Crime and punishment

[Signalcalc]

This feeds into the debate as to whether prisons are places where criminals are physically prevented from committing more crime or places where criminals are encouraged to refrain from committing more crime.

The UK prison system currently fails on both counts and actually cannot succeed. Debate over "high security" or "open" prison regimes just muddies the waters.

I agree, gang banger type prisoners only wear their sentence as a badge of honour, we should be locking them away for an unspecified period with a minimum term of around 10 years without parole, probably longer. As these are mostly youngsters, they need to be broken down and then rebuilt with a new psychology when they are hitting their 40's and have lost their youthful, testosterone fuelled ego and bravado. They will have lost all sense of connection with gang membership and will have been converted to Jesus as the only saviour! Phased release without contact with old or new associates, surely this would solve quite a few issues.

Nothing else has worked so far.

 

[Pat494]

Apparently drugs and mobile phones are regularly smuggled into prisons.
The service is under manned and under paid, so they claim.
In fact the usual shambles I guess.


Inmates are forced into playing mummy/daddy roles to relieve the boredom. Not a jolly romp like porridge.

 

[tomorton]

I agree, gang banger type prisoners only wear their sentence as a badge of honour, we should be locking them away for an unspecified period with a minimum term of around 10 years without parole, probably longer. As these are mostly youngsters, they need to be broken down and then rebuilt with a new psychology when they are hitting their 40's and have lost their youthful, testosterone fuelled ego and bravado. They will have lost all sense of connection with gang membership and will have been converted to Jesus as the only saviour! Phased release without contact with old or new associates, surely this would solve quite a few issues.

Nothing else has worked so far.

Sounds logical if we are (should be) trying to eliminate criminals, rather than making them less successful.

However, in practice, if a burglar knows he's going to get 10 years for the burglary he's planning tonight, plus 10 years for each of the 5 previous crimes he will then be tied to, he might as well get in there tonight and kill all the occupants, he's going to get life anyway if he doesn't and he might escape if he does.

 

[tomorton]

Apparently drugs and mobile phones are regularly smuggled into prisons.
The service is under manned and under paid, so they claim.
In fact the usual shambles I guess.


Inmates are forced into playing mummy/daddy roles to relieve the boredom. Not a jolly romp like porridge.

Policing in prisons must always work worse in prisons than in the general community. Crime is very high in prisons because apart from anything else prisoners are at liberty within the prison.

 

[Signalcalc]

Sounds logical if we are (should be) trying to eliminate criminals, rather than making them less successful.

However, in practice, if a burglar knows he's going to get 10 years for the burglary he's planning tonight, plus 10 years for each of the 5 previous crimes he will then be tied to, he might as well get in there tonight and kill all the occupants, he's going to get life anyway if he doesn't and he might escape if he does.

So if a long or a short sentence incentivises a criminal to commit crime, then a whole new approach is needed. I'm afraid that if the experts haven't dreamed of some new way of dealing with criminals by now, then it is going to take a spark of genius to solve this one.

 

[tomorton]

So if a long or a short sentence incentivises a criminal to commit crime, then a whole new approach is needed. I'm afraid that if the experts haven't dreamed of some new way of dealing with criminals by now, then it is going to take a spark of genius to solve this one.

Yes you're right. The length of sentence is not the winning factor. Whether its a high security prison or a rock-breaking labour camp or a rehabilitation campus is not the winning factor.

Certainty of getting caught is the best deterrent, backed by physical separation from all personal life and all of society's benefits. Beyond release however, I don't see how regarding the "slate" as being "wiped clean" helps society. Why should there not be a full life impact of conviction of any serious crime?

 

[Pat494]

For minor offences I would like the convicted criminal to be given a choice of a prison sentence or X number of hours of electrode pain with the victim given the option of applying it. This would ease prison over crowding and lessen the habitual prison culture.

 

[tomorton]

For minor offences I would like the convicted criminal to be given a choice of a prison sentence or X number of hours of electrode pain with the victim given the option of applying it. This would ease prison over crowding and lessen the habitual prison culture.

I dunno Pat, some people pay good money for that sort of thing........... every other Wednesday afternoon............ for example, just sayin'

 

[trendie]

For some reason, Youtube seems to think I am into Libertarianism!
Anyway, I find Robert Murphy quite entertaining.

First link is a 10-min quickie on the libertarian take on prisons, crime, etc.
Second link is the full lecture.

 

[tomorton]

Refreshing attitude.

Healthy to have people outside the system casting a critical eye over it. Too many times the groups managing a system are beneficiaries of it remaining in its status quo so all we get are circular arguments which prioritise preserving their revenue streams and profiles but don't solve our problems.

 

[tomorton]

Difficult to know with certainty what police in London are doing on the ground to tackle knife crime. Met Commander Cundy said hundreds more officers would be on the streets across all boroughs following the recent murders. He was unwilling to specify what they would be equipped with, where they would be targeting, who they would be targeting or any other tactics to be deployed.

The number sounds big but was vague so let's suppose he meant 500 officers. As there are 32 London boroughs that works out at an average of 15 additional patrol officers per borough. As there are 3 shifts per day that means an extra 5 officers per shift. But these extra officers can't maintain a shift per day indefinitely so let's assume that they each get a rest day after every 4 shifts. That means 20% at least will be absent on leave, but it might be safe to assume another 20% will be absent on any given day owing to planned holiday leave, sickness, suspensions, injury, training or court appearances.

So maybe he really mean there'd be an extra 3 officers on patrol on each shift in each borough. These are his emergency back-up measures for a population of 8 million residents plus perhaps another half million per day commuters, tourists and visitors from outside the city.

Not too impressive.

In any case, its safe to assume the Met can't sustain even this level of policing, as otherwise they would surely be doing it already. Wouldn't they?

 

[tomorton]

A few years back, Chicago police informed gang members and leaders individually that if anyone in the gang was responsible for a death, all members of that gang would be targeted for any infraction, but these would even extend to welfare fraud and tax evasion.

I like that.

 

[NVP]

For minor offences I would like the convicted criminal to be given a choice of a prison sentence or X number of hours of electrode pain with the victim given the option of applying it. This would ease prison over crowding and lessen the habitual prison culture.

seriously Pat ?

 

[Pat494]

seriously Pat ?

As the above have pointed out the old methods just don't work,
I would be delighted if you could put forward a viable plan but I fear we will have to resort to cruder methods to reach our goal.
So let's stop being so wet.
The alternative is to let the criminal gangs take over. They have sheds full of money and plenty willing to contribute muscle. I would rather that the chemists sell clean drugs on prescription.

 

[trendie]

Behaviour is determined by wider social acceptance or disapproval.
We have adopted a care-free society, where the unacceptaable actions of people are not frowned upon, to control behaviour. Some psychologist said something to the effect we have lost the concept of "shame".
Anything is allowed, and nobody accepts civic responsibility, or enforces it.
Somebody earlier mentioned the Krays.

Problem is getting some sort of balance. We dont want Saudi style social values and punishments.

 

[Pat494]

I like the bit where the innocent victim can apply the electric shock therapy on the guilty criminal. Call it revenge therapy for the victim if you like. At the court's discretion of course.

I think the European idea of letting the judge ask any pertinent questions during the trial is an excellent idea too. So often incompetent ( or bribed ) council bungle the trial and the crook gets away with it.

Prisoners inside should have the option of going into therapy to cure their foul habits and receive some remission of sentence as a reward.

 

[Signalcalc]

I would rather that the chemists sell clean drugs on prescription.

And here we have the identification of a large proportion of the basis of crime. The war on drugs is a massive failure (but money spinner for companies that profit from high levels of prisoners at tax payers expense). Do we currently keep class A drugs illegal on the basis of morals or profit? I suggest the latter.

What causes the greatest harms to society in moral and economic cost, class A drugs available in a free market dispensary style as is now the route for cannabis? Or maintaining a black market with high levels of criminal activity and the criminalisation of otherwise innocent users?

Take the morals and the profit out of the equation and surely that must be worth a try?

 

[tomorton]

And here we have the identification of a large proportion of the basis of crime. The war on drugs is a massive failure (but money spinner for companies that profit from high levels of prisoners at tax payers expense). Do we currently keep class A drugs illegal on the basis of morals or profit? I suggest the latter.

What causes the greatest harms to society in moral and economic cost, class A drugs available in a free market dispensary style as is now the route for cannabis? Or maintaining a black market with high levels of criminal activity and the criminalisation of otherwise innocent users?

Take the morals and the profit out of the equation and surely that must be worth a try?

Right now drugs are connected with a vast percentage of other types of crime. Its hard to see reliably if drug users -

a) were good citizens who turned to crime in order to fund an addictive drug habit they couldn't escape or

b) were good citizens who just turned to crime (while enjoying a drug habit) or

c) were criminals (who developed a drug habit) or

d) were good citizens forced into crime because their drug convictions made it impossible to earn money legitimately or

e) were good citizens forced into crime because their drug habits made it impossible to hold down a job to or

f) were criminals who saw a way to make easy money producing, smuggling and supplying drugs, while enjoying a drugs habit or

g) were good citizens who just enjoy using drugs and never committed a crime in their lives.


Legalising some drugs would help persons in categories a), g), maybe d) and maybe e).
I don't see why we should do anything to help persons in categories b), c) or f) and I'm not convinced I should lift a finger for those in d), e) or g).

However, the links between drug use and other types of crime are so strong that its easier or the police to e.g. detect e.g. burglars when they find them buying / carrying / selling drugs. So there's an advantage in crime control from using drugs to flag up people who are up to other stuff too. Positive that drug searches on person or at property or cars have produced a vast haul of weapons, stolen goods, stolen cards, links to all sorts of crime.

On a national scale, obviously increased use of narcotics, legal or not, is counter to a stable, healthy and productive community.

 

[Pat494]

I like the bit where the innocent victim can apply the electric shock therapy on the guilty criminal. Call it revenge therapy for the victim if you like. At the court's discretion of course.

I think the European idea of letting the judge ask any pertinent questions during the trial is an excellent idea too. So often incompetent ( or bribed ) council bungle the trial and the crook gets away with it.

Prisoners inside should have the option of going into therapy to cure their foul habits and receive some remission of sentence as a reward.

The advantages of this therapy idea are:-
1.Likely to be less crime
2. Fewer prisoners and a saving of public costs
3. Prisoners can get some remission of their sentences
4. People can be helped to turn their crooked lives around and beome positive partners in society.
5. Fewer victims of crime.

In fact everyone wins.


https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/crim...five-die-in-a-week/ar-BBPrWzk?ocid=spartanntp

 

[tomorton]

Interesting US research into policing strategies to learn more about what works and what doesn't work.
https://cebcp.org/evidence-based-policing/what-works-in-policing/research-evidence-review/

Some obvious points, like randomly located patrols make no difference to crime deterrence. Some not so obvious, like faster response times to emergency calls, general increases in arrest statistics etc. also make no difference.

But some good details come through, like on Hot Spots Policing. Trials suggest best for patrols to focus on very tight areas of high crime incidence, even down to clusters of addresses, making visits for 15 minutes every 2 hours. Offenders deterred by knowledge policing could increase at any minute.

We can only wonder if our police are doing suchlike, they sure don't like to tell anyone if they are.