Ex brits almost 1 in 10 of UK prison poulation

DublinDes

" An estimated 20,000 veterans are in the criminal justice system, with 8,500 behind bars, almost one in 10 of the prison population. Those involved had served in Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Iraq and Afghanistan. They are most likely to have been convicted of a violent offence, particularly domestic violence. "

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/se...tnumber-troops

The above front page of the Guardian doesn't surprise me in the least, it's been known for years that the prisons of England have'nt got a wing that hasn't a few ex brits on it. But of course they were portrayed as a sort of red cross who couldn't put a foot wrong, helping old ladies across the road in Derry and Belfast etc If that's how they act back in England, can you imagine the thuggery and rascism that they show to the people of Afghanistan and Iraq ?

mike65

Yep they are probably as bigoted as you are.

DublinDes

mike65 wrote: »

Yep they are probably as bigoted as you are.

How is it bigotted when I'm just reporting the facts as in the front page headline news of the Guardian which is one of the most respected newspapers in England ? Surely it's bigotry trying to hide the sort of thugs that are in the British army.

mike65

I think your own editorial contribution tells me all I need to know.

Manic Moran

In fairness, it just shows a one-in-ten percentage of those who get convicted. (Actually, 8.5%)

I don't know about the British Army, but in the US, we have to be fingerprinted and our DNA recorded. Partially for background check, and partically for identification of remains. This makes life so much easier for the police to solve crimes and random recording of fingerprints and DNA samples of the general public is, as far as I know, still not legal.

The other problem with your conclusion is that often times veterans have difficulty adjusting to civilian life after they leave the structure of the military. Note, 'after', their actions on the civilian side are not necessarily a reflection of their actions whilst still in uniform.

What is the percentage of people in the UK who are veterans anyway?

the Guardian which is one of the most respected newspapers in England ?

You were almost believable, 'till you said that bit.

NTM

Latchy

OP your talking about a country with a population of roughly 60 million people .If you were to do a similar quote of former military personell in other countries with a large population you might come up with similar results ( per head per population ) .

Manic Moran

Putting the Moderator hat on for a second, Des, are you planning on this being a discussion as to the sociological aspects of the treatment of discharged veterans in modern society, or are you just going to go on a rant about the British Forces? I really don't have much inclination for the latter, I've already slapped McArmalite for it, and it would only be consistent for me to do so in this case as well.

NTM

troubleshooter

DublinDes wrote: »

" An estimated 20,000 veterans are in the criminal justice system, with 8,500 behind bars, almost one in 10 of the prison population. Those involved had served in Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Iraq and Afghanistan. They are most likely to have been convicted of a violent offence, particularly domestic violence. "

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/se...tnumber-troops

The above front page of the Guardian doesn't surprise me in the least, it's been known for years that the prisons of England have'nt got a wing that hasn't a few ex brits on it. But of course they were portrayed as a sort of red cross who couldn't put a foot wrong, helping old ladies across the road in Derry and Belfast etc If that's how they act back in England, can you imagine the thuggery and rascism that they show to the people of Afghanistan and Iraq ?

Anyone can play your game des.

More than one in five crimes committed in London in the first six months of this year were carried out by a foreign citizen, new police figures have revealed.


Jamaicans, Irish nationals, Somalians and Romanians - accused of more than 1,000 crimes - had the next worst levels of offending.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23408349-foreigners-commit-20-per-cent-of-crime-in-london-say-police.do;jsessionid=836D1B09D281ACE74DFA8AA266C4A8B1

McArmalite

Latchy wrote: »

OP your talking about a country with a population of roughly 60 million people .If you were to do a similar quote of former military personell in other countries with a large population you might come up with similar results ( per head per population ) .

Well I'm sure their are a few ex army guys in prison here, but I'm sure it's not 8.5% of the prison population.

Latchy

McArmalite wrote: »

Well I'm sure their are a few ex army guys in prison here, but I'm sure it's not 8.5% of the prison population.

Wasn't including the ROI in that list of countires with a large population ,thought that was obious .

McArmalite

Latchy wrote: »

Wasn't including the ROI in that list of countires with a large population ,thought that was obious .

Well obviously Ireland is only a tiny country, but I still say that if you did a survey of Irish prisons and as a ratio of the prison population, you wouldn't get a 8.5% ex Irish army population in them, it would be much lower. We have a few bad boys of course, but in general their's a much better calibre of people in the Irish forces.

Latchy

McArmalite wrote: »

We have a few bad boys of course, but in general their's a much better calibre of people in the Irish forces.

And maybe in the much larger British Forces a more Diverse selection of people .

troubleshooter

McArmalite wrote: »

Well obviously Ireland is only a tiny country, but I still say that if you did a survey of Irish prisons and as a ratio of the prison population, you wouldn't get a 8.5% ex Irish army population in them, it would be much lower. We have a few bad boys of course, but in general their's a much better calibre of people in the Irish forces.

Irish people also make up a disproportionate part of the uk prison population.

To the English racists, ie the mirror image of des and yourself its cause they are Irish.

In reality any one with a fair mind knows the reason ex army as well as Irish are more frequent in uk prisons is down to sociological reasons.

Same as with homelessness. People coming home from combat have higher rates of marriage break ups, sucide,homelessness, alcholism, ending up in jail etc, this is well known. Its not cause its the "evil" British army its due to the stress of combat operations and no longer relating to civilian life.

Many of the homeless in the 30s George orwell wrote about in the rd to wigan pier were ex soldiers who were in the trenches, years ago I met a tramp with a fox on a lead, he had been an RAF officer in the war. Being unable to adjust to civilan life is very common.

McArmalite

Latchy wrote: »

And maybe in the much larger British Forces a more Diverse selection of people .

Like this fine body of men ?

iceage

Thanks for highlighting the plight of these Ex Soldiers DD, and it seem your figures are correct according to the press, this does seem to be the case.

Again another sign of the lack of proper support for guys coming out of the Forces after having served in Iraq and Afghanistan. If I might take a wee quote from "another" paper.

"One in four said they had post-traumatic stress disorder, but many went undiagnosed. Others cited depression and behavioural problems"

"Domestic violence was by far the most likely conviction for a veteran, accounting for one in three cases. Other violent crimes accounted for around one in five convictions"

"David Hill, chief executive of charity Combat Stress, said he was 'not surprised' by the findings and urged ministers to look again at the services provided.

'Both the increase in demand for services and the severe and complex presentations we are seeing indicate to us that the six NHS Veterans' Mental Health Pilots are not adequate to deal with the scale and size of the problem,' he said.
The Ministry of Defence insisted the vast majority of former service personnel make a 'successful return' to civilian life.
'A small minority can face serious difficulties and we provide a wide range of support, before, during and after leaving the services, including the MoD's Prison In-Reach initiative,' a spokesman said"

Common traits by all accounts of guys turning on their loved ones, turning to drink and drugs and in a rising amount of cases they top themselves. Some guys can deal with it, and some can't. ****in tragic if you ask me but answer me this, what are the numbers of Ex British Squaddies that go back to civvie Street after returning to live normal lives, hold down jobs and raise families?

Poccington

I love the way lads will use something like this just to try get one up on the Brits... I'm sure the list includes many lads that came back from Overseas with PTSD or whatever else and their heads were all over the ****ing place.

Awe inspiring stuff.

Poccington

McArmalite wrote: »

We have a few bad boys of course, but in general their's a much better calibre of people in the Irish forces.

How did you work that out?

iceage

Bloody hilarious McBakelite, love it, my favorite programme of all time.:D

It wasn't me!

McArmalite wrote: »

We have a few bad boys of course, but in general their's a much better calibre of people in the Irish forces.

With respect, there are about 10,500 in the Irish Defence Forces. The British have armed forces totalling about 425,500. Can you say you know a statistically significant number from both forces in enough detail to support your assertion above? To be fair, let's say about 10% of each. To DublinDes, there is no evidence to support your wing-and-prayer theory that the British armed forces are displaying racist attitudes in the middle east on any ideological level.

troubleshooter

It wasn't me! wrote: »

With respect, there are about 10,500 in the Irish Defence Forces. The British have armed forces totalling about 425,500. Can you say you know a statistically significant number from both forces in enough detail to support your assertion above? To be fair, let's say about 10% of each. To DublinDes, there is no evidence to support your wing-and-prayer theory that the British armed forces are displaying racist attitudes in the middle east on any ideological level.

Yes, your correct.The armed forces of the United Kingdom, known as His/Her Majesty's Armed Forces or sometimes the British Armed Forces, and sometimes legally the Armed Forces of the Crown,[1] encompasses a navy, an army, and an air force. The British Armed Forces are a purely professional and volunteer force with a reported personnel strength of 425,500 in 2006 (191,900 regular force, 191,300 regular reserve, and 42,300 volunteer reserve), HM Armed Forces constitutes one of the largest militaries in Europe, though only the 26th largest in the world by number of troops.[2][3] The British Armed Forces however have the fourth highest declared expenditure of any military in the world, behind the United States, France, and the People's Republic of China according to the Ministry of Defence.[4] Due to currency exchange rate fluctuations, British military expenditure exceeds that of France in some years.

McArmalite

Poccington wrote: »

How did you work that out?

It wasn't me! wrote: »

With respect, there are about 10,500 in the Irish Defence Forces. The British have armed forces totalling about 425,500. Can you say you know a statistically significant number from both forces in enough detail to support your assertion above? To be fair, let's say about 10% of each. To DublinDes, there is no evidence to support your wing-and-prayer theory that the British armed forces are displaying racist attitudes in the middle east on any ideological level.

Problem is, if I criticise the british army I run the risk of getting an infraction or ban as it might be deemed as ranting. Anyway, I would have thought the Irish army's record in the Lebannon, Cyprus, East Timor, Congo etc had proved itself. Maybe their was the odd shooting/whatever, but I can hardly think of any incidents of Irish soldiers shooting innocent civilains, unlike out lovely british friends who did plenty of that during the troubles alone.

Anyway, here is an Amnesty report on the brits in Iraq - Amnesty: British Troops Shot Iraqi Civilians http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,119558,00.html

iceage

McArmalite wrote: »

Problem is, if I criticise the british army I run the risk of getting an infraction or ban as it might be deemed as ranting. [/url]

Not necessarily MA, your entitled to your opinion. I understand that you are anti BA and thats fine by me...You have your reasons for being so. Not that I can ban or infract you actually to be honest I find some of your posts quite amusing, lets all try to get along shall we?

One thing though, the only time I seem to see you post in here is to have a knock...anything positive or humourous? :}

Paddy Englishman, Paddy Irishman, Paddy.............. etc.

McArmalite

iceage wrote: »

Not necessarily MA, your entitled to your opinion. I understand that you are anti BA and thats fine by me...You have your reasons for being so. Not that I can ban or infract you actually to be honest I find some of your posts quite amusing, lets all try to get along shall we?

One thing though, the only time I seem to see you post in here is to have a knock...anything positive or humourous? :}

Paddy Englishman, Paddy Irishman, Paddy.............. etc.

" anything positive or humourous? " See post #14

Manic Moran

McArmalite wrote: »

Problem is, if I criticise the british army I run the risk of getting an infraction or ban as it might be deemed as ranting.

Make a supportable statement, and you're fine.

Make a radical overgeneralisation, and you'll get slapped like you did last time.

NTM

Fratton Fred

McArmalite wrote: »

Well I'm sure their are a few ex army guys in prison here, but I'm sure it's not 8.5% of the prison population.

I suppose that depends on which Irish "Army" you are referring to;)

iceage

The wit is strong with this one... nicely put Fratton Fred.

troubleshooter

McArmalite wrote: »

Problem is, if I criticise the british army I run the risk of getting an infraction or ban as it might be deemed as ranting. Anyway, I would have thought the Irish army's record in the Lebannon, Cyprus, East Timor, Congo etc had proved itself. Maybe their was the odd shooting/whatever, but I can hardly think of any incidents of Irish soldiers shooting innocent civilains, unlike out lovely british friends who did plenty of that during the troubles alone.

Anyway, here is an Amnesty report on the brits in Iraq - Amnesty: British Troops Shot Iraqi Civilians http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,119558,00.html

I dont want to put down the pdf but there have been incidents widely reported in the media, I dont mean shootings,as there are with any army.

You cant compare the above UN peace keeping ops with those in Iraq, Afghanistan , NI etc where the BA was/is under everyday attack including from suicide bombers.

NI millions of foot patrols conducted over 35 yrs, by soldiers av age 19, in areas of hostile civilians and terrorists and a few dozen civilians shot in contentious circumstances over 35 years is in terms of human rights a good record overall.

McArmalite

troubleshooter wrote: »

I dont want to put down the pdf but there have been incidents widely reported in the media, I dont mean shootings,as there are with any army.

Could you give me them please if they were taht common place ?

You cant compare the above UN peace keeping ops with those in Iraq, Afghanistan , NI etc where the BA was/is under everyday attack including from suicide bombers.

They were reguliarily under shell fire etc in the Leb. and was one of the most violent places on earth at the time between 1978 to 2001 losing 47 soldiers. Cann't think of any ' incidents ' where they shot at say, a child, woman, man walking across the road or whatever.

NI millions of foot patrols conducted over 35 yrs, by soldiers av age 19, in areas of hostile civilians and terrorists and a few dozen civilians shot in contentious circumstances over 35 years is in terms of human rights a good record overall.

I see from a previous post your knowledgeable about those unionist militia the UDR, which would of course explain your dismissing of the killing of 363* people by the british forces during the troubles, the vast majority of them unarmed civilians by plain murder. They actually killed more people than the Official IRA, INLA , RIRA, IPLO and Saor Eire combined. And of course they also had their deniable killers in the various loyalist gangs.


*http://www.cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/book/index.html#append

troubleshooter

McArmalite wrote: »

Could you give me them please if they were taht common place ?

They were reguliarily under shell fire etc in the Leb. Cann't think of any ' incidents ' where they shot at say, a child, woman, man walking across the road or whatever.

I see from a previous post your knowledgeable about those unionist militia the UDR, which would ofcourse explain your dismissing of the killing of 363* people by the british forces during the troubles, the vast majority of them unarmed civilians.

*http://www.cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/book/index.html#append

I have no intrest in falling into your trap of trying to get me to put down the PDF, but as with all armies there have been incidents, which have been widely reported.

The Leb was/is nothing like places like NI, deaths there are not from a hostile civilan population and terrorist org who regard the UN as the enemy, rather from Israeli shells or Islamic militas, its a ridiculous comparision to NI or Iraq etc.

Most of the 363 killed in NI by the BA were armed IRA terrorists, inc loughall etc, only an IRA supporter would attempt to claim most were all innocent civilians. The BA kept the gloves on in NI, in my opinion petrol bombers should have been shot dead.

The UDA was originally 20 % Catholic but most left due to IRA reprisals.

McArmalite

troubleshooter wrote: »

I have no intrest in falling into your trap of trying to get me to put down the PDF, but as with all armies there have been incidents, which have been widely reported.

And yet you cann't come up with one.

The Leb was/is nothing like places like NI, deaths there are not from a hostile civilan population and terrorist org who regard the UN as the enemy, rather from Israeli shells or Islamic militas, its a ridiculous comparision to NI or Iraq etc.

Most of the 363 killed in NI by the BA were armed IRA terrorists, inc loughall etc, only an IRA supporter would attempt to claim most were all innocent civilians. The BA kept the gloves on in NI, in my opinion petrol bombers should have been shot dead.

The UDA was originally 20 % Catholic but most left due to IRA reprisals.

As from the Cain website, killed by the british forces Republicans 145, civilians 189 and loyalists 16 ( so much for the brits ' even handedness ' ). The Provos alone killed british forces 1,015, civilians 152.

troubleshooter

McArmalite wrote: »

And yet you cann't come up with one.

As from the Cain website, killed by the british forces Republicans 145, civilians 189 and loyalists 16 ( so much for the brits ' even handedness ' ). The Provos alone killed british forces 1,015, civilians 152.

The IRA your claiming only murdered 152 civilians in 35 yrs,less then 5 per year, yer right :rolleyes:

concussion

What's this got to do with British prisons? Quit pushing your agenda McArmalite, it's getting boring.

Ping Chow Chi

McArmalite wrote: »

And yet you cann't come up with one.

As from the Cain website, killed by the british forces Republicans 145, civilians 189 and loyalists 16 ( so much for the brits ' even handedness ' ). The Provos alone killed british forces 1,015, civilians 152.

thats 152 unintended civilians, looking at that list there where a fair few intended civilians killed as well, like over 100 civilians killed in bomb attacks on buildings and over 100 sectairan killings etc etc. I suppose the easier way to look at their figures is that the IRA killed 1,823 people, of which 1,015 where militery or police. Thus 800 odd where unarmed civilians.

I supose people can bend stats for whatever purpose that they want though, I'm sure you'll see a completly different slant on it than I.

McArmalite

concussion wrote: »

What's this got to do with British prisons? Quit pushing your agenda McArmalite, it's getting boring.

Your friend above brought in the aspect of killings in the six counties in post #27 " a few dozen civilians shot in contentious circumstances over 35 years ". I'm only replying.

McArmalite

Ping Chow Chi wrote: »

thats 152 unintended civilians, looking at that list there where a fair few intended civilians killed as well, like over 100 civilians killed in bomb attacks on buildings and over 100 sectairan killings etc etc. I suppose the easier way to look at their figures is that the IRA killed 1,823 people, of which 1,015 where militery or police. Thus 800 odd where unarmed civilians.

I supose people can bend stats for whatever purpose that they want though, I'm sure you'll see a completly different slant on it than I.

Fair enough, I stand corrected.

cyrusdvirus

Ping Chow Chi wrote: »

thats 152 unintended civilians, looking at that list there where a fair few intended civilians killed as well, like over 100 civilians killed in bomb attacks on buildings and over 100 sectairan killings etc etc. I suppose the easier way to look at their figures is that the IRA killed 1,823 people, of which 1,015 where militery or police. Thus 800 odd where unarmed civilians.
I supose people can bend stats for whatever purpose that they want though, I'm sure you'll see a completly different slant on it than I.

Far from agreeing with McArmalite or anything like that, but no-one of us can be sure that those 800 victims were ALL unarmed civilians. Because we certainly can't call members of the loyalist terrorist groups, members of other republican terrorist groups, or members of factions within the IRA who were killed in internal squabbles, unarmed civilians.

Ping Chow Chi

true enough, but I would suspect that the figure is closer to 800 than 150 to be fair.

cyrusdvirus

Ping Chow Chi wrote: »

true enough, but I would suspect that the figure is closer to 800 than 150 to be fair.

Thouroughly agree with you there.

I just called you on it earlier cos the innocent victims of those murdering scumbags don't deserve to be tossed in with other murdering scumbags and have their memories tarnished

Poccington

Get back on topic or this thread gets locked.

concussion

McArmalite wrote: »

I'm only replying.

My hole. I knew which way this thread was going to go from Post 1.

petergfiffin

Trying to get back on topic here.....


There was a quote recently from the governer of Mountjoy that about 90% of the prison population came from a small number of areas in Dublin. I'm sure the same translates across the water, now you have to remember that these tend to be the same type of areas where the British & US armies recruit so even if these guys never joined the army there is a higher than normal probability they would have ended up in prison. What would really need to be done is to look at say 1000 people from the same area and then compare the percentages of those who ended up in prison between ex army and non-army - but of course that wouldn't make headlines!!

Any comparisons between the Irish army and other armies isn't really fair as the Irish Army has historically been seen as a very good job (and is once again) and one which was highly sought after so they could be very picky about who they took and as a result they recruited well educated people (not just at officer level) who were never in trouble with the law and unlikely to ever be, this has been translated into the excellent service record the DF has overseas.

getz

this may be of interest to some,the mail online wednesday 30th september 2009, in the first 6 months of this year,one in five crimes carried out in london were by poles,[charged with2,310 crimes]the next most foriegn nationals to commit crimes jamaicans,romanians,somalians,AND IRISH NATIONALS,all are accused of more than a 1,000 crimes,had the next worse levels of offending,lets stop throwing stones in glass houses

iceage

Glass Houses...Glasshouse...get it!!





Never mind.:p

getz

iceage wrote: »

Glass Houses...Glasshouse...get it!!





Never mind.:p

hey thats a good crack

r3nu4l

PeterGriffin makes a good point. I'd like to see some statistics on the socioeconomic background of ex-forces personnel that end up in prison compared with those that do not.

I#d be willing to bet that a large proportion of them had less education, less stable backgrounds and were then sent to war zones where they conducted long tours of duty before being demobbed and sent out to civvie street with little or no preparation.

I do remember hearing once of a man who set up a 'school' for ex footballers to teach them how to deal with life outside of football clubs. It turns out that many of them had no clue how to book a flight, get a train ticket, book a satellite TV installation or pay a bill etc. The reason being that most big clubs in England loook after ALL of these things for the players and these guys spend maybe 15 years not having to do anything for themselves other than train or play.

In many ways, the British army is like this and I know that the army 'offers' counselling to those that return from tours of Iraq, Afghanistan etc but does not order soldiers to undergo psychological examination upon return. So a guy comes back from a hectic tour, ends up as a civilian and is completely at a loss. He starts to drink more heavily (more time on his hands) to cope with the boredom and the (often undiagnosed) PTSD and then ends up loosing his aggression via his fists. It's a common and unsurprising story.

Psych tests should be mandatory for all returning vets (you too MM ). There should also definitely be 'life adjustment' courses for those who are leaving the army.

getz

the british army have a life adjustment course when leaving,but when a person suddenly finds himself out of the army with no one to tell him what to do he may go off the rails ,those without a family find it hard to cope,as said earlier many of these young men go into the army because of broken homes. but lets be honest this thread was put up to do some brit bashing,and it seems its working

iceage

Its ok Getz, people here are keeping it together. Again I'd like to raise the point of the thousands of lads and lasses that have left the British Army who have NOT ended up in Jail... after tours in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo, Up North etc.

Yes there are individuals who have come from, lets say a particular socio/Economic bsckground and have returned to same after serving but its their time in the bloody Army/Navy/Air Force in the first place, that has given them the tools to carry on with their lives to hold down jobs, raise families, generally have a full and productive life after serving. Lets not tar everyone with the same brush shall we.

r3nu4l

iceage wrote: »

Its ok Getz, people here are keeping it together. Again I'd like to raise the point of the thousands of lads and lasses that have left the British Army who have NOT ended up in Jail... after tours in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo, Up North etc.

Unfortunately the headline "Ex-forces man leaves army, gets good job, marries, raises kids responsibly and acts as pillar of community" does not sell as many papers as "Crazed forces murderer beat old lady to death over post office queue row"
:rolleyes:

For this reason, as with everything else the story tends to twist according to editorial policy.

iceage

Sad but how true r3nu4l.

DublinDes

r3nu4l wrote: »

Unfortunately the headline "Ex-forces man leaves army, gets good job, marries, raises kids responsibly and acts as pillar of community" does not sell as many papers as "Crazed forces murderer beat old lady to death over post office queue row"
:rolleyes:

For this reason, as with everything else the story tends to twist according to editorial policy.

Well I don't see why anyone would make the headline say " Ex boxer retires, gets good job, marries, raises kids responsibly and acts as pillar of community" is reason for a newspaper headline, after all he's just acting like a normal decent man should act. However if we get " almost 1 in 10 ex boxer beat old lady to death over post office queue row" then it is totally news worthy and should be condemned. But of course every excuse in the world will be found for the criminality of ex Brits.

Interesting also the humane concern for the british soldiers and not a word of concern for the victims of them in Afghanistan and Iraq nor their victims back in Britain.

twinytwo

DublinDes wrote: »

Well I don't see why anyone would make the headline say " Ex boxer retires, gets good job, marries, raises kids responsibly and acts as pillar of community" is reason for a newspaper headline, after all he's just acting like a normal decent man should act. However if we get " almost 1 in 10 ex boxer beat old lady to death over post office queue row" then it is totally news worthy and should be condemned. But of course every excuse in the world will be found for the criminality of ex Brits.

Interesting also the humane concern for the british soldiers and not a word of concern for the victims of them in Afghanistan and Iraq nor their victims back in Britain.

theirs not to reason why,
theirs but to do and die,
:rolleyes: