Reoffending rates - perhaps the spinless left were right after all...

[shoes]

.... or perhaps not

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18188610

A record number of offenders sentenced for serious crimes had committed previous offences, according to figures for 2011.

Some 90% of those sentenced in England and Wales had offended before - and almost a third had committed or were linked to 15 or more crimes.

Reoffending rates were highest among serious offenders who had been jailed.

Hug a hoodie? Misunderstood?

So it appears that criminals stay criminals regardless of our pansy soft as the proverbial rehabilitation system. I think the more logical conclusion is once scum always scum. I wonder, though, if this rate has changed much over the last decade or so - perhaps it's getting better?

PROPORTION OF ALL OFFENDERS WITH 15 OR MORE CONVICTIONS

2001: 29% of offenders
2006: 38% of offenders
2009: 40% of offenders
2011: 44% of offenders

Ministry of Justice officials say the figures show a "clear trend" of a rising re-offending rate.

I guess not then.

So what are we doing about it?

Separate figures show that one in eight offenders who pleaded guilty on or after the first day of a trial received the maximum sentence discount possible, of a third or more.

Ah ha! Shorter sentences. Excellent idea

On a more positive note there were less overall offenders last year than the year before:

During 2011, the criminal justice system dealt with two million offenders - down by more than 100,000 on the previous year.

This is very good news as it means that we have several serial offenders rather than millions of total scrotes.

Some 208,000 of those were "first-time entrants" to the criminal justice system, a 10% fall on the previous year - and down almost 40% since 2006. Approximately 1.3m of all the offenders received a conviction at court.

New offenders seem to be on the decline, this is also very good news. It does, however, re-enforce the argument for tougher punishments as more and more people are re-offending once already convicted.

In conclusion, re-offending is chronic and therefore the left should STFU about being soft and spineless and we need to start punishing criminals in such a way that they never forget it. As an added bonus it'll be nice for the scrotes to suffer a bit - criminals NEVER (to my knowledge) get as harsh a punishment in the UK as the harsh treatment of their vitcims.

Finally - I notice in this paragraph that offences relating to alcohol are due to the effects of it, yet the offences relating to cannabis are simply due to being in possession. This speaks volumes IMO.

Four offences accounted for almost all the on-the-spot fines handed out. Police handed out just over a quarter of the fines for shoplifting or being drunk and disorderly. A fifth of the fines related to behaviour which alarmed others. Almost 13% were for possessing cannabis.

Stand by for a torrent of soppy whiny nonsense from butt hurt lefties in 3....2....1.......

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

Suspect the rates are being skewed by less "petty" offences being dealt with.

 

[fez]

Can't shake the feeling that if prisons are soft and quite an easy ride, then why would the criminals care about re-offending and getting sent back.

Every country's social and economic situation is very different so please don't try and claim that a zero tolerance system wouldn't help over here because in X country the death penalty doesn't deter some.

 

[Pate]

Alternatively, the soft measures aren't actually soft... and we should adopt genuinely 'soft' measures (soft in the eyes of right wing nutjobs [I can say that if you say spineless left, right?]) as those would actually work (*looks at Scandinavia*).

I would say that scandinavia isn't as ridden with 120 different ethnicities with no semblence of a culture, thus it is easier to tackle the problem with such methods.

If I was in charge (thank God I'm not everyone breathes ), I would put stringent sentences with hard labour, BUT with the caveat that when you're free you're free, not like the current system where you have to declare convictions etc. You've paid your debt you're done.

Along with education/apprenticeships being mandadory.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

Stand by for a torrent of soppy whiny nonsense from butt hurt lefties in 3....2....1.......

You're clearly too intellectually devoid to debate this, so I won't bother.

I'll just point out one thing: The fact you think our criminal justice system in any way resembles a rehabilitatory focused system (which you would presumably call 'spineless' and 'leftist') shows you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

It's such a shame that people like you muddy the debate and ultimately progress in this country. We are held back by stupid people, and people who think they know better when you don't have an ounce of experience to stand on.

 

[Edrof]

We need to stop thinking about clearing up the mess after the accidents have happened, and start thinking about how to make it less likely that a person will have the accident in the first place.

 

[fez]

You're clearly too intellectually devoid to debate this, so I won't bother.

I'll just point out one thing: The fact you think our criminal justice system in any way resembles a rehabilitatory focused system (which you would presumably call 'spineless' and 'leftist') shows you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

It's such a shame that people like you muddy the debate and ultimately progress in this country. We are held back by stupid people, and people who think they know better when you don't have an ounce of experience to stand on.

What type of system would you say we have. To me it just seems like a bit of a soft system with little to recommend it either way.

We don't rehab criminals and we don't make it horrible for them to be in jail either.

 

[Wolfe777]

I would say that scandinavia isn't as ridden with 120 different ethnicities with no semblence of a culture, thus it is easier to tackle the problem with such methods.

If I was in charge (thank God I'm not everyone breathes ), I would put stringent sentences with hard labour, BUT with the caveat that when you're free you're free, not like the current system where you have to declare convictions etc. You've paid your debt you're done.

Along with education/apprenticeships being mandadory.

Scandinavia's considerate culture in terms of crime and punishment is largely based upon the previous good behaviour of the indigenous population - well as they're now witnessing, new immigrant populations often bring new crimes with them.

Rape was almost non existent in Norway and Sweden, but following large Islamic immigration it has sky rocketed with the perpetrators being largely Islamic immigrants and the victims being largely indigenous women.

Anders Breivik is a proper nut job, no question about it, but his misguided and twisted attempt to fight his cause does have some basis in reality.

As we're seeing in this country, a soft soft approach on crime is utterly ineffective, whether the criminals are domestic or imported, a hard but fair policy is the only way.


.

 

[fez]

We need to stop thinking about clearing up the mess after the accidents have happened, and start thinking about how to make it less likely that a person will have the accident in the first place.

This is the crux of the problem isn't it. Until we get tough with people at some point in their development we will never get anywhere with this. We never ever blame it on the person who commits a crime. It wasn't their fault was it, it was their upbringing, they were desperate, they didn't know any better, the school system failed them.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

What type of system would you say we have. To me it just seems like a bit of a soft system with little to recommend it either way.

We don't rehab criminals and we don't make it horrible for them to be in jail either.

You answered it yourself, although hardly any of our prison spaces are 'soft'. If anyone would set foot in any of the main criminal prisons, you'd see there simply isn't space for the 'luxuries' all prisoners supposedly have access to. It is absurd.

We have one of the highest prison population per capita in Europe and one the highest reoffending rates in the developed world, more jailable offences and some of the longest sentences.

If you don't rehabilitate them (which in the OP's eyes will be mean 'soft' measures), you can't expect reoffending rates to go down.

 

[Edrof]

The thing is, though, the school system is a one-size-fits-all entity and there are many, many people that simply don't fit. This creates problems that ripple throughout society. We need harsher punishments in some areas and new 'social' punishments, but we also need to rethink the incentives and opportunities that are achievable to people who would potentially commit crimes.

 

[Pestilence]

What type of system would you say we have. To me it just seems like a bit of a soft system with little to recommend it either way.

We don't rehab criminals and we don't make it horrible for them to be in jail either.

Chain gangs. Enforced community orders including public service in highly visible dress for removal of graffiti, reparation of damaged private and public property. The public should be allowed to express their feelings towards these people however they choose while they complete their orders, bar physical aggression. When not doing these, they're in a jail cell consisting of four walls, a bed, a toilet, and whatever books they've decided to take out from the jail library. They should be out of said cell for an absolute maximum of two hours per day.

This is all off the cuff so not thought through particularly well, granted. Mind you, considering the mountain of **** that I've had to put up with for years from nomark scrotes I'd be happy enough to pump some money back into the economy by paying to attend their public hanging in the town square.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

Chain gangs. Enforced community orders including public service in highly visible dress for removal of graffiti, reparation of damaged private and public property. The public should be allowed to express their feelings towards these people however they choose while they complete their orders, bar physical aggression. When not doing these, they're in a jail cell consisting of four walls, a bed, a toilet, and whatever books they've decided to take out from the jail library. They should be out of said cell for an absolute maximum of two hours per day.

This is all off the cuff so not thought through particularly well, granted. Mind you, considering the mountain of **** that I've had to put up with for years from nomark scrotes I'd be happy enough to pump some money back into the economy by paying to attend their public hanging in the town square.

hahaha I love your ironic slate at the 'jail them hard' idiots. Very well done

Because, I mean, you couldn't possibly think all of this having done a minute of research into it, or set foot into a regular prison, right?

 

[Andy]

I have a friend who just started working in a prison, he said it's a horrible place.

I don't think harsher punishments are the way forward. Disassociation from the system creates re-offenders.

 

[fez]

I have a friend who just started working in a prison, he said it's a horrible place.

I don't think harsher punishments are the way forward. Disassociation from the system creates re-offenders.

Of course its a horrible place. Its full of criminals, they are horrible buildings and you are dealing with nasty characters a lot of the time. Its hardly going to be nice.

 

[fez]

You answered it yourself, although hardly any of our prison spaces are 'soft'. If anyone would set foot in any of the main criminal prisons, you'd see there simply isn't space for the 'luxuries' all prisoners supposedly have access to. It is absurd.

We have one of the highest prison population per capita in Europe and one the highest reoffending rates in the developed world, more jailable offences and some of the longest sentences.

If you don't rehabilitate them (which in the OP's eyes will be mean 'soft' measures), you can't expect reoffending rates to go down.

I explained that poorly. They are not "soft" but they should be a lot more of a deterrent than they are.

The cost of rehabilitating someone later in their life is ridiculous. The work needed whilst they are in prison, getting them trained, getting them a job, keeping them away from negative influences etc.

I think that we need to get them much younger than we do. We have created a country that almost invited people to grow up to be little *****.

Our social benefits system is easily exploited and rewards people who shouldn't be reproducing at all to have loads of children. Their childhood and behaviour when they are developing is the root cause.

How can you expect to undo 20 or more years of bad parenting, abuse, low self esteem, anger and a healthy dislike for authority. Couple that with a lack of education, the easy with which they can make money from criminal activities and any potential baggage from their previous life and its a miracle that we rehab anyone in the prison system.

 

[Pestilence]

hahaha I love your ironic slate at the 'jail them hard' idiots. Very well done

Because, I mean, you couldn't possibly think all of this having done a minute of research into it, or set foot into a regular prison, right?

Take it to SC, serious boy!

Some of us are trying to have fun here.



EDIT: Mind you, I do know what a regular prison is like: My brother is currently incarcerated in one. He recently told the police to take him back there (and they subsequently obliged) after he broke his bail curfew due to how awful the hostel/halfway house he was staying in a few weeks ago was.

 

[Irish_Tom]

Ken Clarke was on Radio 4 a month-or-so ago suggesting that the solution was to put young, first-time offenders into prison for six months to a year to 'scare' them into not wanting to reoffend.

My own views are still forming in this area: I can see some logic behind KC's idea, but I can also see some issues with it.

Are there any statistics to show the effectiveness of young-offenders institutes or should we scrap them and send everyone to prison proper?

 

[shoes]

You answered it yourself, although hardly any of our prison spaces are 'soft'. If anyone would set foot in any of the main criminal prisons, you'd see there simply isn't space for the 'luxuries' all prisoners supposedly have access to. It is absurd.

We have one of the highest prison population per capita in Europe and one the highest reoffending rates in the developed world, more jailable offences and some of the longest sentences.

If you don't rehabilitate them (which in the OP's eyes will be mean 'soft' measures), you can't expect reoffending rates to go down.

If prisons were awful places to be then no one would want to go back. Currently we have thousands of criminals who are just 'meh' about prison.

This includes my cousin, dominic. He's a chief scrote and has been in and out of our loljustice system for quite some time now. He never learns.

Letting people out early is laughable too.

Here's dominic's story - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/8475440.stm

You'll see he was sentenced to three years in January 2010. He was released just after my birthday this year - January 2012. He served 66% of his sentence.

Please please please watch the video of the attack and tell me, if you were the victim, would you feel this was justice?

The victim managed to run away and was admitted to Poole General Hospital the following day, where he was treated for a collapsed right lung, a fractured rib and bruising to the ride side of his chest.

In my eyes this offence, which was clearly pre-meditated, should carry a minimum of ten years hard - and I mean hard, no pansy left wing 'hard' - labour.

 

[JBod]

Why can't we give convicted fellons regular beatings?