Anyway, prisons.......
If they worked we wouldn't have so much re-offending. Marek is right, treating people humanely is not the same as being soft. If we want to reduce re-offending we will put our prejudices and understandable desire for a bit of vengeance (nothing wrong with that!) to one side and objectively look properly at what will get us to what we want to achieve.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
alternatively we can adopt the method favoured by david and barry and use a shoe horn to get more in.
Let's think that through....... sardined prisoners, boredom, fisticuffs, staff at risk, riots. People with a record, unable to get employment, unable to get housing, homeless, vulnerable to drink, drugs and abuse, nothing to lose, crime, mental health problems. You will notice that none of that reduces crime or re-offending.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Bern, it is several decades of increasing leniency in sentencing, easier prison conditions and treating the criminal as victims that has bought us to this state.
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
Correct barry.
End parole for a start, 5 years = 5 years, life = life.
Which part of "it doesn't work" was written in hieroglyphics? If we continue to expect a simple jail sentence to reduce reoffending we set ourselves up to fail! We need to really think it through. Preparing people for post-sentence life is the most crucial bit. It isn't "soft" - it is a major challenge and genuinely the most important part of the whole process if what we really want is to stop crime.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Quite right Bern. It is not good enough this idea of, "A cell for some and a cocoon for the rest."
We are, each and all. in this together, whether we like it or no.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
bern, re-offending has risen with attempts at rehabilitation.
Prison works because you cant commit crime inside, prison will work better if criminals are terrified of returning.
Guest 683- Registered: 11 Feb 2009
- Posts: 1,052
David
do you have any research based evidence to support your claims? I would be interested to read it if you have.
I direct your attention to the word "attempts". There is, Mark, evidence to the contrary of what David says, and I can give anecdotal evidence ditto. Of course there are failures, many of them. Sadly they hit the headlines unlike the quietly successful non-offending ex-offenders. Prison serves a good purpose, and there is a real place for punishment in this equation, but it is such a fragment of the picture. I repeat: there is a real challenge involved, but it is crucial to plan for and support people through post-sentence life. If what you really want is to reduce crime, you need to think differently. If you are content to support and contribute to the rise in crime and merely imprison people when they inevitably re-offend, carry on. But don't claim that you want to reduce crime if that's the case.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
I do think we all need to consider carefully the way forward.
i support davids view that prison should be a place that people fear to go to, at the moment this is not the case.
but we also need to look at the long term,
it has been said just locking people away for years on end doesnt solve issues, just shuts them out for a while.
there needs to be some forward thinking on what happens when the sentences finish.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
