Steve Terry posted
It's not "irresponsible debt" as in "debt that won't be paid back". It will be paid back.
Whether it was a good idea for the Treasury to incur it is doubtful, but that's another matter entirely.
By extra taxing future generations, what's the difference between that and theft
Steve Terry
In message , Jon writes
What is the evidence that this will result in lower crime and reduced re-offending?
Hmmm. What would you suggest? I assume you are aware of the full details and have read the reports that were presented to the magistrates for you to make your assertion.
Why would anyone need to send 5000 text messages a month..? I struggle to send 5 a week. Are you a spammer..?
Then pay the money that you owe..!
Ivor
And so it would be for some people..!
Ivor
No, it shows that your *phone* is in Cambridge, not that you are actually with it, unless of course a call was made to/from the phone in question to confirm it.
Ivor
Well yes, of course. But let's not lose sight of the fact that this thread is about someone who is concerned that his mobile phone will reveal his whereabouts so - for the purposes of this particular discussion - it's a given that the phone and the owner are in the same place.
Well then, the OP has an easy solution - give his phone to somebody else..! Problem solved ;-)
Ivor
Except that he *needs* his phone for the millions of texts that he is compelled to send!
Maybe a slight change of lifestyle is indicated?
snipped-for-privacy@localhosts.net declared for all the world to hear...
Yes - by building more prisons.
I'm not a victim of crime but I think longer sentences are the way forward.
Indeed.
snipped-for-privacy@johnboyle1.demon.co.uk declared for all the world to hear...
I have none. But if all of the prisons are full then it says to me that we need more prisons.
Of course I'm not. Nor do I profess to be.
:-) LOL!
It says to me we need to examine our sentencing policy and also look at the rate of recidivism before we start locking more people up. If prison doesn't work I certainly don't want to fund its expansion.
IIRC we seem to have a higher percentage of our population in prison than any other European country; if this is the case I'd be interested to understand the root cause- are the Brits less law abiding or is our law system more likely to hand out a custodial sentence.
It isn't like that.
The irony is that it's the opposite of what most people aspire to.
People borrow money so that they can buy a house on a mortgage, and eventually own it outright. We generally see that as a better option than renting forever,.
PFI takes hospitals and schools that were in public ownership, and gives them to private contractors who redevelop, renovate (or in the case of one local school, repaint) the building, then hire it back to the original owner f0r decades if not forever.
In addition they sting the victims for huge service charges (for example, it costs £60 to have a patient wheeled from the ward to the operating theatre at our local hospital, and another £60 to wheel them back. The porter doing the pushing will be on little more than minimum wage, but the PFI contractor has the trust over a barrel).
If you think you have been paying excessive bank charges, hop over to the 'consumer action group' web site and read the notes.
For what it's worth, I am just about to claim back about £3600 from a mortgage company - and that's not the full amount.
We're all victims of crime. Even if it only puts up our insurance premiums.
Longer sentences are the way backwards. People don't commit crimes because they think "I'll only get three years for this, not nine years". They assume they won't get caught at all (reasonable assumption: only a small minority of crimes are cleared up) or they don't think at all.
Of the criminal that get caught (admittedly a small sub-set of criminals) it seems that they mostly don't think ahead, which is why the commit crimes - and why they're caught.
Most crime is extreme selfishness. Sending people to prison teaches them to be more selfish, not less. It allows them to learn new criminal skills and make connections with like-minded colleagues.
It is very clear that sending people to prison is neither a deterrent nor a rehabilitation. It does not prevent offending. It does not help people build a life for themselves that allows the out of crime.
Countries with harsh punitive prison systems have more crime, not less.
Prison doesn't work. An uncomfortable fact.
It prevents them re-offending while they are inside!
So what do you suggest as an alternative - capital punishment? At least
*that* would prevent re-offending and may even act as a deterrent - as in the days when you could incur it for sheep stealing!fx: faints.
In 10 or whatever years of reading your posts this is probably the first one I'm completely in agreement with.
I think I need to lie down.
Not sure that's true, there's plenty of drug dealing whilst inside, assault and similar crimes committed.
So let's look at America and see how effective capital punishment is as a deterrent.
How about trying to address the causes of crime and rehabilitation of criminals rather than focus on retribution.
You mean like Singapore?
Steve Terry
BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.