Taken from
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.g...-the-cycle.pdf

QUOTE:
Having somewhere suitable to live upon release from custody can be a critical factor in rehabilitating offenders. Prisoners are often at risk of losing their accommodation whilst in prison. For those serving short sentences, this can further contribute to their unstable and chaotic lifestyles. In addition, around 15% of prisoners were homeless or living in some form of insecure accommodation before entering prison, including 9% who were sleeping rough.

Taken from the same article..
Prisons as places of hard work and industry
There are some examples of prisoners working hard within a disciplined environment. At HMP Manchester nearly 60 prisoners are now working up to 40 hours per week in an industrial laundry and a printing workshop. At HMP Ranby a workshop that produces plastic goods operates using prisoners over three shifts, and runs for 20 hours per day.
Some prisons also have active partnerships with the private sector. In a joint venture at HMP Kirkham with Calpac UK, some 40 prisoners work a 37.5 hour week packing food. At HMP Ford, Travis Perkins runs a 30 prisoner workshop, refurbishing equipment.
Our proposals will build on these too isolated examples, with more prisoners working hard across the prison system.

But as someone on The Guardian comments quite rightly pointed out, you go to prison as punishment, not for punishment.

Being stripped of your liberties and freedom should be enough 'punishment', and then the focus should move to rehabilitation. Many of the inmates in the article comment on how they don't enjoy being in prison, and miss their families, so clearly it's still not a place where they want to be, and I have to say despite how nice it looks, it's not a place I'd want to be either. The balance seems right to me.

Sorry, I don't feel any sympathy.

I'm sure some of these types fall into the type of criminals who beat the hell out of babies, torture them, mistreat them, bludgeon old frail pensioners, con them out of their live savings, and druggies.

This is one area that I don't have pity on them. They should have thought of all this before committing their crimes.

Harsh but there it is; that's my opinion.

Yes, and of course: you have to build in this important little factor

"Harsh but there it is; that's my opinion. "

Which Is Bang On Right

Freedom of liberties, missing their families.

They should have considered all that before they decided do break the law.

Do you feel sorry for people who horrifically abuse children, you feel sorry for those who destroy other people's lives, who punch the daylights out of OAPs leaving them living in fear for the rest of their lives, for the drug pushers that cause untold hell on earth for many (those they supply to and those even that they don't) because they lose 'some' freedom in some things? That is part of the punishment - it's the way the cookie crumbles.

Nope, not one ounce of pity here Jack, it's not as though the idea of getting caught and banged up is a new concept.

Please refer me to the part of my post where I stated, or indeed implied that I disagreed with prisoners freedom being removed.

That was actually the point I was making, that that's all they should lose. Losing their freedoms is the punishment. Being in prison is the punishment, not that they should go to prison for their punishment. That's what I was trying to say.

And no of course I don't feel sorry for them (in most cases anyway), but that doesn't mean I don't want them to be rehabilitated. Rehabilitation is important and I think we should start focusing some more on that, because at the end of the day, the fact is most prisoners are going to be released one day, and I'd much rather them come out less likely to re-offend than more likely.

Being in prison itself should be the punishment, and then the focus should be on rehabilitation and changing these people for the better.

But why would you champion such a system when Norway has put forward one that not only works but aims to turn criminals into functioning members of soceity? A system based on fear and misguided revenge only goes so far.

Frankly I'd be more interested in an article that talks about how the victims of crime are supported rather than another thousand words about how well the perpetrators are being looked after. I'd be interested to count the posts on this forum that bemoan the harsh treatment of criminals and compare them to posts bemoaning the sh*tty deal that the victims get.

Im sorry but the bottom line is we cannot afford to keep anyone to that standard....
Ask Marc about the current state of council accomodation in the UK.

So connect the dots, why do they have a smaller prison population?

In my original post I did say that it should be something we should test out when the economy balances out.

[
Please refer me to the part of my post that where I stated, or indeed implied that you disagreed with prisoners' freedom being removed. I stated no such thing.

I pointed out that it is only 'some' of their freedom is lost in comparison to what many of their victims lose. I then asked if you felt sorry for x/y/z type of offenders - that's not implication: that is a question, and one which you answered.



I'm not championing anything. I am pointing out that other systems stats on reoffenders can be achieved just as equally as the system Norway is presenting. It is a comparison on reoffending stats: not championing.

Where is the 'fear' and 'misguided revenge' coming into play? I mentioned nothing like that - I'd be grateful if you would point me to where I mentioned, suggested or implied anything to do with 'fear' or 'misguided revenge'. This is where good debates go awry Dezzy: people start throwing around comments that were not said.

Ever visited anyone in a jail in the Middle East? I have and it was less to do with fear or revenge: and more to do with harsh living conditions, no luxuries: the very basics in respect of food/accomodation/bedding - and having to rely on relatives and friends visiting to bring money, clothing, food etc.

Harsh living that not many are willing to repeat.

Well we will all be dead by then so...:)

I'll thank you for refraining from being so patronising and rude MTVN - there really is no need.

5millon Norway population.

62 million UK population.

I don't really have to point out the obvious... do I? :conf:

Quite.

Obv... lol

I'll have snuffed it in about 10 years I reckon: so by this thread: I'm going to nip over to Norway, get my resident's permit then go commit some heinous crime and spend my last few years in absolute pleasure: having my every whim catering.

That really sounds like a fabulous plan.

Except the article is stating they have a smaller prison population per 100,000 of the population

Not like here then..Our prison population will soon be larger than the population of norway....

Less people in a country = less people committing crimes to start off with as far as Europeans figures appear to show - additionally: I suspect it is more to do with the way Norway bring up their children to be more decent law abiding adult, more responsible and respectable citizens, compared to the UK.

Sometimes you have to expand the mind, educate people in a better way, teach them how to behave in a civilised society, to respect others and their property etc: if the UK started from grass roots level, and spent less money and time pandering to those who do commit crimes and are imprisoned: we'd HAVE less people per 100,000 in jail - going to jail is not a deterrent in this county. It's seen more as in inconvenience to most cons - who suffer from revolving door syndrome.

Again, I think that's fairly transparent.

Yes but they have a proportionately less crime per head of the population, the size of a country is irrelevant

And sure, many factors contribute towards a low crime rate; an effective justice system is a pretty big one

The justice system in this country is a joke - mind you, it again goes back to grass roots.

If people are brought up to respect others, to respect the laws of the land, and to be aware that prison is not some cushy number - there would be less crime.

The size of the country is relevant - as was made clear in the article in the Guardian.

Good. I think society places too much importance on punishment rather than rehabilitation. Normally living in a good environment and acquiring skills to transition into a crime-free life on the outside produce the lowest recidivism rates. Where I live they once did a program that allowed prisoners to earn bachelor's degrees and the focus was on achieving that rather than punishing them for their crimes, and not one of the prisoners in the program returned to jail after they were released.

What did they do for the victims to help them on the road to recovery?

were they offered free shelter, food, clothing, heating and free education to Degree level?

Which rehab program was this: there must be some link to it - I'd be interested to read about it.