Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    So there are measures in place for the situations you are describing, so why should we reduce the sentence of someone who deliberately ends the life of another person?
    There are measures in place, but they are imperfect. There is clearly a range of blameworthiness of different cases of murder. This should be reflected in greater discretion in sentencing than simply setting a tariff.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    The recidivism rates for released prisoners in the USA is 60% compared with 50% in the UK. The report attributed the lower recidivism rate in the UK to a focus on rehabilitation and education of prisoners compared with the US focus on punishment, deterrence and keeping potentially dangerous individuals away from society.

    Really?

    Then let's look at Norway's progressive rehabilitative prison system:

    When criminals in Norway leave prison, they stay out. It has one of the lowest recidivism rates in the world at 20%.

    Norway also has a relatively low level of crime compared to the US, according to the Bureau of Diplomatic Security. The majority of crimes reported to police there are theft-related incidents, and violent crime is mostly confined to areas with drug trafficking and gang problems.

    Based on that information, it's safe to assume Norway's criminal justice system is doing something right. Few citizens there go to prison, and those who do usually go only once.
    So how does Norway accomplish this feat? The country relies on a concept called "restorative justice," which aims to repair the harm caused by crime rather than punish people. This system focuses on rehabilitating prisoners.

    Take a look at Halden Prison, and you'll see what we mean. The 75-acre facility maintains as much "normalcy" as possible. That means no bars on the windows, kitchens fully equipped with sharp objects, and friendships between guards and inmates. For Norway, removing people's freedom is enough of a punishment.

    Like many prisons, Halden seeks to prepare inmates for life on the outside with vocational programs: woodworking, assembly workshops, and even a recording studio.Halden isn't an anomaly either. Bastoy prison is also quite nice.

    As Bastoy prisoner governor Arne Wilson, who is also a clinical psychologist, explained to The Guardian:
    "In closed prisons we keep them locked up for some years and then let them back out, not having had any real responsibility for working or cooking. In the law, being sent to prison is nothing to do with putting you in a terrible prison to make you suffer. The punishment is that you lose your freedom. If we treat people like animals when they are in prison they are likely to behave like animals. Here we pay attention to you as human beings."
    You realise life on licence means you are not actually in prison? All what you are arguing could apply to those subject to a life licence, but it offers the added protection in that the person will be monitored and recalled to prison if they pose a risk.
    Offline

    18
    Nay I can't agree.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    You realise life on licence means you are not actually in prison? All what you are arguing could apply to those subject to a life licence, but it offers the added protection in that the person will be monitored and recalled to prison if they pose a risk.
    This has nothing to do with life on licence. This abolishes making life sentences for murder mandantory.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    This has nothing to do with life on licence. This abolishes making life sentences for murder mandantory.
    A mandatory life sentence for murder will normally involve a period in prison with the 'life' bit being on licence. I am saying there is nothing wrong with this and it protects the public by ensuring that the offender is constantly monitored and recalled to prison should they pose a risk once released from prison.

    A mandatory life sentence essentially gives someone a life licence, with the period in prison varying depending on the circumstances. I think that is proportionate and right. I am not sure why you oppose this given someone can spend just 20 years in prison for murder and then be freed but on licence to protect the public.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    A mandatory life sentence for murder will normally involve a period in prison with the 'life' bit being on licence. I am saying there is nothing wrong with this and it protects the public by ensuring that the offender is constantly monitored and recalled to prison should they pose a risk once released from prison.

    A mandatory life sentence essentially gives someone a life licence, with the period in prison varying depending on the circumstances. I think that is proportionate and right. I am not sure why you oppose this given someone can spend just 20 years in prison for murder and then be freed but on licence to protect the public.
    Being on licence is a sentence in itself. Judges ought to have flexibility over that part as well.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Being on licence is a sentence in itself. Judges ought to have flexibility over that part as well.
    One that is appropriate for murder.

    And I still do not trust a judge sitting alone to make that call and to come to the most moral and just decision in every case. They already have a lot of flexibility but society, through Parliament, has set down some boundaries and expectations.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    One that is appropriate for murder.

    And I still do not trust a judge sitting alone to make that call and to come to the most moral and just decision in every case. They already have a lot of flexibility but society, through Parliament, has set down some boundaries and expectations.
    These boundaries as they are currently are archaic and out of place.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    These boundaries as they are currently are archaic and out of place.
    That's rhetoric. The current guidelines are very recent.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    That's rhetoric. The current guidelines are very recent.
    Serious, positive change is obstructed by the political need to pander to the reactionary Daily Mail crowd.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Serious, positive change is obstructed by the political need to pander to the reactionary Daily Mail crowd.
    Yes, because those who oppose the mass liberalisation of sentencing, which is largely proportionate and fair at the present time, are all part of the 'Daily Mail crowd'.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    Yes, because those who oppose the mass liberalisation of sentencing, which is largely proportionate and fair at the present time, are all part of the 'Daily Mail crowd'.
    Yes, largely. Criminal sentencing is far, far too harsh at the present time, and effectively nixes any opportunity for rehabilitation.
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Yes, largely. Criminal sentencing is far, far too harsh at the present time, and effectively nixes any opportunity for rehabilitation.
    It isn't. I remember one case where a woman burnt a Matalan store down, and she was out for the grand reopening despite being a reoffender

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Andy98)
    It isn't. I remember one case where a woman burnt a Matalan store down, and she was out for the grand reopening despite being a reoffender

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    First, the fact that you've heard about it almost certainly means it's an outlier.

    Secondly, you've left out a whole bunch of relevant facts as to whether that was appropriate or not (specifically any way she may or may not have posed a continued risk to society).
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Nah
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    PS Reviewer
    This is in cessation
    • Wiki Support Team
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    This bill has been withdrawn.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: May 29, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.