably next year.

Yet because all the stories involve murders carried out by feral youths, the impression is given of a society on the edge of breakdown. It is certainly true that there has been an increase in the past few years in the number of teenagers killed by guns in Britain. That is not a scare based on anecdote, but these deaths are still highly unusual. The policy implications should be tailored to the reality rather than to the wilder shores of the public imagination.

Guns, and indeed knifes, are a problem that may be worse now than 14 years ago; the anti-social behaviour of a minority is a general problem that has always been with us. Targeted police action is required on one; a wider and deeper social mobilisation is called for on the other.

What is important, though, is that a punitive mood of "crackdowns" should not dominate the broader policy. Repression and authoritarianism will further demonise disaffected young people and drive them away from a life of purpose. Sensible policy is expensive and long term rather than the stuff of cheap headlines. In this, Mr Blair was right in the past to be "tough on the causes of crime", just as Mr Cameron is more right today in his "hug a hoodie" mode – however distorted his message may have been by his enemies – than he is in his absurd "anarchy in the UK" punk garb.