Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Prisoner Tagging
13-10-2005, 10:03 AM
Post: #1
Prisoner Tagging

This is on Yahoo news.


Thousands of prisoners could be released early if controversial Home Office plans to extend tagging go ahead.

In a move to ease prison overcrowding, criminals sentenced to four years in prison could be released after 18 months. A two-year sentence would mean six months would be spent in jail. .

Prisoners would be released early under a curfew and electronic tag, in addition, to the automatic release halfway through all sentences of less than four years.

It is understood half the 70,000 prisoners sentenced each year to less than four years in jail for sentences such as burglary, fraud and theft would be eligible. Sex and violent offenders would not be eligible for the scheme.



I am in two minds about this. On one hand i think its a great way of easing overcrowding in prisons (as it states in the article) and i assume that it would save the tax payer money not having to house / feed the prisoners.

BUT there was a report (im not sure if it was on the national or local news) of a man who managed to take off his tag, didnt respond to the curfews - and noone had the time to chase him up on it. The end result was that he killed someone, whilst untagged.

Could this kind of thing happen more if prisoners were let out early ? Would they have had time to think about 'why' they are inside, and just go out and start their life of crime again ?

What do you think.

I'm not perfect, but im so close it scares me
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
13-10-2005, 10:37 AM
Post: #2
Prisoner Tagging
In principle I think it is a good idea which could ease the problem of overcrowding.

However, I don't think this initiative should be applied to all prisoners. Firstly, I think it should only be applied to people who are nearing the end of their sentance - they should have already served some time in custody otherwise its not much of a punishment. Also Category A type prisoners (terrorists, armed robbers, rapist, murderers and peodo's - anyone who is a danger to the public) should not be eligible. But for people who have served time inside for non-voilent crime this could be feasible.

If at first you don't succeed, failure may be your style.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
16-10-2005, 10:52 PM
Post: #3
Prisoner Tagging
Bonsai Wrote:This is on Yahoo news.


Thousands of prisoners could be released early if controversial Home Office plans to extend tagging go ahead.

In a move to ease prison overcrowding, criminals sentenced to four years in prison could be released after 18 months. A two-year sentence would mean six months would be spent in jail. .

Prisoners would be released early under a curfew and electronic tag, in addition, to the automatic release halfway through all sentences of less than four years.

It is understood half the 70,000 prisoners sentenced each year to less than four years in jail for sentences such as burglary, fraud and theft would be eligible. Sex and violent offenders would not be eligible for the scheme.



I am in two minds about this. On one hand i think its a great way of easing overcrowding in prisons (as it states in the article) and i assume that it would save the tax payer money not having to house / feed the prisoners.

BUT there was a report (im not sure if it was on the national or local news) of a man who managed to take off his tag, didnt respond to the curfews - and noone had the time to chase him up on it. The end result was that he killed someone, whilst untagged.

Could this kind of thing happen more if prisoners were let out early ? Would they have had time to think about 'why' they are inside, and just go out and start their life of crime again ?

What do you think.

Hello Bonsai

From a sociologists point of view, I should see this as a move forward.
But I have serious reservations about it. The reason why is for the very fact that it is extremely difficult for police forces to monitor x amount of prisoners all at the same time. If it were one or two at lodge in the community than this would be an easier task but it isn't just one or two they are speaking of releasing.

I would hate to see a malfunctioning police force over taxed due to the monitoring of existing criminals on our streets, but would much rather see an efficient body to prevent crime and destruction.

A report has also been issued already in relation to the subject you have raised and this has highlighted more than one breach of behaviourial codes in relation to crimes being commited of both a civil and criminal nature in addition to the servicing of curfew orders.So far it has not worked, and does not ease the burden on the tax payer.

In an effort to analysing how to make this work an in depth study of each individual case is a must.

To make it work the hypothesis raised must ask the likelihood of the individual repeating the offence or similar offences to which sentences had been passed?

How many sentences have been passed for how many offences?

But as the fourth precedent of jurisprudence has always been rehabilitation no sentenced prisoner should be released unless they have an opportunity in the outside world to fulfill a worthwhile working role in it?

What else are they to fill there time with if a life of crime is all they know?

Very probing questions indeed and in truth, this policy is a get out for avoiding the greater issues of alienation, degradation, lost opportunities, restricted areas social growth etc. You know youv'e heard it all before.

Early release however might work for about 5% of the prison population and other forms of judicial action for another 15% of the current prison population.

I could go on.
If you are serious I'll log up a number of books for you sometime to browse through at your leisure.

Meanwhile enjoy your deliberations.

Maureen
Northern Angel. :smartie:
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2005, 11:52 AM
Post: #4
Prisoner Tagging
Tagging would be a good idea if it was also used to control where 'prisoners go' so although they are out in the community they would not be allowed back to the areas where they committed their offences. They would have to be housed elsewhere and then only allowed to travel within a certain radius of their home address. This would be good as they could split up co-offenders and keep them seperated so they don't all get chummy together and start commiting crimes again.

I know civil liberty groups would have my head on a pole but I have always been of the belief that the minority should not be allowed to ruin the lifes of the majority....most crime is commited by a very small percentage of the population...indeed any long serving police officer will tell you that as soon as a certain person or persons are locked up a particualar crime will become vertually non-existant in their patch and then as soon as that person is released....boom it all starts up again!


On another note....I think all juvinile offenders should be forced to join the services at 16...unless they attend college or a YTS type scheme and stay clean for the entire time and have a job at the end of it otherwise...bam into the armed forces with them! It would help solve the recruitment shortage no end!

[Image: animated_shark184f200.gif] [Image: AniDive.gif][FONT="Comic Sans MS"][SIZE="5"]Eeek! [/SIZE][/FONT][Image: yachtsink.gif] [SIZE="5"][FONT="Comic Sans MS"]Don't panic...I'll save you...oh dear![/FONT] [/SIZE]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2005, 08:16 PM
Post: #5
Prisoner Tagging
On another note....I think all juvinile offenders should be forced to join the services at 16...unless they attend college or a YTS type scheme and stay clean for the entire time and have a job at the end of it otherwise...bam into the armed forces with them! It would help solve the recruitment shortage no end! Coastie.

That is how it worked in the begining of the 60's, and kids who commited petty crimes (and most were petty back then - nicking tiles off church rooves etc.) were given the option of joining the forces or serving time and having a record. Many chose the forces who DID know they were petty offenders, and boy did they do a job of work on them! The majority were upstanding citizens real quick, it was like boot camp with hobnails.

Problem is, the forces won't take just anyone these days, in fact they often insist on qualifications of some form before they will accept you for basic training. Maybe they could do something on the line of Reserve Forces - something like the TA, and still kick the sh*t out of 'em! :naughty:

[Image: chirol_nawa1.gif]
~Today is the youngest you will ever be~
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2005, 10:32 PM
Post: #6
Prisoner Tagging
Hello Coastie, Eternity,

Oh dear, I'm not sold on this idea either however I do see where you are coming from. My father had he been alive would tell you he'd think this was a good idea and that it should be compulsory.

Having said that many a rebel would become an even greater threat if given training to kill and miam. Some rebels might well have the **** knocked out of them in there home lives and the communities in whch they exist and this on top instead of training the young men to become gentlemen of honour and to become useful members of the community at large may well make them a far more dangerous human being. (The grandaughter of a friend of mine has only just excaped with her life, after having been the victim of a despotic ex army member, after having served many years in trouble torn countries now out of work.)

Many a rebel is only a rebel because the norms of the community he is brought up in, and they are the end products, of having no hope for a decent future, which in turn has poverty and depravation the biggest wall to climb out of in terms of social status.

To enable some analysis here we need to look at the principles of jurisprudence and how each four tenets are represented.

A person commits a crime and jurisprudence is supposed to render

a) justice and punishment befitting the crime. On this point prison would be a deterrent - if good behaviour early release systems were abolished, if full sentences were given instead of minimal ones and if articles listed in d) were all earned.

b) trial and retribution - this one is quite difficult as it has serious leanings towards being retribution and revenge, rather retribution being the opportunity to appease pay, face up to, or surrender compensation for the crime having been committed. Fines are normally exercised at this point or awards for injuries sustained etc.

c) JUSTICE IS SEEN TO BE DONE oOOO Very dangerous ground here as this questions not only accountability of the justice systems in existence, but is more to with the origin of the judicial system and why it exists. Is it to protect life and property/Is it to protect civil liberties/Is it to protect those who pay for it? When I did all my readings of past trials and sentences given - Juries were extremely volatile people they could bought and paid for they could even be compromised, evidence of who was guilty could be contrived, in the end justice was not really done at all. It was in fact very much a case historically and socially of Rough Justice. (Riding the charavari)
Justice being seen to be done is more connected to public opinion and whos paying for it.

d) REHABILITAION
Prison during the Victorian era was extremely tough. But against a background of a non existent welfare state many prisoners thought of prison as home. Two or three meals a day a bed and some work to do to fill in the time. On the street these early convicts rarely had a bed, a home, a meal, a job. Yet some truly wonderful social thinkers who were revolutionary in their attitude and attack upon these pre-existing barbaric systems brought about several changes within the tenets of jurisprudence and sought that the enactment of justice and what prison life should provide. Were not just the above but an education, better treatment and facilities within prison and some form of work training with a small wage attached. On leaving prison it was hoped that the pennies they'd earned would enable them to get off the street, it was hoped the education given would equip them for a life of work and not crime.

Today it is this section that needs over viewing. Education, training and Work releases the boredom of living day to day with nothing to do.Work provides for ones keep. Work gives individuals hope for a future. Those who work have pride and some degree of contentment with life, those who work find satisfaction and the rewards of work.

16 year olds don't need military service. Not all 16 year olds are criminals, we shouldn't criminalise people because of there age, race or sex.

However there are some people who will never learn that crimes against the person or property are not acceptable. I feel that when a man of 30 has lived a life of crime since his teens, throwing away the key is the only answer I have then, especially since todays prisons whilst they are nowhere near those of the days of Elizabeth Fry and opportunities to improve oneself exist within. There is just no excuse for persistent re-offending. These are the ones who should be sent to the front line to fight a foreign foe, these are the ones. I have no compassion for whatsoever. These are the dregs of society, who need to see what someone else's life is like suffering from absolute poverty and absolute depravation. They should after 5 to 10 years be given the chance to reform themselves from within the institution, being forced to earn all priviledges.

This may be the answer to the problems we visualise with criminals today.

Maureen
Northern angel.
:angel_not
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)