O/T:- Prison

[navypie]

Wow some very thoughtful posts so far. I have to say I agree with almost everything that has been written.

From murder to council tax evasion, lock em up and throw away the key.

[maddogslater]

inspector Javert is on the scene

[ancientpie]

An interesting question and comparison, the lockdown is causing me anguish and feelings of claustrophobia, I imagine it must be a lot worse being incarcerated.
Of course some people need to be there but we should be treating them with dignity and trying to rehabilitate them. In the US prison is a big corporate money maker.

I think that most decent people would find being locked in prison very hard to take, unfortunately most prisoners aren't decent people, most have committed many offences before being locked up & have refused any efforts to be rehabilitated. I once employed a 20 year old who had committed dozens of crimes & undergone counselling (which he laughed about) & probation before finally serving 12 months in prison, he obviously hadn't learned his lesson & showed no fear of going back inside, he frequently turned up in "dodgy" cars & when we let him go he returned to rob our premises. The time for rehabilitation is before these people get set in their ways & imo prison should be unpleasant enough to convince offenders that they don't want to return. I have 2 uncles in the prison service & they both agree that especially for young offenders prisons are little more than youth clubs where they can meet like minded people & brag about their exploits.

[TSANHO]

I've always liked the idea of prisoners having to work, or give something back to society whilst they are serving their time. Whatever that may entail, cleaning up the streets, helping others and anything that may help them see 'the other side'. Like the OP says, how does locking people up for 23 hours a day help rehabilitate a criminal....The devil finds work for idle minds and all that.

Perhaps a 5 year minimum stint in the armed forces would straighten some of them out and give them some self worth. Complete their 5 years and evaluate their progress then, if they can't, or are unwilling, then let them complete longer jail terms with less chance of parole.

Of course, some criminals are too dangerous to be released, but with the lesser criminals being made to be a use to society e.g the armed forces, the prisons wouldnt be so cramped and the re-offending rates would hopefully be reduced.

[LaxtonLad]

I think that most decent people would find being locked in prison very hard to take, unfortunately most prisoners aren't decent people, most have committed many offences before being locked up & have refused any efforts to be rehabilitated. I once employed a 20 year old who had committed dozens of crimes & undergone counselling (which he laughed about) & probation before finally serving 12 months in prison, he obviously hadn't learned his lesson & showed no fear of going back inside, he frequently turned up in "dodgy" cars & when we let him go he returned to rob our premises. The time for rehabilitation is before these people get set in their ways & imo prison should be unpleasant enough to convince offenders that they don't want to return. I have 2 uncles in the prison service & they both agree that especially for young offenders prisons are little more than youth clubs where they can meet like minded people & brag about their exploits.

I was sitting outside a beach-side pub on holiday in the Isle of Wight a few years ago (totally irrelevant) with two or three other dads, all strangers to each other and we got chatting over our beers, like you do. One dad was a prison officer at some YOI, we asked him about controlling teneagers. He told us about keeping them fit, active and rehab, he reckons all that these kids learnt was how to run faster than the police.

[SwalePie]

I've always liked the idea of prisoners having to work, or give something back to society whilst they are serving their time. Whatever that may entail, cleaning up the streets, helping others and anything that may help them see 'the other side'. Like the OP says, how does locking people up for 23 hours a day help rehabilitate a criminal....The devil finds work for idle minds and all that.

Perhaps a 5 year minimum stint in the armed forces would straighten some of them out and give them some self worth. Complete their 5 years and evaluate their progress then, if they can't, or are unwilling, then let them complete longer jail terms with less chance of parole.

Of course, some criminals are too dangerous to be released, but with the lesser criminals being made to be a use to society e.g the armed forces, the prisons wouldnt be so cramped and the re-offending rates would hopefully be reduced.

Slightly off topic, perhaps, but I believe the return of National Service might help reduce the offending in the first place by giving a sense of self-worth to many. Maybe I'm a bit old fashioned though.

[navypie]

Slightly off topic, perhaps, but I believe the return of National Service might help reduce the offending in the first place by giving a sense of self-worth to many. Maybe I'm a bit old fashioned though.

Absolutely.

[Mapperleypie]

Wow, a decent and at times thoughtful thread and on the whole people being reasonable. Am I really on NCM? This won't last into Saturday night, it never does.

The idea to keep first-timers away from repeat offenders is a good one. Possibly split into categories depending upon the severity of the crime (violent or not).

Also, the idea of any sentence needs to be served in full and a reduction only if you work to give something back to society is something that should be adopted. I think many people lose respect in the criminal justice system when they hear a 10 year sentence but know they are likely to be out in 5.

I've never really understood the need to privatise parts of the prison service, it should never have a profit-motive underpinning it. It gives the company involved an incentive to not rehabilitate in order to garner repeat 'custom'. That can never be good for society as a whole.

[60YearsAPie]

Our ancestors had the right idea - transportation! It removed the criminal from society and the only expense was the cost of the journey. It also solved the problem of reoffenders.

Before transportation you could be hung for over 200 offences. Some of the more unusual were: being in the company of gypsies for a month, being out at night with a blackened face, impersonating a Chelsea pensioner, damaging Westminster Bridge, and writing a threatening letter!

We used to transport criminals to the American colonies prior to the War of Independence, then we started sending them to Australia.

Either or both of these destinations seem a good option if transportation returned.

[navypie]

Our ancestors had the right idea - transportation! It removed the criminal from society and the only expense was the cost of the journey. It also solved the problem of reoffenders.

Before transportation you could be hung for over 200 offences. Some of the more unusual were: being in the company of gypsies for a month, being out at night with a blackened face, impersonating a Chelsea pensioner, damaging Westminster Bridge, and writing a threatening letter!

We used to transport criminals to the American colonies prior to the War of Independence, then we started sending them to Australia.

Either or both of these destinations seem a good option if transportation returned.

I might be wrong but I believe you can still be hung for ...high treason, the assassination of the monarch and arson in HM dockyards. Being a Forest fan only carries a life sentence of thinking you are better than you actually are.