|
Trin Tragula posted:Norway is showing the way; the vast majority of their prison system is based around rehabilitation and they have a ludicrously superior recidivism rate to us, but it's also flexible enough to keep Anders Breivik locked away where he can't radicalise anyone else, until such time as he decides to engage in good faith with what they can do to help him. Also the Bastøy Prison Project seems very promising, although it does have a bias towards those who are willing to work within it, 16% reoffending rates compared to 60-odd% in ours is worth looking at. Also Sweden and Finland have massively lower prison populations per capita than England & Wales, so they must be doing something right at the social level.  kustomkarkommando posted:im naturally a bit cautious about declaring 15 and 16 years olds naturally violent who need a good locking up as there's naught we can do with the wronguns That should give some pointers at to at least one place to look for improvement proactively, rather than just wait for them to gently caress up and then write them off as failed. e: Section 379 of the California Penal Code bans giving salvia to under 18s.
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 20:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 12:24 |
|
|
joedevola posted:
I want prisons I want rail Mao mix Mao mix Please prevail
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 20:09
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Norway is showing the way; the vast majority of their prison system is based around rehabilitation and they have a ludicrously superior recidivism rate to us, but it's also flexible enough to keep Anders Breivik locked away where he can't radicalise anyone else, until such time as he decides to engage in good faith with what they can do to help him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 20:16
|
|
|
crispix posted:I think we should have a more proactive approach, I don't understand why school nurses aren't taking measurements of the children's heads for till identify evildoers and ne'erdowells at an early stage 
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 20:18
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Reminds me of this peak 00s moment. He sure was a oval office eh
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 20:26
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:
I think I'm a little clearer on the issue now and I think the exaggerated tone of my post was misinterpreted. It comes across a bit "BRING BACK HANGING" and that's not what I'm saying. I think there should be almost no crimes which justify incarceration, and any reformation of criminal justice should start with drug legalization and proceed from there. However, and apparently this makes me cynical (?), but there are people (almost entirely men, let's be honest) who cannot control violent impulses - regardless of however well situated they are financially or in society. And I don't even mean child abusers or serial murderers. I mean men who beat their wives for years, or who can be perfectly nice then lash out after three cans. The sort of person who isn't deprived of anything or has any sort of diagnosable mental illness. This sort of person would still exist in a socialist utopia. My main point however was that a Labour party who could point to a case like the one in the tweet and say they could do better, would win votes. Maybe some of those votes would be from unpleasant reactionaries but a vote is a loving vote and evidently they're thin on the ground this weather.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 20:27
|
|
|
joedevola posted:However, and apparently this makes me cynical (?), but there are people (almost entirely men, let's be honest) who cannot control violent impulses - regardless of however well situated they are financially or in society. And I don't even mean child abusers or serial murderers. I mean men who beat their wives for years, or who can be perfectly nice then lash out after three cans. do you not think that domestic violence can have root causes other than "this bloke's a bad'un"? like someone who "lashes out after three cans" might benefit a bit more from a substance abuse programme than a period of incarceration, no? joedevola posted:My main point however was that a Labour party who could point to a case like the one in the tweet and say they could do better, would win votes. Maybe some of those votes would be from unpleasant reactionaries but a vote is a loving vote and evidently they're thin on the ground this weather. imo pandering to reactionaries is not something Labour should be doing whether it would win votes or not
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 20:36
|
|
|
The kid in question in that tweet wasn't invovled in chucking the batteries or throwing the punches, that teenager is due to be sentenced later, but grabbed a handbag and scarpered with it as the situation was escalating. So got done for harassment and handling stolen goods with the sentence being bumped up due to the aggravating homophobic factors. I mean those are arguable non violent convictions so do we run a "little poo poo" test for non violent convictions
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 20:37
|
|
|
joedevola posted:I think I'm a little clearer on the issue now and I think the exaggerated tone of my post was misinterpreted. It comes across a bit "BRING BACK HANGING" and that's not what I'm saying. I think there should be almost no crimes which justify incarceration, and any reformation of criminal justice should start with drug legalization and proceed from there. Actually I think this thread would mostly be in favour of hanging all the Tories.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 20:37
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Norway is showing the way; the vast majority of their prison system is based around rehabilitation and they have a ludicrously superior recidivism rate to us, but it's also flexible enough to keep Anders Breivik locked away where he can't radicalise anyone else, until such time as he decides to engage in good faith with what they can do to help him. Wanna watch the ex-superintendent of Attica NY prison have his mind blown repeatedly by the Nordic prison model? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfEsz812Q1I
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 20:43
|
|
£
|
joedevola posted:My main point however was that a Labour party who could point to a case like the one in the tweet and say they could do better, would win votes. Maybe some of those votes would be from unpleasant reactionaries but a vote is a loving vote and evidently they're thin on the ground this weather. Unless you're talking to literal anarchists the left generally don't mean literal complete prison abolition when they talk about prison abolition. They mean scrapping the currently existing criminal justice system & rebuilding from scratch because it's clearly not fit for purpose. First and foremost, a lot less people should be sent to prison, on that we agree. As for those crimes that would still end up with a period of incarceration, the emphasis must be towards rehabilitation. Prison as it exists does a terrific job of ruining someones future employment prospects (which often leads them back to a life of crime), it usually ends up with them being placed somewhere there's a bunch of other criminals which shock horror leads to an institutionalisation of behaviours, and generally just fails at rehabilitation. As much as prison being tough sounds like it would work, it's one of those "common sense beliefs that are in fact nonsense beliefs". Labour cannot win on a "hard on crime" platform with your suggestion because the laxness on drugs and other petty crimes would be an easy attack line for the Tory press to run with. "They say they are tough on crime but they'll let your 10 year old daughter shoot up heroin in her school's bathroom floor". "They say they are tough on crime but they will let illegal immigrants steal your job!" It doesn't work. You either go the Blair way and be loving appallingly regressive on all criminal justice regardless of how minor or you're not going to beat the Tories on that ground. It's a radical suggestion and relies on facts so it's obviously going to need a nuanced sell which the media will not help with. Doesn't mean it's not the right thing to do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 20:50
|
|
|
joedevola posted:Get Group 4 the gently caress out of the process and make sure the (now uncrowded) prisons are drug and violence free and see if two or three years of education and manual labour wouldn't be better for them than going to some community volunteer to talk about their feelings. Why not this and go to a community volunteer to discuss feelings? Both seem good and way more conducive to this kind of stuff not happening again. Dealing with prisoner's emotional well being and rehabilitation back into society is crucial if you don't want them to come back.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 20:53
|
|
|
joedevola posted:I think I'm a little clearer on the issue now and I think the exaggerated tone of my post was misinterpreted. It comes across a bit "BRING BACK HANGING" and that's not what I'm saying. I think there should be almost no crimes which justify incarceration, and any reformation of criminal justice should start with drug legalization and proceed from there. There's the handful (and it really is a handful) of people completely unsuited to participate in wider society, the Arthur Hutchinsons and Victor Millers of the world (the latter has even requested imprisonment forever over returning to society so make of that what you will) but the majority of the other thousands, especially youth prisoners, is mostly a terrible sticking plaster for fuckups in other parts of society. joedevola posted:However, and apparently this makes me cynical (?), but there are people (almost entirely men, let's be honest) who cannot control violent impulses - regardless of however well situated they are financially or in society. And I don't even mean child abusers or serial murderers. I mean men who beat their wives for years, or who can be perfectly nice then lash out after three cans. If all you've done in that 5 years is make them pissed off, unemployable, and a member of a knife gang, that's a big waste of everyone's time and money. With domestic abuse it's often not reported anyway because the family needs them around even if they're a violent twat, so you're going to need other support systems in place there too before anyone even goes to the police. Restorative justice systems in Australia have shown good work in the "we still need him working to pay the bills but he needs to know there's consequences if he starts drinking again" cases. joedevola posted:My main point however was that a Labour party who could point to a case like the one in the tweet and say they could do better, would win votes. Maybe some of those votes would be from unpleasant reactionaries but a vote is a loving vote and evidently they're thin on the ground this weather.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 20:58
|
|
|
Azza Bamboo posted:I want prisons 
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 20:59
|
|
|
Pound_Coin posted:Wanna watch the ex-superintendent of Attica NY prison have his mind blown repeatedly by the Nordic prison model?  at how mad he gets about the prisoner who is slightly irate about appearing on camera. "he likes taking walks? I'd stop him doing that for a week". What the gently caress is that going to achieve
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 21:12
|
|
|
Also i think were kind of talking past the fact that the people being charged in this case are 15, 16 and 17 and that opens up a whole other avenue about whether or not custodial sentences for young offenders increase likelihood to re-offend over community orders (research says they largely do).
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 21:13
|
|
|
Yeah, it's about 50% for community orders vs. 60-70% for custodial sentences. Both of those are a lot higher than Nordic prisons though so that implies there's some other social level stuff going on in terms of probation support, re-employment, etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 21:23
|
|
|
Some Spurs fans allegedly did a racism towards some of Chelsea's players earlier today, and were told on the PA to stop it three times. Afterwards, Gary Neville had words, again: https://twitter.com/AdamCatterall/status/1208840851176247297
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
"I'm here to have a balanced debate" get to gently caress you spineless wanker, balanced between what? racism is bad and racism is good? loving worm sinky posted:
yup, he's a powermad poo poo, he seems offended and/or surprised at every instance of treating prisoners like human beings Pound_Coin fucked around with this message at 21:40 on Dec 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
One thing that hasn't come up which should absolutely be front and center of any left wing approach to law and order is deterrence. The dividing line between progressives and reactionaries on this is somewhere around the moment the crime happens: would you prefer that the murderer is caught and punished harshly or that they didn't do the murder in the first place. The second one seems to be a complete block in Daily Mail thought. But it's right there in the Peelian Principles in loving 1829, which were prescient enough that I think they should be on an 8 foot monolith like the Code of Hammurabi in every police station for as long as police stations are a thing that society has. The final and possibly most important one: To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them. In modern society that's not just the police, it's social services, care and benefits, every part wider society has a more important role in deterrence rather than reaction. And what best drives deterrence? According to Nagin who has failed to deter me from wanting to  his paper, it has very little to do with the severity of punishment, and very much to do with the certainty of apprehension.And that is a huge place where we're failing. If there's a place where we should be angry on a lawnorder grounds it's our loving pathetic rape conviction rates, or that people are staying in abusive relationships (and so not reporting them). That's probably a huge driver of "it's all too soft" sentiment too, because when you have something like an 8% conviction rate for rape, there's a tendency to howl at the one who did get charged to be strung up. In reality, getting that conviction rate far far higher would be much better even in the punishments were far more lenient, because it would achieve the most important bit: deterring rapists. Same goes for violence, robbery, and all that too. A guaranteed slap on the wrist works better than a 5% chance of a noose, because everyone about to do a major crime thinks they won't be in that 5%.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 21:40
|
|
|
I stopped watching at "It's not the job of the prison to make sure you stop being a criminal" cos like, what the hell else do we pay your gammony rear end for? God forbid that someone think the department of corrections be supposed to correct people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 21:40
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Reminds me of this peak 00s moment. lol New Labour was genuinely tragic at times: Attachment Theory - at its core, a model of love - shall be implemented via sanctions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 21:46
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I stopped watching at "It's not the job of the prison to make sure you stop being a criminal" cos like, what the hell else do we pay your gammony rear end for?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 21:54
|
|
|
This is why my Stalinist Tendency idea is so great: take the British public's boner for beating the poo poo out of felons and use sleight of hand to say you'd only reeducate the paedos through labour while also wholly planning to put Toby Young and Dan Hodges in a human centipede ouroborous and whip them to roll themselves up a hill constantly Sisyphus style.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 21:57
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:This is why my Stalinist Tendency idea is so great: take the British public's boner for beating the poo poo out of felons and use sleight of hand to say you'd only reeducate the paedos through labour while also wholly planning to put Toby Young and Dan Hodges in a human centipede ouroborous and whip them to roll themselves up a hill constantly Sisyphus style. George Galloway has started a party in conjunction with CPGB-ML so the Stalinist space is getting crowded
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 22:02
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Reminds me of this peak 00s moment. Nob's gob: We'll dob yob rob job mobs before their D.O.B. prob!
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 22:07
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I stopped watching at "It's not the job of the prison to make sure you stop being a criminal" cos like, what the hell else do we pay your gammony rear end for? He only does the Delbert Grady style of Correction.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 22:09
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MrStephenHowson/status/1208851977259671553 lol, Sky man's butthole tightening up as Nev makes some good points. Braggart posted:Nob's gob: We'll dob yob rob job mobs before their D.O.B. prob! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 22:09
|
|
|
Afraid I don't get the reference 
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 22:19
|
|
|
I do, and appreciate it
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 22:35
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Reminds me of this peak 00s moment. In defense of this article, it reads like a good idea really badly framed. IDK if this is how Blair felt he had to act to get stuff past the press, but identification of at-risk newborns is something we actively do in paediatrics. Kids whose families are subject to child protection/child in need plans, or for whom there's a lot of drug/alcohol abuse in pregnancy, have a lot of social work involvement. The latter often don't stay off drugs in pregnancy, and lose custody of their children. This is preferred to the alternative of them being neglected or killed. Fully agree the framing of it sounds like "Blair tough on yobbos" trying to make a left-wing idea palatable to the engammoned masses
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 22:47
|
|
|
But it's blair, which means he would just try to ban single mums and accidentally ban women in the process.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 22:50
|
|
|
winegums posted:In defense of this article, it reads like a good idea really badly framed. IDK if this is how Blair felt he had to act to get stuff past the press, but identification of at-risk newborns is something we actively do in paediatrics. Kids whose families are subject to child protection/child in need plans, or for whom there's a lot of drug/alcohol abuse in pregnancy, have a lot of social work involvement. The latter often don't stay off drugs in pregnancy, and lose custody of their children. This is preferred to the alternative of them being neglected or killed. Outreach to at-risk pregnancies is good, "do it or we'll sanction you" is bad no matter what the intent. You just make them poorer, more at-risk, and just as pregnant unless the pregnancy terminates. And then the Tories come along and can do sanctions and lovely means testing twice as
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 22:58
|
|
|
Yeah, I think he lacked the guts to ever try to challenge the press and change the frame of debate, so he might've done good things but it was always surreptitiously, whilst never really challenging the ideology they were done under. Blair had 420 seats in 1997. He could've enacted gay communism and had every newspaper editor executed if he wanted to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 23:04
|
|
|
I mean the reason he had the seats would be because he's the sort who wouldn't do that. Also given the kinds of people he had in a lot of those seats they might have killed and eaten him if he tried.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 23:08
|
|
|
winegums posted:In defense of this article, it reads like a good idea really badly framed. IDK if this is how Blair felt he had to act to get stuff past the press, but identification of at-risk newborns is something we actively do in paediatrics. Kids whose families are subject to child protection/child in need plans, or for whom there's a lot of drug/alcohol abuse in pregnancy, have a lot of social work involvement. The latter often don't stay off drugs in pregnancy, and lose custody of their children. This is preferred to the alternative of them being neglected or killed. Yeah the premise is ground in sound research. I recognise what they're going for in theory (Attachment) and practice (am an adoptive parent). It's description there though implies the creation of a relationship between the state and parent that mirrors the very environment they are hoping to avoid for the child.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 23:17
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:It's more "you never had a youth center, or anything else to make your life worthwhile, so you quite rationally grow to believe that society hates you (it does) and will never offer you anything (it won't) and that trying to fit in is pointless (it is) so why not just do whatever you like?" If you like beating up lesbians and homophobicly abusing them then you need a bullet in the head. baka kaba posted:there's some kind of primal desire to see justice done, people punished for bad things, consequences falling on the perpetrators more than the victims etc. and you have to watch out for that, because it starts to push buttons where certain people need to suffer because they deserve it or it's their own fault. next thing you have a daily mail subscription A bullet to the head of a fascists, rapists and other indefensibles works
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 23:33
|
|
|
gently caress I have some really bad gammon tendencies
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
I might suggest that building a society on the basis of bullets to the head is a little bit fascist. Though historically it has also been instrumental to dismanting such a society so who can say if it's good or bad?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 12:24 |
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I might suggest that building a society on the basis of bullets to the head is a little bit fascist. Though historically it has also been instrumental to dismanting such a society so who can say if it's good or bad? Yea I’m actually against the death penalty in reality. Just very angry at the sentencing for those horrors.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2019 23:40
|
|