The Student Room Group

Should we build a giant prison?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
Original post by Hal.E.Lujah
Prisons work by segregating. If the aim was to cohesify, the prisons would be broken at a basic psychological level.


You can segregate within a giant prison complex much better than you can in a locality defined prison. Get off your faux-intellectual soapbox.
Reply 21
Someone's been watching too much Johnny English.
Reply 22
Nope. Prisons are better managed with smaller inmate populations, where a guard can get to know the prisoners on a first name basis. Imagine a riot with 100,000 prisoners in one spot? It would take the Armed Forces to quell it. Also prisoners should be housed near to where they live so visiting is easier for their family. Plus by putting all prisoners in one place you are concentrating all the prison jobs, meaning other towns which rely on prisons for employment will suffer. We need to make bigger, more modern prisons but making a super 100,000 all in one facility is a bad idea.
Original post by Hal.E.Lujah
Prisons work by segregating. If the aim was to cohesify, the prisons would be broken at a basic psychological level.


Divide and conquer I like it

We could have 2x2m rooms in the complete dark with a pillow and cover to sleep on/under and when they're not working or using the toilet then could stay in their by themselves
Original post by Deathray
You can segregate within a giant prison complex much better than you can in a locality defined prison. Get off your faux-intellectual soapbox.



But it would be a grouped identity from one location, and there'd be inevitable mixing that is hard to monitor. The judges doing sentencing don't trawl through facebook friends to check there's no mutuals with their cell block :lol:


No need for insults, just came to discuss it. I don't know much about it and am happy to learn.
Original post by uktotalgamer
Ha, nothing that harsh. I don't know to be fair. But they're certainly to lax at the moment. Some people come out and don't mind going back in.


It's not necessarily that they don't mind going back in, it's perhaps more to do with the cr*p conditions when they leave prisons, and prison is seen as a more desirable alternative; they know that at prison you can get a bed, three meals a day etc. - when people leave prison they're given next to nothing with regards to support in aiding them to fit back into life outside prison, hence why some will re-offend.
I like how its the super right wingers who always suggest all these extra harsh punishments, and then its going to be them that gets sent off to jail for making a non politically correct comment on Twitter.
Original post by HBPrincess
It's not necessarily that they don't mind going back in, it's perhaps more to do with the cr*p conditions when they leave prisons, and prison is seen as a more desirable alternative; they know that at prison you can get a bed, three meals a day etc. - when people leave prison they're given next to nothing with regards to support in aiding them to fit back into life outside prison, hence why some will re-offend.


Yes which is why we still need huge reforms in the benefit system.
Reply 28
For the people who have to manage and run the prison it would be a disaster, especially if an incident occurred.
Reply 29
We could always revive the idea of penal transportation. I hear that South Georgia has plenty of free space up for grabs.
Original post by yo radical one
It's not really slavery, they owe a debt to society and can work it off in a very literal sense. The worst most unskilled jobs could be fulfilled by these reprobates allowing the companies to save money to expand or take on those civilized enough not to break the law and give them more comfortable employment.

It's not revenge, revenge would be torturing them


Oh please. As if that'd result in companies improving the working conditions of employees they already have. They'd just cut costs because they have to employ less people since they're getting free labour.

Original post by Deathray
It worked, that's the truth of the matter. It gives prisoners a sense of normality; they still work and they're not couped up in inhumane holes all day. We can give them the jobs no-one wants to do; recycled waste filtering, human waste handling or animal waste handling.


No it didn't. Why do you think it was abolished in the first place? Some people need those jobs anyway. It's like making all convicts do cleaning jobs because 'no one wants them' without taking into account that people do them. You'd just be taking away jobs from people instead of increasing opportunities for them.
Reply 31
The government already have plans to build 'super jails'. In all honesty i think that by building huge prisons to accommodate the increasing prison population is a good idea as prisoners would not be living in overcrowded conditions and overcrowding in prison has been linked to high blolod pressure and stress amongst other medical conditions.

However, the fact that the need for more and bigger prisons to be built just highlights that there is a huge problem with crime in our society and more should be done to deal with that issue rather than just locking offenders up and then putting them back out into society after a certain period of time because they are more than usually going to re offend and end back up in prison within a few years. With recidivism rates in the UK at approximately 50-60%, surely this shows something more needs to be done.

The financial impact on the other hand is going to be huge with it costing around £2.5 billion to build and then there are the other costs such as paying for rehabilitation measures for the inmates whilst incarcerated, uniform, payments to prisoners for their labour etc.

So overall, i do not think that it would be a good idea in the short term as it could reduce the need for more smaller prisons to be built and as said it may bring down the level of problems within smaller prisons. But i do not believe it would be a good idea financially at all. We should be bringing in more rehabilitation initiatives to tackle the problem of crime first hand.
Reply 32
Original post by Swanbow
Nope. Prisons are better managed with smaller inmate populations, where a guard can get to know the prisoners on a first name basis. Imagine a riot with 100,000 prisoners in one spot? It would take the Armed Forces to quell it. Also prisoners should be housed near to where they live so visiting is easier for their family. Plus by putting all prisoners in one place you are concentrating all the prison jobs, meaning other towns which rely on prisons for employment will suffer. We need to make bigger, more modern prisons but making a super 100,000 all in one facility is a bad idea.


I'm not suggesting a giant all-in-one prison with one guard looking after 100,000 convicts. You'd probably need at least 10,000 guards and that would need to be spread dependent on the number of convicts. That however is a significant reduction on the 22k looking after prisoners now and would save a tonne of money

Original post by Hal.E.Lujah
But it would be a grouped identity from one location, and there'd be inevitable mixing that is hard to monitor. The judges doing sentencing don't trawl through facebook friends to check there's no mutuals with their cell block :lol:


No need for insults, just came to discuss it. I don't know much about it and am happy to learn.


Does it really matter if prisoners are housed with people they know or people they don't? That seems to be missing the point of prison.
Reply 33
Original post by Deathray
I'm not suggesting a giant all-in-one prison with one guard looking after 100,000 convicts. You'd probably need at least 10,000 guards and that would need to be spread dependent on the number of convicts. That however is a significant reduction on the 22k looking after prisoners now and would save a tonne of money


Yeah, but that puts 12k people out of work. In the long run it would probably save money, but the costs of building a 100,000 capacity prison would be astronomical. Labour's plans to increase capacity by just 12,000 was going to cost £2 billion and that was quite a while back. Plus there is the logistical problem, providing healthcare, food and other provisions will be an absolute nightmare causing gridlock where ever you place this prison. The influx of 10,000 guards would put pressure on the housing market in that area, and the government would most likely need to fund housing developments for all the staff that will be directly employed by the prison, and that isn't even taking into account those indirectly employed by it.

A better idea would be to create a number of new prisons catering for each region; one for London, one for the South, one of the Midlands, one for the North, one for Wales and one for Scotland. Logistically it would be much simpler, and would spread jobs out across the country. Plus it makes visitation much easier.
Reply 34
Original post by Swanbow
Yeah, but that puts 12k people out of work. In the long run it would probably save money, but the costs of building a 100,000 capacity prison would be astronomical. Labour's plans to increase capacity by just 12,000 was going to cost £2 billion and that was quite a while back. Plus there is the logistical problem, providing healthcare, food and other provisions will be an absolute nightmare causing gridlock where ever you place this prison. The influx of 10,000 guards would put pressure on the housing market in that area, and the government would most likely need to fund housing developments for all the staff that will be directly employed by the prison, and that isn't even taking into account those indirectly employed by it.

A better idea would be to create a number of new prisons catering for each region; one for London, one for the South, one of the Midlands, one for the North, one for Wales and one for Scotland. Logistically it would be much simpler, and would spread jobs out across the country. Plus it makes visitation much easier.


Shove it in the middle of nowhere or under the ocean, you can then get the prisoners to provide services the guards need etc and reduce strain on the locality.
Reply 35
Original post by Deathray
Shove it in the middle of nowhere or under the ocean, you can then get the prisoners to provide services the guards need etc and reduce strain on the locality.


Hmm yes. Because putting something in the middle of nowhere does not mean that extensive infrastructure has to be created to support it. Under the ocean? Yeah good luck with that.
Reply 36
Original post by Swanbow
Hmm yes. Because putting something in the middle of nowhere does not mean that extensive infrastructure has to be created to support it. Under the ocean? Yeah good luck with that.


It's a bunch of retrogade societal scum, if they all rot to death nobody cares. That's the beauty you don't need infrastructure.
Reply 37
Original post by Deathray
It's a bunch of retrogade societal scum, if they all rot to death nobody cares. That's the beauty you don't need infrastructure.


If that is your opinion why not just build death camps for them?

But oh wait, even death camps require extensive infrastructure to function. :wink:
Reply 38
Original post by Swanbow
If that is your opinion why not just build death camps for them?

But oh wait, even death camps require extensive infrastructure to function. :wink:


Or we could shoot them when they plead guilty, no infrastructure required?
Reply 39
Original post by Deathray
It's a bunch of retrogade societal scum, if they all rot to death nobody cares. That's the beauty you don't need infrastructure.


Thats a bit of a extreme view you have there Deathray...

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending