Why don't our prisoners work?

A Battered Mars Bar

What are they doing all day? Just lounging around playing ps4?

Only punishment suitable for them would be to put them to work in prison. As most of them haven't done a days work in their lives it would put a bit of discipline in them and they will learn the merits of working hard.

And I don't mean cotton wool jobs like laundry and kitchen work. I mean making stuff that can be sold so the state profits or digging. There is always stuff to be dug.

Just think it's a joke that they're allowed lay about all day like lazy sods in prison.

eeguy

A Battered Mars Bar wrote: »

What are they doing all day? Just lounging around playing ps4?

Only punishment suitable for them would be to put them to work in prison. As most of them haven't done a days work in their lives it would put a bit of discipline in them and they will learn the merits of working hard.

And I don't mean cotton wool jobs like laundry and kitchen work. I mean making stuff that can be sold so the state profits or digging. There is always stuff to be dug.

Just think it's a joke that they're allowed lay about all day like lazy sods in prison.

Because then you'd have some lad with a landscaping company up in arms that prisoners were taking his job.

Same reason they don't pick up rubbish or make anything. Some lad would be looking for compensation.

Alcoheda

Do you really want a prison for profit system like they have in the states?

A Battered Mars Bar

Alcoheda wrote: »

Do you really want a prison for profit system like they have in the states?

Yes and 3 strike rule while we're at it. Be far better off for Irish society if people with 90 convictions are locked up for life after 3 and made to work so they can some use to us.

Glenster

Because hassle.

That's why.

Lock 'em up and forget about 'em.

livedadream

because slavery doesn't exist in Ireland...

neris

probably against their human rights and all that pc liberal bolloxology

colm_mcm

Ah yeah but your accommodation is worth €8k a month!

goose2005

Many of them do, e.g. from Shelton Abbey. http://www.sundayworld.com/news/news/scandal-ex-convict-is-now-using-prison-labour

Pure tashte

A Battered Mars Bar wrote: »

Yes and 3 strike rule while we're at it. Be far better off for Irish society if people with 90 convictions are locked up for life after 3 and made to work so they can some use to us.

The three strike rule is a ridiculous law that has seen many low level criminals get absurd life sentences for minor crimes. We'd have to go down the privatisation route if that was enacted, as the prison population would be absolutely huge and would cripple the economy.

Bill Clinton has acknowledged that the three strike rule has been a disaster and a regret of his presidency

Alcoheda

A Battered Mars Bar wrote: »

Yes and 3 strike rule while we're at it. Be far better off for Irish society if people with 90 convictions are locked up for life after 3 and made to work so they can some use to us.

Do a little research into how that actually works, It's not going to make things better.

Panrich

Can you imagine how many would disappear every time a group set foot outside the prison?

I suspect both the 3 strikes rule and the prospect of forced labour would be contrary to the ECHR.

Gravelly

If prisoners were put to work doing "real" jobs, then private companies could complain (rightly) about unfair competition, and you would also have the above mentioned problem of "for profit" prisons, and all the potential problems that could bring. In order to get around both of these problems, you could make prisoners do "makework jobs" - such as digging trenches in the prison yard, which are then filled in and dug again, building brick walls using lime mortar which are then knocked down to be rebuilt, stripping car engines and rebuilding them etc.

Prisoners could be given very basic accommodation and food (no TV or playstation, no dessert, basic, no-frills cell) and they could earn these things through their work, and lose them if they refused to work or did their work badly.

The advantages to these types of jobs would be:

Prisoners would learn the discipline of real-world jobs - getting up at the same time every day, working a full 8 hours, taking orders etc.
They would learn real, usable skills - in the cases above, labouring, bricklaying, mechanical skills etc. which could be used when they are released
They would have less time on their hands, so less fighting, drug use, etc.
It would keep them fit and healthy, physically and mentally

A prisoner who did such work would have to be more prepared for life in the outside society than one who has sat in a cell, taking drugs and playing video games for the duration of their sentence.

The problem of course, is that the do-gooder brigade would consider it a human rights violation akin to the nazi concentration camps to make prisoners work, so it will never happen unfortunately. Far better to let them stew and plan their further criminal enterprises when they get out.

soups05

3 strikes may not be a great rule, but 50 plus convictions and still walking the streets is a bad joke. why would any of us follow the rule of law when you can just rack up convictions like points in a video game with no consequences?

at what point should the courts say that's enough, you not getting back out.

Collie D

Imagine you own a small firm in the construction industry. Your local council needs some ditches dug and puts it out to tender. You put in a good estimate and feel confident the job is yours. Along comes Mountjoy Ditch Diggers Ltd. who come in at less than half of estimate due to their low to non-existent labour costs. And with their workforce of a few huindred they can do this again and again on multiple jobs

Summer wind

Working would make a good change from them going to the gym and 3 course dinners with jugs of orange and coffee and watching tv all at our expense.

Conservative

Stick the scobes in hard labour camps 14 hours a day, 7 days a week. Living conditions should be cramped, literally a pot to piss in. Think how

Reoffenders could increased to 18 hour days, one meal otherwise placed in solitary confinement for the entirety of their sentence.

Third time offenders hung in the streets.


Instead we have the UN telling us we are currently infringing on their human rights but putting them 3 to a cell.

end of the road

A Battered Mars Bar wrote: »

Yes and 3 strike rule while we're at it. Be far better off for Irish society if people with 90 convictions are locked up for life after 3 and made to work so they can some use to us.

the whole lot added up would probably bankrupt the country, even with the hugely increased taxes that would be required. the 3 strike rule would cost possibly billions and it doesn't work. a prison for profit system would mean a lot bigger costs. there is no work for the prisoners to do as the work that needs doing all ready has people to do it who aren't locked up and who wouldn't need the huge amount of supervision prisoners would require, again which would cost huge amounts of money.

mfceiling

If they wouldn't work on the outside they sure as shìte wouldn't work on the inside.

Boom_Bap

mfceiling wrote: »

If they wouldn't work on the outside they sure as shìte wouldn't work on the inside.

But while inside from being outside they would need to go back outside to work and return inside.

SEPT 23 1989

we could get the Japanese to run them

Wossack

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

we could get the Japanese to run them through

ftfy

end of the road

Gravelly wrote: »

If prisoners were put to work doing "real" jobs, then private companies could complain (rightly) about unfair competition, and you would also have the above mentioned problem of "for profit" prisons, and all the potential problems that could bring. In order to get around both of these problems, you could make prisoners do "makework jobs" - such as digging trenches in the prison yard, which are then filled in and dug again, building brick walls using lime mortar which are then knocked down to be rebuilt, stripping car engines and rebuilding them etc.

Prisoners could be given very basic accommodation and food (no TV or playstation, no dessert, basic, no-frills cell) and they could earn these things through their work, and lose them if they refused to work or did their work badly.

The advantages to these types of jobs would be:

Prisoners would learn the discipline of real-world jobs - getting up at the same time every day, working a full 8 hours, taking orders etc.
They would learn real, usable skills - in the cases above, labouring, bricklaying, mechanical skills etc. which could be used when they are released
They would have less time on their hands, so less fighting, drug use, etc.
It would keep them fit and healthy, physically and mentally

A prisoner who did such work would have to be more prepared for life in the outside society than one who has sat in a cell, taking drugs and playing video games for the duration of their sentence.

The problem of course, is that the do-gooder brigade would consider it a human rights violation akin to the nazi concentration camps to make prisoners work, so it will never happen unfortunately. Far better to let them stew and plan their further criminal enterprises when they get out.

the supposed "do-gooder brigade" (whoever they are) would not have an issue with this as long as
1. it was implemented properly and could be proved to work in cutting reofending rates and would mean prisoners would get work.
2. there was a guarantee that prisoners released from prison would receive employment.

soups05 wrote: »

3 strikes may not be a great rule, but 50 plus convictions and still walking the streets is a bad joke. why would any of us follow the rule of law when you can just rack up convictions like points in a video game with no consequences?
at what point should the courts say that's enough, you not getting back out.

i should imagine the reason most of us would follow the law is we don't want to end up in court or jail.

Summer wind wrote: »

Working would make a good change from them going to the gym and 3 course dinners with jugs of orange and coffee and watching tv all at our expense.

a lot of the living conditions claimed to be the case in irish prisons (and uk prisons) are over exaggerated on the basis of so called evidence by rags.

Conservative wrote: »

Stick the scobes in hard labour camps 14 hours a day, 7 days a week. Living conditions should be cramped, literally a pot to piss in. Think how

Reoffenders could increased to 18 hour days, one meal otherwise placed in solitary confinement for the entirety of their sentence.

Third time offenders hung in the streets.


Instead we have the UN telling us we are currently infringing on their human rights but putting them 3 to a cell.

well, the un are just going on the rules. if they are telling us we are in breach, then we are.

Irish Praetorian

We could always, and I admit this is rather off-field, give them jobs and pay them for the work they do? Naturally this has limits and you would ideally want some kind of work that could be done in-house or close by, but it might be a better return for both the prisoner and the prison. The prison could take a portion of the proceeds naturally enough and the prisoner could benefit from work experience as well as a lump sum of cash on release. The Japanese seem to do quite well on this system, though their prison system is out of this world.

Also the three strikes rule does seem quite absurd for obvious reasons - I could get on board with a '30 strikes and your out' rule quite easily though.

El Tarangu

Prisoners could do jobs making things that the state would normally have to buy, but that wouldn't be economical to produce in Ireland (i.e. uniforms for the defence forces).

It would probably be good for the prisoners rehabilitation and mental health for them to have something to occupy their days with.

Gravelly

end of the road wrote: »

the supposed "do-gooder brigade" (whoever they are) would not have an issue with this as long as
1. it was implemented properly and could be proved to work in cutting reofending rates and would mean prisoners would get work.
2. there was a guarantee that prisoners released from prison would receive employment.

Going by the above, you would fit quite nicely in the do-gooder brigade.

Why should it only be implemented if it proves to cut reoffending rates?

Why should prisoners be guaranteed employment? Why should they be rewarded for breaking the law?

The above attitude is the reason prison has become a holiday camp for the recidivist criminal - the do-gooders dread that the poor prisoner might have to get out of the scratcher in the morning and do a days labour - that's only for the foolish law-abiding apparently!

Summer wind

end of the road wrote: »

the supposed "do-gooder brigade" (whoever they are) would not have an issue with this as long as
1. it was implemented properly and could be proved to work in cutting reofending rates and would mean prisoners would get work.
2. there was a guarantee that prisoners released from prison would receive employment.



i should imagine the reason most of us would follow the law is we don't want to end up in court or jail.



a lot of the living conditions claimed to be the case in irish prisons (and uk prisons) are over exaggerated on the basis of so called evidence by rags.



well, the un are just going on the rules. if they are telling us we are in breach, then we are.

I'm not depending on newspapers for information about prison living conditions. What iv said is the truth. They do have a gym and 3 course meals and tv.

end of the road

Gravelly wrote: »

Going by the above, you would fit quite nicely in the do-gooder brigade.

Why should it only be implemented if it proves to cut reoffending rates?

Why should prisoners be guaranteed employment? Why should they be rewarded for breaking the law?

The above attitude is the reason prison has become a holiday camp for the recidivist criminal - the do-gooders dread that the poor prisoner might have to get out of the scratcher in the morning and do a days labour - that's only for the foolish law-abiding apparently!

prison is not a holiday camp. i want my money spent on solutions proven to actually work in terms of cutting reofending rates, not to be pissed down the drain on solutions just to make some feel good. you guarantee employment for them on the outside as it will give them a foothold back into society and may even make them realise it's worth contributing to society then going against it. if it doesn't work and they reofend then you lock them up again. the facts are, the current ysystem doesn't cut reofending rates, the usual suggestions put forward here and on the internet in general are mostly rabel that don't work. so, one must put forward suggestions that haven't been tried here but have been tried elsewhere and been proven to work.

Summer wind wrote: »

I'm not depending on newspapers for information about prison living conditions. What iv said is the truth. They do have a gym and 3 course meals and tv.

those are privelages and can and are taken away if prisoners misbehave.

Gravelly

end of the road wrote: »

prison is not a holiday camp. i want my money spent on solutions proven to actually work in terms of cutting reofending rates, not to be pissed down the drain on solutions just to make some feel good. you guarantee employment for them on the outside as it will give them a foothold back into society and may even make them realise it's worth contributing to society then going against it. if it doesn't work and they reofend then you lock them up again. the facts are, the current ysystem doesn't cut reofending rates, the usual suggestions put forward here and on the internet in general are mostly rabel that don't work. so, one must put forward suggestions that haven't been tried here but have been tried elsewhere and been proven to work.

At present "your" money is being spent on providing Sky Sports and Playstations to recidivist criminals with absolutely no evidence that it does anything other than make them want to go back inside on numerous occasions for "a break".
When they don't feel like a break, "your" money is spent, in vast quantities, ensuring they get legal representation to stay out, regardless of their record.

The definition of madness is trying the same thing over and over, expecting a different result - forcing prisoners to work may not be the solution, but it sure beats doing nothing.

PARlance

They should be put to work in some form or another, ideally it would be work that was income generating for the State. Keep it at a distance from private enterprise and substituted imports rather than domestic product.
I.e Making school desks and chairs or something.

The state (prisoners) make them and sell them to another state body instead of that state body importing them.

The US system is not one to be copying but a rule like the 3 Strikes Rule is not terrible in itself. It's the length of the minimum mandatory sentences that go along with it that's the major problem. The US system is privatised and is big business with big lobbies, they want those prisons full with prisoners.

Summer wind

end of the road wrote: »

prison is not a holiday camp. i want my money spent on solutions proven to actually work in terms of cutting reofending rates, not to be pissed down the drain on solutions just to make some feel good. you guarantee employment for them on the outside as it will give them a foothold back into society and may even make them realise it's worth contributing to society then going against it. if it doesn't work and they reofend then you lock them up again. the facts are, the current ysystem doesn't cut reofending rates, the usual suggestions put forward here and on the internet in general are mostly rabel that don't work. so, one must put forward suggestions that haven't been tried here but have been tried elsewhere and been proven to work.



those are privelages and can and are taken away if prisoners misbehave.

It's a joke that they've got it at all.

Hector Savage

Maybe a reward system for working - like early release.
Of course this dependes on the crime they did in the first place to get them into the slammer!

Samuel T. Cogley

Quick question. If prison is so nice and easy why not just go in yourselves?

Gravelly

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Quick question. If prison is so nice and easy why not just go in yourselves?

I think you may be misunderstanding. Speaking for myself, I'm not saying prison is nice and easy, I'm saying prison is far less uncomfortable than it should be.
It's not The Hilton, but why should it be? Prison should surely do two things:

1) Encourage reformation of the criminals character and help him readjust to a useful life after release

2) Discourage the criminal from a return visit

The Irish prison system would appear not only not to do either of these things, but not to even attempt to do them.

Work would surely help reform the prisoners character, and help him prepare for life afterwards, and a tougher regime, where perks are earned not given automatically, would surely discourage return visits.

I realise that many people, especially those in the Irish legal profession, recoil at the thought that prison should be anything other than as comfy as possible, and bereft of any responsibility for the prisoner to attempt to reform himself, but that is surely not the best for society in general.

Wossack

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Quick question. If prison is so nice and easy why not just go in yourselves?

Im trying, but the judge keeps giving me suspended sentences

Beyondgone

Hamster wheels - big ones. Loads of them. Linked to a generator, wired into the grid.

5 hours a day of Team-Hamster-Wheeling. In shifts - shifts that run 24 hours a day. Big slaps for those who refuse to put their shoulder feet to the wheel.
Be like wind power only more reliable.

They could call it "Prisoner Empowerment". Feck it, they could call it "Mickeys big machine" for all I care, once it chucked out loads of clean electricity for the grid and kept the "lads" active.

Samuel T. Cogley

Gravelly wrote: »

I think you may be misunderstanding. Speaking for myself, I'm not saying prison is nice and easy, I'm saying prison is far less uncomfortable than it should be.
It's not The Hilton, but why should it be? Prison should surely do two things:

1) Encourage reformation of the criminals character and help him readjust to a useful life after release

2) Discourage the criminal from a return visit

You're former and latter points are incompatible. Take a look at the 'Justice systems' of Brazil, Guatemala and Ghana. Brazil the police fairly routinely beat the **** out of people, Guatemala the punishment du jour is 'lynching' which involves setting the person on fire and Ghana it's a luck prisoner who gets to lie down at night on the concrete due to lack of space. All three jurisdictions have out of control crime. Ah but they developing world countries... See the US for how this easily applied to a developed country.

Scandinavian countries on the other hand - large focus on rehabilitation, largely comfortable safe prisons - low reoffending rate. That's not going to win many votes though so we continue doing what we've always done.

Gravelly wrote: »

The Irish prison system would appear not only not to do either of these things, but not to even attempt to do them.

It attempts to do them but can't due to prisoner numbers, drug addiction, chronic under-funding and the fact that people would rather prisoner be made uncomfortable, that rehabilitated.

Gravelly wrote: »

Work would surely help reform the prisoners character, and help him prepare for life afterwards, and a tougher regime, where perks are earned not given automatically, would surely discourage return visits.

Hasn't worked so far.

Gravelly wrote: »

I realise that many people, especially those in the Irish legal profession, recoil at the thought that prison should be anything other than as comfy as possible, and bereft of any responsibility for the prisoner to attempt to reform himself, but that is surely not the best for society in general.

You realise that people in the Irish legal profession come from all walks of life and some would make most of AH look like the liberal lefties bleedin' hearts club?

Many would have an understanding that if there was an easy and/or cheap solution it would have been implemented by now.

Samuel T. Cogley

Wossack wrote: »

Im trying, but the judge keeps giving me suspended sentences

Silly you - stop all them sexual assaults and rapes and avoid tax on Garlic.

Galwayguy35

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Quick question. If prison is so nice and easy why not just go in yourselves?

Because we're not scumbags.

Samuel T. Cogley

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Because we're not scumbags.

So are there a lot of scumbags in prison?

YFlyer

goose2005 wrote: »

Many of them do, e.g. from Shelton Abbey. http://www.sundayworld.com/news/news/scandal-ex-convict-is-now-using-prison-labour

What's the scandal?

neverever1

So they play playstation, have sky tv and so on, what's the big deal? I think this comes down to simple begrudgery.

Gravelly

There's a veritable army of strawmen in this post, but I'll tackle it as best I can.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

You're former and latter points are incompatible. Take a look at the 'Justice systems' of Brazil, Guatemala and Ghana. Brazil the police fairly routinely beat the **** out of people, Guatemala the punishment du jour is 'lynching' which involves setting the person on fire and Ghana it's a luck prisoner who gets to lie down at night on the concrete due to lack of space. All three jurisdictions have out of control crime. Ah but they developing world countries... See the US for how this easily applied to a developed country.

Scandinavian countries on the other hand - large focus on rehabilitation, largely comfortable safe prisons - low reoffending rate. That's not going to win many votes though so we continue doing what we've always done.

Nice strawman with lynching, beating etc. You might show me where I suggested any of that? A link, or a quote perhaps?

And then on to the great Scandinavian prison model, so beloved of the Irish legal fraternity - oh, if only we could be like Sweden. What they'll never tell you is that Sweden's criminal justice system is so liberal that criminals routinely get away with heinous crimes, and get either a suspended sentence, or no sentence at all - makes the recidivism rates look great. They'll never tell you how recidivism rates among some classes of paedophiles in Sweden is 92%, but they still get off without being incarcerated - in fact, single convicted paedophiles can apply to adopt children, and some have been approved! Yes, Sweden is the model to follow alright.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

It attempts to do them but can't due to prisoner numbers, drug addiction, chronic under-funding and the fact that people would rather prisoner be made uncomfortable, that rehabilitated.

Here's a novel idea - if prisoners had work to do, perhaps the rates of drug addiction would go down? Perhaps if we made prison a bit more like having to do a days work, we wouldn't have so many coming back time and time again? Maybe if we trained prisoners in useful skills, they might get a job that didn't involve crime? Who knows? You certainly don't.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Hasn't worked so far.

We don't know, because we haven't tried. The current system certainly isn't working for anyone who isn't getting free legal aid money.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

You realise that people in the Irish legal profession come from all walks of life and some would make most of AH look like the liberal lefties bleedin' hearts club?

Many would have an understanding that if there was an easy and/or cheap solution it would have been implemented by now.

You should read "Freakonomics" some time. It has interesting case studies on unintended consequences. Are you seriously suggesting that the Irish legal profession, who have grown fat on recidivist criminality and "free" legal aid, and who have shown themselves to be virulently opposed to upsetting their lucrative apple cart, are going to change the system that makes them rich? Pull the other one!

Samuel T. Cogley

Gravelly wrote: »

There's a veritable army of strawmen in this post, but I'll tackle it as best I can.

I've never really understood this strawman thing it does seem to be all the rage in schools debating or something. There's so latin broken out occasionally. I quite like the irony of it when it's used in the usual arguments about the legal system.

Gravelly wrote: »

Nice strawman with lynching, beating etc. You might show me where I suggested any of that? A link, or a quote perhaps?

Is it like Worzel Gummidge or something? Or perhaps they were examples of how harsh justice systems don't do what you think they'll do. I dunno maybe that's one of those logical falsies things but I tend to try and have the discussion rather than a discussion on the discussion.

Gravelly wrote: »

And then on to the great Scandinavian prison model, so beloved of the Irish legal fraternity - oh, if only we could be like Sweden. What they'll never tell you is that Sweden's criminal justice system is so liberal that criminals routinely get away with heinous crimes, and get either a suspended sentence, or no sentence at all - makes the recidivism rates look great. They'll never tell you how recidivism rates among some classes of paedophiles in Sweden is 92%, but they still get off without being incarcerated - in fact, single convicted paedophiles can apply to adopt children, and some have been approved! Yes, Sweden is the model to follow alright.

Is that a strawman thingy?

Sweden is once country in what is termed Scandinavia by the way, just as sexual crime is one element of crime. There are also significant issues with Sweden, especially around sexual crime oddly enough. However there are two prison systems I'm aware of that deal effectively with recidivism. The first is the Scandinavian model which is largely accepted to be pretty good, although hardly the crime free utopia some make it out, however it's a hell of a lot better than the systems many like you suggest that are not only massively expensive but completely ineffectual.

The second being Japan which uses short sentences and somewhat harsh - as in no talking etc. rather than breaking rocks 18 hours a day - but the benefits are considered to stem from a cultural backdrop that we simply don't have.

Gravelly wrote: »

Here's a novel idea - if prisoners had work to do, perhaps the rates of drug addiction would go down?

Novel idea as in a load of bollocks? Heroin is a bit moreish from all accounts and tends to cloud ones judgment in many ways. Perhaps this would be a good place to start outside of the Criminal Justice System?

Gravelly wrote: »

Perhaps if we made prison a bit more like having to do a days work, we wouldn't have so many coming back time and time again?

Again most likely bollocks. They don't come back for the craic, as someone has pointed out it's very difficult to get sent to prison and nobody want to be there.

Gravelly wrote: »

Maybe if we trained prisoners in useful skills, they might get a job that didn't involve crime? Who knows? You certainly don't.

Now we're getting somewhere! I could not agree more and actually I do know. Yes that's exactly what we should be doing. It's massively expensive and will require more space and staff though. This or the Children's hospital - what do you reckon?

Gravelly wrote: »

We don't know, because we haven't tried. The current system certainly isn't working for anyone who isn't getting free legal aid money.

You're better off on the dole than working DC level legal aid as a barrister. A small number of solicitors firms make a few bob though. It's hardly the biggest issue but if it can be reformed happy days. It might get us 1%-2% towards the money we need for proper reform to the prison system.

Gravelly wrote: »

You should read "Freakonomics" some time. It has interesting case studies on unintended consequences. Are you seriously suggesting that the Irish legal profession, who have grown fat on recidivist criminality and "free" legal aid, and who have shown themselves to be virulently opposed to upsetting their lucrative apple cart, are going to change the system that makes them rich? Pull the other one!

We get to the crux of it. You don't like lawyers.

You are vastly overestimating the sums of money involved, especially in the minor offences department that the vast majority of people with loads of offences are involved in. If the legal profession was truly self serving it would be queuing up to have tough, harsh sentences, ideally consecutive sentences. Let's have a full trial on every single one of the 30 burglaries Roddy the Robber had previously asked to be taken into consideration.

The vast majority of crimes (90% IIRC) are plead guilty to, the quid pro quo for that is shorter sentences it saves a **** tonne of money, which is ultimately what the Irish system is about.

pickarooney

There's an uninhabited island near Tristan Da Cunha which has millions of tons of refuse on it. Flights wouldn't be cheap but it wouldn't be infringing on any private company's territory.

Gravelly

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

I've never really understood this strawman thing it does seem to be all the rage in schools debating or something. There's so latin broken out occasionally. I quite like the irony of it when it's used in the usual arguments about the legal system.

Tis a long time since I was in school, debating or otherwise, but they thought me not to feign ignorance, for only the ignorant do that.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Is it like Worzel Gummidge or something? Or perhaps they were examples of how harsh justice systems don't do what you think they'll do. I dunno maybe that's one of those logical falsies things but I tend to try and have the discussion rather than a discussion on the discussion.

Harsh? Again, you seem to equate a bit of work with torture - why is that I wonder?

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Is that a strawman thingy?

You tell me, you're the expert.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Sweden is once country in what is termed Scandinavia by the way, just as sexual crime is one element of crime. There are also significant issues with Sweden, especially around sexual crime oddly enough. However there are two prison systems I'm aware of that deal effectively with recidivism. The first is the Scandinavian model which is largely accepted to be pretty good, although hardly the crime free utopia some make it out, however it's a hell of a lot better than the systems many like you suggest that are not only massively expensive but completely ineffectual.

It's kinda ironic (seeing as how you seem to like a bot of 'oul irony) that you point out (or try to anyway) that Sweden is just one country of what is termed Scandinavia, but then pretend that all of Scandinavia has one legal system.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

The second being Japan which uses short sentences and somewhat harsh - as in no talking etc. rather than breaking rocks 18 hours a day - but the benefits are considered to stem from a cultural backdrop that we simply don't have.

You know those strawmen we spoke about? That would be one.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Novel idea as in a load of bollocks? Heroin is a bit moreish from all accounts and tends to cloud ones judgment in many ways. Perhaps this would be a good place to start outside of the Criminal Justice System?

How many people do you know hold down a full time job while addicted to heroin? Me neither. A bit cause an effect obviously, but still, worth considering. Unless you are an expert on addiction? No, I didn't think so.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Again most likely bollocks. They don't come back for the craic, as someone has pointed out it's very difficult to get sent to prison and nobody want to be there.

Most likely = I haven't a clue, but I'll disagree anyway

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Now we're getting somewhere! I could not agree more and actually I do know. Yes that's exactly what we should be doing. It's massively expensive and will require more space and staff though. This or the Children's hospital - what do you reckon?

Massively expensive = I haven't a clue how much, but I'll disagree anyway. How much? If we spend any money on anything we can't build the childrens hospital? Better hope the HSE doesn't go another billion over budget next year then.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

You're better off on the dole than working DC level legal aid as a barrister. A small number of solicitors firms make a few bob though. It's hardly the biggest issue but if it can be reformed happy days. It might get us 1%-2% towards the money we need for proper reform to the prison system.

The average barrister earns less than €188 per week? Any links for that figure, or, like the rest of your post, did it spontaneously appear from your rear end?
Over €50 million a year on legal aid. A million a week. Peanuts, sure you can't buy a decent private jet for that kind of money nowadays.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

We get to the crux of it. You don't like lawyers.

Oh the poor lawyers, won't someone think of the children.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

You are vastly overestimating the sums of money involved, especially in the minor offences department that the vast majority of people with loads of offences are involved in. If the legal profession was truly self serving it would be queuing up to have tough, harsh sentences, ideally consecutive sentences. Let's have a full trial on every single one of the 30 burglaries Roddy the Robber had previously asked to be taken into consideration.

Geese. Golden eggs. Basic stuff, please don't over do the condescension, it works better if you use it sparingly.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

The vast majority of crimes (90% IIRC) are plead guilty to, the quid pro quo for that is shorter sentences it saves a **** tonne of money, which is ultimately what the Irish system is about.

Shorter sentences + recidivist criminals + unlimited legal aid = plenty of gravy for everyone.

Samuel T. Cogley

I see that you've an open mind and have fully though through all your points. As for the rear end comments, I can see your points are all peer reviewed and backed up with sourced information.

€54 million I believe was the figure for 2016. There were 38 murders in 2016 - that doesn't mean they were tried in the same year of course but rough figures here. How much of that €54 was taken up by the fees in murder cases? What level of frequent recidivism is there among murder convictions? What do you reckon the solution is - simply deny people access to a defence?

As for my figures, go and ask some of the lads in practice and they'll run through their expenses such as the Law Library fee and what they make - I've found them pretty open about it. Bear in mind the one's still in practice are the once that have managed to make it work, many don't.

Take solace in the fact that you're winning the argument - not with me but the wider one that counts. Your opinion is the prevailing one, the one that gets people elected, the one that's got us here...

Oh and BTW all of Scandinavia is one legal system and it's a damn more expensive than the common law system.

Gravelly

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

I see that you've an open mind and have fully though through all your points. As for the rear end comments, I can see your points are all peer reviewed and backed up with sourced information.

€54 million I believe was the figure for 2016. There were 38 murders in 2016 - that doesn't mean they were tried in the same year of course but rough figures here. How much of that €54 was taken up by the fees in murder cases? What level of frequent recidivism is there among murder convictions? What do you reckon the solution is - simply deny people access to a defence?

As for my figures, go and ask some of the lads in practice and they'll run through their expenses such as the Law Library fee and what they make - I've found them pretty open about it. Bear in mind the one's still in practice are the once that have managed to make it work, many don't.

Take solace in the fact that you're winning the argument - not with me but the wider one that counts. Your opinion is the prevailing one, the one that gets people elected, the one that's got us here...

Oh and BTW all of Scandinavia is one legal system and it's a damn more expensive than the common law system.

It's simple really, and all this gets us nowhere - I believe that perfectly humane, useful work, in the same conditions as anyone on the outside would work under, would be beneficial for prisoners, teaching them new skills and preparing them for a contribution to society on release. You believe that this is tantamount to torture and lynching, and means I hate lawyers. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Really Interested

A Battered Mars Bar wrote: »

Yes and 3 strike rule while we're at it. Be far better off for Irish society if people with 90 convictions are locked up for life after 3 and made to work so they can some use to us.

So you are happy if a person gets a speeding conviction a drunk in public conviction and say a Drink driving conviction that they be incarcerated for a long period of bonded slavery.

Really Interested

Gravelly wrote: »

It's simple really, and all this gets us nowhere - I believe that perfectly humane, useful work, in the same conditions as anyone on the outside would work under, would be beneficial for prisoners, teaching them new skills and preparing them for a contribution to society on release. You believe that this is tantamount to torture and lynching, and means I hate lawyers. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Most prisoners look at work in the prison as a good thing the highest job is kitchen work, but prisoners also do the laundry, cleaning and in some prisons farm work.

With out prison labour it would not be possible to feed each one for the budget of I believe €1.50 a day.