An Answer to Anti Social behaviour
Discussion
Negative Creep said:
I though the punishment was supposed to be against the offender, not their family?
The idea is the family suffering along with the offender might just create enough family pressure to stop the little basterd from doing it again, no?Wasn't there a similar idea to fine families for kids mis-behaving at school too sometime? Anyone know what happened to that?
Negative Creep said:
I though the punishment was supposed to be against the offender, not their family?
Then the family encourage the offender to toe the line lest they are all inconvenienced.I maintain it's potemtially a cheap to implement deterrent. Joking aside the stocks or public flogging aren't likely to make a comeback soon.
You Can argue thay it's punishing a family for potentially the actions of one person but I like that. Besides a family are also punished if one member is imprisoned, just in a different way
Stupid idea. Doesn't even work when parents try it, never mind people who can go around to a friend's house with a bottle of cider and a bag of weed, watch all the TV they want and then mug someone on the way home.
There isn't really any answer except removing the persistently anti-social from society. 3 strikes and off to the big house for 25 years. No ifs, no buts. No appeals, no parole hearings, no behaviour reports etc. No good behaviour or day release.
It would be cheaper than letting them roam the streets, and come back for endless trials that result in no meaningful punishment.
There isn't really any answer except removing the persistently anti-social from society. 3 strikes and off to the big house for 25 years. No ifs, no buts. No appeals, no parole hearings, no behaviour reports etc. No good behaviour or day release.
It would be cheaper than letting them roam the streets, and come back for endless trials that result in no meaningful punishment.
What is needed is the reinstatement of Banishment as a punishment, as opposed to deportation.
Banishment differs significantly from deportation. With deportation we are forced to return the offender to his home country. If he is a UK or EU citizen, or his homeland might infringe his human rights then we cannot send him. The responsibilities and expenses are borne by the UK government.
Banishment was the requirement to leave the country. The offender had to register his departure at the port of exit within a specified time. The port authorities had to certify the offender actually departed.
The offender was responsible for their own travel costs and arrangements. They could go to any country of their choosing. They were then required to remain abroad for the duration of the banishment order. This could include life banishment.
Failure to depart or returning prior to the banishment order expiring resulted in a more serious punishment. We usually hanged them.
Any appeal process had to be conducted from abroad. There was no expensive holding in detention or absconding whilst on bail. You left the UK to your choice of destination and appealed in writing from there.
Banishment differs significantly from deportation. With deportation we are forced to return the offender to his home country. If he is a UK or EU citizen, or his homeland might infringe his human rights then we cannot send him. The responsibilities and expenses are borne by the UK government.
Banishment was the requirement to leave the country. The offender had to register his departure at the port of exit within a specified time. The port authorities had to certify the offender actually departed.
The offender was responsible for their own travel costs and arrangements. They could go to any country of their choosing. They were then required to remain abroad for the duration of the banishment order. This could include life banishment.
Failure to depart or returning prior to the banishment order expiring resulted in a more serious punishment. We usually hanged them.
Any appeal process had to be conducted from abroad. There was no expensive holding in detention or absconding whilst on bail. You left the UK to your choice of destination and appealed in writing from there.
thinfourth2 said:
Have you been taking drugs?
So if I act like an arse you ban me from watching telly
1 I'm not 12
2 I don't watch much telly
3 Its a bloody stupid idea throw the
s in jail
Fantastic! I agree, stupid idea, not much of a punishment, and certainly not a deterrent. Throw them in jail, or, preferably, public flogging. That's it. Take away telly? This will fix the scrotes, how, exactly? And you really think their families would put any pressure on them, or, if they actually did, it would have any effect? So if I act like an arse you ban me from watching telly
1 I'm not 12
2 I don't watch much telly
3 Its a bloody stupid idea throw the
s in jailOP, I am having a hard time figuring out whether to blame insanity or drugs for your line of thinking. I am going to go with both.
My idea is in response to the current judicial system.
Flogging, jailing or banishing people are
Not options. The goverment wont spend the money on jailing low level offenders. The options at present are fines and community punishments.
As I explained the fines are a nonsense as they can be paid off at a nominal amount per week. They have no deterrent value.
Community punishments cost to implement and monitor. Add to this the people paid to 'supervise' these schemes want an easy life.
Offender is supposed to report at 10am but turns up at 1130. The person supervising doesn't want a confrontation or additional paperwork.
The offenders really get an easy ride
with these schemes.
Tv control is an inconvenience that's cheap to administer and has real deterrent value. Sure you can go watch tv at your mates or even on your
Phone. But knowing police can
Come calling on you and spin your drum at any time is going to be a major hassle, one you may be keen to avoid. Simples no?
Flogging, jailing or banishing people are
Not options. The goverment wont spend the money on jailing low level offenders. The options at present are fines and community punishments.
As I explained the fines are a nonsense as they can be paid off at a nominal amount per week. They have no deterrent value.
Community punishments cost to implement and monitor. Add to this the people paid to 'supervise' these schemes want an easy life.
Offender is supposed to report at 10am but turns up at 1130. The person supervising doesn't want a confrontation or additional paperwork.
The offenders really get an easy ride
with these schemes.
Tv control is an inconvenience that's cheap to administer and has real deterrent value. Sure you can go watch tv at your mates or even on your
Phone. But knowing police can
Come calling on you and spin your drum at any time is going to be a major hassle, one you may be keen to avoid. Simples no?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff