Given five minutes before work this morning, I can only find UK reoffending rates statistics for 10-17 year-olds. Apparently, in 2004, 41.3% of young offenders reoffended within a year.
Now I've had my car broken into a couple of times, but in my book that barely qualifies as being a victim of crime compared to some crime against your person, like being mugged or (God forbid) actual bodily harm. So my point of view is probably off to one end of the scale (the Bleeding Heart Liberal end, obviously - duh). But speaking personally, even if I was the victim of some sort of serious crime, I'd like to think that I'd prefer a rehabilitation policy to one of punishment. I'd like to think that, if you could absolutely guarantee that I would never be a victim of crime again, I'd be happy to see the criminal go unpunished.
That's a slightly misleading statement, because it links punishment and rehabilitation - and I think most of the evidence shows that there is no link. Some might argue that that is because the punishments we hand down aren't extreme enough - but we only have to look at Dickensian England and the origin of the phrase "might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb", to see that it doesn't stamp out crime. It might reduce the level, but it pushes the remainder to increased levels of desperation and violence. That's not good.To my mind, that condones a level of barbarism into society which is precisely the wrong direction for society to progress in.
Oh, and for the record, I do not believe that the state has the right to take the life of any of its citizens, for any reason. But that's not the debate I wanted to have. I want to concentrate here on the prison system, and what it achieves or fails to achieve. And what that says about us, and what we demand of it.
Okay, well, that's my rather facile opinion on the matter, thrown together in ten minutes this morning. What do you think?
(and Moom, having lit the blue touchpaper, retires...)
Now I've had my car broken into a couple of times, but in my book that barely qualifies as being a victim of crime compared to some crime against your person, like being mugged or (God forbid) actual bodily harm. So my point of view is probably off to one end of the scale (the Bleeding Heart Liberal end, obviously - duh). But speaking personally, even if I was the victim of some sort of serious crime, I'd like to think that I'd prefer a rehabilitation policy to one of punishment. I'd like to think that, if you could absolutely guarantee that I would never be a victim of crime again, I'd be happy to see the criminal go unpunished.
That's a slightly misleading statement, because it links punishment and rehabilitation - and I think most of the evidence shows that there is no link. Some might argue that that is because the punishments we hand down aren't extreme enough - but we only have to look at Dickensian England and the origin of the phrase "might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb", to see that it doesn't stamp out crime. It might reduce the level, but it pushes the remainder to increased levels of desperation and violence. That's not good.To my mind, that condones a level of barbarism into society which is precisely the wrong direction for society to progress in.
Oh, and for the record, I do not believe that the state has the right to take the life of any of its citizens, for any reason. But that's not the debate I wanted to have. I want to concentrate here on the prison system, and what it achieves or fails to achieve. And what that says about us, and what we demand of it.
Okay, well, that's my rather facile opinion on the matter, thrown together in ten minutes this morning. What do you think?
(and Moom, having lit the blue touchpaper, retires...)
No comments:
Post a Comment