You are very good at using terms such as 'do gooder' and 'hug a hoodie' in a sarcastic manner as a put down for any view that on the face of it does not seem to fit what could be construed as your ultra conservative right wing ramblings. In effect you are putting forward a black and white perspective that is saying people are either completely law abiding or, must be habitual criminals. For the sake of clarification are you saying that all 'poor souls' who fall on the wrong side of the law are all habitual criminals? Because that is how it is reading IMO. Such a statement would be nonsense. Whilst there will always be those who will not benefit from interventions other than being locked up are you saying this is the case for all? I would like to see your evidence where rehab is a complete waste of time and just locking them up works (I dont need to hear the whilst they are locked up they are not doing crime argument as we both know they will come out at some point).
Ouch! I think I hit a nerve there...
Let me put your mind at rest, though: I'm do not use the term "do-gooder" sarcastically, rather as a term I feel adequately describes those I am referring to. I can think of nothing more apt.
Secondly, simply arguing that we should have a tougher, more robust criminal justice system does not necessarily make me ultra conservative or guilty of right wing ramblings. Despite the obvious amusement those comments caused me, I did then start to wonder - maybe you're trying some meaningful intervention on me here. That is trying to rehabilitate me into a liberal "hug-a-hoodie" type. Well, good luck with that...
On a serious note though, I think you don't particularly grasp the points I've been making. Clearly, not all those who fall foul of the law are habitual criminals. I have never said that. If you look at the original post though, it's about prolific offenders and how we deal with them. My view is, the sort of leniency shown here tends to breed contempt, fails to adequately set boundaries and that there should be a more impactive punishment at a much earlier stage in the offending cycle. I'm not talking about chopping their hands off. Or stringing people up for stealing a car. You'd think I was though. I'm simply talking about less tolerance, effective punishment and a justice system that delivers justice first and foremost. Hardly right-wing ramblings, as disparaging as I am of the liberals "do-gooders", who always seem to know best and tend to dismiss, I might add, any view which doesn't fit with their own as insidious right-wing propaganda (or ramblings, as you put it).
Someone who makes a one-off mistake, unless very serious, is unlikely to end up in prison. In terms of rehabilitation we are largely talking about those who haven't made a one-off mistake, rather those who have repeated their mistakes time and time again. The problem is, many who end up in prison only end up there once the Judge or Magistrates have little choice left other than to send them to prison because all the "soft" alternatives (reprimands, cautions, community service, curfews, drug rehabilitation orders etc.) have been a distinct and unremitting failure. That we arrive at a point where the focus is on trying to rehabilitate those who have chosen a life of crime is in itself indicative of a failing system that has simply failed to keep their behaviour in check in the first place. But the point I make, when we talk of prison and rehabilitation here, in reality we're not talking about someone's who's made a one-off mistake. Those that have and end up in prison likely fall in the category of those who are unlikely to re offend in any case, primarily because they are likely to be the one's who cope least well in prison and never want to go back.
So can I suggest focusing on the topic and considering my views, whether you agree with them or not, in the context of the topic at hand - and that is habitual offenders committing crime time and time again. Which brings me back to my original point: sort them out before it ever gets to that stage. Dare I mention short, sharp, shock?.. Maybe not..
When all is said and done though, I do have extensive experience of working in the Criminal Justice System. I have no idea if you have comparative experience, perhaps you can enlighten me. Each view is as valid as the next. But if you choose to dismiss my views out of hand, that's fine. You might at least acknowledge I do speak from a position of roughtly 20 years personal experience of dealing with criminals, the justice system and the courts.
In conclusion this is a Police forum and whilst I appreciate you don't want to hear that whilst they're locked up they're not out committing crime, you might be in the wrong place - because that's a fact.
Edited by morek54, 24 February 2013 - 09:55 PM.