Should flogging be an alternative to prison?

southsiderosie

An American academic takes a controversial position on prison reform.

From Time Magazine:

It's tough stuff and generally considered a barbaric punishment that the 21st century Western world would and should never consider. That makes it a bit startling to find a new book by a serious U.S. academic arguing that the U.S. should start flogging criminals. Peter Moskos' In Defense of Flogging might seem like a satire — akin to Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal," an essay advocating the eating of children — but it is as serious as a wooden stick lashing into a blood-splattered back.

Despite what you may think, Moskos is not pushing flogging as part of a "get tougher on criminals" campaign. In fact Moskos, who teaches at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, begins not by arguing that the justice system is too soft on criminals, but the opposite. So before you accuse him of advocating a cruel and unusual form of punishment, he offers this reminder: in the U.S., there are 2.3 million inmates incarcerated in barbaric conditions. American prisons are bleak and violent, and sexual assault is rampant.

And, Moskos points out, imprisonment is not just cruel — it is ineffective. The original idea for the penitentiary was that criminals would become penitent and turn away from their lives of crime. Today, prisons are criminogenic — they help train inmates in how to commit crimes on release.

Flogging, Moskos argues, is an appealing alternative. Why not give convicts a choice, he says: let them substitute flogging for imprisonment under a formula of two lashes for every year of their sentence.

There would, he says, be advantages all around. Convicts would be able to replace soul-crushing years behind bars with intense but short-lived physical pain. When the flogging was over, they could get on with their lives. For those who say flogging is too cruel, Moskos has a simple retort: it would only be imposed if the convicts themselves chose it.

At the same time, Moskos says, society would benefit. Under his proposal, the most dangerous criminals would not be eligible for flogging; the worst offenders, including serial killers and child molesters, would still be locked up and kept off the streets. But even so, he guesses the prison population could decline from 2.3 million to 300,000. That would free up much of the $60 billion or more the U.S. spends on prisons for more socially useful purposes.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2079933,00.html#ixzz1QYaFQcLi

Should flogging be re-introduced as an alternative punishment to time in prison? Or is this a barbaric practice that has no place in modern society? Do you think this is something that could work in Ireland?

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, it does seem kind of barbaric, and basically gives up on the end goal of the criminal justice system being rehabilitation rather than simply punishment. On the other hand, for the kind of low-level crimes that affect quality of life (vandalism and the like), maybe this would act as a deterrent? Caning is used in Singapore, which is a very clean, safe, low-crime city, but I wonder if it would have been like that anyway without caning as a punishment.

What do other people think?

pickarooney

I think it's a ridiculous argument. A few belts with a stick would be no deterrant to someone brought up in a violent environment as a good proportion of offenders are.

Biggins

No. Violence (in any description) in the long run, is not the answer.

(Curiously, its still on the law books of the Isle of Man I'm told)

chin_grin

No. Physical wounds heal. Contrast that to their mental state after being continually raped by "Bubba" in prison. Now that's punishment. (Depending on the crime of course! I'm talking about heinous ones.....not petty theft).

ronan45

Bit Barbaric............What about dusting off the stocks in dublin castle and having a 15 inch rubber dildo shoved up your arse outside Berties office in Drumcondra while strapped up?

southsiderosie

chin_grin wrote: »

No. Physical wounds heal. Contrast that to their mental state after being continually raped by "Bubba" in prison. Now that's punishment. (Depending on the crime of course! I'm talking about heinous ones.....not petty theft).

The article says that serious offenders (rape, murder, assault) would not be eligible for caning - it would essentially be for stuff like vandalism, petty theft, etc.

Kev_ps3

No but it should be included in prison punishment, prisoners have it too easy.

Wazdakka

No,

If anything use it in conjunction with a prison sentence.

I really don't think that short term violence or pain is in any way as big a deterrent as confinement and long term stripping of freedoms.

Especially not to the general populous who are likely to end up in prison.

grizzly

Does beating people make them better? I think prison is the best solution we have. It doesn't solve the problems of society but we can't consider the better alternatives due to our own greed.

southsiderosie

grizzly wrote: »

Does beating people make them better? I think prison is the best solution we have. It doesn't solve the problems of society but we can't consider the better alternatives due to our own greed.

But part of the argument is that prisons themselves are extremely violent. Should someone who spray painted cars be sent to prison with Bubba who is doing hard time, or should he get two strokes and be done with it?

racso1975

I'd certainly advocate the flogging of healy rae's listening to the sh1te bags on radio today

ilovesleep

I like getting my bum flogged, and caned and spanked. It is very good. Just saying like. Could do with a bating right now actually.

chin_grin

southsiderosie wrote: »

The article says that serious offenders (rape, murder, assault) would not be eligible for caning - it would essentially be for stuff like vandalism, petty theft, etc.

Well then definitely a bad idea. It's a very childish attitude to fight fire with fire especially where crime is concerned. Why don't they take a page out of South Parks book and concoct some really awkward situation where they trap the offender?

Like that one armed guy the dad hires in Arrested Development to teach the kids a lesson.

ilovesleep

grizzly wrote: »

Does beating people make them better? I think prison is the best solution we have. It doesn't solve the problems of society but we can't consider the better alternatives due to our own greed.

It makes me better. Talking about bdsm of course.

YFlyer

ilovesleep wrote: »

I like getting my bum flogged, and caned and spanked. It is very good. Just saying like. Could do with a bating right now actually.

Come here NOW!

tayto lover

Violence solves absolutely nothing.
Community service is the answer. Cutting grass and roadside hedges, painting O.P.D's, cleaning up estates, graffiti etc. Good hard work for their dole is the answer to crime.
The serious criminals like armed robbers, rapists, paedos and murderers should be the only ones locked up.

Chuck Stone

I'd take the flogging if it were me but i'm uncomfortable with it as being a solution.


Legalize drugs imo.

CreepingDeath

southsiderosie wrote: »

Should flogging be re-introduced as an alternative punishment to time in prison? Or is this a barbaric practice that has no place in modern society? Do you think this is something that could work in Ireland?

People don't really have a fear of the justice system any more.
Most criminals see it as an occupational hazard and even a holiday away from the family to meet their mates inside again.

Throwing in some physical pain isn't a bad thing.
Especially if you catch the young offenders for anti-social behaviour early.
That catches the problem earlier before it gets worse.

ilovesleep

YFlyer wrote: »

Come here NOW!

OK. Thanks. Would love that. That would be good.

I know I'm talking about batings in two very different situations. As part of bdsm roleplay it is welcomed. But in normal day to day life, even receiving a pinch it is not.

Look whos talking

Prison solves nothing in my opinion it just causes the tax payer and government, they should be sent to work on the roads.....

CreepingDeath

tayto lover wrote: »

Violence solves absolutely nothing.

You probably want to read a few history books and reconsider your opinion.

komodosp

I don't think it would be useful... I don't think it would be a deterrent to crime. Especially as pickarooney said quite a few criminals probably come from violent backgrounds anyway, so how would this be any different?

Although I do agree that imprisonment is not the answer. I'd say the worst possible thing you can do to a criminal is lock him up with other criminals. Also I'd imagine that you get used to being in jail so it's no way to discourage repeat offenders.

The punishment should fit the criminal. They don't care about being locked up? Find somehting else they do care about.

stovelid

For a lot of people, I think violence actually turns them on as much as the perpetrators but they're too passive to actually practice it themselves. Therefore any proposal to do with public beatings, whippings or executions (or any chance to vent about gory punishments online) is popular because you can get your kicks but subsume it beneath a veneer of corrective morality.

Monty Burnz

At least the guy is asking questions. Who thinks that the current system (here, or in the US) is actually working? How many times have you heard about someone who knifes someone to death being sentenced to 10 years for manslaughter (and they will only serve 6 due to 'remission' which was never legislated for in this country, it just became the norm somehow ). Then you hear that they have 80 (or some other ludicrous number) previous convictions. And they are 30 years old. And then you think, how many crimes did they actually commit, to get charged AND convicted 80 times? 800??

The current criminal justice system here and the US does not work if the intention is to protect citizens or reform criminals. Does anyone want to claim otherwise?

And the most depressing thing is that if someone suggests doing something different, you get outrage.

Rawhead

Remember watching a program about the spate of armed robberies that plagued England in the 70's and 80's. The program asked what stopped the robberies. They interviewed the robbers, cops, bank managers everyone involved and they all said that better policing and technology helped, but the one thing that everyone agreed on (the robbers especially) was the introduction of mandatory 18 year sentences stopped the robberies over night.

The reason that I remember the program was that they interviewed one particular scrote and they asked what turned him from a petty thief to a armed robber and he said it was the flogging. He remembers getting flogged and looking behind him to see the prison officers smirking, he reckons it made him so angry at the system that he swore he'd rebel against it for life.
Could also be that he was a lazy dirtbag like all the other lags and just wants to blame other people for his lot in life.

willow tree

the judicial system does my head in. the guards could work on a case only for it to get to court and be thrown out or a very small sentence for the crime. like look at the people walking around who should be locked up, its insanity and as previous poster said people with loads of convictions eventually commit a really bad crime, thats the systems fault i think. anyways there was a study done years ago (unfortunately i dont have all details or a link to it but i'll try find it)... it had 2 groups with similar crimes. one group was sent to regular prison. the other group was given made to take part in therapy (kind of like they were in rehab). the group in normal prison mostly reoffended. the group from rehab mostly went on to rebuild their lives and never reoffend. i think every prisoner should have to work out their issues and why they acted the way they did and yeah working on roads as others have suggested.

Rawhead

I'm a Prison Officer and we know more than most how badly broke the system is. I love the way that people who have never even been outside a prison always give out that it's so soft when I know they would be the very people crying their eyes out, shaking and begging us to put them on protection 5 minutes after coming through the gates.
If brutally tough prisons deterred crime then California would have zero crime, France would have had no crime while they had penal colonies and Russia would be a crime free paradise.
Remember when California introduced the 3 strike rule in the 90's and everyone said how good an idea it was, well now they have a major problem. Their prison system is so over crowded that the U.S. Supreme court has ruled that it is in breach of the constitutional right not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment and ordered the State to fix it, immediately. The state is as broke as Ireland and they cannot afford to keep their prison system going so they are left with a stark choice,
1. Build more prisons which they cannot even come close to affording
or
2. Release 30,000 of the most brutalised and hardened criminals in the U.S. penal system onto the streets.

Puts our revolving door system into perspective and shows how the short sighted plans of a politician looking for votes can have unthinkable long term consequences.

The King of Moo

I can see where this guy is coming from, as an alternative to prison and prison reform are both needed. I don't see how flogging would help anything. There's no way two lashes could be the equivalent to one year in prison, and physical pain is something you have a great degree of control over. Repeat offenders would get used to it, and you can also train your body to feel less pain and distract yourself.

And the idea that it's better than prison as prison is very violent is like admitting defeat on the idea of prison reform. Why not try to make prisons safer but still somewhere you don't want to go to make it a deterrent to crime?

I think as tayto lover mentioned above, community service could be used in lots of minor cases instead of prison sentences, as long as it was just hard enough that it wouldn't be seen as an incentive to commit petty crimes in order to get a little security in the form of food and perhaps shelter or simply something to pass the time(as is already the case with some homeless and destitute people who deliberately get locked up in the winter to have somewhere warm with food and a bed.)

LeeHoffmann

Why do we have prisons? I think there are 3 main answers - to rehabilitate, to punish, to protect the rest of us. These 3 answers seem to me to correspond to different types of criminal behaviour, yet they've become all muddled together, leading us to treat drug dealers, burglars, repeat assailants and rapists with the same solution of imprisonment. As previously noted, there are many drawbacks to this approach: prisons become training camps for committing crime, prisons don't prevent violent crime, prisons are overcrowded and inhumane, prisons cost too much money to run.

I haven't fully thought this all out but, to start with, how about we lay down 3 categories of crime - violent crime (rape, assault, abuse); non-violent crime against the person (burglary, forgery, identity theft, privacy violation, slander, neglect); crime against society (white collar crime, drink driving, drug dealing, drug use).

What if we had different approaches/solutions for the different types of crime? Maybe we should try to match up the type of crime with the goal we want to accomplish in responding to it and then try to work out what an effective treatment would be.

Violent crime - the aim: to protect the rest of us - appropriate solution: incarceration.
Crime against society - the aim: punishment - appropriate solution: community service.
Non-violent crime against the person - aim: rehabilitation - appropriate solution: perhaps a combination of community service, compensation to the victim, and personal assistance (counselling/ education and training for employment).

As I said, I haven't thought out all aspects of this approach so this post is not meant to be comprehensive, but maybe it hints at a more effective way of dealing with crime than locking everyone up together.
I don't think flogging people is an effective remedy for crime because it doesn't address the heart of the issue (the motivations for engaging in crime) for any of the above categories outlined.

Rawhead

As an interesting aside I have talked to some of the most violent and hardest nuts in our prison system and they nearly all agree on one thing, they quietly admit to liking the harsh strict system that is operated in the punishment block in Cork prison. They have had such chaotic, crazy lives, that they like the order and regiment of the Block.
The idea of boot camps starts to make sense.

Duiske

Biggins wrote: »

No. Violence (in any description) in the long run, is not the answer.

(Curiously, its still on the law books of the Isle of Man I'm told)

Just a pity it is not enforced over there. Was there for a weekend a couple of years back and hooligans on motorbikes were treating the place like their own personal racetrack. And no-one reported them. They were just standing there cheering them on.
And I think they are all pervs as well. Everywhere I went people were asking if I was enjoying the titty. Sickos

orourkeda

chin_grin wrote: »

No. Physical wounds heal. Contrast that to their mental state after being continually raped by "Bubba" in prison. Now that's punishment. (Depending on the crime of course! I'm talking about heinous ones.....not petty theft).

Sounds like a plan. Don't whip someone because someone their wounds will heal but a violent arse f*cking in the shower will solve everyones problems.

The King of Moo

Rawhead wrote: »

As an interesting aside I have talked to some of the most violent and hardest nuts in our prison system and they nearly all agree on one thing, they quietly admit to liking the harsh strict system that is operated in the punishment block in Cork prison. They have had such chaotic, crazy lives, that they like the order and regiment of the Block.
The idea of boot camps starts to make sense.

That seems to be one of the tricky things about prison to me, it's not an equal punishment as different prisoners react differently to it. Some enjoy it as you say, and others no doubt despise it and become hardened by it, and therefore possibly more likely to reoffend and wind up back there.
I think there'd be the same problem with flogging: some wouldn't be bothered by it at all, and see it as a light punishment and not a deterrent, yet others would probably be humiliated and bitter by it. Neither would probably feel much like reforming their criminal ways.

Monty Burnz

tayto lover wrote: »

Violence solves absolutely nothing.
Community service is the answer. Cutting grass and roadside hedges, painting O.P.D's, cleaning up estates, graffiti etc. Good hard work for their dole is the answer to crime.

So basically, their punishment for crimes is to do what normal citizens do anyway? Work for their money?

I'm not saying you are totally wrong, just something to think about.

Dyr

I saw a video of a fella being caned in malaysia or soem such place...I think he learned his lesson judging by the roars of him

The King of Moo

Monty Burnz wrote: »

So basically, their punishment for crimes is to do what normal citizens do anyway? Work for their money?

I'm not saying you are totally wrong, just something to think about.

That's the difficulty with community service: making sure that it qualifies as punishment, especially these days when so many can't even get work when they want to. Simply doing physical labour for nine or ten hours a day, as you say, is what lots of people already do anyway.
There has to be certain loss of liberties to go along with it. I think the biggest difference between community service and work has to be the compensation. The state would have to ensure these people survive if they're doing full-time community service and don't have time for a job. But they should try to make sure that they're given enough to survive on and not much else. The easy way would be to provide food and shelter and no wage, but then you're starting to blur the line between prison and community service.
To be honest, I'm not in a position to state how exactly to go about making sure community service works as punishment, but I think it could be made into a viable alternative to sending young pettyish criminals to prison with hardened scumbags.

southsiderosie

The King of Moo wrote: »

That's the difficulty with community service: making sure that it qualifies as punishment, especially these days when so many can't even get work when they want to. Simply doing physical labour for nine or ten hours a day, as you say, is what lots of people already do anyway.
There has to be certain loss of liberties to go along with it. I think the biggest difference between community service and work has to be the compensation. The state would have to ensure these people survive if they're doing full-time community service and don't have time for a job. But they should try to make sure that they're given enough to survive on and not much else. The easy way would be to provide food and shelter, but then you're starting to blur the line between prison and community service.
To be honest, I'm not in a position to state how exactly to go about making sure community service works as punishment, but I think it could be made into a viable alternative to sending young pettyish criminals to prison with hardened scumbags.

The problem with some convict work programs is that the state then works hand in hand with employers to essentially supply them with cheap labor. I believe this was an issue in Colorado - convicts were working for $1.25 an hour, which is far below the minimum wage, but it was being billed as a rehabilitation program. I believe there was something similar in Scotland as well, and people raised similar concerns. This kind of thing can create gross incentives to support harsher sentencing because it can provide a cheap - and legal - workforce. It also takes jobs away from law-abiding people who really need them.

I think the best thing would be some kind of combination of life in a group home with strict rules and chores combined with therapy. The main thing seems to be helping people deal with their own issues while giving them some kind of structure and responsibility. Some programs have had a lot of success with putting inmates in charge of dog training, so perhaps something like that would be beneficial as well?

There is also the cost issue, which is why flogging may appeal to some as a quick and easy way to deal with prison overcrowding.

pickarooney

southsiderosie wrote: »

The problem with some convict work programs is that the state then works hand in hand with employers to essentially supply them with cheap labor. I believe this was an issue in Colorado - convicts were working for $1.25 an hour, which is far below the minimum wage, but it was being billed as a rehabilitation program. I believe there was something similar in Scotland as well, and people raised similar concerns. This kind of thing can create gross incentives to support harsher sentencing because it can provide a cheap - and legal - workforce. It also takes jobs away from law-abiding people who really need them.

I think it's called WPP in Ireland.

RachaelVO

ronan45 wrote: »

Bit Barbaric............What about dusting off the stocks in dublin castle and having a 15 inch rubber dildo shoved up your arse outside Berties office in Drumcondra while strapped up?

I dunno about the dildo thing (well not for this anyway ), but for petty criminals a bit of mortification a few rotten tomatoes with 24 hours in the stocks in a town/city centre would be enough of a deterrent. Could ya imagine a few drunkards in college green throwing a loada rancid kebabs at ya... *shivers*

Monty Burnz

RachaelVO wrote: »

I dunno about the dildo thing (well not for this anyway ), but for petty criminals a bit of mortification a few rotten tomatoes with 24 hours in the stocks in a town/city centre would be enough of a deterrent. Could ya imagine a few drunkards in college green throwing a loada rancid kebabs at ya... *shivers*

And it would be cheap.

I don't really care about how embarrassing it is for criminals to be honest - if it works, it should be used. Every criminal is a volunteer. If you don't want to volunteer for our punishments, don't commit crimes against your fellow human beings.

robman60

I'm not exactly in favour of flogging, but I do think prison does very little for the reform of inmates.

My personal stance is that community service and other similar methods are far better than locking someone in a cage, and hoping they'll emerge as a saint when the sentence has been served.

Rawhead

The King of Moo wrote: »

That seems to be one of the tricky things about prison to me, it's not an equal punishment as different prisoners react differently to it. Some enjoy it as you say, and others no doubt despise it and become hardened by it, and therefore possibly more likely to reoffend and wind up back there.
I think there'd be the same problem with flogging: some wouldn't be bothered by it at all, and see it as a light punishment and not a deterrent, yet others would probably be humiliated and bitter by it. Neither would probably feel much like reforming their criminal ways.

I probably put my case about wrongly. What I was trying to point out was the chaos that exists in most of these fellas lives. The Sunday World would have us believe they are living rock star lifestyles and sticking two fingers up at us. The reality is that they live chaotic, squalid, paranoia filled short little lives. Even the few at the top live in a constant state of paranoia and fear. They are praying that when the door is kicked in that its a Garda at the end of the gun and not a coked up 18 year old paying off a drugs debt.

A well known Limerick gang leader told me that the first proper nights sleep he had in two and a half years was the first night he was locked up. This is the world that most of these yokes exist in so how in the name of funk can you threaten them with anything when even the hardest prison regime is a break from the mad world that they live in. The point I was making about a tough regime was that some actually like the order of a tightly controlled system when compared to the chaos of their day to day lives, they never had order from a young age, most had no father and a teenage mother who couldn't or wouldn't discipline them. It might not work for all but a boot camp system would have some success for some of the younger scrotes.

RachaelVO

Monty Burnz wrote: »

And it would be cheap.

I don't really care about how embarrassing it is for criminals to be honest - if it works, it should be used. Every criminal is a volunteer. If you don't want to volunteer for our punishments, don't commit crimes against your fellow human beings.

Be really cheap, supermarkets sell off their rotten produce, it can be thrown at the culprit, then collected and used as compost (or what ever). I don't particularly care how mortified the criminal would be either, but I think that the idea of it would act as a greater deterrent than any current punishments!

LeeHoffmann

I don't particularly care how mortified the criminal would be either

how many of you actually know any criminals? I know a few who should be locked up but aren't and I know one who is locked up when he probably shouldn't be. This guy is young (just turned 21) and was a very small time drug-dealer. He got 10 years in Mountjoy. I don't think throwing rotten tomatoes at him and/or humiliating him in public would make him a 'better person' or stop him from doing the same again :rolleyes:

The King of Moo

Rawhead wrote: »

I probably put my case about wrongly. What I was trying to point out was the chaos that exists in most of these fellas lives. The Sunday World would have us believe they are living rock star lifestyles and sticking two fingers up at us. The reality is that they live chaotic, squalid, paranoia filled short little lives. Even the few at the top live in a constant state of paranoia and fear. They are praying that when the door is kicked in that its a Garda at the end of the gun and not a coked up 18 year old paying off a drugs debt.

A well known Limerick gang leader told me that the first proper nights sleep he had in two and a half years was the first night he was locked up. This is the world that most of these yokes exist in so how in the name of funk can you threaten them with anything when even the hardest prison regime is a break from the mad world that they live in. The point I was making about a tough regime was that some actually like the order of a tightly controlled system when compared to the chaos of their day to day lives, they never had order from a young age, most had no father and a teenage mother who couldn't or wouldn't discipline them. It might not work for all but a boot camp system would have some success for some of the younger scrotes.

I get what you mean. It's interesting how different people react to a strict regime, I'd imagine many prisoners would also automatically buck against it.
A boot camp system does sound like a good idea, especially for younger criminals who I'd imagine would be easier to put on the straight and narrow. But as you say it might not work for some, so it might be difficult to determine who would benefit from it. I think that's why prisons are appealing to governments, they see them as a catch-all solution for a variety of criminals, regardless of whether prison would actually be effective for all of them.

Spread

Could there not be a way of getting prisoners to apologise publiclyfor their crimes, to trigger the % of time off for good behaviour? Plus, some of the wardens should be checked out. You get guys going to jail who, probably dabbled, emerging with serious drug problems. Not all the stuff is taken in by visitors or catapulted. And if they're given drugs inside, they've got to pay when they come out by becoming complcit in drug criminality. That is the cycle.

Monty Burnz

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

how many of you actually know any criminals? I know a few who should be locked up but aren't and I know one who is locked up when he probably shouldn't be. This guy is young (just turned 21) and was a very small time drug-dealer. He got 10 years in Mountjoy. I don't think throwing rotten tomatoes at him and/or humiliating him in public would make him a 'better person' or stop him from doing the same again :rolleyes:

We don't know that until we try, do we?

Do you think his stint inside will make him a better person? Because, on average, it doesn't seem to. By the way, since when do small-time dealers get locked up on a first offence?

LeeHoffmann

Do you think his stint inside will make him a better person?

no but then again I don't think he should be in there at all. As per my first post on this thread, I think there should be another way of dealing with non-violent crime.
It wasn't his first offence - I think the 2nd or 3rd (stupid, I know). His trial was just after that famous model died from cocaine at a party- there had been a couple of high-profile drugs deaths around that time. I don't know if that kind of thing affects sentencing (not ideally but realistically)

Monty Burnz

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

I don't know if that kind of thing affects sentencing (not ideally but realistically)

You're probably right, it does. But a guy who is determinedly selling illegal drugs, particularly hard drugs, in spite of being caught and convicted a few times before, has no grounds for comlpaint in my view. He's a volunteer, just like the rest of them.

Which does not mean that there are not other/better alternatives to banging him up of course.

du Maurier

southsiderosie wrote: »

The article says that serious offenders (rape, murder, assault) would not be eligible for caning - it would essentially be for stuff like vandalism, petty theft, etc.

Who's this Bubba fella? He seems to be in every prison with an isatiable appetite for the newly inducted.

LeeHoffmann

:pac::pac::pac:
thanks for that du Maurier, gave me a good ole chuckle