A lot of them have PlayStations in their cells! Only PlayStation 1’s though.
Is the slap on the wrist as you go in or after you come out? Or maybe at some point during your stay?
I imagine that’s the worst bit, I’ll take the porridge if I did it, but being a grown adult getting a slap on the wrist is just degrading.
Once again the taxpayer foots the bill for some pervert to play crash bandicoot
Two words: Bring back-hanging
Prison is just Butins for crims
But without Shellac playing twice a weekend
Does my head in. It’s the same people who are quick to moan about their taxes being used to fund the prison population.
Basically- prison doesn’t work. 1. It drives recidivism, 2. quite the opposite of being a deterrent, is a badge of honour in many gang cultures, 3. prison is a survival strategy for some people, 4. the only real justification for incarceration is where an offender is a real danger to themselves or other people, in which case they should be detained for so long as that danger is a risk (such as a serial psychopathic killer/serial sex offender.)
Sorry- bit too much serious answer for 09.08.
Get busy living or get busy dying.
If i spent the rest of my life replaying ffvi/ffvii/silent hill/resi 1-3 on loop, i’d be ok with that, basically what I do anyway.
wonder what the food’s like in prison
What are the alternatives for prison that still ensure that criminals pay a price for their actions, while avoiding the issues of custodial sentences as UP nicely lays out. Also to ensure that the issues that many criminals have that they need support and help with are addressed.
If Paddington 2 is an accurate reflection, then pretty great but likely to result in diabetes
The rhetoric of ‘pay a price’ is all wrong. Punitive justice doesn’t work.
I knew as I typed it that it wasn’t great phrasing. I guess ‘justice’ more generally
Still seems so bizarre to me that we still just have a system where if someone does a crime, violent or non violent, our blanket response is ‘put them in a big house with the others and don’t let them out for a bit.’ like what the fuck is it meant to achieve? Is it a punishment? A safety thing? Is it meant to somehow rehabilitate people? It’s so obviously stupid but so many ostensibly smart people just accept it as a thing that works.
It’s honestly not your fault for using that phrase- it’s trotted out in the media all the time! It’s just approaching the problem from the wrong angle.
If the same money was spent on community orders, strengthening the probation service, providing rehabilitation, then virtually all academic /critical thinking on the issue points to this having a good impact on crime rates and reoffending rates in particular.
Most people in prison are not first time offenders.
If you stop people from becoming first time offenders, then you stop a cycle of reoffending.
How do you stop people from becoming first time offenders? All research shows that it is down to socio-economic factors. Things are going to get worse before they get better, given the political climate in which we exist at the moment. I find knife carrying among teenagers, in the same way as they’d carry a mobile, particularly fucking terrifying, like an epidemic- locking them up isn’t going to stop this.
To give an example however- I think that Aaron Campbell is a classic case of somebody who ought to be detained at HM pleasure. A psychopath of the highest order. So bad that his own defence couldn’t even lead the evidence contained in the defence-commissioned psych report because it was so unutterly damning. THe psychologist said it was the worst case in his entire career of facing somebody so remorseless and devoid of empathy.
I guess this poses some other interesting question- this lad is essentially still a wee boy in many ways, and he has a horrific personality disorder. He is not insane as defined in law, so he has full criminal responsibility. Is it his fault though? Whose fault is it to be born with or develop such a terrible personality problem by the time you’re in your mid teens. Who bears the responsibility for that?
Rehabilitation is not thought to be an option for him given the severity of his condition and that being so, it is absolutely correct that he is detained for the sake of the safety of the public. The reality is he’ll probably never get out and will see out his days in Polmont and then the Bar-L, that is until somebody slits his throat. It’s inhumane and doesn’t really look at ‘fault’, in my very humble and no longer practising criminal law opinion.