The prison population is.................?

Question

at the highest it has ever been,and higher than most coutries in europe.population in 1950 was around 20,000 now 80,000 is this because it used to be called hard labour and it was.now you get three good meals a day you can take in playstations,t.v.'s,stereo;s e.t.c.Why can't these prICks that are running this country into the ground see that jail is no longer a deterant.Make them work! twelve hours a day doing the jobs they allege we need the eastern europeans to do the prison population would be sorted over night they can pay compensation to their victims,tax,N.I.and for their keep.WE NEED A COMMON SENSE PARTY.sorry if i offend the p.c. brigade but the victim needs looking after not the scum bags in jail

Evidence!!!!!!!!!!!! look at the home office reports for the last fifty odd years.
Complicate, more like paralysis by analysis

"P.C.BRIGADE MY POINT EXACTLY lets send them on holiday maybe the victims could look after them while they r away

Answer 1

Here Here!! Is there anywhere I can vote for you???

Answer 2

The argument used by Tony Blair at today's PMQs was that the Labour government was fulfilling it's promise to the British people..."tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime."

Blair claimed that more violent criminals were now being handed longer sentences by the judges.

UK with 81,000 people in prison, has the EUs largest prison pop.

Deterrants do not work. Back in the 18th century a child as young as 12 years could be hanged for stealing a lump of coal. It did not stop people and/or their kids steeling coal. They were cold, hungry and poor. So long as poverty, deprivation and drugs are allowed to flourish, so too will crime.

"Sure Start" made possible by this Labour Government, will reduce crime and help start kids on the right road to becoming model citizens.

It worked in the USA, so why not in UK.

Answer 3

It is has been shown that when a society passes irrational laws, the 'criminal' population rises proportionally... I do not dispute that the prison system is 'soft' but there are an awful lot of people locked up for very minor offences...

The problem with 'hard labour' in prisons is that it is productive... Whatever you get prisoners to do, it will undermine the legitimate labour market for that industry, lowering wages, and undercutting prices etc... Yes you can get them to 'break rocks' but even gravel has a price on the open market...

Answer 4

Your suggestion is already happening in the US. Corporations use prisoners as cheap labour, which i don`t agree with. Loss of liberty is seen in this country as punishment enough for a crime. Golden rule being: Prisoners are in prison AS punishment and not FOR punishment, big difference. As for deterrents, well, one man`s wine is another man`s poison, but i do believe a panel of the general public should have a say in what the offenders sentence should be and not just say guilty or not guilty, i don`t think that`s enough.

Answer 5

According to the Christian Science Monitor, the United States incarcerates a larger percent of its population than any other democracy in the world. You are not alone in having overcrowded prisons.

In the U.S. sentences are unreasonably long. Many are in prison for victimless crimes. The extreme overcrowding in California's prisons makes it impossible for most inmates to have work--which we all need for self esteem, and they especially need, not only for self esteem but for learning life and job skills.

Inmates are stacked in bunks three high in areas that were supposed to be used for rehabilation and other programs. The lack of proper treatment for the incarcerated mentally ill is especially lacking in California.

When inmates are left to rot in prison, they will be more rotten when they are released--as most will be. We would all be safer and it would save us lots of money if sentences are reasonable and if there are required programs that prepare inmates for productive lifes on the outside.

Answer 6

I hate the p.c, if it was up to me people would do the time they are given not let out early on good behaviour. I would keep them locked up in a cell with nothing to do for 20 hours a day. It would be the death sentance for anyone who murders,rapes or abuse's children if they are 100% proven guilty. If you steel the sentance would be 1 month locked up as above and then if you are caught doing it again you have one hand cut off, then the other if your stupid enough to do it a third time. This may seem very harsh but i bet it would work.

Answer 7

Its costs around £40,000 a year to keep one prisoner in jail - maybe we would be better off just giving the money (or maybe only £30,000) directly to them - it would certainly be cheaper. We should certainly lock up fewer people

Answer 8

Yes bring back the rack lets hang draw and quarter them. What about public stocks or chopping of the right hand of a theif or purhaps henging them upside down in a dungeon or tying them to a post in a rising tide or perhaps a flogging with a cat o' nine tales. it would in fact make little difference but no doubt the questioner would enjoy the sight

Answer 9

OK, so show some evidence, any evidence, that deterrents are effective in reducing offending. Can't find any? That'll be 'cause there isn't any

Tw4t

[EDIT]

You're full of it; I've studied plenty of HO statistics, I've got a degree in criminal justice studies - There is no evidence to support deterrence as being effective in reducing offending, some of the harshest regimes in he world have the highest offending rates.

Answer 10

Well said, I completely agree with every word you said

Answer 11

spot on......
the prisons are like a rest for these guys.....
in france a major sentance wd be a year.....( 1960s).....but that year was like being a rat.....you slept in yr own shyte....
maybe thats too harsh.....but too many luxuries leads to overcrowding......