Should prisoners have to work?

ShatterAlan

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Why so angry, you say?


I'm not angry at all. I'm annoyed at people like you who spread lies.
You asked me if I had experience of the inside of a prison and I replied that I hadn't.

I do however have friends who are guards in detention facilities and they would roll their eyes at your assertions.


You maintain that people getting "cut" is extremely rare. How on Earth would you know this? And it's not called "cut" it's called getting "chopped" for any specific rreason. It could be as innocuous as you saw some other loser in the system and thought he called your granny a slag.


So if you are going to ask me about whether or not I've toured...the answer is no. But I'm not a bull****ter who tries to maintain that they are given the best of everything in their shoebox cells.

Stop being so angry and making out I said things I didn't. Twice now you have called me a liar. Quote the lie or retract the statement like an adult.

I deal with Criminals daily. I investigate all the assaults that occur in Mountjoy. It's not common and using a different term doesn't make you an expert because of mates unless your suggesting it's all hidden from the authorities and your mates are not just terrible at their jobs but possible worse.

Oh and it would be great if you could man up and acknowledge the multiple inspector reports that contradict your assessment of the facilities.

Omackeral

Omackeral wrote: »

Shelton Abbey is an open center. It’s not even a prison tbh. There’s literally no walls on the place, it’s a big house in the woods. It’s for people that are nearing the end of their sentence and getting ready to make a return to society. Some of them work in the town during the day among the public, which is relevant to this thread. So things are purposely relaxed there for reintegration reasons. Anyone can physically walk out the front door of they want. It’s run on the honour system.

Oberstown is a children’s detention center. It’s not under the remit of the Irish Prison Service whatsoever. Has care workers rather than prison officers.

I know all that. We deal with the same people. If you're in Mountjoy we have probable met multiple times.

None of that changes that I was correct though. They had all the facilities I said they had in multiple prisons including Limerick.

My comment about obberstown was as it's supposedly the replacement system for pats. The poster seemed to be suggesting that as Pat's was gone, so we're the facilities whereas in reality they got better.

murpho999

murpho999 wrote: »

Yes, that's my point. The punishment is removal of their liberties, rights and freedom to make decisions.

There's no need to make them suffer any more mental hardship , slave work, or denial of entertainment.

I haven't once suggested otherwise.

corner of hells

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

I know all that. We deal with the same people. If you're in Mountjoy we have probable met multiple times.

None of that changes that I was correct though. They had all the facilities I said they had in multiple prisons including Limerick.

My comment about obberstown was as it's supposedly the replacement system for pats. The poster seemed to be suggesting that as Pat's was gone, so we're the facilities whereas in reality they got better.

I'm not sure if it was me you were replying too , I know Oberstown replaced Pat's, I've a few ex colleagues there.

Cobalt17

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Litter picking! That would hardly cause them to be resentful and angry against the world, would it? How about helping them deal with the underlying issues that lead them into the world of criminality in the first place, then train and education them as best as possible, prepare them for the working upon release, including some actual meaningful work, including decent pay and conditions

Yeah, sure. Because hardened, violent prisoners are the real victims here. This hug-a-thug attitude is why we’ve scum with 300 previous convictions on suspended sentences because they’ve “a hard life”.

There’s already training and education in prison.

Wanderer78

Cobalt17 wrote: »

Yeah, sure. Because hardened, violent prisoners are the real victims here. This hug-a-thug attitude is why we’ve scum with 300 previous convictions on suspended sentences because they’ve “a hard life”.

so treating them even worse is gonna make them changes their ways because...

the root causes of many crimes are well known and researched

biko

cian68 wrote: »

If they're paid a fair wage sure

If you don't want to be forced to work for lower pay, don't commit crime...

Cobalt17

Wanderer78 wrote: »

so treating them even worse is gonna make them changes their ways because...

the root causes of many crimes are well known and researched

How the hell is litter picking treating them worse?

Wanderer78

Cobalt17 wrote: »

How the hell is litter is litter picking treating them worse?

gimme a fckuing break, most none criminals, including me and you, wouldnt do this kind of work, train and educate them as best as possible, in order to do more meaningful work

Cobalt17

Wanderer78 wrote: »

gimme a fckuing break, most none criminals, including me and you, wouldnt do this kind of work, train and educate them as best as possible, in order to do more meaningful work

Like I said before, they do have training and courses available in prison.

Secondly, I volunteer for litter picking every month, as do countless hard working, tax payers, who want to cohesively make the country a little bit better. I guess it’s ok for us to pick litter, but not for your precious jailbirds. They need hot chocolate and hugs instead.

Suggesting litter picking isn’t meaningful just reveals your broken attitude.

KiKi III

Cobalt17 wrote: »

Yeah, sure. Because hardened, violent prisoners are the real victims here. This hug-a-thug attitude is why we’ve scum with 300 previous convictions on suspended sentences because they’ve “a hard life”.

There’s already training and education in prison.

I agree with you on violent career criminals.

But what about non-violent criminals and/ or those on a first offence?

Giving them skills/ income potential is surely a good thing.

Illiteracy rates in prisons are extremely high.

Wanderer78

KiKi III wrote: »

I agree with you on violent career criminals.

But what about non-violent criminals and/ or those on a first offence?

Giving them skills/ income potential is surely a good thing.

Illiteracy rates in prisons are extremely high.

leaning disabilities in general are very common

Grab All Association

Saying it for years that it’s time to change tact and treat Jimmy the scumbag 100+ conviction types like this with psychiatric drugs or lobotomies. Prison is not a deterrent anymore and the only way to stop it is neurologically altering these people’s personalities.

KiKi III

Grab All Association wrote: »

Saying it for years that it’s time to change tact and treat Jimmy the scumbag 100+ conviction types like this with psychiatric drugs or lobotomies. Prison is not a deterrent anymore and the only way to stop it is neurologically altering these people’s personalities.

Tell me more. Which drugs? How would it work? What science or research are you basing this on?

Cobalt17

KiKi III wrote: »

I agree with you on violent career criminals.

But what about non-violent criminals and/ or those on a first offence?

Giving them skills/ income potential is surely a good thing.

Illiteracy rates in prisons are extremely high.

Non-violent criminals, or first offenders are very unlikely to end up in prison. However I’m all in favour of segregation based on ones crimes. For example I don’t think it’s fair for someone who didn’t pay their tv license to be sandwiched between a rapist and a murderer.

KiKi III

Cobalt17 wrote: »

Non-violent criminals, or first offenders are very unlikely to end up in prison. However I’m all in favour of segregation based on ones crimes. For example I don’t think it’s fair for someone who didn’t pay their tv license to be sandwiched between a rapist and a murderer.

If you robbed 10k without hurting anyone you’d be a non-violent, first time offender but you’d definitely go to jail (rightfully).

Do we treat this as someone who made a big mistake and help them to do better in the future or lock’em up and throw away they key.

Cobalt17

KiKi III wrote: »

If you robbed 10k without hurting anyone you’d be a non-violent, first time offender but you’d definitely go to jail (rightfully).

Do we treat this as someone who made a big mistake and help them to do better in the future or lock’em up and throw away they key.

I don’t think we should ever lock up and throw away the key.

But to answer your question, if violence occurs, the crime should be considered more heinous.

Omackeral

Cobalt17 wrote: »

For example I don’t think it’s fair for someone who didn’t pay their tv license to be sandwiched between a rapist and a murderer.

Luckily that never happens. Ever.

corner of hells

Omackeral wrote: »

Luckily that never happens. Ever.

Unless the rapist and murderer have no TV licence either.

DavyD_83

I don't know if there's any valid reason why a qualified in prison couldn't do a 9-5 job remotely, in a situation where the company is willing to hire somebody else remotely.
But equally don't know of it would be asked, or how it would be facilitated.

I suppose I'm more talking about allowing them to work, rather than making them work.

My job, for example, can be done from anywhere with a computer and internet access.

RandomViewer

Prisons are being used to hold certain people who a few decades ago would have been permanently kept in padded cells in the country's psychiatric hospitals,

kowloon

seamus wrote: »

The only reason people want harsh prisons is out of a desire for revenge.

This is the way I see it, and the reason we don't let the victims determine the punishment (although victim statements seem to have influence).

But I think I diverge from the way a lot of people see crime and punishment. People are people, there aren't any evil people, there's a reason behind every crime and criminal and be it the person's physical makeup or outside influences acting on them they're just people doing people things.
We can try and reforming them to varying degrees of success, others will just have to be kept locked up because they're beyond help and need to be kept away from society. Unless torturing someone to reform works, the Chinese government seems to think it does, what's the point of treating people so badly?

square ball

There are evil people. There are a very very small minority of people that aren't capable of living in a civilised society who are dangerous and need to be locked up.

There are a lot of prisoners who are habitual offenders who will commit crimes regardless of what the punishments are eg: drug dealers/organised crime gang members. These people need to be kept inside for long times when they do get caught.

Then there are people who will take a chance doing something illegal maybe get away with it, think there is no risk and maybe flirt parameters of the law. These are the people that could be deterred by harsher sentences. These are the people that could change their life and 'go straight' if prison wasn't a nice experience.

I see people who regularly get arrested mostly for minor offences but keep committing small crimes and getting locked up for a few weeks or months, then released then back to committing small crimes and it is a vicious cycle. These are the guys racking up hundreds of convictions.

Usually have addiction problems but come out of prison after a short stint and will either be high coming out or get their fix before they go anywhere else. The very least that the prison should be doing is not letting prisoners out until they are clean.

These guys need to be put to work, made work hard and have a fear of prison. The softly softly approach is not working in this country at the minute. It will cause huge social problems here in the next ten or fifteen years.

corner of hells

corner of hells wrote: »

I'm not sure if it was me you were replying too , I know Oberstown replaced Pat's, I've a few ex colleagues there.

No, did I quote you by mistake? I meant the lad that's a prison officer. Apologies

Queasy Tadpole

square ball wrote: »

There are evil people. There are a very very small minority of people that aren't capable of living in a civilised society who are dangerous and need to be locked up.

There are a lot of prisoners who are habitual offenders who will commit crimes regardless of what the punishments are eg: drug dealers/organised crime gang members. These people need to be kept inside for long times when they do get caught.

Then there are people who will take a chance doing something illegal maybe get away with it, think there is no risk and maybe flirt parameters of the law. These are the people that could be deterred by harsher sentences. These are the people that could change their life and 'go straight' if prison wasn't a nice experience.

I see people who regularly get arrested mostly for minor offences but keep committing small crimes and getting locked up for a few weeks or months, then released then back to committing small crimes and it is a vicious cycle. These are the guys racking up hundreds of convictions.

Usually have addiction problems but come out of prison after a short stint and will either be high coming out or get their fix before they go anywhere else. The very least that the prison should be doing is not letting prisoners out until they are clean.

These guys need to be put to work, made work hard and have a fear of prison. The softly softly approach is not working in this country at the minute. It will cause huge social problems here in the next ten or fifteen years.

I'd agree that there is a very small cohort who cannot be helped. But like you said, these issues are usually due to addiction. If I'm a heroin addict who has just gotten out of prison, has no family, no home, no job and an addiction what am I going to do when I'm released? Get high and do anything to get the money... so mug someone or rob some place.


Most people can be helped and can move away from that type of life if given a chance. Forcing them to work or having harsh prison conditions is not going to do that. It's right there to see easily today, USA vs Norway. I'd rather live in Norway where people go to prison once, get out and have normal lives where in the USA they are locked up for years upon years, get out and have absolutely nothing which leads to more crime.

El_Duderino 09

TheBoyConor wrote: »

Ah here, come on and be realistic. The sort of hybrid Dickensian / Japanese Death March camp you describe would have nothing to contribute in terms of rehabilitation and is more so to satisfy your own thirst for revenge and to inflict suffering on prisoners. Someone spending 5 years in a hamster wheel or on some relentless marching reminiscent of the Jap POW camps would have the opposite effect - prisoners probably would be traumatised by the experience and it would extinguish any change of rehabilitating them back into society as normal functioning people.

The desire to watch punishment is always a big factor in these threads. Aimless punishment is only for those with bloodlust. But boredom and Inactivity are a recipe for disaster and drug addiction.

Meaningful occupation is really the ticket but it's always ping to be more expensive than anything involving slave labour. The fact that low wages are so poor now means that cre really does pay better than honest toil.

The notion of in-work benefits didn't exist when the welfare state was established. Now it's taken for granted because low paid work is not enough to live. So how to you convince a career criminal that they're better off on a zero hour contract or in the gig economy? It's a difficult sell

Education and practical skills are probably the best way to go. You can only expect very low success rates but better than nothing.

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

gimme a fckuing break, most none criminals, including me and you, wouldnt do this kind of work, train and educate them as best as possible, in order to do more meaningful work

There's a full complement of paid staff who do this job.

You suggest that work being performed by honest law abiding people is below a criminal?

Perhaps some nice accountancy positions might suffice m'lord?

Cobalt17

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

There's a full complement of paid staff who do this job.

You suggest that work being performed by honest law abiding people is below a criminal?

Perhaps some nice accountancy positions might suffice m'lord?

I do it for free once a month. Plus tidy towns Organizations throughout the country do the same. But people like Wanderer think that this work should be reserved for “the help”. An atrocious attitude to have.

El_Duderino 09

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

So how to you convince a career criminal that they're better off on a zero hour contract or in the gig economy? It's a difficult sell .

You cancel his welfare and punish him for committing crime instead of rewarding him.

Jesus wept, they have training, they have courses. How much money do you want people that are performing these jobs to pay in tax to cajole Criminals into playing nice? Especially when do many crimes consist of pretty big money

ShatterAlan

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

They had PlayStations in what was St Pat's. I have physically seen them. Ok so it's not every wing but they are there or at least were.

They also had all the other things I said so It's as I described.

I never described it as a hotel though. I actually said it wasn't.

I'd like to know exactly why you're so up in arms about Playstations. They're not exactly an extravagant luxury are they? It's just a game to play. If computer games didn't exist would you be all cock-a-hoop abut them having yo-yo's or colouring books or chess or playing cards?



Even Red and Haywood had baseballs and gloves to throw and catch in Shawshank. Playstations weren't around back then.