Halibut Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 (edited) Aye, and I have never been in trouble of any kind, so at 68 I think I have done ok. Of course the snowflakes like yourself would try to save the most serious of criminals. That's where we differ, I would punish them severely, you would take them home for tea. Good luck with that. Angel1. ..and ignore all the evidence about what actually reduces reoffending. Sad. Edited February 11, 2018 by Groose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 (edited) Aye, and I have never been in trouble of any kind, so at 68 I think I have done ok. Of course the snowflakes like yourself would try to save the most serious of criminals. That's where we differ, I would punish them severely, you would take them home for tea. Good luck with that. Angel1. Oh Angelfire you silly goose. In the UK we jail 150 per 100,000 of the population. In America, land of free, home of really silly 200 hundred year long sentences and the death penalty, they jail 693 per 100,000. Now I'm going out in a minute but I'll google who has the highest murder rates, and if I can find them, reoffending rates. Who do you think will have the highest? Edited February 11, 2018 by Groose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaati Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 Just fixed some quote tags. Please do be careful when quoting as the chain was looking like a user had said something that they had not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukdobby Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 Oh Angelfire you silly goose. In the UK we jail 150 per 100,000 of the population. In America, land of free, home of really silly 200 hundred year long sentences and the death penalty, they jail 693 per 100,000. Now I'm going out in a minute but I'll google who has the highest murder rates, and if I can find them, reoffending rates. Who do you think will have the highest? So taking them home for tea causes them not to 're-offend,didn't think that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 So taking them home for tea causes them not to 're-offend,didn't think that way. Who the **** is taking ex-cons for tea? Rehabilitation is what I'm talking about. I'm not saying some sentences aren't too short, but the lock em, bread and water thing won't help matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollwithit Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 There aren't any politicians around presently with the balls to tackle prisons effectively. What's needed is a) reform of our ludicrous drug laws b) prison largely for violent offenders only c) massive investment in community sentences that properly address the causes of offending d) massive investment in the prison service to rehabilitate and educate prisoners and e) most crucially of all, massive investment in aftercare; the single most important important antidote to reoffending is having a job. Having gainful employment reduces offending too. However, the system is geared up to prevent people getting employment because of the DBS checks and having to declare unspent convictions when asked. No employer wants a con in the workforce. Raises risk, mistrust and public image issues. Employers can get hold of information on DBS checks that aren't even relevant to the post advertised. So cons have not chance of breaking the cycle if they don't have money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 There's little evidence that jail works. And plenty that it doesn't. You can easily look at the crime rate in countries with less harsh and more harsh punishment, having a propensity to send people to jail doesn't reduce crime. You can also look at crime rates before and after laws change to reduce/increase the likelihood of jail time, again there is no correlation between jailing people and reduced crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted February 11, 2018 Author Share Posted February 11, 2018 You can easily look at the crime rate in countries with less harsh and more harsh punishment, having a propensity to send people to jail doesn't reduce crime. Speed cameras work, at that very spot, reducing crime. If people thought they would get caught and punished, that would reduce crime. The punishment need to be harsh, but not so that the person goes into the dark side of society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 Unfortunately that's not how it works psychologically. People either commit crime with no forethought (ie in the heat of the moment) or alternatively convince themselves that they won't be caught. The level of punishment is irrelevant, that's well documented. Prison does achieve the purpose of keeping someone away from the public, but it doesn't reduce the chance of further offences and may teach them more sophisticated criminal behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted February 12, 2018 Author Share Posted February 12, 2018 Unfortunately that's not how it works psychologically. People either commit crime with no forethought (ie in the heat of the moment) or alternatively convince themselves that they won't be caught. The level of punishment is irrelevant, that's well documented. If they believe that they may be caught, behaviour is different. How do people drive near speed camera if they already have 10 points on their licence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now