IIRC Venables was the only perpetual reoffender?
Harmless 39 year old alcoholic woman tortured and beaten to death by girls aged 13 and 14.
- Thread starter Destination
- Start date
IIRC Venables was the only perpetual reoffender?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
Some people ostensibly cannot be rehabilitated.
And for some of the worst cases how much are we prepared to pay to rehabilitate someone, there is a cost concern here.
I mean if the offender/their family was soon keen to see them rehabilitated it would be nice for them to pay for it.
These two should never be let out.
Put them wherever. But they should never ever be let out .
Absolutely disgusting. This isn't just someone losing control. It's motivated, cold , and calculated. They do not deserve a place in societ .
And by sounds of it they had friends etc and seemed fairly typical. So the 'mental' conditions doesn't wash here
Put them wherever. But they should never ever be let out .
Absolutely disgusting. This isn't just someone losing control. It's motivated, cold , and calculated. They do not deserve a place in societ .
And by sounds of it they had friends etc and seemed fairly typical. So the 'mental' conditions doesn't wash here
My sister in law tells me off for saying 'no' to her kid. Apparently it is negative.
Doesn't work in the USA. Some people are just not fit for civilised society.
Kind of ****ed up but maybe see how they both fare against a group of fully grown Chimpanzees. While we are at it throw Robert Thompson and Jon Venables in with them to.
The stats show that prison systems that are built around the idea of punishment being a deterrent leads to higher incidence of offending and re-offending. This is especially true for violent and petty crimes.
The playstations are neither here nor there. Our prison system is awful and causes more problems than it fixes. Part of the reason for this is the public's demand to see offenders punished.
That's never worked in any place or time, so what makes you think it would work here and now?
By far the best results today come from a prison system that's so relaxed it startles even me. The Norwegian model. Norwegian prisons are roughly on a par with a decent long stay hotel and prisoners have, deliberately and explicitly, the full rights of citizens in all things apart from freedom. Towards the end of a sentence, they get more and more of that too. For example, one reporter doing a piece on the Norwegian model was met in town by a guide from the prison, who showed them to and around the prison. They found out that their guide was a prisoner, convicted of murder. Who had a pass to pop into town to meet the reporter and show them round. It was part of the "getting long term prisoners used to freedom" thing.
Norway serves as a good comparison of systems because until ~50 years ago it had a punitive penal system. A real doozy. Loads of people imprisoned, forced labour and all that sort of thing. Under that system, the recidivism rate was 90%. Then they radically changed their criminal justice system to a rehabilitive system. Most criminals not jailed at all, short jail sentences (21 years maximum, usually much less), pleasant jails, etc. And, crucially, massive (and massively expensive) rehabilitation programs. The recidivism rate is now 20% and that's despite the fact that a third of prisoners in Norwegian jails aren't Norwegian. The recidivism rate amongst Norwegian prisoners is even lower. They also have hardly any prisoners - there's only about 4,000 people in jail in Norway and some of them are in what we wouldn't even consider a prison. Even the closed prisons in Norway, which more resemble a prison, are so much unlike traditional prisons that, for example, the prisoners have a union rep.
Norway haven't exactly cracked crime, now have they. This POS shouldn't be allowed to any benefits of society yet they want to educate him further https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45705939
A death sentence might not solve the situation, but it'll solve it by one.
A death sentence might not solve the situation, but it'll solve it by one.
You don't crack crime.
You have to decide if you're on the side of punishing/deterring crime, or rehabilitating those that commit them. You should do that, with the full knowledge that punishing/attempting to deter crime/meting out "justice" actually causes more of it. ie, who's side are you on? do you want a good outcome for society or do you want to see people get punished?
If killing Breivik makes it more likely someone else will come along and do similar, you're not solving anything at all are you? In fact, you're making it worse.
I'm not convinced it's possible to rehabilitate all offenders.
these 2 girls are sub humane in my eyes, how evil must you be in order to torture a person and brag about it on social media, then call the police for a ride home whilst laughing.
I've known some messed up people in my life and I think even they would struggle to inflict pain on someone over a length of time, never mind be capable of actually enjoying it.
these 2 girls are sub humane in my eyes, how evil must you be in order to torture a person and brag about it on social media, then call the police for a ride home whilst laughing.
I've known some messed up people in my life and I think even they would struggle to inflict pain on someone over a length of time, never mind be capable of actually enjoying it.
Maybe it isn't. But "punishing" them doesn't do anyone any good.
There's plenty of humans on earth. Getting rid of 2 worthless cause ones shouldn't even matter.
There should be a line to cross in law that results in a fast execution.
Doesn't matter if its because of your terrible unfortunate upbringing or mental instability.
People put down bad dogs everyday.....
There should be a line to cross in law that results in a fast execution.
Doesn't matter if its because of your terrible unfortunate upbringing or mental instability.
People put down bad dogs everyday.....
That's fine, and if the Norwegian model turns out to be more successful that ours I wouldn't argue against it, except..
But what do you do with psychopaths like these.. you don't really rehabilitate them. You certainly don't release them back to the community, or give them the freedom to leave prison and go for a walkabout.
So they have to be kept in some kind of facility, arguably all their lives. Not for punishment but because perhaps they can't control themselves, or have no concept of empathy, etc.
What these kids did was horrific, and does mark them as being different from other children/people. They won't be the first kids to have a bad or traumatic upbringing. Even amongst such people, torture murders aren't exactly common.
This is interesting. I wonder if they have a lot more 1 time criminals who do something as they know the punishments aren't that severe.
I would have thought a country with harsher punishment would discourage people from criminal activity in the first place.
most criminals in our country see prison as a holiday to visit friends and sentences appear to be getting more lenient than ever.
most the people I grew up with are in and out of prison all the time and never feared it, prison did make them more aggressive though and less trusting of others.
our system is broken when it comes to even the most basic rehabilitation, people tend to come out much worse than they went in, they also make connections inside basically turning them in to a better criminal with more opportunities to re-offend once released
And when that "wrong person" lumps them one, they will be the ones in trouble for hitting a minor (assuming they get caught) :/
It's a common misconception. Most people committing non-white collar crimes, for whatever reason, do so without regard for the consequences, regardless of what they are. They're usually committed as a result of a long chain of circumstances. That's before you even get to the question of whether they think they'll be caught or not.
Mandatory punishments for carrying a knife are currently currently historically high, yet knife crime is still rising. Punishment and deterrence just are not good anti-crime tools.
What they tend to be is good vote winners though as people think that's being tough on crime, when in reality, sadly, the opposite is actually true.
Nowhere has "cracked crime". That's only possible in the most extreme possible authoritarian state, beyond any that have existed yet. Maybe not even then. Even if somewhere did spy on everyone in every way all of the time and killed anyone and everyone who committed any crime at all, there would probably still be some crime.
What Norway has done is reduced crime far more effectively than pretty much anywhere, including current authoritarian states. Certainly far, far better than the UK.
It doesn't seem to be. For example, the UK has 50% more criminal convictions per capita than Norway, for all crimes. Double the murder rate per capita. The UK has a famously low murder rate and Norway's is half that. In fact, the UK has a low crime rate in general. But Norway's is much lower.
Many people do, despite the abundance of evidence showing that it doesn't and in fact makes thing worse. It usually wins votes, though, and it at least appears to be cheap. For example, Norway spends about 4 times as much per prisoner per year than the USA does despite the huge cost per person of some USA prisons and the huge inefficiency of the USA having private prisons run for profit. But it's not actually cheap because it increases crime. So you end up spending less per prisoner but you have more prisoners. Maybe you save money overall, maybe not. But you definitely have more crime.
Most people committing crimes either think they won't get caught or don't think. Either way, the punishment is irrelevant in terms of deterrence. How likely a person is to be caught helps, but not how bad the punishment is. Certainly not if the worst punishment is death. Prolonged torture might sometimes have some effect, maybe. Perhaps it would reduce crime a little bit if a country routinely tortured people for weeks for most crimes. Maybe. But that would be worse for society than crime. And it probably wouldn't work.