Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


706 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 206


Topic # 198236 1-Jul-2016 15:03
Send private message

Reading through some headlines in recent times, our judicial system is simply failing, so long as no one is dead or seriously injured, the penalties seem to be little more than a slap on the wrist and a short stay care of her majesty. In some cases, even where death / severe injury are involved, the penalties still seem somewhat lenient. At what point do we say as a society, you are a waste of our resources and remove said offenders from society permanently (I'm thinking an island in the southern ocean, survival of the fittest sort of thing). 

 

Imagine if we had a demerit point system for the privilege of being a member of society much like we do for the privilege of holding a drivers license. At x points, your turn in society is over, you clearly are a waste of space and resource. Could that result in someone being removed from society for a trivial offense, possibly, but if they had amassed enough points to get to that stage, should we really tolerate them? 

 

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11666988 

 

Woman who cons people our of money, has been convicted before and is now convicted again, sentence 13 months, of which she'll serve what, 6 months? What a joke. Her last sentence (6 years in Aussie I believe) should be doubled, and non parole.  The figures in this case may not be earth shattering, but it is still a gross breach of trust and money from people that most likely could not afford it. Whilst a white collar crime, the impact is still traumatic for the victims and the financial consequences could be dire. 

 

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11664433 

 

This clown, this case is at least the 2nd time he has ripped off an employer for significant sums. Ok, the first was a multi-national vehicle financier whom could easily absorb the loss of over $1.0mio, but the 2nd time (if that is only the 2nd time) was a health centre in a smallish community, hardly capable of absorbing the kind of losses he inflicted. Sentencing is yet to occur, but if he only got 3 years for the first time, no doubt his "early guilty plea and his remorse" will earn him a discount on the sentencing. 

 

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/81618394/highend-cars-targeted-by-christchurch-chop-shop 

 

These two pillars of society. Over 50 previous convictions each for theft / dishonesty offenses and the maximum term is 5 years? Really? Should they really be allowed to use up our finite resources any longer? 

 

Im sure there will be the "oh, he has a gambling / drug / alcohol" addiction, its not his fault, his addiction made him do it blah blah blah, but the old "my addiction made me do it" chestnut seems to be the cop out dujour.

 

Ok, so the whole island thing may be a bit extreme, but surely there is a better way?


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
 1 | 2 | 3 | 4
18538 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5307

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1584126 1-Jul-2016 15:11
2 people support this post
Send private message

First offenses should result in minimum 3 month stay in a Thai prison. This would ensure second offenses were rare :) 


3471 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1928

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1584136 1-Jul-2016 15:26
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

First offenses should result in minimum 3 month stay in a Thai prison. This would ensure second offenses were rare :) 

 

 

+1

 

Totally support outsourcing our prisons to Thailand, Indonesia, etc.

 

The Howard League for Bleeding Hearts would have a field day however.

 

 

 

 





Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.


7546 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3963


  Reply # 1584140 1-Jul-2016 15:32
2 people support this post
Send private message

All three are property crimes - not crimes of violence.

 

The threat of imprisonment balanced against perceived risk of getting caught did't work as a deterrent.
There's proof of the abject failure of the system to rehabilitate - the offenders have been imprisoned before - whatever methods were used failed. Recidivism rates are such that there's a very good chance they'll come out of prison worse than they went in - again probably.  So 2/3 of the reason to use imprisonment as a punishment failed (deterrent and rehabilitation).
While they won't be able to offend while they're in prison, at a cost to taxpayers of $100k/year, that's a hell of a high cost.

 

Probably a good idea to sit back quietly and consider that before rushing to the conclusion that longer harsher sentences are going to solve the problem.  IMO offenders don't really consider the length of imprisonment against the crime they're going to commit.  They think they're not going to get caught.


18538 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5307

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1584141 1-Jul-2016 15:36
Send private message

Fred99:

 

All three are property crimes - not crimes of violence.

 

The threat of imprisonment balanced against perceived risk of getting caught did't work as a deterrent.
There's proof of the abject failure of the system to rehabilitate - the offenders have been imprisoned before - whatever methods were used as a deterrent failed. Recidivism rates are such that there's a very good chance they'll come out of prison worse than they went in - again probably.
While they won't be able to offend while they're in prison, at a cost to taxpayers of $100k/year, that's a hell of a high cost.

 

Probably a good idea to sit back quietly and consider that before rushing to the conclusion that longer harsher sentences are going to solve the problem.

 

 

 

 

Your comments are based on NZ prison system stats I'm guessing. If you've ever seen a Thai prison, you'd be a little less doubting of the motivation to avoid one, and even greater motivation to avoid a second, longer sentence. 

 

Also Thai prisons do NOT cost 100K a year :) 

 

Cambodian Prisons are even cheaper.


7546 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3963


  Reply # 1584143 1-Jul-2016 15:39
3 people support this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

Fred99:

 

All three are property crimes - not crimes of violence.

 

The threat of imprisonment balanced against perceived risk of getting caught did't work as a deterrent.
There's proof of the abject failure of the system to rehabilitate - the offenders have been imprisoned before - whatever methods were used as a deterrent failed. Recidivism rates are such that there's a very good chance they'll come out of prison worse than they went in - again probably.
While they won't be able to offend while they're in prison, at a cost to taxpayers of $100k/year, that's a hell of a high cost.

 

Probably a good idea to sit back quietly and consider that before rushing to the conclusion that longer harsher sentences are going to solve the problem.

 

 

 

 

Your comments are based on NZ prison system stats I'm guessing. If you've ever seen a Thai prison, you'd be a little less doubting of the motivation to avoid one, and even greater motivation to avoid a second, longer sentence. 

 

Also Thai prisons do NOT cost 100K a year :) 

 

Cambodian Prisons are even cheaper.

 

 

Yay.  It's a very dumb idea - congrats.

 

 


13369 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6286

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1584146 1-Jul-2016 15:41
One person supports this post
Send private message

Most people that commit these crimes are narcissists, they don't care  about being caught and they don't care about their victims. The best thing is to keep them away from being able to to re offend.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

 

 




706 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 206


  Reply # 1584159 1-Jul-2016 15:44
Send private message

The threat of imprisonment is the issue. If you could do something for a period knowing that at worst, you'd get a slap on the wrist, whats the deterrent for someone who is that way inclined? Even if they are caught, out come the excuses or if that fails, the remorse fallback and the world pitys the crim, not the victim.

 

The Richard Beven case above, he stole $1.mio from his employer and served what, 18 months maybe 2 years, thats a cool $900k per year for a holiday on a farm somewhere, hardly a deterrent. The money "vanished" much like it did in his most recent case, spent on lifestyle and whatever else took his fancy, but in each case, a large sum of money was "lost" without properly being accounted for. I have no doubt he stashes it somewhere / somehow for retrieval when hes done his time to live on again. Unfortunately yes, I do credit him with some brains, to get employed and assess processes for weakness and exploit those weaknesses shows a certain level of intelligence.

 

If the threat of imprisonment was enough, then crimes would only be committed by the worst of offenders who arguably are beyond help anyway. The $100k per year thing would erode as the threat of prolonged imprisonment and / or removal from society would surely deter all but the determined crook?


5248 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1134

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1584177 1-Jul-2016 16:17
11 people support this post
Send private message

sen8or:

 

 

 

Im sure there will be the "oh, he has a gambling / drug / alcohol" addiction, its not his fault, his addiction made him do it blah blah blah, but the old "my addiction made me do it" chestnut seems to be the cop out dujour.

 

Ok, so the whole island thing may be a bit extreme, but surely there is a better way?

 

 

I've worked in prisons. They aren't nice places. Go spend 3 months in one and see how your views change on "light" sentences of 5 years or 10. 

 

You know what? Prisons are a huge waste of money. They are the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff after the social support systems fail. Why did they fail? Tax cuts and not enough resources? So prisons are cheaper? They are not cheaper. 

 

Absolutely...some people need to be kept away from the rest of us because they are broken forever and dangerous. That's what Paremoremo Maxi is for. 

 

But the rest of the crims? many of them are simply mentally ill. In the past they would have been in asylums...but we shut all those down.

 

Prisons tend to make people worse and expose them to gangs. Stigmatised, their only mates become other crims. That leads nowhere good.

 

Longer sentences just cost money. They don't do anything else. Prison corporations LOVE longer sentences....so much so they have a history of funding groups that call for them. There's a lot profit in incarceration. No rehab. You can't rehabilitate when the staff numbers are cut in half and the wages are gutted. It's not safe for staff or the prisoners. 

 

After several years in the Dept of Corrections it became clear to me that if you want more criminals...just build more prisons. 

 

People often end up in prison because they were taught (abused) that arbitrary authority combined with violence works. Bullying works. So a justice system based on exactly that same dynamic merely serves to confirm their approach works just fine...they just weren't bad enough. 

 

I've found the people with the strongest views on long sentences generally have no idea what a prison is really like. 





____________________________________________________
I'm on a high fibre diet. 

 

High fibre diet


7893 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 796

Subscriber

  Reply # 1584194 1-Jul-2016 16:22
Send private message

Linuxluver:

 

sen8or:

 

 

 

Im sure there will be the "oh, he has a gambling / drug / alcohol" addiction, its not his fault, his addiction made him do it blah blah blah, but the old "my addiction made me do it" chestnut seems to be the cop out dujour.

 

Ok, so the whole island thing may be a bit extreme, but surely there is a better way?

 

 

I've worked in prisons. They aren't nice places. Go spend 3 months in one and see how your views change on "light" sentences of 5 years or 10. 

 

You know what? Prisons are a huge waste of money. They are the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff after the social support systems fail. Why did they fail? Tax cuts and not enough resources? So prisons are cheaper? They are not cheaper. 

 

Absolutely...some people need to be kept away from the rest of us because they are broken forever and dangerous. That's what Paremoremo Maxi is for. 

 

But the rest of the crims? many of them are simply mentally ill. In the past they would have been in asylums...but we shut all those down.

 

Prisons tend to make people worse and expose them to gangs. Stigmatised, their only mates become other crims. That leads nowhere good.

 

Longer sentences just cost money. They don't do anything else. Prison corporations LOVE longer sentences....so much so they have a history of funding groups that call for them. There's a lot profit in incarceration. No rehab. You can't rehabilitate when the staff numbers are cut in half and the wages are gutted. It's not safe for staff or the prisoners. 

 

After several years in the Dept of Corrections it became clear to me that if you want more criminals...just build more prisons. 

 

People often end up in prison because they were taught (abused) that arbitrary authority combined with violence works. Bullying works. So a justice system based on exactly that same dynamic merely serves to confirm their approach works just fine...they just weren't bad enough. 

 

I've found the people with the strongest views on long sentences generally have no idea what a prison is really like. 

 

 

So what do you want, Instant fines for everything including murder??  That would keep the prison population down..





Regards,

Old3eyes


2712 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 692


  Reply # 1584201 1-Jul-2016 16:36
4 people support this post
Send private message

old3eyes:

 

Linuxluver:

 

sen8or:

 

 

 

Im sure there will be the "oh, he has a gambling / drug / alcohol" addiction, its not his fault, his addiction made him do it blah blah blah, but the old "my addiction made me do it" chestnut seems to be the cop out dujour.

 

Ok, so the whole island thing may be a bit extreme, but surely there is a better way?

 

 

I've worked in prisons. They aren't nice places. Go spend 3 months in one and see how your views change on "light" sentences of 5 years or 10. 

 

You know what? Prisons are a huge waste of money. They are the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff after the social support systems fail. Why did they fail? Tax cuts and not enough resources? So prisons are cheaper? They are not cheaper. 

 

Absolutely...some people need to be kept away from the rest of us because they are broken forever and dangerous. That's what Paremoremo Maxi is for. 

 

But the rest of the crims? many of them are simply mentally ill. In the past they would have been in asylums...but we shut all those down.

 

Prisons tend to make people worse and expose them to gangs. Stigmatised, their only mates become other crims. That leads nowhere good.

 

Longer sentences just cost money. They don't do anything else. Prison corporations LOVE longer sentences....so much so they have a history of funding groups that call for them. There's a lot profit in incarceration. No rehab. You can't rehabilitate when the staff numbers are cut in half and the wages are gutted. It's not safe for staff or the prisoners. 

 

After several years in the Dept of Corrections it became clear to me that if you want more criminals...just build more prisons. 

 

People often end up in prison because they were taught (abused) that arbitrary authority combined with violence works. Bullying works. So a justice system based on exactly that same dynamic merely serves to confirm their approach works just fine...they just weren't bad enough. 

 

I've found the people with the strongest views on long sentences generally have no idea what a prison is really like. 

 

 

So what do you want, Instant fines for everything including murder??  That would keep the prison population down..

 

 

 

 

check out the way Norway does it, rehabilitation works and is the only way to get the crime rates down. 

 

 

 

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/why-norways-prison-system-is-so-successful-2014-12?r=US&IR=T





Common sense is not as common as you think.


3471 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1928

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1584215 1-Jul-2016 16:55
2 people support this post
Send private message

vexxxboy:

 

 

 

check out the way Norway does it, rehabilitation works and is the only way to get the crime rates down. 

 

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/why-norways-prison-system-is-so-successful-2014-12?r=US&IR=T

 

 

I think the most realistic option is a balanced carrot and stick one.

 

For the carrot, you rehabilitate the ones who DON'T do things serious enough to get jail. We actually need to make the period for Clean Slate much shorter for minor offending, and offer education and training to these ones at the lower end. 

 

For the stick, you bring back hard labour on bread & water, and a proper 3 strikes that applies to any offending serious enough to get you sent to jail for more than a few months. Not our watered down version, 3 strikes and you don't leave prison till you're in a body bag (which on hard labour, bread & water shouldn't be that long)

 

Personally I'm down with bringing back the death penalty for rape, murder, and child abuse (be that Uncle Bully bad touching or beating a child until it's dead or a vegetable). Would take a lot of the true evil off the streets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 





Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.


gzt

10269 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1578


  Reply # 1584234 1-Jul-2016 17:08
One person supports this post
Send private message

Many of these carrot and stick approaches assume the offender is rational in deciding to carry out the offending and/or has something to lose by the application of severe penalties and then is rational again after having recieved them.

That Norway article was interesting. It does amaze me if we can put someone in prison here and they come out unable to prepare three good meals a day. I'm guessing NZ does some of that stuff as preparation in the last few weeks for release but not really integrated into the sentence.

gzt

10269 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1578


  Reply # 1584236 1-Jul-2016 17:12
Send private message

By the way it appears the OP is about recidivist fraud/financial type offenders therefore most of us are a bit off topic already ; ).

1746 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 356

Trusted

  Reply # 1584242 1-Jul-2016 17:16
2 people support this post
Send private message

Stocks and public floggings for burglary crimes / thuggery (drunken minor assaults) / jaywalking / minor fraud

 

Though there is not much physical value in the above, which makes prison time hardly justifiable, there is much social harm.

 

 

 

 





My thoughts are no longer my own and is probably representative of our media-controlled government


2712 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 692


  Reply # 1584249 1-Jul-2016 17:25
2 people support this post
Send private message

Lias:

 

vexxxboy:

 

 

 

check out the way Norway does it, rehabilitation works and is the only way to get the crime rates down. 

 

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/why-norways-prison-system-is-so-successful-2014-12?r=US&IR=T

 

 

I think the most realistic option is a balanced carrot and stick one.

 

For the carrot, you rehabilitate the ones who DON'T do things serious enough to get jail. We actually need to make the period for Clean Slate much shorter for minor offending, and offer education and training to these ones at the lower end. 

 

For the stick, you bring back hard labour on bread & water, and a proper 3 strikes that applies to any offending serious enough to get you sent to jail for more than a few months. Not our watered down version, 3 strikes and you don't leave prison till you're in a body bag (which on hard labour, bread & water shouldn't be that long)

 

Personally I'm down with bringing back the death penalty for rape, murder, and child abuse (be that Uncle Bully bad touching or beating a child until it's dead or a vegetable). Would take a lot of the true evil off the streets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

and thats why it will never catch on in NZ, you say bring back the death penalty for say Child abuse, fine it makes the general person fell better but it still doesn't bring the victim back. Most of the Abusers have been abused themselves and been in and out of prison most of their adult lives. Instead of killing them after the fact how about trying to rehabilitate the person so he doesnt take his anger out on a child, if we did this maybe the child would still be alive . Isnt that a better result for everybody. 





Common sense is not as common as you think.


 1 | 2 | 3 | 4
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.