Punishment is it enough,

W

whisteria

Member
Hello folks,
Ive been reading the bbc news ref all sorts of crimes and im wondering if the punishment is far to soft?
It's an old saying crime does'nt pay "But" is crime really a no go area as it once was?

It seems no problem or embarrassment to return to prison "infact people on verious tv shows dont turn a cheek to say while i was in prison such & such happend

Should it be that once anyone is in prison they never want to have a second term ever again.
 

Punishment is the left hand of justice but rehabilitation is the right.
If gaol simply institutionalises someone, it has failed.
Recidivism is the inevitable result.
 
Sometimes it does seem that the punishment is too lenient, but we don't have all the knowledge that the judge has about an offender, they take certain things into consideration before a sentence.There has to be some sort of less time served also for good behaviour, otherwise prisoners would be rioting all the time. true, we want everyone to not ever want a second time in prison but as DW says in her post above, rehabilitation is also needed or they will re-offend.
 

I have mixed feelings about such things. What I don't like are some of the "deals" that are cut between prosecutors and a defendant's attorney.I also notice that a lot of judges do not hand out sentences fairly. Some sentences seemed to be based on social class, money, gender and race. Thomas Jefferson made the statement that "All men are created equal." What he should have added is that "All men should be treated equal."

Just my opinion.
 
Firstly good morning to one and all and im hoping your all having a nice day,

Ive read all the comments and thoughts on the subject and ive one or two things to talk about here,

(1) we keep hearing and seeing on the verious news stations and in the press that when (and this is the important part) someone is found tobe guilty they are given a sentence "but" they dont go to gaol "but are given suspended sentences,!!!!

Whats the good in such a sentence? how did the offender get to have their daily life upset or changed? How will such a sentence make any other person think twice before they go out and do the same "CRIME" and lets face it these are "Crimes" and the victim has already suffered 'they didnt get their part suspended'

It can't be a good or satisficing thing to know or see the person who committed some really evil crimes walking the streets or even able to see them walking past their front doors.

(2)Being locked up,
From the amount of reoffenders that keep going back to gaol time and time again and to a life of pool tables, tv in cells and infact able to have the time and meanes to contact the outside world and continue to do deals with people outside of gaol !!!!!!!
Should'nt gaol be the last place on earth you 'd ever want to be in?

Whats happend to if you commit the crime you do the time? Whats happend to knowing right from wrong????

Ive read about a gang of youths who urinated on graves, "Now they didn't know anyone in those graves" it was just something to do, a laugh.
WHAT DID THEY GET????? Community service,

To me thats the Laughable part of the sentence,
Anyone can make a mistake "but" to do something illegal a second time or a third or to make a life of crime then that becomes something that if the first punishment didn't work we only have the system to blame.

I think one question should be asked here, if you we're asked what countries prison you wouldnt like to spend any time in what country would it be ??? And why?:confused:
 
Dame Warrigal said:
Punishment is the left hand of justice but rehabilitation is the right.
If gaol simply institutionalises someone, it has failed.
Recidivism is the inevitable result.
Click to expand...

Very true. Rehabilitation, education, preparation for life as a responsible citizen should be the goal of prison and if it isn't the system fails.
 
I know someone who is a Prison Guard. He said that being too severe and harsh makes prisoners very resentful and that resentment often spills over into violence against both prison guards and other prisoners. I'm not suggesting that prisoners be pampered but I agree that rehabilitation is just as important as punishment.
 
The easiest way I can respond to your post is to insert my thoughts in blue. Hope this is OK with you.

whisteria said:
Firstly good morning to one and all and im hoping your all having a nice day,

Ive read all the comments and thoughts on the subject and ive one or two things to talk about here,

(1) we keep hearing and seeing on the verious news stations and in the press that when (and this is the important part) someone is found tobe guilty they are given a sentence "but" they dont go to gaol "but are given suspended sentences,!!!!

Whats the good in such a sentence? how did the offender get to have their daily life upset or changed? How will such a sentence make any other person think twice before they go out and do the same "CRIME" and lets face it these are "Crimes" and the victim has already suffered 'they didnt get their part suspended'

It can't be a good or satisficing thing to know or see the person who committed some really evil crimes walking the streets or even able to see them walking past their front doors.

IMO the value of a suspended sentence is to give a first offender a better option than gaol where they will inevitably learn how to be a better criminal from the hardened men inside. For the duration of the suspension period they should be monitored and checked regularly to make sure that they are making improvements to their life such as education, getting a job, living sensibly without drugs or other antisocial behaviours. Failure to co-operate results in cancellation of the suspension and a custodial sentence. Suspended sentences should only be given for lesser crimes and not available for recidivists.

(2)Being locked up,
From the amount of reoffenders that keep going back to gaol time and time again and to a life of pool tables, tv in cells and infact able to have the time and meanes to contact the outside world and continue to do deals with people outside of gaol !!!!!!!
Should'nt gaol be the last place on earth you 'd ever want to be in?

Spare a thought for the people who have to maintain order in the gaols. You cannot use denial of privileges as a sanction if there are no privileges to take away in the first place. I am in favour of some paid work being available to well behaved prisoners. When I was a school girl our text books were sent to the prisons to be repaired and in 1957 we were still using text books that had been used by students in 1918. Later when I was teaching I used to order the girls' kitchen aprons from the prisons department. Meaningful work that teaches a practical skill is a valuable path to a better life when they are released.

Whats happend to if you commit the crime you do the time? Whats happend to knowing right from wrong????

Ive read about a gang of youths who urinated on graves, "Now they didn't know anyone in those graves" it was just something to do, a laugh.
WHAT DID THEY GET????? Community service,

To me thats the Laughable part of the sentence,
Anyone can make a mistake "but" to do something illegal a second time or a third or to make a life of crime then that becomes something that if the first punishment didn't work we only have the system to blame.

I wouldn't want to see stupid young men sent to gaol for public urination, even if it was on a grave. I would make the community service relevant to the offence and make sure they came to understand how antisocial and offensive their behaviour has been.

I remember a case in Sydney after a fracas between some young Lebanese men and some surfies. Both sides behaved very badly, with violence and serious destruction of property. In the middle of all of this one young man burned the Australian flag. There was great public outrage and the boy went before a magistrate. He seemed quite remorseful and was given a suspended sentence. A branch of the Returned Services League took him under their wing, educated him about the meaning of the flag to Australians, then took him to PNG to walk the Kokoda Trail to see for himself the tough conditions under which young Australian soldiers took on the advancing Japanese and turned them back. The boy came back completely changed and became a force for good in his community. He now understood the meaning of courage and sacrifice.

I will always believe that young people are worth salvaging. I don't believe that gaol is the best place to achieve salvage.

I think one question should be asked here, if you we're asked what countries prison you wouldnt like to spend any time in what country would it be ??? And why?:confused:

I don't want to spend any time in prison, anywhere, but if any of my family had to go to gaol, I hope it would be a place of reformation, not oppression. You can't build better people by treating them as less than human.
Click to expand...
 
Any noncom will tell you the way to make people fight is to make them more scared of you than they are of the enemy!

The same should apply to prison. We used to have something called "Preventative Detention" when a judge could decide that a recidivist would continue to offend any time they were free, and should therefore be locked up to "prevent" them doing so.

Thus you could have twenty years for a simple bit of shoplifting. The ungodly were terrified of it!

We also used to have something called "Hard Labour". A bit of that wouldn't come amiss.

The right hand of justice may be rehabilitation, but the hand should wear a chainmail gauntlet!
 
Sending some offenders to jail can be just plain crazy and a waste of expensive resources. In some cases the conviction is purely vindictive ¨society revenge¨ and nothing to do with rehabilitation. At the moment in the UK we are banging up old men in their eighties for sex offences dating back fifty or so years. Where´s the rehab in that? Why not get them to pay cash compensation to the victims? Many of them are quite wealthy. What is the point of jailing someone so old? They´ll probably spend most of the time in the hospital wing due to physical frailty.
Jailing youths tends to turn them into hardened criminals, as ¨rehabilitation¨ usually depends on a job on release, and jobs aren´t easy to come by for the law-abiding never mind an ex con. The system is archaic, and needs a top to bottom rethink. Don´t hold your breath though.
 
Laurie, perhaps you forget that my country was built on the labour of convicted felons.
When their sentences were over, most stayed on and became productive farmers, builders, architects, even a surgeon.

Even in those days you only got 7 years for theft or forgery. Don't you think 20 years for shoplifting is a bit over the top?
 
Then why is it that child sex abusers are known to fear gaol because of the hidings given out to them?

Then person that killed "APRIL JONES" from mid wales has been beaten and cut by other inmates,
Are you saying such a beast should be reformed to walk the streets again?
Should people that really are evil and commit evil things to others enjoy the luxury life style a lot of prisoners get?
 
Whisteria, you are all over the shop. Are we talking about child sex abusers or shoplifters?

I don't hold out much hope for reformation of paedophiles. I had a friend who was a prison psychologist specialising in these types of offenders and he was quite clear about this bleak outlook. Career criminals are also hard to reform.

Gaol is perfectly appropriate for men and women who are a serious threat to the public. For young offenders who commit crimes against property it is my opinion that they can be redeemed if handled well. If at all possible they should be kept away from the hard men who will suck them into a life of perpetual criminality.
 
Don't want to do the time then don't do the crime. I have absolutely no sympathy for any guilty person put in jail.
There is no such thing as "life in prison", they get out eventually to kill again.
 
Hello Dame,
Firstly Im not all over the shop at all
the thread is about crime, any crime,
If for instance an old couple are beated up by youths who knocked on their front door one evening , this is a crime against a couple minding their own business in their own home and here in the uk this very crime happend last week both people are in their 80's and 90's And now they are scared to death everytime someone knocks on the door.

We have care-workers stealing their patients money while they are to old to know whats going on (cctv cameras have been installed by the patients children to catch these people,
But its still theft,
Can you tell me why you think these people should not go to goal?

And on an other scale a young man has taken his own life because he was bullied and just couldnt cope,
are you telling me these two very different crimes are not as serious to those who suffered the outcome of both crimes? And their loved ones?
It was a case of black-mail ref the lad who took his own life, whats your idea ref the bullies who pushed him to far?

Or if someone thieves from your home "your" goods you've worked hard for "but the thief didnt kill you" that these sorts of crimes are not to be delt with to hard a punishment "incase these sort of people can become an icon in the future?

Ive never committed any of the crimes we are talking about "but ive been the victim of theft,
I got no reward for being the said victim and the person who did thieve from myself was infact one of the many repeat crime people,

No i can assure you im not going all over the shop, to me crime is crime and if you decide to break the law no matter if it be driving offence or rape or murder, once found guilty then you should be delt with in such away that you think twice should you have not learnt your lesson the first time and if you "DO" decided to continue to break the Law after the first offence then perhaps a much harder time inside may make you think "IS Crime really worth while"
But the important thing is this the normal everyday person who has not committed any crime has a right to be able to walk the street or answer a knock on the without fear And as long as the people who do want to continue to commit crime feel gaol isn't that bad (ive been there before) then it's no wonder crime is on the increase.

By the way Dame Warrigal "Have you been the victim of any crime's"?
 
Davy Jones,
Very well said,
When i stop and consider "what is the most important thing in my life i'd hate to have taken away from me, It's not the property we own, or our pets, or even my luxury car,
All these things can be replaced,
But if i lost my wife due to crime!!!!!!!!!!!!! Im not sure i'd want to go on, but if i found the person who caused this loss was in a few years walking the streets !!!

I'd be a changed man and i fear not a very nice one.

I agree 100% of what you've said and i'll add this "if some of these people who put so much thought into crime put just a fraction of the same effort into making a legal living "they'd be free and enjoy a good living,
"but they'd have only one worry in life, " (who's going to steal their hard earned cash) It' s what we call turniing the tables around.

Well said DAVEY JONES.
 
"Don't you think 20 years for shoplifting is a bit over the top?"

No. If someone has 150 or more convictions and steals to order, as a way of life, there is only one way of stopping them. They are never going to be rehabilitated, so lock them up.
 
Ok folks we've talked about theft/murder/rape and how prison should help these poor lost souls,

One more crime and then i'll say no more,

On the BBC forum news a few weeks ago was about a dog, shot through th neck with a cross bow,
Now do you think the person wh o did this crime to get rid of the animal should be given another chance? After all's said and done he had to get the weapon !!! and the dog !!!
find a nice out of the way spot to commit this crime and then when his deed was done he had to get himself home without being seen,

"OH" almost forgot, The dog, it didn't die no it was found two days later "still with the bolt sticking out of it's neck " wondering around a woods,
He was found by a couple out walking,
the vet said if the bolt would have been a few centimeters closer to the dogs spine it would have died,

The dog was later shown on the tv, its got new owners and they've said he's so friendly its just not true, he really is a fantastic loving dog.

CRUEL' CRUEL' CRUEL' No other words can describe such a person or is willing to do such acts.

Now would you like to leave your animal or child with such a person?
 
People become criminals for different reasons.Some have every good thing in life but still turn to crime, others have terrible childhoods and are either drawn into crime by others or perhaps become drug users.That's why judges and magistrates take background into consideration before they sentence anyone.I don't believe anyone thinks prisoners should be having a soft or easy time at the victim's expense, and mostly this doesn't happen anyway.
 
So many issues and possibilities here. But one thing as a society that could be done is reward good behavior. Certain things in life should be for those who fulfilled a requirement of good behavior. An example would be a police job. If one of the requirements to be a cop is not only working in a dfwp/drug free work place but no uses of illegal or intoxicating drugs as adult then so be it. There are some police departments that allow 4-16 uses of an illegal drug like pot for applicants and academy candidates. Why should a 21 year old be excused for committing a known crime no matter how minor get the same privileges as another 21 year who used no illegal drugs or the last time they did it was as a 17 year old juvenile. They should be able to allow none if it's known to be a cop in that community is that they don't want previous or recent illegal drug users. Same for any job. In some respects I think we let kids/young adults get too old before we hold them responsible. They think when they decide to turn the switch of adult responsibility on is when life starts. Too many second, third and fourth chances even before something becomes criminal. This is just one possibility but the rewarding of good behavior would be a start.
 
No intoxicating drugs at all? Alcohol falls within those parameters, I fear if that were in place, it would be very difficult to find sufficient applicants for law enforcement jobs.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top