No Jail for Moderate Crime Convictions

[Zapp]

24 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

The Netherlands and other Scandinavian countries are unique, for instance, they have very low crime rates per head of population and I'm going to make a guess that they don't suffer from the same level of social and cultural problems we have in this country that will obviously lead to crime, its only a guess and I stand to be corrected if I'm wrong I have very little knowledge of the system over there, unlike here. 

The American system mainly falls down due to there being very little support for prisoners, unlike the UK, when released, if you release a prisoner out of jail and they have nowhere to live, no job and no money, they will obviously turn back to crime very quickly, that is a totally sepreate issue to the UK, the three strikes and your out system if used correctly is very effective at stopping reoffending, how can anyone reoffend if they are never released? We had a better system than that here which had a loose similarly in that life sentences could be given to criminals who would otherwise been let out in a year or two, it had the lowest reoffending rate of all sentences and I believe was about half of the next lowest, so that proves that long sentences can be very effective when used proportionately, unfortunately it was deemed unlawful and has been banned under the ECHR. 

No amount of money in the world can prevent someone who cares for nothing and no one but themselve, similar to treating alcoholism, the person would need to want to stop for there to be any hope of them stopping drinking, the problem is the vast majority of criminals once they reach adulthood have no intention of stopping and never will. 

I don't disagree about the need for strong sentencing nor that it's a deterrent to some extent, but look at the number of posts on this thread suggesting that simply having harsh sentences and bad conditions will solve the problem by deterring offending in the first place.  The US experience disproves that categorically.

As I've said before on there threads, I'm not interested particularly in "being nice" to anyone who doesn't deserve it.  I'm only interested in having a prison system that works.

[12gauge82]

6 minutes ago, Zapp said:

I don't disagree about the need for strong sentencing nor that it's a deterrent to some extent, but look at the number of posts on this thread suggesting that simply having harsh sentences and bad conditions will solve the problem by deterring offending in the first place.  The US experience disproves that categorically.

As I've said before on there threads, I'm not interested particularly in "being nice" to anyone who doesn't deserve it.  I'm only interested in having a prison system that works.

I certainly don't disagree with that, most criminals don't commit a crime with the belief they will be caught for it so even the harshest sentencing will still often be ineffective as the person committing the crime never intends to go to prison anyway. 

 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

"Norman Stanley Fletcher, you have pleaded guilty to the charges brought by this court, and it is now my duty to pass sentence. You are an habitual criminal, who accepts arrest as an occupational hazard, and presumably accepts imprisonment in the same casual manner. We therefore feel constrained to commit you to the maximum term allowed for these offences: you will go to prison for five years".

Edited January 13, 2019 by TIGHTCHOKE

[oowee]

9 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

I certainly don't disagree with that, most criminals don't commit a crime with the belief they will be caught for it so even the harshest sentencing will still often be ineffective as the person committing the crime never intends to go to prison anyway. 

 

This ^^^^^ i think is a large part of the equation. Rehabilitation as a program will only work if you are likely to be picked up in the first place. I used to sit on a joint agency group in Milton Keynes. Regular shoplifters in the shopping centre were caught every week and the police advised that they could not respond. Very frustrating and I think the lack of being caught is as important as deterrent sentencing.

If the three things could work together, certainty of being caught, a strong rehab program and deterrent sentencing where it failed and you have the basis of a solution. One on its own will not work. The lower your crime rate the easier it is to fund and afford. The longer you leave it the more out of control,the more expensive and daunting an issue to tackle it becomes. 

[Harnser]

7 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

"Norman Stanley Fletcher, you have pleaded guilty to the charges brought by this court, and it is now my duty to pass sentence. You are an habitual criminal, who accepts arrest as an occupational hazard, and presumably accepts imprisonment in the same casual manner. We therefore feel constrained to commit you to the maximum term allowed for these offences: you will go to prison for five years".

Stanly fletcher was sentenced to 5 years preventive detention . This was a sentence of imprisonment that a judge could award for repeat offenders . A judge could send some body to prison for minor offences if they persisted in offending . I have seen men sentenced to 10 years preventative detention for offence that would get a slap on the wrist in a court of law today . Yes bring back the old PD sentence .

harnser

[12gauge82]

4 minutes ago, oowee said:

This ^^^^^ i think is a large part of the equation. Rehabilitation as a program will only work if you are likely to be picked up in the first place. I used to sit on a joint agency group in Milton Keynes. Regular shoplifters in the shopping centre were caught every week and the police advised that they could not respond. Very frustrating and I think the lack of being caught is as important as deterrent sentencing.

If the three things could work together, certainty of being caught, a strong rehab program and deterrent sentencing where it failed and you have the basis of a solution. One on its own will not work. The lower your crime rate the easier it is to fund and afford. The longer you leave it the more out of control,the more expensive and daunting an issue to tackle it becomes. 

Well I never thought I'd see the day we'd absolutely agree on something! 

But spot on 😂👍

[panoma1]

The issue really is not what the authorities do to offenders, it's what the authorities don't do!....And that is protect the public from crime and criminals!.........if crimes such as mugging, theft and burglary are not seen by the authorities as important enough the attract a custodial sentence............and the public do.........at what point will the public decide to take action and defend and protect themselves, their family and their possessions?

Justice and punishment needs to not only be done.........but be seen to be done!.....how would you feel if someone who had been convicted of burgling your house one week...........was drinking and playing darts in the local the next?

[grrclark]

1 hour ago, oowee said:

This ^^^^^ i think is a large part of the equation. Rehabilitation as a program will only work if you are likely to be picked up in the first place. I used to sit on a joint agency group in Milton Keynes. Regular shoplifters in the shopping centre were caught every week and the police advised that they could not respond. Very frustrating and I think the lack of being caught is as important as deterrent sentencing.

If the three things could work together, certainty of being caught, a strong rehab program and deterrent sentencing where it failed and you have the basis of a solution. One on its own will not work. The lower your crime rate the easier it is to fund and afford. The longer you leave it the more out of control,the more expensive and daunting an issue to tackle it becomes. 

Good post, aligns with my thinking too.

[pinfireman]

14 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

I think the point was that places like the Netherlands and Scandinavia actually do rehabilitate their offenders. 

Despite us claiming we focus on rehabilitation, with prisons understaffed and under resourced there isn’t really any on offer, hence we don’t see any of the positive results!! 

 

It costs a big amount of investment to properly rehabilitate people and give them other legitimate options in life.

 

I once worked with a youngish lad, father died suddenly before the young lad could even walk, mother hit the drink hard. 

Young lad never taken to school, never shows support, ended up barely able to read and write. 

Drug dealers and gang members seek out these CHILDREN, much like the grooming gangs in Rochedale etc seek out vulnerable girls, these gangs seek out these lads, they “help them out”, pay them good money and start them off delivering unknown packages, and next thing selling drugs for them. 

 

These children are out there making hundreds of pounds a day, when they couldn’t even get a legitimate job in KFC because they can’t add up small change or read ... how are you going to tell them to straighten up and fly straight?! 

Your living on a different planet than what some of these people experience. 

My youngest worked in the Drug section of a medium security prison for 5 years, I DO know a little about what goes on.......However, just throwing more money at it does NOT solve the situation.  The carrot and stick approach currently in use here does not work, but perhaps that is because a.  the carrot is not big enough, and b.   the stick is not heavy enough! A slap on the wrist is just that, a slap on the wrist!

[Scully]

2 hours ago, oowee said:

This ^^^^^ i think is a large part of the equation. Rehabilitation as a program will only work if you are likely to be picked up in the first place. I used to sit on a joint agency group in Milton Keynes. Regular shoplifters in the shopping centre were caught every week and the police advised that they could not respond. Very frustrating and I think the lack of being caught is as important as deterrent sentencing.

If the three things could work together, certainty of being caught, a strong rehab program and deterrent sentencing where it failed and you have the basis of a solution. One on its own will not work. The lower your crime rate the easier it is to fund and afford. The longer you leave it the more out of control,the more expensive and daunting an issue to tackle it becomes. 

Makes sense to me. 

[Bazooka Joe]

Quote

You are making a big assumption in believing that a lot of offenders are capable of being rehabilitated or hold any desire to be rehabilitated. Many are very happy living exactly the way they do right now.

Spot on Vince, first thing that needs to happen is sorting the jails out first, the recent C5 program on Durham Jail proved this, one of the inmates couldn't wait to get back inside Durham because he made more money on the inside than he could outside...

[pinfireman]

3 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

The Netherlands and other Scandinavian countries are unique, for instance, they have very low crime rates per head of population and I'm going to make a guess that they don't suffer from the same level of social and cultural problems we have in this country that will obviously lead to crime, its only a guess and I stand to be corrected if I'm wrong I have very little knowledge of the system over there, unlike here. 

The American system mainly falls down due to there being very little support for prisoners, unlike the UK, when released, if you release a prisoner out of jail and they have nowhere to live, no job and no money, they will obviously turn back to crime very quickly, that is a totally sepreate issue to the UK, the three strikes and your out system if used correctly is very effective at stopping reoffending, how can anyone reoffend if they are never released? We had a better system than that here which had a loose similarly in that life sentences could be given to criminals who would otherwise been let out in a year or two, it had the lowest reoffending rate of all sentences and I believe was about half of the next lowest, so that proves that long sentences can be very effective when used proportionately, unfortunately it was deemed unlawful and has been banned under the ECHR. 

No amount of money in the world can prevent someone who cares for nothing and no one but themselve, similar to treating alcoholism, the person would need to want to stop for there to be any hope of them stopping drinking, the problem is the vast majority of criminals once they reach adulthood have no intention of stopping and never will. 

Very true!

3 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

"Norman Stanley Fletcher, you have pleaded guilty to the charges brought by this court, and it is now my duty to pass sentence. You are an habitual criminal, who accepts arrest as an occupational hazard, and presumably accepts imprisonment in the same casual manner. We therefore feel constrained to commit you to the maximum term allowed for these offences: you will go to prison for five years".

True then, and true now!

2 hours ago, oowee said:

This ^^^^^ i think is a large part of the equation. Rehabilitation as a program will only work if you are likely to be picked up in the first place. I used to sit on a joint agency group in Milton Keynes. Regular shoplifters in the shopping centre were caught every week and the police advised that they could not respond. Very frustrating and I think the lack of being caught is as important as deterrent sentencing.

If the three things could work together, certainty of being caught, a strong rehab program and deterrent sentencing where it failed and you have the basis of a solution. One on its own will not work. The lower your crime rate the easier it is to fund and afford. The longer you leave it the more out of control,the more expensive and daunting an issue to tackle it becomes. 

I wont disagree with that...carrot and stick.  But it should be a big stick!

2 hours ago, Harnser said:

Stanly fletcher was sentenced to 5 years preventive detention . This was a sentence of imprisonment that a judge could award for repeat offenders . A judge could send some body to prison for minor offences if they persisted in offending . I have seen men sentenced to 10 years preventative detention for offence that would get a slap on the wrist in a court of law today . Yes bring back the old PD sentence .

harnser

[pinfireman]

2 hours ago, panoma1 said:

The issue really is not what the authorities do to offenders, it's what the authorities don't do!....And that is protect the public from crime and criminals!.........if crimes such as mugging, theft and burglary are not seen by the authorities as important enough the attract a custodial sentence............and the public do.........at what point will the public decide to take action and defend and protect themselves, their family and their possessions?

Justice and punishment needs to not only be done.........but be seen to be done!.....how would you feel if someone who had been convicted of burgling your house one week...........was drinking and playing darts in the local the next?

Cannot disagree with that! 

[henry d]

On 13/01/2019 at 00:44, pinfireman said:

We could put them in your backyard..................not much different than the Falklands? But you, no doubt, would want them kept nice and warm and comfortable, ?

Totally different to my backyard, and I`ve been to the Falklands too. So your idea is to transport (at great cost to the tax payer) them to the colonies, which didn`t work in the past, you also seem to advocate cold uncomfortable conditions, which also didn`t work in the past. Good to see some forward thinking!

[panoma1]

Its a battle of wills, criminals want to earn easy money by committing criminal acts, the authorities want to stop them.....the authorities just have to keep upping the stakes (including both corporal and capital punishment) to deter criminals!.........until this happens and the authorities actually decide to get hard on crime, successfully upholding law and order  will continue to deteriorate! 

[Rewulf]

50 minutes ago, henry d said:

So your idea is to transport (at great cost to the tax payer) them to the colonies, which didn`t work in the past,

Didnt it ??
It had the effect of removing criminals from society, often as an alternative to the noose = deterrent .

It also had the effect of giving them work and a vent for their frustrations, a motivation to better themselves = rehabilitation.

Obviously wouldnt work in these times, as it would be classed as inhumane, and there are no colonies, but please dont say it didnt work, it was highly effective.

1 hour ago, panoma1 said:

Its a battle of wills, criminals want to earn easy money by committing criminal acts, the authorities want to stop them.....the authorities just have to keep upping the stakes (including both corporal and capital punishment) to deter criminals!.........until this happens and the authorities actually decide to get hard on crime, successfully upholding law and order  will continue to deteriorate! 

Spot on .

[pinfireman]

7 hours ago, henry d said:

Totally different to my backyard, and I`ve been to the Falklands too. So your idea is to transport (at great cost to the tax payer) them to the colonies, which didn`t work in the past, you also seem to advocate cold uncomfortable conditions, which also didn`t work in the past. Good to see some forward thinking!

Good to hear some touchy, feeling thoughts...............by the way, expensive to ship them there, but very cheap to keep them there! It costs £700 per week to keep them nice and warm and well fed etc etc etc......once you drop them off on a nice cold remote island, it,s win, win financially!

With the money saved, we could increase the State Pension, or scrap the TV licence, or put more into the NHS....

Edited January 14, 2019 by pinfireman
spelling

[henry d]

So punishment for the Falkland islanders too then as they have to put up with roaming crims?

[johnphilip]

12 hours ago, henry d said:

So punishment for the Falkland islanders too then as they have to put up with roaming crims?

But would they .

[blackbird]

If I was homeless the first thing I would do is get thrown into prison, then it’s tv every night, nice bed, guaranteed food clean clothes Wow beats sleeping on the streets 

[Rewulf]

25 minutes ago, blackbird said:

If I was homeless the first thing I would do is get thrown into prison, then it’s tv every night, nice bed, guaranteed food clean clothes Wow beats sleeping on the streets 

Dont forget Bubbas 'special' cuddles 

[mel b3]

57 minutes ago, blackbird said:

If I was homeless the first thing I would do is get thrown into prison, then it’s tv every night, nice bed, guaranteed food clean clothes Wow beats sleeping on the streets 

The theory is great , but the reality is somewhat different. 👍

[blackbird]

21 minutes ago, mel b3 said:

The theory is great , but the reality is somewhat different. 👍

Yes totally agree with you, my point is if just the word prison should put the fear of god in to criminals maybe we would not have this problem then.

Edited January 16, 2019 by blackbird

[12gauge82]

3 hours ago, mel b3 said:

The theory is great , but the reality is somewhat different. 👍

You'd be surprised how many people do that in the winter time or when they know they've gone too far on drugs and need to get cleanish. 

[Penelope]

1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said:

You'd be surprised how many people do that in the winter time or when they know they've gone too far on drugs and need to get cleanish. 

Had one recently, broke into a building I manage and he then called the police himself and was arrested for burglary and theft. He had a keyboard and mouse from an ancient PC stuffed up his top.