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.
Samuel T. Cogley wrote: » Quick question. If prison is so nice and easy why not just go in yourselves?
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
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.
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.
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.
Wossack wrote: » Im trying, but the judge keeps giving me suspended sentences
Galwayguy35 wrote: » Because we're not scumbags.
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
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.
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.
Samuel T. Cogley wrote: » Hasn't worked so far.
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.
Gravelly wrote: » There's a veritable army of strawmen in this post, but I'll tackle it as best I can.
Gravelly wrote: » Nice strawman with lynching, beating etc. You might show me where I suggested any of that? A link, or a quote perhaps?
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.
Gravelly wrote: » Here's a novel idea - if prisoners had work to do, perhaps the rates of drug addiction would go down?
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?
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
Samuel T. Cogley wrote: » Is that a strawman thingy?
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.
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
Samuel T. Cogley wrote: » We get to the crux of it. You don't like lawyers.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Really Interested wrote: » 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.
Gravelly wrote: » Better call the UNHCR, apparently having prisoners work is like beating and lynching them.
Really Interested wrote: » Where dis I say that. In fact I said prisoners do work and from what I am told most want to.
Gravelly wrote: » You didn't, the sensitive lawyer above you did.
Samuel T. Cogley wrote: » He's trying to show me what strawmen are I think. Either I've got it and he's misunderstood them himself or he's not a very good teacher. :pac:
Really Interested wrote: » Why then quote me?
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.
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.
Beyondgone wrote: » 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.
