Boris's plans to deal with violent crime

varian, many thanks for your contributions to this thread, especially for the link to the research and to the Secret Barrister's views.
The evidence hasn't changed since I started work with offenders in the late 70's. The next 40 years I worked with children and families, most families had an adult who'd been in prison and many had children involved with the youth justice systems.
The evidence says, countries who put money and expertise into early years are likely to have less drug/alcohol/mental health or crime than those like ours, that come on after offending/anti social behaviour has started to attract the attention of the authorities.
Boris Johnsons and Priti Patel are appealing to people who aren't interested in research, or what actually works and helps society.
Short prison sentences don't work. They're often the last resort for drug addicted mothers who have worked their way through alternatives to custody. They get 3 months hmp. Unless they have family to step in, their children go into foster care, often separately as finding places for 3 - 6 children and keeping them together is almost impossible. The emotional damage done to these vulnerable family units is immeasurable, although we can predict those children will become "known" to the criminal justice system.
Put money into prevention, into early years, into supporting vulnerable parents. Bring back youth clubs, relationship building between area social work teams and the families they're there to support. Re-open the family centres, the drug and alcohol treatment services. Yes, have more police officers and teams of social workers, probation officers and community police officers working together.
By all means have long sentences for dangerous offenders. But don't think returning to Victorian bread, water and cruel regimes will rehabilitate them.
We could learn a lot from the Netherlands.

An eloquent and informative article varian but sadly it will be disregarded and probably rubbished as leftie nonsense by the lock em up brigade. I would stake my house on this information not being published by the Mail and Express or the Borisgraph.

"Let's hug a hoody" was also once Tory policy. Whatever happened to that?

Very strong stuff, varian.
That's how I feel too, though his feelings must be much stronger than mine.

A barrister warns us Johnson's plan to lock up more criminals is a con:-

"This is why I am angry. Not because I’m a “lefty” inherently resistant to Boris Johnson’s white hot public service reforms. I’m angry because as a prosecutor I am still having to sit down with crying witnesses week after week and explain that their torment is being prolonged for another six months because the government refuses to pay to keep courtrooms open. I’m angry because the Innocence Tax – the policy that forces the wrongly accused to pay privately for their legal representation and then denies them their costs, bankrupting them, when they are acquitted – is not even in the political peripheral vision. I’m angry because our Prime Minister is a man who looks at the record rates of death, violence, suicide, overcrowding and self-harm in our prisons and whose first question is, “How do we get more people in there?”. I’m angry because the notion that you “crack down on crime” by chucking a few more police officers onto the streets and shoving more and more people into our death-riven prisons is a con. It is a con to victims of crime, and it is a con to you, the public. I’m angry because we have the indignity of a dishonest, cowardly and exploitative Prime Minister fiddling with his Party’s g-spot while the criminal justice system burns.

Don’t fall for his con trick."

thesecretbarrister.com/2019/08/13/dont-fall-for-boris-johnsons-criminal-justice-con-tricks/

Why am I not surprised, Fennel?

Interesting though it proves that my (now) MP really was lying through her teeth.

Was it Gove's predecessor, Chris Grayling, who wanted to ban prisoners from having books? That'll teach them!

Did anyone else see the BBC news tonight about 'county lines" and the exploitation by drug dealers of vulnerable children in the so called care system? It would make you weep, or it should. The supervised housing (outsourced) was shameful and it looked disgusting and the police officers were in despair as they are the front line social and mental health service. The people at the top of the drug business need to be dealt with because of the misery and exploitation but no amount of 'bang them up and throw away the key" will solve the problems that these rejected and overlooked children suffer.

This is all too little too late and nothing will work.

I've just found this on the Independent's website:
"Boris’s “new” proposal to create 10,000 new prison places was, in fact, announced by Michael Gove three years ago, albeit cushioned by the slightly fluffier language of “rehabilitation”."

And you're not a very good mindreader.

All I can do is judge you by what you write and what you have written suggests you're prone to stereotyping.

I wasn't making any assumptions, Day6, nor was I being arrogant.

I was asking a question.

Ahem! And I wonder which model you fit, Day6.

Before the last GE, I went to the hustings, when all the hopefuls face questions from the general public. When asked about the Tory reduction in police numbers, the Tory candidate first denied there had been a cut. Then, she claimed that the numbers weren't relevant and the number of police officers has no relevance to crime or the number of solved crime.

So what's the truth? Far be it from to suggest that my (now) MP was lying through her teeth.

There is a huge difference between a person who forms their opinions based on facts, evidence, research and their own experience and a person who believes exactly what they are told to believe by the right wing tabloids.

All of us, I imagine, have friends or acquaintances with different opinions. Some deserve respect and others do not.

"The criminally inclined" -
Day6 I don't see the young people involved in these violent gangs, even if drugs are involved, as criminally inclined.
When I was that age I belonged to a 'gang'. But TG our activities were more adventurous than criminal.
But there are more sophisticated influences on young people at work now.

It is typical of the simplistic thinking which has lead to the brexit nonsense and so much else which has gone wrong in our country thanks to the influence of the Daily Mail, Express and The Sun

Oh be careful Varian That was rather imperious.

People might accuse you of seeing anyone who disagrees with you as stupid or a reader of certain papers.

Your sentence sums up the arrogance and blinkered thinking of Remainers. You really do fit the sneering, short-sighted remainer model who dismisses anyone who believes and thinks differently.

What Works to Reduce Re-offending: A Summary of the Evidence

www.gov.scot/publications/works-reduce-reoffending-summary-evidence/

You'd be surprised growstuff

Do stop making arrogant assumptions.

I don't have a stereotype but you obviously see me as not knowing anything about the criminally inclined or indeed of having any dealings with them either.

Thank you quizqueen for that classic example of uninformed opinion on "law and order" typical of the ultra-right.

You cannot even give a minute to considering whether this "lock em up and throw away the key" policy has ever worked or could ever work to reduce offending.

It is typical of the simplistic thinking which has lead to the brexit nonsense and so much else which has gone wrong in our country thanks to the influence of the Daily Mail, Express and The Sun.

How many people who have been locked up for crime do you actually know personally, Day6?

They don't all conform to your stereotype.

I agree with you quizqueen
I also think a life sentence should mean life.

a reactionary advocate of "tougher prison sentences

There is NOTHING reactionary in wanting the punishment to fit the crime, is there?

I fully believe we have to 'temper justice with mercy' (as the Bard believes) but there have been a number of cases over the years when sentencing of serious crime has been extremely lenient, for no good reason.

Our prisons should try to rehabilitate offenders -I firmly believe in that - but sadly trying to deter young criminals when all they know in family life is criminality and no sense of right from wrong means the state has to pick up the tab for any remedial work - much of which is totally ineffective.

Very few criminally inclined young people go straight because because they are able to have a game of table tennis on a Tuesday night down at the community centre. When their mates are hanging around outside with drugs, alcohol and the spoils of a few burglaries they find each other.

I agree, we should try to show them how life can be different, but sadly, like always tends to gravitate towards like. Family life is important but sadly many of the criminally inclined come from homes where dishonesty and substance abuse are a way of life.

Not sure how you break that cycle because very few have Damascene experiences because of intervention and go on to a dramatically change their attitude or actions. The intervention is needed at the mother's knee. How do we teach people to be honest and good, concerned parents?

I believe in helping young people to make the most of their opportunities, especially if they come from disadvantaged backgrounds but you also have to change the company they keep as well, and that's a gargantuan task, if not an impossible one.

I don't see that a 'deterrent' stance, such as the one BJ is going to initiate is a bad thing. It's probably long overdue, in truth. I think we can all agree that crime/lawlessness isn't going to improve society and we cannot allow it to flourish because we don't have the people power on the streets and in the judicial system.

I am very happy to be separated from criminals by bars and I don't care how long they are in there for as long as it's a long, long time. The innocent public should be the priority here, not the offenders.

day6. As you like. I am not a leftie Guardian reader, but one only has to look at the headlines in the red tops to see what I mean. If you choose to misunderstand my point there is little I can do about that.

I think most people have been victims of one crime or another, “coming down hard on those who break the law” doesn’t mean locking up for longer and longer sentences. Surely it’s better to prevent so many crimes in the first place, making sure those who do commit crimes get caught and are given sentences which mean they are less likely to repeat the offence, and make a contribution to society in one way or another. This means - more police on the streets, more help for those with mental health, drug and alcohol problems, help for families with difficulties, more emphasis on education and rehabilitation inside. We have the biggest per capita prison population in Europe and it doesn’t seem to deter crime. Still, if we are becoming a vassal of the USA we’d better copy their penal system. That works.