ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 13th August 2019, 02:28 AM   #1
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 44,028
Tougher and mandatory sentencing

This could arguably go in the Crime and Punishments or even Politics section, but I’m not talking a specific crime so think it’s good here.

Anyway, I’ve been thinking about the trend towards mandatory (where the judge has little discretion) and tougher sentencing. Lo and behold Boris throws a log on the fire.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...automatically/

Quote:
The Prime Minister will pledge to end the automatic release of serious criminals who are currently freed after serving half of their sentence.

He will press for a tougher stance on sentencing at a roundtable meeting in No 10 on Monday with police chiefs, prosecutors, former judges, courts administrators and prison bosses.
We now have public outrage about lenient sentencing in many parts of the world, including Australia, and politicians trying to prove who is “tougher on crime”. Victims lobby groups are becoming more vocal and influential. New prisons popping up like mushrooms. Police forces growing in staffing and power. Etc etc.

Yet our societies don’t seem to be safer and more secure (yes I’ve read that gun violence in the US is decreasing, but it is still at an unacceptable level in my view). Rehabilitation might be a stated objective of justice systems, but when someone gets a set sentence of 30 years without parole, how is rehabilitation really working?

So my question. Is tougher sentencing a good or bad thing and why?
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill

Last edited by lionking; 13th August 2019 at 02:29 AM.
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 02:40 AM   #2
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,975
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
This could arguably go in the Crime and Punishments or even Politics section, but Iím not talking a specific crime so think itís good here.

Anyway, Iíve been thinking about the trend towards mandatory (where the judge has little discretion) and tougher sentencing. Lo and behold Boris throws a log on the fire.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...automatically/



We now have public outrage about lenient sentencing in many parts of the world, including Australia, and politicians trying to prove who is ďtougher on crimeĒ. Victims lobby groups are becoming more vocal and influential. New prisons popping up like mushrooms. Police forces growing in staffing and power. Etc etc.

Yet our societies donít seem to be safer and more secure (yes Iíve read that gun violence in the US is decreasing, but it is still at an unacceptable level in my view). Rehabilitation might be a stated objective of justice systems, but when someone gets a set sentence of 30 years without parole, how is rehabilitation really working?

So my question. Is tougher sentencing a good or bad thing and why?
Depends on he crime.
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With todayís Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 02:45 AM   #3
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 44,028
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Depends on he crime.
Just letís assume for the sake of argument that all crimes now receive longer sentences.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 02:55 AM   #4
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,975
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Just letís assume for the sake of argument that all crimes now receive longer sentences.
OK

I don't think these people should have got longer prison sentences

https://www.theguardian.com/australi...original-women
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With todayís Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 03:01 AM   #5
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,975
But I do think this geezer should have

https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2019/07/a..._sentence.html
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With todayís Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 03:08 AM   #6
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 25,176
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
This could arguably go in the Crime and Punishments or even Politics section, but Iím not talking a specific crime so think itís good here.

Anyway, Iíve been thinking about the trend towards mandatory (where the judge has little discretion) and tougher sentencing. Lo and behold Boris throws a log on the fire.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...automatically/



We now have public outrage about lenient sentencing in many parts of the world, including Australia, and politicians trying to prove who is ďtougher on crimeĒ. Victims lobby groups are becoming more vocal and influential. New prisons popping up like mushrooms. Police forces growing in staffing and power. Etc etc.

Yet our societies donít seem to be safer and more secure (yes Iíve read that gun violence in the US is decreasing, but it is still at an unacceptable level in my view). Rehabilitation might be a stated objective of justice systems, but when someone gets a set sentence of 30 years without parole, how is rehabilitation really working?

So my question. Is tougher sentencing a good or bad thing and why?
From what you quoted it looks as though the only change here is an end to automatic release of prisoners who have served half their sentence.

I don't see how that is an onerous theft of a judge's discretion. In fact, if anything, it surely grants more discretionary powers to those involved in specific cases. It also seems fairly logical to me that sentences should not be automatically reduced to half.

(Also, I did not realize that police staffing was on the rise, or at least I was under the impression that it had been through a number of cuts because of austerity. I could be wrong, though.)

Of course, I am only going by the quote you provided from the Daily Telegraph which may be putting a pro-Boris spin on things.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 05:57 AM   #7
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Besźel or Ul Qoma - not sure...
Posts: 9,579
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
This could arguably go in the Crime and Punishments or even Politics section, but Iím not talking a specific crime so think itís good here.

Anyway, Iíve been thinking about the trend towards mandatory (where the judge has little discretion) and tougher sentencing. Lo and behold Boris throws a log on the fire.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...automatically/

Quote:
The Prime Minister will pledge to end the automatic release of serious criminals who are currently freed after serving half of their sentence.

He will press for a tougher stance on sentencing at a roundtable meeting in No 10 on Monday with police chiefs, prosecutors, former judges, courts administrators and prison bosses.
We now have public outrage about lenient sentencing in many parts of the world, including Australia, and politicians trying to prove who is ďtougher on crimeĒ. Victims lobby groups are becoming more vocal and influential. New prisons popping up like mushrooms. Police forces growing in staffing and power. Etc etc.

Yet our societies donít seem to be safer and more secure (yes Iíve read that gun violence in the US is decreasing, but it is still at an unacceptable level in my view). Rehabilitation might be a stated objective of justice systems, but when someone gets a set sentence of 30 years without parole, how is rehabilitation really working?

So my question. Is tougher sentencing a good or bad thing and why?
As far as I am aware, release is not universally "automatic." It's the equivalent of the old "time off for good behaviour," i.e. if someone has not been a good prisoner, and especially if they have committed further crimes in prison, they don't get released once they hit the half-way mark. For serious offences like murder, there is certainly a requirement for a demonstration by the prisoner that they have acknowledged the seriousness of their offence, and accept their guilt.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 09:30 AM   #8
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,442
The UK has one of the higher levels of incarceration among western European countries, which is a result of both longer prison sentences and lower threshold for incarceration in general. And yet clearly the British policy of placing prisoners in squalid, overcrowded and utterly dysfunctional detention facilities rife with drugs and violence does nothing to inspire people to be law abiding citizens.

Merely holding them there longer is only going to cost more money that would be far better spent actually renovating said prisons and improving staffing among both the police and penal facilities.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr

Last edited by Arcade22; 13th August 2019 at 09:32 AM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 09:41 AM   #9
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,144
If I thought BJ's motive was anything to do with reducing crime then it might be an interesting question. Unfortunately its only about pandering to the idiots who might vote for him.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 10:23 AM   #10
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
The Norseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,198
This is just another sign of the further creep to the right politically/societally especially in light of massive amounts of evidence which demonstrate the ineffectiveness of such policies.
The Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 11:06 AM   #11
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
This could arguably go in the Crime and Punishments or even Politics section, but I’m not talking a specific crime so think it’s good here.

Anyway, I’ve been thinking about the trend towards mandatory (where the judge has little discretion) and tougher sentencing. Lo and behold Boris throws a log on the fire.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...automatically/



We now have public outrage about lenient sentencing in many parts of the world, including Australia, and politicians trying to prove who is “tougher on crime”. Victims lobby groups are becoming more vocal and influential. New prisons popping up like mushrooms. Police forces growing in staffing and power. Etc etc.

Yet our societies don’t seem to be safer and more secure (yes I’ve read that gun violence in the US is decreasing, but it is still at an unacceptable level in my view). Rehabilitation might be a stated objective of justice systems, but when someone gets a set sentence of 30 years without parole, how is rehabilitation really working?

So my question. Is tougher sentencing a good or bad thing and why?
I don't know about Australia, but the way the system functions in the US, pretty much guarantees that once you get convicted of a crime, you're likely to be a criminal for the rest of your life. There is little opportunity for training or education once you are in the system, and even when there is, once someone has a conviction on their record it's virtually impossible to find a decent job. While it's understandable that, given a choice between a convicted criminal and just about anybody else, an employer is likely to choose the latter, perhaps a little incentive offered by the government could help here.

To me it seems, that unless it's determined that a crime is so bad, or the criminal is so irredeemably bad that there is nothing to be done but lock them up for life, which is a very expensive proposition, the primary goal of any correctional system should be rehabilitation. If you're going to let them out some day, you'd like to have at least a reasonable chance that they will be functioning members of society when you do. However, it seems that you'd be hard pressed to design a system that is more likely than the current system to do the exact opposite.

I know there is a desire to deter crime and to punish those who commit serious crimes, but I'm not at all convinced that harsh sentences are particularly effective at deterrence. I think most criminals either think they are too clever to get caught, or choose not to even think about the consequences if they do get caught.

I certainly don't know all the answers, but I think more effort at job training and education for people in the system, and more effort to get them employed when they have completed their sentences would pretty much have to work better than simply warehousing them for several years with a bunch of other criminals, then turning them loose with no real opportunity to do anything but go back to crime.

On top of that, far too many of the people in prisons (again in the US) are there for drug related offenses, which, in most cases, shouldn't be crimes at all or should be dealt with through addiction treatment rather than prison.
CORed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 01:30 PM   #12
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,203
I am very much in favour of mandatory minimum sentences for crimes of violence (particularly where they involve the death or serious injury of the victim) such that the judge has no discretion to apply a lesser sentence.

I'm also in favour of a protocol in which if you get 20 years for such a crime, you SERVE 20 years, and you need an extraordinary set of circumstances to get any time sliced off that sentence.
__________________
ďGive me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 07:01 PM   #13
Venom
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,737
I think U.S. sentences are already too tough in some circumstances.

Jail is incredibly boring! Other than sheer torture, spending 25+ years of your precious life behind bars must be the most heart breaking thing.
Venom is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 07:13 PM   #14
Venom
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,737
The Sentencing Project wants a maximum 20 years for all violent crimes except serial rapists or mass murderers.

I thought this part was interesting in particular:
Quote:
A. ďAging OutĒ of Crime
A longstanding finding in the criminology literature is that involvement in criminal activity is strongly dependent on age, an outcome that cuts across race and class lines. Increased involvement in crime begins in the mid-teen years and rises sharply, but for a relatively short period of time. For most crimes, these rates of involvement begin declining by a personís early to mid-twenties and continue on a downward trajectory. Looking at rates of robbery, for example, these peak at age nineteen and, by their late twenties, have declined by more than half.

These dynamics have significant meaning for the length and effectiveness of prison terms. In the federal prison system, the median age range in prison is 36 to 40 years old, well past the peak age of criminal involvement. Further, the length of stay for released federal prisoners doubled between 1988 and 2012, from an average of 17.9 months to 37.5 months. This rise is largely attributed to policy changes, including the implementation of the sentencing Guidelines, elimination of parole, and advent of a new generation of mandatory sentencing laws.
Venom is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 07:57 PM   #15
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,861
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
I think U.S. sentences are already too tough in some circumstances.

Jail is incredibly boring! Other than sheer torture, spending 25+ years of your precious life behind bars must be the most heart breaking thing.
Pretty sure having your loved ones raped and murdered is a more heart breaking thing.

Or having your loved one killed by a serial drunk driver who didn't get the message when his license was revoked. After he killed someone else's loved ones.

**** your heartbreak. **** your bleeding heart for the worst of us, while their victims carry a broken heart they never asked for.

At least the people in prison chose their heartbreak. So **** them. And **** your pity.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 08:06 PM   #16
Venom
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,737
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Pretty sure having your loved ones raped and murdered is a more heart breaking thing.

Or having your loved one killed by a serial drunk driver who didn't get the message when his license was revoked. After he killed someone else's loved ones.

**** your heartbreak. **** your bleeding heart for the worst of us, while their victims carry a broken heart they never asked for.

At least the people in prison chose their heartbreak. So **** them. And **** your pity.
Is this one of those liberals don't care about us law abiding citizens things.
Venom is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 08:12 PM   #17
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,861
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
Is this one of those liberals don't care about us law abiding citizens things.
If the shoe fits? Wear it, I guess.

But no, this is one of those your argument is full of **** things.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 08:18 PM   #18
Venom
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,737
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
If the shoe fits? Wear it, I guess.

But no, this is one of those your argument is full of **** things.
I wouldn't call it an argument. It was more of my musings of what it'd be like to spend that much of your life behind bars.

I do think life sentences are handed out far too excessively in the U.S., but I haven't formulated an argument for that. It just feels right.
Venom is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 08:30 PM   #19
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,861
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
I wouldn't call it an argument. It was more of my musings of what it'd be like to spend that much of your life behind bars.



I do think life sentences are handed out far too excessively in the U.S., but I haven't formulated an argument for that. It just feels right.
I agree that the US hands out too many life sentences.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2019, 08:51 PM   #20
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,857
Some of these right-wing hard-liners want to think twice about stiffening sentences for lesser crimes. Because some of them are certain to be in those cross-hairs should their own white-collar crimes get them up in front of the judge some time.

Third time speeding ticket for $100? Three-strikes-you're-out! Life in the slammer for you.

First time Enron scam netting $100 million? Wrist-slap and a good behaviour bond. And you can keep the mansions.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 12:47 AM   #21
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,975
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
The UK has one of the higher levels of incarceration among western European countries, which is a result of both longer prison sentences and lower threshold for incarceration in general. And yet clearly the British policy of placing prisoners in squalid, overcrowded and utterly dysfunctional detention facilities rife with drugs and violence does nothing to inspire people to be law abiding citizens.

Merely holding them there longer is only going to cost more money that would be far better spent actually renovating said prisons and improving staffing among both the police and penal facilities.
They have it pretty easy though.

I saw a series of 1/2 hour documentaries called Porridge about a recidivist offender. Norman Stanley Fletcher I think his name was.

Seemed to spend most of the time just telling jokes
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With todayís Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000

Last edited by cullennz; 14th August 2019 at 12:48 AM.
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 12:55 AM   #22
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 63,039
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
They have it pretty easy though.

I saw a series of 1/2 hour documentaries called Porridge about a recidivist offender. Norman Stanley Fletcher I think his name was.

Seemed to spend most of the time just telling jokes
For those who are too young to get the reference, Porridge was a British comedy show from the 1970s starring Ronnie Barker.
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him

We can't go back. We don't understand everything yet.
"Everything" is a little ambitious. We barely understand anything.
Yeah. But that's what the first part of understanding everything looks like.
- xkcd Time (frame 1071-3)
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 12:58 AM   #23
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,975
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
For those who are too young to get the reference, Porridge was a British comedy show from the 1970s starring Ronnie Barker.
All that effort to create one of the worst jokes in Int' Skept' history wasted



__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With todayís Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 01:12 AM   #24
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,874
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
For those who are too young to get the reference, Porridge was a British comedy show from the 1970s starring Ronnie Barker.
And a series in 2016, by the original writers. Updated to the main character being Norman Stanley Fletcher's grandson. I have the entire original series.

Unsurprisingly, it was immensely popular in prisons.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 01:14 AM   #25
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,203
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Pretty sure having your loved ones raped and murdered is a more heart breaking thing.

Or having your loved one killed by a serial drunk driver who didn't get the message when his license was revoked. After he killed someone else's loved ones.

**** your heartbreak. **** your bleeding heart for the worst of us, while their victims carry a broken heart they never asked for.

At least the people in prison chose their heartbreak. So **** them. And **** your pity.
THIS

When a person commits the murder of another, its a life sentence for victim, and their their family, and their loved ones - mother never gets to see their son or daughter grow to adulthood, never gets the change to attend their child's wedding, never gets the chance to hold their grandchildren.
__________________
ďGive me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 01:41 AM   #26
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 44,028
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
THIS

When a person commits the murder of another, its a life sentence for victim, and their their family, and their loved ones - mother never gets to see their son or daughter grow to adulthood, never gets the change to attend their child's wedding, never gets the chance to hold their grandchildren.
Do you support execution? Not a gotcha, a serious question?
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 01:52 AM   #27
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 11,899
This;

"The Prime Minister will pledge to end the automatic release of serious criminals who are currently freed after serving half of their sentence."

makes it sound like if you get 10 years, you only do 5. WRONG! You get 10 years, of which you do 5 in prison, the punishment part and 5 on licence.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/l...board-use-them

The standard conditions on release on licence are;

"A prisoner must:

(a) be of good behaviour and not behave in a way which undermines the purpose of the licence period;
(b) not commit any offence;
(c) keep in touch with the supervising officer in accordance with instructions given by the supervising officer;
(d) receive visits from the supervising officer in accordance with instructions given by the supervising officer;
(e) reside permanently at an address approved by the supervising officer and obtain the prior permission of the supervising officer for any stay of one or more nights at a different address;
(f) not undertake work, or a particular type of work, unless it is approved by the supervising officer and notify the supervising officer in advance of any proposal to undertake work or a particular type of work;
(g) not travel outside the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man except with the prior permission of your supervising officer or for the purposes of immigration deportation or removal."

Further conditions may be applied;

" residence at a specified place;
restriction of residency;
making or maintaining contact with a person;
participation in, or co-operation with, a programme or set of activities;
possession, ownership, control or inspection of specified items or documents;
disclosure of information;
curfew arrangement;
freedom of movement;
supervision in the community by the supervising officer, or other responsible officer, or organisation."

If someone on licence is MERELY SUSPECTED of breaching a licence condition, a warrant is issued to recall them to prison. The police will trace that person and take them straight back to prison.

As this article points out

https://hub.unlock.org.uk/knowledgeb...ce-conditions/

"Often, with hindsight, people released from prison say that they thought prison would be the hard bit, when in fact it was after prison that they really started encountering problems.

Being released from prison can be a daunting experience. Being released on licence can be even worse.

Given the way that the current legislative/sentencing regime operates, most people being released from prison are released in advance of the point that they were sentenced to serve by the judicial system. This means that there is a large number of people being released from prison “on licence”."
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 01:58 AM   #28
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 26,541
Originally Posted by CORed View Post
I don't know about Australia, but the way the system functions in the US, pretty much guarantees that once you get convicted of a crime, you're likely to be a criminal for the rest of your life. There is little opportunity for training or education once you are in the system, and even when there is, once someone has a conviction on their record it's virtually impossible to find a decent job. While it's understandable that, given a choice between a convicted criminal and just about anybody else, an employer is likely to choose the latter, perhaps a little incentive offered by the government could help here.

To me it seems, that unless it's determined that a crime is so bad, or the criminal is so irredeemably bad that there is nothing to be done but lock them up for life, which is a very expensive proposition, the primary goal of any correctional system should be rehabilitation. If you're going to let them out some day, you'd like to have at least a reasonable chance that they will be functioning members of society when you do. However, it seems that you'd be hard pressed to design a system that is more likely than the current system to do the exact opposite.

I know there is a desire to deter crime and to punish those who commit serious crimes, but I'm not at all convinced that harsh sentences are particularly effective at deterrence. I think most criminals either think they are too clever to get caught, or choose not to even think about the consequences if they do get caught.

I certainly don't know all the answers, but I think more effort at job training and education for people in the system, and more effort to get them employed when they have completed their sentences would pretty much have to work better than simply warehousing them for several years with a bunch of other criminals, then turning them loose with no real opportunity to do anything but go back to crime.

On top of that, far too many of the people in prisons (again in the US) are there for drug related offenses, which, in most cases, shouldn't be crimes at all or should be dealt with through addiction treatment rather than prison.
Prison regimens which focus more on rehabilitation are more expensive (because they have higher staff to inmate ratios and require more skilled staff) and are less popular with the public at large (because they are too easy to portray as being hotels for criminals). They are however much more successful at reducing recidivism.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 02:23 AM   #29
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 44,028
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
Prison regimens which focus more on rehabilitation are more expensive (because they have higher staff to inmate ratios and require more skilled staff) and are less popular with the public at large (because they are too easy to portray as being hotels for criminals). They are however much more successful at reducing recidivism.
Yes, but votes donít swing on rehabilitation unfortunately.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 02:26 AM   #30
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 11,899
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Yes, but votes donít swing on rehabilitation unfortunately.
It is odd how a politician can get more votes by announcing he/she will be tough on crime, but cannot evidence that works, than announcing the greater use of rehabilitation with evidence how it does work.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 02:42 AM   #31
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 26,541
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Yes, but votes donít swing on rehabilitation unfortunately.
Correct, politicians simply need to promise longer sentences and harsher prison regimens despite the copious evidence that this is completely ineffective at being a deterrent and the body of evidence any such system is more likely to force people into a life of crime.

Indeed, it seems that the public at large want anyone convicted of anything that they deem serious* locked up for many years on a bread and water diet and subject to hard labour and then when they are released, kept in some kind of ghetto so they never have to interact with "nice" people.

Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
It is odd how a politician can get more votes by announcing he/she will be tough on crime, but cannot evidence that works, than announcing the greater use of rehabilitation with evidence how it does work.
Facts don't (and maybe never did) matter, what matters is people's gut feel.

Ideally we as a society would educate people of the benefits of rehabilitation but it's much easier and more effective to pander to people's prejudice.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 03:56 AM   #32
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,777
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
Correct, politicians simply need to promise longer sentences and harsher prison regimens despite the copious evidence that this is completely ineffective at being a deterrent and the body of evidence any such system is more likely to force people into a life of crime.



Indeed, it seems that the public at large want anyone convicted of anything that they deem serious* locked up for many years on a bread and water diet and subject to hard labour and then when they are released, kept in some kind of ghetto so they never have to interact with "nice" people.







Facts don't (and maybe never did) matter, what matters is people's gut feel.



Ideally we as a society would educate people of the benefits of rehabilitation but it's much easier and more effective to pander to people's prejudice.
And strangely enough even though we keep making sentencing tougher and tougher and imprison more and more people we still have crime!
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 04:18 AM   #33
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 83,853
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Pretty sure having your loved ones raped and murdered is a more heart breaking thing.
That's not an argument again Venom's post. Two wrongs don't make a right. I'm not sure shoving someone in prison for 25 years, in and of itself, is likely to turn them into a better person.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 04:20 AM   #34
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,442
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Pretty sure having your loved ones raped and murdered is a more heart breaking thing.

Or having your loved one killed by a serial drunk driver who didn't get the message when his license was revoked. After he killed someone else's loved ones.

**** your heartbreak. **** your bleeding heart for the worst of us, while their victims carry a broken heart they never asked for.

At least the people in prison chose their heartbreak. So **** them. And **** your pity.
So society should needlessly waste money on imprisoning people just because someone is upset and angry, even-though they would most certainly remain upset and angry no matter what happened? Even while things like education and social-welfare services that reduce crime are grossly underfunded?

I guess in a twisted sense it makes sense. If crime is a "choice" you can ignore the fact that its correlated with various social factors that could be addressed if there was political will and money. Yet you feel justified in refusing to spend money on alleviating those social factors, because in the end it's the fault of criminal for "choosing" to commit a crime even if the society they live in has only contributed to their criminality in the first place.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr

Last edited by Arcade22; 14th August 2019 at 04:22 AM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 04:32 AM   #35
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,442
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
That's not an argument again Venom's post. Two wrongs don't make a right. I'm not sure shoving someone in prison for 25 years, in and of itself, is likely to turn them into a better person.
More importantly, the fact that someone has done something bad isn't any good reason to cease caring about their welfare. It's not reasonable to dismiss the concerns of people just because they have brought their misfortune upon themselves, when doing so is more than likely going to have negative impact on yourself and society.

I don't want to live in a society where "to each his own" is a prevailing attitude of public indifference, and thankfully i don't.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr

Last edited by Arcade22; 14th August 2019 at 04:35 AM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 05:10 AM   #36
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,975
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
More importantly, the fact that someone has done something bad isn't any good reason to cease caring about their welfare. It's not reasonable to dismiss the concerns of people just because they have brought their misfortune upon themselves, when doing so is more than likely going to have negative impact on yourself and society.

I don't want to live in a society where "to each his own" is a prevailing attitude of public indifference, and thankfully i don't.
While I agree in the vast majority of cases, and while I care this dude should get feed and watered, I wouldn't give it a moments thought if people like this got brown breaded

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Sophie_Elliott
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With todayís Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 05:12 AM   #37
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,975
Or Mr Christchurch either for that matter
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With todayís Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 05:49 AM   #38
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,144
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
THIS

When a person commits the murder of another, its a life sentence for victim, and their their family, and their loved ones - mother never gets to see their son or daughter grow to adulthood, never gets the change to attend their child's wedding, never gets the chance to hold their grandchildren.
None of which is changed by the sentence the perpetrator receives. So the aim should be to reduce/minimise instances of murder.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 05:54 AM   #39
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 19,462
I think "tougher" or "lighter" sentences as if there is some sort of predetermined scale we're bouncing it off of is a bad way to look at it.

We should be shooting for effective sentencing.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2019, 05:56 AM   #40
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 83,853
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
I think "tougher" or "lighter" sentences as if there is some sort of predetermined scale we're bouncing it off of is a bad way to look at it.

We should be shooting for effective sentencing.
Yes, absolutely.

But what is more effective is likely to be something that isn't satisfying, and it's hard to detach our sense of justice from what "feels" right, and to take it into the cold embrace of science and reason.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:24 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.