Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    Well the way some people seem to be on her, we are taking away their human rights by putting them in jail, "why, they only raped someone" they should not be allowed to vote and should be locked up properly. Not with their ps3's and sky tv. To be honest rights in general, they shouldnt have the same rights as everybody else.
    Is that a serious reply or are you just misinformed like 99% of the public when it comes to what prison life is like(then again the media does this sort of thing to every situation)

    I knew someone who was long term in prison and only was recently released, even a few months ago out of his wing like 1 person had a PS2, yes I typed that right a PS2!

    They were allowed a maximum of 2 electrical items which they had to either have the money sent in from family or earned by full time jobs in the prison(which they get about £10 a week for)

    Their "sky tv" was about 5-10 channels and they didnt even have many basic channels, they didnt have BBC3, Sky 1, any sports channels etc.

    Their recreation room was 2 pool/snooker tables which were falling to pieces and their "luxury" meals would make a £1 ready meal look like it was all fresh ingredients made from a chef.

    (Original post by kevR94)
    That is true... there are pedophiles, rapists, sexual attackers, kidnappers, arsonists, thiefs, i could go on. Should these people be allwed to have their say? No they shouldnt.
    Yes, and there is plenty of people who arent in prison who are bullies and destroy peoples lives in other ways, or at least really affect their lives.

    At what point do we turn round and say someone is enough of a criminal? If someone scams someone but doesnt go to jail wheras there may be someone in jail for a lesser offense not be able to vote just as they are in jail?

    Also being given the vote is a part of rehabilitation, like already been said the point of jail isnt to punish its to rehabilitate, to just punish them will just make them angry and bitter and more likely to commit further crime.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    Possessing drugs for personal use - the victim is the inocent man they kick the crap out of because he looks like he has money and your so high you dont know what is happening.

    Having consensual incestuous contraceptive sex - well to be honest, thats just wrong.

    Being a member of a banned proscribed political group - that group of mixed race kids you beat up because they were mixed race. Of course there are different groups.

    Kerb crawling and soliciting sex - the plain damage to yourself to be honest.
    So you would imprison people, not for actually committing crimes, but for doing something that you (wrongly) associate with crimes, or alternatively for doing something that you find unsavoury.

    Sound moral judgement there.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drbluebox)
    Is that a serious reply or are you just misinformed like 99% of the public when it comes to what prison life is like(then again the media does this sort of thing to every situation)

    I knew someone who was long term in prison and only was recently released, even a few months ago out of his wing like 1 person had a PS2, yes I typed that right a PS2!

    They were allowed a maximum of 2 electrical items which they had to either have the money sent in from family or earned by full time jobs in the prison(which they get about £10 a week for)

    Their "sky tv" was about 5-10 channels and they didnt even have many basic channels, they didnt have BBC3, Sky 1, any sports channels etc.

    Their recreation room was 2 pool/snooker tables which were falling to pieces and their "luxury" meals would make a £1 ready meal look like it was all fresh ingredients made from a chef.



    Yes, and there is plenty of people who arent in prison who are bullies and destroy peoples lives in other ways, or at least really affect their lives.

    At what point do we turn round and say someone is enough of a criminal? If someone scams someone but doesnt go to jail wheras there may be someone in jail for a lesser offense not be able to vote just as they are in jail?

    Also being given the vote is a part of rehabilitation, like already been said the point of jail isnt to punish its to rehabilitate, to just punish them will just make them angry and bitter and more likely to commit further crime.
    Fistly i am not misinformed at all, the person you knew that was in jail were almost definately bending the truth. I am not proud to admit it really but i have had at least one family member in jail. They were in for about 5 years and he never stopped going on about how much he actually prefered it in jail than to be out. Its a cheap way of living.

    Secondly, even if they get a ps2 or 2 electrical items or any channels (maybe the news channels in prisons may be acceptable) at all or their 'falling to bits' snookertable, they do not deserve these things.

    Prison is supposed to be rehabilitation but it just dosent work. If it worked people wouldnt keep commiting crimes. To become proper rehabilitation, prisons need to be more like they used to be, a lot more strict. (i can accept that years ago there was a lot of corrupt police officers so we could do without them)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Callum828)
    So you would imprison people, not for actually committing crimes, but for doing something that you (wrongly) associate with crimes, or alternatively for doing something that you find unsavoury.

    Sound moral judgement there.
    These things ARE associated with crimes.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    These things ARE associated with crimes.
    Yes but they're NOT CRIMES.

    At least in the sense they're not actually hurting anyone.

    Being a young male is associated with crime, doesn't mean I'm gonna hand myself in at the police station.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    Fistly i am not misinformed at all, the person you knew that was in jail were almost definately bending the truth. I am not proud to admit it really but i have had at least one family member in jail. They were in for about 5 years and he never stopped going on about how much he actually prefered it in jail than to be out. Its a cheap way of living.

    Secondly, even if they get a ps2 or 2 electrical items or any channels (maybe the news channels in prisons may be acceptable) at all or their 'falling to bits' snookertable, they do not deserve these things.

    Prison is supposed to be rehabilitation but it just dosent work. If it worked people wouldnt keep commiting crimes. To become proper rehabilitation, prisons need to be more like they used to be, a lot more strict. (i can accept that years ago there was a lot of corrupt police officers so we could do without them)
    Shame then, that I got to visit their facilities on an open day and saw the facilities which were just as they said they were.

    I dont know why you dont think they should be rewarded for good behaviour which encourages rehabilitiation.

    The reason why many people keep reoffending is in part due to the fact people are so used to being in jail they are afraid of the outside, plus once they are out they have a stigma attached to them so find it hard to get work etc.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drbluebox)
    Shame then, that I got to visit their facilities on an open day and saw the facilities which were just as they said they were.

    I dont know why you dont think they should be rewarded for good behaviour which encourages rehabilitiation.

    The reason why many people keep reoffending is in part due to the fact people are so used to being in jail they are afraid of the outside, plus once they are out they have a stigma attached to them so find it hard to get work etc.
    On open days, where ever you go, a prison, a school, a buisness, it is all set out to look like what they say it is. It is set out in the best light. In reality, when you go for real, it is nothing like that.

    i do think good behaviour should be rewarded, to an extent. And the stuff they get, they get from the begining. Not as areward. It isnt right.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Callum828)
    Yes but they're NOT CRIMES.

    At least in the sense they're not actually hurting anyone.

    Being a young male is associated with crime, doesn't mean I'm gonna hand myself in at the police station.
    They are crimes though. You cannot argue about this. These are crimes which, if commited, should be punishable by imprisonment.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    If the prisoner is going to be let out within 4 years (i.e. before the next general election), then yes they should be given the vote, because the electoral decision is going to directly affect them. If not, then they shouldn't.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    They are crimes though. You cannot argue about this. These are crimes which, if commited, should be punishable by imprisonment.
    Well I don't think they should be punishable by imprisonment but hey, that's not really the topic for today.

    The point is, you are saying that prisoners shouldn't be able to vote because 'rapists and murderers' don't deserve the vote, while ignoring that many people in prison haven't done anything nearly as bad as this.

    It's important to discuss whether these are serious crimes (though apparently you have such blind faith in the British justice system that you believe everyone in prison is guilty of a heinous crime) because they need to be in order to justify the disenfranchisement of those people convicted of them.

    Unless you can convince us that everyone in prison is as bad as Iain Huntley, then your argument falls down.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    So you dont think pedophiles are discusting people. In fact im not even going to answer that one you uneducated idiotic freak. How can you possibly at any length defent a pedophile?
    This comment has discredited you completely, you are quite obviously quite a prejudiced person. Go on, I want to hear your reasons. What have you got against them?

    So if YOU think someone is disgusting, they are automatically scum and should be thrown in jail? You definitely don't come off as a a person with an illogical prejudiced mentality at all. :lol:

    (Original post by kevR94)
    Possessing drugs for personal use - the victim is the inocent man they kick the crap out of because he looks like he has money and your so high you dont know what is happening.
    :lolwut: What drug is this that makes you kick the crap out of someone because you don't know what is happening? Do you read the *******s you type?

    That's a completely separate crime, assault and battery. Nothing to do with drugs. LOL at trying to suggest drug users are violent, illegal drug users are far more peaceful and not violent unlike alcohol users.

    (Original post by kevR94)
    Having consensual incestuous contraceptive sex - well to be honest, thats just wrong.
    :lolwut: Why? You can't just decide to say something's wrong and not give a reason.

    (Original post by kevR94)
    Being a member of a banned proscribed political group - that group of mixed race kids you beat up because they were mixed race. Of course there are different groups.
    Sorry.. what?

    :facepalm:

    (Original post by kevR94)
    Kerb crawling and soliciting sex - the plain damage to yourself to be honest.
    :lolwut:












    :lolwut:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    I am not proud to admit it really but i have had at least one family member in jail. They were in for about 5 years and he never stopped going on about how much he actually prefered it in jail than to be out. Its a cheap way of living.
    I guess by your definition you are related to scum, I wonder what that makes you?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    This comment has discredited you completely, you are quite obviously quite a prejudiced person. Go on, I want to hear your reasons. What have you got against them?

    So if YOU think someone is disgusting, they are automatically scum and should be thrown in jail? You definitely don't come off as a a person with an illogical prejudiced mentality at all. :lol:

    :lolwut: What drug is this that makes you kick the crap out of someone because you don't know what is happening? Do you read the *******s you type?

    That's a completely separate crime, assault and battery. Nothing to do with drugs. LOL at trying to suggest drug users are violent, illegal drug users are far more peaceful and not violent unlike alcohol users.


    :lolwut: Why? You can't just decide to say something's wrong and not give a reason.

    Sorry.. what?

    :facepalm:



    :lolwut:












    :lolwut:
    HAHA your such a backward person its hilarious. Please keep saying stupid things like 'What have you got against paedophiles' HAHA its hilarious that your so ****ing stupid. Seriously, keep quoting me and saying stupid things it is providing me and my riends with such a jolly good time.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    I guess by your definition you are related to scum, I wonder what that makes you?
    By my definition, i am related to scum, that makes me a knowledgeable person, in relation to this argument.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Callum828)
    Well I don't think they should be punishable by imprisonment but hey, that's not really the topic for today.

    The point is, you are saying that prisoners shouldn't be able to vote because 'rapists and murderers' don't deserve the vote, while ignoring that many people in prison haven't done anything nearly as bad as this.

    It's important to discuss whether these are serious crimes (though apparently you have such blind faith in the British justice system that you believe everyone in prison is guilty of a heinous crime) because they need to be in order to justify the disenfranchisement of those people convicted of them.

    Unless you can convince us that everyone in prison is as bad as Iain Huntley, then your argument falls down.
    HAHAHA, just leave.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    HAHAHA, just leave.
    There's nothing wrong with not being able to think of a response. If you just leave it nobody will hold it against you. We're very forgiving here.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Callum828)
    There's nothing wrong with not being able to think of a response. If you just leave it nobody will hold it against you. We're very forgiving here.
    HAHA, na im taking a backseat as you and some other uneducated weird people talk ****. It is absolutely hilarious.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    HAHA, na im taking a backseat as you and some other uneducated weird people talk ****. It is absolutely hilarious.
    It's pretty transparent what you're doing here. You spend days arguing fervently, then when you realise that nobody else is agreeing with you, you act like you never cared in the first place.

    Edit:In fact looking back at the last few pages of the thread, there were several people on one side, and just you on the other. You, by definition, cannot be sitting back to watch the arguments, since they're all with you.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Callum828)
    It's pretty transparent what you're doing here. You spend days arguing fervently, then when you realise that nobody else is agreeing with you, you act like you never cared in the first place.

    Edit:In fact looking back at the last few pages of the thread, there were several people on one side, and just you on the other. You, by definition, cannot be sitting back to watch the arguments, since they're all with you.
    You must be either blind or plain thick if you cant see the people supporting me. Weirdo.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    HAHA your such a backward person its hilarious. Please keep saying stupid things like 'What have you got against paedophiles' HAHA its hilarious that your so ****ing stupid. Seriously, keep quoting me and saying stupid things it is providing me and my riends with such a jolly good time.
    I seriously doubt you have friends, but if you can't provide a logical reason then I guess you don't have one. In that case it's called prejudice.

    Paedophiles aren't even put in jail, so it was a stupid comment saying they are the same as rapists and murderers.
 
 
 
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

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

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