community service

[Jerrek]

Originally Posted by philip.j.fry

People chained together? Yes, I would call that inhumane and have a problem with it.

Why?

[MovedGoalPosts]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

Why?

Unless your into S&M, I think the answer should be obvious.

[kronas]

a tricky one, so are we going to consider the mentality of the teens in question ?

is someone going to suggest we do a 'softly softly' approach to 'rehabilitating' these teens ?

what drove them to do such things ?

psychiatric help ?

teens who are 'too young' to understand because of there habitual drinking lifestyles ? personally i would throw the book at them, jail time for you lot.........

[Jerrek]

Originally Posted by MovedGoalPosts

Unless your into S&M, I think the answer should be obvious.

Well I am, but thats beside the point. The answer is not actually obvious to me, so you have to do better than that.

[philip.j.fry]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

Well I am, but thats beside the point. The answer is not actually obvious to me, so you have to do better than that.

Well, given my obviously liberal opinions, it should be obvious why I feel that chaining prisoners up is inhumane

Inhumane - lacking pity or compassion.

I do feel pity for criminals, that's not pity for them because they have been caught and punished but pity for the fact that they either felt a crime was necessary or that they thought it was okay to commit a crime (that's my thoughts on what is a crime and what isn't, which isn't the same as that stated by law). It is my belief that chaining people up lacks compassion and to reiterate what I said earlier, if you treat people without compassion and more like animals, you damage the rehabilatory aspects of punishment...if you treat people like animals, they are more likely to behave like animals.

[zovat]

Originally Posted by paulyoung666

just seen this , and why not , imho there should be a lot more of this , instead of slaps on wrists and promises to be good , chain gangs might be a good idea , pity the dogooders would complain about them being inhumane

Not sure about the whole "chain gang" side of this - I cerainly agree with the notion of making the offenders do hard physical work that brings a benifit to the community that they have harmed...

The old/american (we don't have them, per se, in the uk) idea of chaining a load of convicts together and making them break rocks for no other reason than they are told to is, to my mind, barbaric, inhumane, demeaning and pointless...
Criminals do not learn respect for their fellow man by being treated in this way, what they learn is that they had better not get caught next time.

Taking a group of teenagers who got drunk and started their own mini-riot and forcing them to make ammends by doing unpaid work within the community is, IMO, the best way to deal with them.
Putting them in jail may make them decide never to do such a thing again, but it may just make them think - ah well, if thats all I get - then I'll carry on.. Or worse they could end up learning more about criminal life and start moving forward in the criminal scheme of things.
Forcing them to do the types of task they are likely to get as part of their community service (tend to include canal cleaning and other physically hard and messy jobs) will hopefully make them consider those around them, whilst avaiding a custodial sentance will leave them at the mercy of their parents and other family figures who are likely to be key in helping them to choose the correct path for the remainder of their lives.

Just my 2c ;-)

[Jerrek]

I see nothing wrong with it. Its not hurting them and it prevents them from running away or escaping.

Originally Posted by Jerrek

I see nothing wrong with it. Its not hurting them and it prevents them from running away or escaping.

Jerrek, we're not talking about "hardened villians" here. We're not talking about murderers or rapists or child molesters, we're talking about often teenagers who have had too much to drink and got out of hand or sprayed graffiti on walls, ie *MINOR* offences.

So *why* are they going to "run away or escape" (isn't that a tautology?!). Where are they going to go? Are they going to spend their life on the run? Is there really any *NEED* to chain them up?

They could quite easily be "tagged" with GPS transponders if you wanted to know where they were. There's no need to chain them like animals.

[Jerrek]

All you voiced is your opinion that it isn't necessary. Perhaps. You made no argument against it though.

[zovat]

Originally Posted by Graham

Jerrek, we're not talking about "hardened villians" here. We're not talking about murderers or rapists or child molesters, we're talking about often teenagers who have had too much to drink and got out of hand or sprayed graffiti on walls, ie *MINOR* offences.

Yes- these are minor offences (although physically attacking police officers and damaging public property is more than "minor" IMO).

Originally Posted by Graham

So *why* are they going to "run away or escape" (isn't that a tautology?!). Where are they going to go? Are they going to spend their life on the run? Is there really any *NEED* to chain them up?

I agree - in this case they are not under a custodial sentance, and can return home at the end of their working period.

Originally Posted by Graham

They could quite easily be "tagged" with GPS transponders if you wanted to know where they were. There's no need to chain them like animals.

Even this may be more than required in this case - after all, they have had no restrictions placed on their ability to move about in society.



In the case of hardened criminals, then maybe more would be required, as they would probably see an advantage to a life on the run, as opposed to a life in a prison cell. However we are discussing teenagers here - not hardened criminals....

Originally Posted by Jerrek

All you voiced is your opinion that it isn't necessary. Perhaps. You made no argument against it though.

Oh good grief, Jerrek, don't start that again...!!

Look: Years ago we used to have criminals secured with a ball and chain around their ankle. We long ago decided that it wasn't necessary. What this seems to propose is a return to that sort of thing without a good reason.

Now if there *isn't* a good reason for doing something *why* do it?

[Jerrek]

We still use it over here...

And I already mentioned the good reason. It prevents them from running away.

Originally Posted by Jerrek

We still use it over here...

And so *we* should do it too???

And I already mentioned the good reason. It prevents them from running away.

And I have already demonstrated that this is *not* a good reason.

[zovat]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

We still use it over here...

And I already mentioned the good reason. It prevents them from running away.

Jerrek - just because you still use it, does not mean it is the right thing to do....

We have got rid of the death penalty, chain gangs and the like - other countries have not.. That is their right, as it is our right to disagree.....

In this case - the people involved will be returning to their own homes at the end of their work - they will be able to live relatively normal lives (apart from doing the community service, and getting serious grief from their parents ) - there is no incentive for them to run away..

In fact, after 1 session when they were chained up, I feel fairly certain that they would be less than willing to return for the next session (and would therefore end up with a custodial sentance) as they would (IMO rightly) feel that prison is less demeaning than the other option they were given..

I am not going to get into a discussion about the rights and wrongs of various countries penal codes and systems. This thread is about the use of community service as a form of punishment - not whether other countries have better/worse methods..