ladylinda
Moderatorz 
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on Jul 1, 2014 16:05:17 GMT -5
www.thebookseller.com/news/downing-street-protest-prison-book-ban.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitterDowning Street protest for prison book ban 27.06.14 | Sarah Shaffi 29 1 119 Writers including Mark Haddon, Sarah Waters and A L Kennedy will gather at Downing Street today to protest to Prime Minister David Cameron against a decision banning the sending of books and other small items to prisoners. The authors will join English PEN and the Howard League for Penal Reform in presenting a letter to Number 10 signed by more than 40 high-profile figures, including Poet Laureate Carol Ann Duffy, Alan Bennett, Salman Rushdie, Philip Pullman, Vanessa Redgrave, Julian Barnes, Irvine Welsh, Jacqueline Wilson and Joanne Harris. The letter says that the government’s policy, which came into force last November and is part of the Earned Privileges Scheme, is “misguided”. “Reading goes hand in hand with education and rehabilitation, whilst research shows that informal learning reduces re-offending,” the letter continues. “We strongly urge you to reverse this harmful policy at the earliest opportunity.” A petition against the ban on books being sent to prisoners has been signed by almost 29,000 people. Today’s protest, part of the Books for Prisoners campaign, has been arranged after a request for Justice Secretary Chris Grayling to meet with Duffy and other writers was refused. Jo Glanville, Director of English PEN said: “We're hopeful that David Cameron will appreciate the necessity of reversing a misguided policy. “There is already evidence of the positive and lasting benefits of access to books on prisoners. At a time of chronic overcrowding and stress in the prison population, it would be perverse to continue to deny supporting the enjoyment of a fundamental human right.” Frances Crook, Chief Executive of the Howard League for Penal Reform, said: “That so many leading writers are urging the Prime Minister to act illustrates the growing disquiet over the ban on sending books and other essentials to prisoners. “The Justice Secretary’s refusal to meet with us to discuss the issue has succeeded only in galvanising the campaign and baffling anyone who believes we should be broadening access to reading and not restricting it. “This is a petty and counter-productive policy which the Ministry of Justice has tried and failed to justify with spurious arguments. “It is surely time the government conceded a change, particularly against a backdrop of ever more overcrowding, growing unrest in prison and an alarming rise in suicides behind bars.”
|
|
Tempus Fugit
Global Facilitator
Contributing Member
Science - making religion look stupid since the 17th century.
Posts: 7,474 
|
Post by Tempus Fugit on Jul 1, 2014 16:14:59 GMT -5
Earned privileges? So they can have books sent in if they behave themselves but not if they don't, then? Sounds perfectly reasonably. Whilst we're at it, let's have the PlayStations and TVs off of 'em if they can't behave, too.
Behavioural conditioning - behave, get stuff; misbehave, suffer. With the plethora of short sentences that are typical these days, if an offender actually gets custody that is, it seems a far more effective way of teaching people to behave than putting them on courses they won't be inside long enough to properly settle into let alone complete.
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on Jul 1, 2014 16:18:50 GMT -5
Ah, Tempus, you're always so soft on crime!
Every study done shows that treating prisoners decently makes them LESS likely to re-offend and treating them badly makes them MORE likely to.
So anyone who calls for TOUGHER regimes in prison is ACTUALLY advocating an INCREASE in crime!
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on Jul 1, 2014 16:19:30 GMT -5
Make them read Shakespeare and Milton and Dickens; that'll larn 'em!
|
|
Tempus Fugit
Global Facilitator
Contributing Member
Science - making religion look stupid since the 17th century.
Posts: 7,474
|
Post by Tempus Fugit on Jul 1, 2014 16:22:15 GMT -5
Ah, Tempus, you're always so soft on crime! Every study done shows that treating prisoners decently makes them LESS likely to re-offend and treating them badly makes them MORE likely to. So anyone who calls for TOUGHER regimes in prison is ACTUALLY advocating an INCREASE in crime! That's funny because the crime and recidivism rates in Singapore are extremely low. Can't recall them having anything other than a tough, robust criminal justice system with tough, robust punishments. |
|
Tempus Fugit
Global Facilitator
Contributing Member
Science - making religion look stupid since the 17th century.
Posts: 7,474
|
Post by Tempus Fugit on Jul 1, 2014 16:24:33 GMT -5
I don't imagine there's much re-offending in the islamic world, either (assuming the sentence isn't the always-popular death).
|
|
Tempus Fugit
Global Facilitator
Contributing Member
Science - making religion look stupid since the 17th century.
Posts: 7,474
|
Post by Tempus Fugit on Jul 1, 2014 16:29:21 GMT -5
Every study done shows that treating prisoners decently makes them LESS likely to re-offend and treating them badly makes them MORE likely to. But as far as I can tell treatment will be as decent as usual if they behave. They'll only lose priveleges if they step out of line. That's cause and effect. So, behave and live reasonably comfortably. How hard can it be...? Mind you, if pokey was an absolute of "hard routine" then I imagine the majority would be quite keen to work towards that early parole and then do their damnedest to not get sent back in. But that needs there to actually be a strong likelyhood of being severely sanctioned on conviction and not given an ineffectual slap on the wrist and asked nicely to not do it again by some wet bleeding-heart right-on yoghurt-knitter on the bench who's swallowed the cock-and-bull sob story your brief has cooked up and has taken pity on you whilst totally forgetting the victim. Aye, there's the rub... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2014 16:33:56 GMT -5
Every study done shows that treating prisoners decently makes them LESS likely to re-offend and treating them badly makes them MORE likely to. But as far as I can tell treatment will be as decent as usual if they behave. They'll only lose priveleges if they step out of line. That's cause and effect. So, behave and live reasonably comfortably. How hard can it be...? Mind you, if pokey was an absolute of "hard routine" then I imagine the majority would be quite keen to work towards that early parole and then do their damnedest to not get sent back in. But that needs there to actually be a strong likelyhood of being severely sanctioned on conviction and not given an ineffectual slap on the wrist and asked nicely to not do it again by some wet bleeding-heart right-on yoghurt-knitter on the bench who's swallowed the cock-and-bull sob story your brief has cooked up and has taken pity on you whilst totally forgetting the victim. Aye, there's the rub... on San Quentin Death Row it's the carrot and stick approach and it works.......good behavior equals contact visits, phone calls, tv, yard, quarterly packages and larger canteen and special purchases. break the rules and these are taken away and most guys who have frequent visitors don't want to lose those contact visits or phone calls plus all the other goodies so they stay in line and try not to get caught at misbehaving. it works. |
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on Jul 1, 2014 16:49:00 GMT -5
Speaking as someone who's been working with inmates for years and has visited LOADS of prisons in Britain I know what I'm talking about.
I've seen the difference in inmates who've been treated decently from those who haven't been.
It really is remarkable.
And it's not only good practice; it's morally better to treat people RIGHT than to treat them WRONG.
How does denying inmates books serve ANY purpose except spite, malice and cruelty?
It doesn't.
It's also counterproductive as well so it fails morally and practically.
|
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Jul 1, 2014 19:45:09 GMT -5
If they want the special rewards then they have to earn them. That works.
Some years ago I had an electronics company and many of the employees went to a federal prison and taught skills to the inmates. These were the toughest of the tough and learning new skills was considered very much special privileges. They worked very hard to obtain and keep those special privileges.
This also gave us time to talk with many of these prisoners in casual environments. It became very clear that if they didn't have to work for these special privileges they would not be very good prisoners and most seem to feel what they got for free came from fools.
Some did change (at least to some degree) while they were inside but many didn't and they saw those running the prison system and those on the outside as people to be used. One thing that was amazing were the number who developed relationships with women (these prisoners were man) on the outside and they would often laugh about how they could lie to what they considered gullible fools simply to be used.
For those who met the requirements for special privileges life inside was not particularly nice, and nearly all had no desire to return. A significant number returned anyway.
Studies reflecting what has been asserted here do not fit my experiences nor the experiences of the police with whom I work.
|
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on Jul 1, 2014 21:59:06 GMT -5
on San Quentin Death Row it's the carrot and stick approach and it works.......good behavior equals contact visits, phone calls, tv, yard, quarterly packages and larger canteen and special purchases. break the rules and these are taken away and most guys who have frequent visitors don't want to lose those contact visits or phone calls plus all the other goodies so they stay in line and try not to get caught at misbehaving. it works. It doesn't make the murder victims whole, so how does any of it "work?" I don't understand what purpose is served manipulating "good" behavior from condemned murderers. They are to be executed. Why are we allowing them anything? |
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 2, 2014 1:10:28 GMT -5
Speaking as someone who's been working with inmates for years and has visited LOADS of prisons in Britain I know what I'm talking about. I've seen the difference in inmates who've been treated decently from those who haven't been. It really is remarkable. And it's not only good practice; it's morally better to treat people RIGHT than to treat them WRONG. How does denying inmates books serve ANY purpose except spite, malice and cruelty? It doesn't. It's also counterproductive as well so it fails morally and practically. question..when your children have been badly behavaved do you punish or reward your children  and this """""particularly against a backdrop of ever MORE overcrowding, growing unrest in prison and an alarming rise in suicides behind bars""" proof positive the regime isn't working under the present lax system...so time for a tougher system..one based on rewards for good and no rewards for bad |
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on Jul 2, 2014 10:59:23 GMT -5
Speaking as someone who's been working with inmates for years and has visited LOADS of prisons in Britain I know what I'm talking about. I've seen the difference in inmates who've been treated decently from those who haven't been. It really is remarkable. And it's not only good practice; it's morally better to treat people RIGHT than to treat them WRONG. How does denying inmates books serve ANY purpose except spite, malice and cruelty? It doesn't. It's also counterproductive as well so it fails morally and practically. question..when your children have been badly behavaved do you punish or reward your children and this """""particularly against a backdrop of ever MORE overcrowding, growing unrest in prison and an alarming rise in suicides behind bars""" proof positive the regime isn't working under the present lax system...so time for a tougher system..one based on rewards for good and no rewards for bad Do I punish or reward my children? Of course. That's a strange question. But my kids are under my control and my husband's and we try to instil good values in them. They're not in prison and under the control of the state. Your second comment is proof positive that the regime isn't working under the present TOO TOUGH system - so time for a laxer, more generous and sympathetic system, one based on rehabilitation and encouragement. 'Tough' policies on crime never work; in fact they lead to an INCREASE in crime and an INCREASE in re-offending. So anyone who argues for 'tougher' policies is, almost certainly through genuine misunderstanding of the realities rather than any deliberate attempt, ENCOURAGING crime. 'Tough' policies are PRO-CRIME policies. Nobody (except criminals) wants that. Frankly all non-violent offenders ought to be released from prison and dealt with through proper community service. That would leave us free to lock up the REAL criminals. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2014 12:42:02 GMT -5
on San Quentin Death Row it's the carrot and stick approach and it works.......good behavior equals contact visits, phone calls, tv, yard, quarterly packages and larger canteen and special purchases. break the rules and these are taken away and most guys who have frequent visitors don't want to lose those contact visits or phone calls plus all the other goodies so they stay in line and try not to get caught at misbehaving. it works. It doesn't make the murder victims whole, so how does any of it "work?" I don't understand what purpose is served manipulating "good" behavior from condemned murderers. They are to be executed. Why are we allowing them anything? nothing will ever make a murder victim whole....nothing, not even execution. we can't find any justice to replace the taking of a life because there is none. the purpose of good behavior makes it much easier on the correctional officers. it is less hazardous to work North Seg and East Block than the Adjustment Center where inmates have nothing left to lose We allow because we are humane. If we can't rise above their behavior then what does that speak about us? Don't fool yourself that it is all fun and games on death row as it isn't and it's a living hell in itself but that's not good enough for some people with nothing but revenge in their hearts and I have had the unpleasant experience of dealing with some of those nutcases, and survivor or not, many are nutjobs with encouragement from more whackjobs |
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on Jul 2, 2014 13:08:34 GMT -5
the purpose of good behavior makes it much easier on the correctional officers. it is less hazardous to work North Seg and East Block than the Adjustment Center where inmates have nothing left to lose It would easier on the correctional staff if they simply opened the gates and let the inmates out. I'm not interested in making the lives of correctional officers easier, or safer. They're extremely well-compensated for what they do. We allow because we are humane. If we can't rise above their behavior then what does that speak about us? It says we're not humane, which is fine with me. I'm not trying to be. Don't fool yourself that it is all fun and games on death row as it isn't and it's a living hell in itself but that's not good enough for some people with nothing but revenge in their hearts and I have had the unpleasant experience of dealing with some of those nutcases, and survivor or not, many are nutjobs with encouragement from more whackjobs Presumably this "living hell" is common knowledge among the violent. One reaps what one sows. Furthermore, all punishment is revenge. That goes for death sentences and parking tickets. |
|
