Soldato
We used to hang people for murder, didnt stop murder though
Crime (stabbings) in London
- Thread starter jsmoke
- Start date
We used to hang people for murder, didnt stop murder though
It stopped them from killing again.
Caporegime
Definitely effective at preventing reoffending
Lol, who would have thought!
It's as if falling stop search and rising knife crime are linked...
Soldato
So putting someone in prison and making them smash rocks all day will stop them reoffending ? lol
that isn't what they said, they were clearly referring to hanging people for murder... if you need any further details on how that stops reoffending then...
Soldato
Well lets just hope they dont bring hanging back .
that isn't what they said, they were clearly referring to hanging people for murder... if you need any further details on how that stops reoffending then...
Only, doesn't murder beget murder, when eventually someone innocent is murdered for a murder they didn't commit, as seen time and time again by death row and the injustice charities such as the innocence project, do we then murder the prosecution team for incompetence to put them off doing it again?
no I don't think we should murder the prosecution???
I was just pointing out that the other posters were referring to the death penalty
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 6,590
You make it so unbearable the thought of reoffending sends shivers down ones spine.
Lucky you. I used to live in a new town (full of families originating from London, having moved out after the war - exceedingly un multicultural) and there were plenty of stabbings etc.
It’s less to do with “multiculturalism”, more to do with poverty.
Last edited:
Arguably hard labour is a more “traditional” punishment than what we do now. It didn’t work then either.
I've lived in London my whole life (I'm 28 now) and when we were teenagers there were certain areas you just wouldn't go to (Brixton, Peckham, Hackney and Tottenham to name but a few) but now you would. Back then it was always the fear of gangs and getting mugged and or stabbed.
Nowadays that fear doesn't seem to exist as many of these areas have to some extent become gentrified. It seems to me that many of these stabbings seem to happen on estates where "gangs" (I use this term loosely but it could just be groups of friends) have issue with other gangs/groups. They seem more isolated incidents in that way. But they do seem more numerous.
I've not checked the stats but I expect to some extent social media and technology makes this seem like a more prevalent issue. With rising population numbers too, can we expect to see higher figures as well?
Nowadays that fear doesn't seem to exist as many of these areas have to some extent become gentrified. It seems to me that many of these stabbings seem to happen on estates where "gangs" (I use this term loosely but it could just be groups of friends) have issue with other gangs/groups. They seem more isolated incidents in that way. But they do seem more numerous.
I've not checked the stats but I expect to some extent social media and technology makes this seem like a more prevalent issue. With rising population numbers too, can we expect to see higher figures as well?
Plenty of poor people where I live, it's an ex-mining town where a lot of people work in factories/warehouses, no stabbings though. The reason being is the town still has a sense of community, everyone knows everyone. People aren't stabbing each other because you probably went to school with the guys brother you're intending on stabbing and know his Dad from the pub. When you have big populations full of people who share a town or city but are basically complete strangers then you have stabbings. This is the problem that a lot of working class people have with mass immigration, it erodes away at the sense of community people have or used to have because there's a complete lack of integration.
Man of Honour
The evidence doesn't support harsher punishments being effective at reducing either levels of crime or recidivism - the only thing that has consistently been shown to work in terms of reducing recidivism is well planned, organised and resourced rehabilitation c.f. the Scandinavian countries. Anecdotally you will find people who've been subjected to a short sharp shock and they'll be able to tell you that it straightened them out so no doubt it can work in some cases but in many more it doesn't lead to a change in behaviour for the better and does nothing to improve their chances for reintegrating with society after their sentence has finished. The argument you've just advanced also assumes a rational actor who recognises an almost unavoidable likelihood of punishment following e.g. "if I commit this crime I will face X punishment which I don't want" - detection and clear up rates would have to be pretty near 100% before people assumed it would be them that got caught and that also assumes that they are committing crime on a "rational" risk/reward basis rather than a compulsion to commit a crime or by circumstances which have meant they committed the crime which were beyond normal for them e.g. they got into a fight and it went a bit too far, what you might loosely term crimes of passion.
At the other end of the scale I'd have to acknowledge that capital punishment does remove the chance of that individual reoffending once the sentence has been carried out but importantly it shows little to no effect on the occurrence of crime overall i.e. there is no deterrent effect from it so all that means is you get roughly the same amount of crime but now perpetrated by someone else. That's before you consider that capital punishment would be disproportionate for most crimes and leaves you nowhere else to go, if you start executing people for comparatively trivial offences then you might find perverse incentives arise to cause escalation in crimes. I don't propose to rehearse all the arguments for and against capital punishment, there are a number of threads here where this has been done and very few people will change their position on it.
And it stopped the tax payer from having to pay for their stay in prison.
They cut down on "stop and search" because people claimed police were targeting certain groups or areas, but they were just going by statistics. If certain people or places are problem spots then obviously they are going to target them more. Otherwise it's a waste of resources.
Last edited:
Associate
I can't criticise London, a woman was shot in the head on her doorstep around the corner from me and a man was stabbed to death in the town centre. If you're going to kill someone I don't think it matters where you live.
Permabanned
Making prisoners do hard labour, in the community if possible, gives them a sense of responsibility, a means of earning things like TV time, library access and early release. If they refuse or muck about their sentence is no longer up for early release and their privileges are withdrawn. Plus it keeps them fit and disciplined, a tired out prisoner is less likely to cause aggravation in the prison. The same for young offender institutions, make `em work until their muscles scream, it may not make them less liable to re-offend, but they can do productive work for their communities and for many it will be the first time they have had to expend energy to other's benefit.
You were doing great until you brought up immigration
There's little sense of community in London for many reasons;
- Just too many people
- Busy/hectic lives
- Younger population
- Most people rent and therefore move more often
- Economic differences are very pronounced in some areas (e.g. council estates right next to £1m homes)
Immigration could be one of the reasons in particular areas, but I doubt it in most. a lot of areas with high immigration, or a particular ethnic community is exactly that - a strong community. Probably a lot better than some Tottenham rudeboys born and bred that think they're the best thing since sliced bread and that they 'own' their estate
