Wythenshawe police crash

[p1esk]

SVTRick said:

p1esk said:

Sheepshanks said:

p1esk said:

Incidentally, what's the view here on the policy whereby in some pursuits the police drivers will now sometimes deliberately ram the 'bandit' vehicle in order to terminate the pursuit? It might be justified in extreme cases, but are they resorting to that tactic too readily?

Not enough, I’d say.

Well, as you may have guessed, my inclination was the other way, but I suppose it's not something we can judge with any degree of certainty.

Well if the driver & passengers causing this type of required failure to stop pursuit which results in them being forced to stop, if found guilty should be made to pay the full cost and not some pathetic £200 fine.

Yes, I'd agree with that, but I suppose the problem then would be that in many cases the culprits would not have the resources to pay for it anyhow. My answer to that would be to keep them locked up in some secure institution in which they can carry out useful work until they've paid it off. That might take a long time, but that's their problem.

We keep being told that prison doesn't work, but it certainly works to the extent of keeping serious troublemakers out of circulation, and preventing them from committing further offences. If there's a better answer, let's be hearing about it and applying it.

[OddCat]

p1esk said:

We keep being told that prison doesn't work.........

Well, it doesn't the way we do it....

[p1esk]

OddCat said:

p1esk said:

We keep being told that prison doesn't work.........

Well, it doesn't the way we do it....

Well what should we be doing then?

I must admit that I'm not far removed from the hanging and flogging camp, but on the other hand it's time we instituted some system that would crack down on serious crime, particularly the repeat performances. Paying taxes to fund this stupid merry-go-round is not on, when we ought to be deploying that money to help genuine cases where people are in difficulty because they are truly unable to cope reasonably from their own resources.

[Sheepshanks]

p1esk said:

That might take a long time, but that's their problem.

Snag is it’s costing us 40 grand a year to keep them there.

[p1esk]

Sheepshanks said:

p1esk said:

That might take a long time, but that's their problem.

Snag is it’s costing us 40 grand a year to keep them there.

I did appreciate that prison is very expensive, but I'd no idea the costs were at that level. We definitely need some form of sanction that's effective and cheaper.

I'm not in favour of simply copying what is done in other countries, but are there no good examples elsewhere from which we might learn something?

Another aspect is that we simply put too many people in prison, do we not? I would suggest that people should only be sent to prison if they are such a menace to society, e.g. they are seriously violent individuals, that they need to be kept out of circulation for the protection of the public. Other offenders should be made to work to pay - so far as possible - for the harm they have done.

[Derek Smith]

p1esk said:

I did appreciate that prison is very expensive, but I'd no idea the costs were at that level. We definitely need some form of sanction that's effective and cheaper.

I'm not in favour of simply copying what is done in other countries, but are there no good examples elsewhere from which we might learn something?

Another aspect is that we simply put too many people in prison, do we not? I would suggest that people should only be sent to prison if they are such a menace to society, e.g. they are seriously violent individuals, that they need to be kept out of circulation for the protection of the public. Other offenders should be made to work to pay - so far as possible - for the harm they have done.

There's lots of research online. You suggest you are not in favour of copying what other countries do, but the correct way of describing it is to say copying what has been proved to work.

The point with locking up offenders is that, without some diversionary measures it turns them into more committed offenders.

One of the more common suggestions of prison reform groups is to restrict prison to those whom the public need to be protected from. Another, less common, is some form of restitution.

[p1esk]

Derek Smith said:

p1esk said:

I did appreciate that prison is very expensive, but I'd no idea the costs were at that level. We definitely need some form of sanction that's effective and cheaper.

I'm not in favour of simply copying what is done in other countries, but are there no good examples elsewhere from which we might learn something?

Another aspect is that we simply put too many people in prison, do we not? I would suggest that people should only be sent to prison if they are such a menace to society, e.g. they are seriously violent individuals, that they need to be kept out of circulation for the protection of the public. Other offenders should be made to work to pay - so far as possible - for the harm they have done.

There's lots of research online. You suggest you are not in favour of copying what other countries do, but the correct way of describing it is to say copying what has been proved to work.

The point with locking up offenders is that, without some diversionary measures it turns them into more committed offenders.

One of the more common suggestions of prison reform groups is to restrict prison to those whom the public need to be protected from. Another, less common, is some form of restitution.

On your first point I don't advocate simply copying, but looking at how successful are the methods used elsewhere, and applying them here in modified form, i.e. modified to accommodate possible differences in the respective environments. What works well elsewhere, might not work so well here if simply copied without any adjustments.

On your second point the more committed offenders would simply have to be dealt with more appropriately and effectively. I don't know what is meant by diversionary measures, but at the end of the day the real troublemakers need to be put out of business, one way or another. If that conjures up a picture of harsh treatment for some offenders, e.g. the more serious offenders, and the more frequent offenders, well so be it. Quite frankly I'm a bit fed up of resources being expended on people like that, when there are plenty of normal decent people who deserve to be in receipt of some of those resources.

With regard to your third point, I've already mentioned the point about reserving prison for those who need to be kept out of circulation. As for restitution, I'm all in favour of that policy if it can be applied effectively and at acceptable cost. Presumably this is already part of the policy for dealing with offenders, but it does need to be delivering worthwhile results, otherwise I wouldn't be in favour of continuing to deploy resources in that way.

[jonwm]

Sheepshanks said:

p1esk said:

Incidentally, what's the view here on the policy whereby in some pursuits the police drivers will now sometimes deliberately ram the 'bandit' vehicle in order to terminate the pursuit? It might be justified in extreme cases, but are they resorting to that tactic too readily?

Not enough, I’d say.

We need more suitable vehicles if this is the way they are going, ramming a 3 series into the rear of any other car is going to disable the police car quicker than the suspect car, I know it will never happen but the bull bars on the US police cars should be available for our traffic police, they would think twice of reverse ramming then too

[Derek Smith]

p1esk said:

On your first point I don't advocate simply copying, but looking at how successful are the methods used elsewhere, and applying them here in modified form, i.e. modified to accommodate possible differences in the respective environments. What works well elsewhere, might not work so well here if simply copied without any adjustments.

On your second point the more committed offenders would simply have to be dealt with more appropriately and effectively. I don't know what is meant by diversionary measures, but at the end of the day the real troublemakers need to be put out of business, one way or another. If that conjures up a picture of harsh treatment for some offenders, e.g. the more serious offenders, and the more frequent offenders, well so be it. Quite frankly I'm a bit fed up of resources being expended on people like that, when there are plenty of normal decent people who deserve to be in receipt of some of those resources.

With regard to your third point, I've already mentioned the point about reserving prison for those who need to be kept out of circulation. As for restitution, I'm all in favour of that policy if it can be applied effectively and at acceptable cost. Presumably this is already part of the policy for dealing with offenders, but it does need to be delivering worthwhile results, otherwise I wouldn't be in favour of continuing to deploy resources in that way.

Diversionary tactics are the strength of more sensible tactics in other countries. They work in all sots of societies, so I'm not sure we need to modify them in any significant way. But if you want a choice, there is one. Picking something untried is not sensible.

Diversion works. There are many charities that use it with a high degree of success. It's a shame that we have to depend on money donated from the public. I understand the reluctance of MPs to use such tactics as the dreadful press we have will make out it is soft on the offenders.

We send out offenders into the world with no skills and no support for a change of lifestyle. We seemed surprised when they revert to crimes.

We should forget what the offenders 'deserve' and do what is best for the rest of us. Ignore the DM.

[Mr Tidy]

Sheepshanks said:

Not enough, I’d say.

+1 - Just stop them and get them nicked.

Then if they can't pay the fine, give them more hours of community service or time inside instead surely?

And even if there are cockroaches in the nick, isn't that what plenty of people renting privately and living on benefits experience every day? Why are crims so "precious"?

[Psycho Warren]

chaingangs and forced labour gets my vote.

Prisoners should have all rights stripped from them except the most basic rights of food, water, shelter and healthcare. They want better conditions then they have to "earn" it through labour and good behaviour.

MAybe the experience of doing a good days graft for free will mean they look forward to doing it AND getting paid when they are released.