lane
Veteran
Well if prison's with reoffending rate's as high of 70% get your vote then fine carry on. As for not caring like I said most come out so if as a society we can't even show them even basic standard's of society. Than how do we even being to believe they will know how act once out? It's also worth remembering many you don't care about will be on remand so have not been found guilty of a crime so we should treat them just the same ? Like i said anyone of us can find ourselves locked up. As you will know from the well balanced and informed new's a common past time is to spike stuff and give it to someone and watch what happen's for a laugh. One such case was a 23 year old who was serving a short sentence for a petty crime he had such a bad trip he gouged is own eye's out. But that never get's reported. I'd prefer to care enough to try and stop them getting near the prison gate. If you don't care what happen's to then they only have crime to fall back on so the likelihood is your at even greater risk of your bike getting stolen or house getting turned over. If the current way work's then we'd not have so many going round and round the system. Forward thinking countries worked this out year's ago e.g Netherland's have such a low crime rate they can't fill prison's and busy closing them
we are busy building them at great public expense.
OK then....
I did know about the spike issue you mention because it has been reported in the media although not the specific incident you mention.
I referred to criminals not innocent people on remand.
I think I made clear no issue with reabilitation if it works then seems the best option. However if locking people up for longer is more effective I would support that. I'm just a bit sceptical about the effectiveness of reabilitation.
Prevention is better than cure you get no argument from me it's clearly better to stop people offending in the first place but it's very difficult to do.
I don't think that criminals care about my welfare and I have no interest in thier welfare.