Lord David Ramsbotham – three words that strike fear into the heart of anyone concerned about the criminal justice system.. You see Sir David is the kind of guy who thinks a criminal is just a friend you haven’t met yet and he was on the BBC this morning pleading for government to spend more of our taxes creating a to back a network of young offender “academies”. The aim would be to provide continuity for offenders aged 10 to 18 before, during and after periods in custody. Access to a range of health, education, and family support services would be offered, to try to stop re-offending. He got a sympathetic hearing from the BBC, as you might expect – no tough questions at all, no articulated concern for the victims of these teenage thugs. The BBC is in harmony with Ramsbotham’s view that crime is the consequence of parental neglect, truancy or eviction from school, lack of meaningful employment, drugs, violence and other causes. Individual culpability is not considered – society is to blame, guv. The thing is that Ramsbotham is never off the BBC, pontificating ever more ludicrous schemes to shift responsibility for crime away from the criminal and onto the victims of crime. He must give thanks that the BBC is always there – ready to provide a public pulpit for him and his soft on crime notions.
ACADEMY OF CRIME.
Bookmark the permalink.
I always like the 67% of offenders sent to prison re-offend statistic. The insinuation being that prison does not work. Of course the fact that the re-offending rates are higher for people who have served community sentences is not mentioned.
On this one, David Vance, you have it completely wrong. Ramsbotham is no liberal, I know the man, and his record shows that he was a fine soldier and a humane but very stern inspector of prisons.
He is as much for personal responsibility and inetgrity as the next man. What he is saying is that you can’t treat crime without looking at the causes. The Labour government have spent ten years dismantling the family systematically, and undermining the concept of personal responsibility. The consequence – to cut a very long story short – is that we have a generation of kids growing up who don’t even understand what personal responsbility is, let alone the capacity and judgment to exercise it. The BBC fan their incomprehension by lauding anti-social behaviour at every opportunity and by kneeling at the altar of the cult of celebrity worship.
All David Ramsbotham is saying is that these kids need decent education – not the ersatz nonsense that is rammed down their throats by NuLabour acolytes in their shoddy sevent-rate schools – and they will then come to understand personal responsibility.
Kids aren’t ‘thugs’ – they don’t have a developed sense of personal responsibility because their brains aren’t fully formed. They become ‘thugs’ as adults if they are not given the right moral framework and education.
This is what Id do.
Id make prison actually prison. You are there to suffer the consequences of your actions and you are there to do the time you have been sent down to do!
However, Id also put in place a system where prisoners who are nearing the end of their sentences are offered the support and help required so they can become productive members of society.
Mailman
Robin,
Ramsbotham may be charming man but he has yet to say anything in this topic with which I agree.
I’d like to see Ramsbottom put up fort debate against
JOE ARPAIO, THE MARICOPA COUNTY SHERIFF (ARIZONA) and his tent city jails.
Of course that would mean the BBC offering a real edgy, controversial alternative to the cosy, corrupt left-wing establishment’s’ BBC echo chamber and noise machine.
Everyone has a take on prisons, from the hang them and flog them to the lets fluff up their pillows every night crew; here is mine….for anyone interested.
A prison should be a place no one wants to experience again.
A prison should not be run by the biggest and most aggressive prisoners.
A prison should not pass on better ways to commit crime.
A prison should not allow the use of drugs.
A prison should not allow brutality.
How to accomplish this need not be brutal in any way just thought out differently and with different sentencing criteria.
1 There should no NO free association of prisoners, all cells should be small and self contained and all sentences should be carried out separated from all other prisoners.
2 There should be no provision of Television, only books and of an educational nature, anyone misusing supplied books gets no more for the full sentence, there should be no weightlifting facilities.
3 All visitors to be completely separated from the prisoner, no exchange of anything between them should be possible.
Sentences should start at say 3 months…. No free association, no one but the Prison Officers to speak with, educational books only to break the monotony of staring at the walls and waiting for your sentence to pass. No kudos of associating with “Hard men” , no “better crime classes” no pool, no TV, no weights, no drugs..….in fact little of anything other than time to think about how boring being in prison is.
Recidivists…. 6 months of the same, then 9, then 12 or as appropriate for the crime.
There would be no prison contacts, friends, people who could “put you in contact” with so and so, you would walk in, spend your time alone, and educate yourself if you wish, get very bored of prison and not want to return.
Getting rid of free association cuts down on bullying, drug trafficking, the number of officers needed to maintain control, no need for expensive workshops, no work to be done to relive the boredom, to way to hatch plans or recruit to some faction or other.
I could go on listing how much better it would be but by now I think you have the picture, simple, cheaper, more humane, and easier to control.
All it needs is some lateral thinking….. and not more and more of our money.
I work in the judical system, have responsibility for some sentencing, and I’m not ‘soft’ on crime. I strongly believe that adults should pay for the consequences of their actions. I also believe that our prisons should be made tougher, and for example, rid completely of drugs (to pick one issue that has been mentioned by the media over the past few days).
What I strongly object to is that we are increasingly demonising our children and branding them as ‘thugs’ when they are below the age of criminal responsibility. We are one of the worst countries in the world at doing this. That is all David Ramsbotham is pointing out. He’s not urging ‘soft’ treatment, only that children should at least be given the opportunity to develop a sense of responsibility through firm, decent education. The brain is not fully formed until children are in their teens, and before that age they need guidance to understand what is right and wrong.
Instead of giving that guidance, NULabour, aided and abetted by the ‘liberal’ values of the BBC and most of the media class, have created a sub-standard educational system that glorifies all the behaviour that we of often revile young people for. An example of their values is that they take hard drugs (coke), so they think it’s OK for young people to experiment with cannabis. At the same time, they have also conspired to undermine the two-parent family, which – though never perfect -for generations did instil decent values into the vast majority young people.
Notwithstanding, a society that brands youngsters as thugs and does nothing about it is barbaric – as callous in my book as the Iranians who execute children. NuLabour has a lot to answer for.
Robin,
I understand your point of view but do not agree with you, or Lord Ramsbotham, that those in their teens are victims of society. Far from it – many of them create victims and are the thugs that you deny. I am not saying ALL teenagers fall into this category but too many do – and you identify the reasons very well. Do you think the killers of Jamie Bulger were victims of society, are evil killers? Barbarism is out there – we must not deny it because it comes with a hoodie and acne.
Jack Bauer | Homepage | 17.06.08 – 10:26 am |
Ah, yes, Sheriff Joe from my home county. No porn, no cigarettes, no TV except for educational shows, Disney, and CNN (not Fox News), and Frank Sinatra and patriotic music piped on an in-house radio station. Certainly all as it should be (except maybe the CNN part). Although tent cities for prisoners during 120ºF summers may sound unpleasant (it is), people pay large sums of money every summer to send their children to sleep-away camps to live in the exact same conditions, albeit with much better food. Arpaio is also a legendary penny pincher, and certainly can’t be accused of throwing money at criminals.
Mind you, Sheriff Joe did bring back the chain gang, and proudly. He also uses it just like they did in the South: as slave labor for local building projects who pay the county for their use.
On the other hand, he does have mandatory English classes for non-speakers, a substantial drug treatment program which continues to follow inmates after their release, the Hard Knocks High School – a fully accredited high school within the jail system – and an animal rescue center and no-kill shelter run and operated entirely by inmates, who get professional training.
He’s what we need here in the UK!
David Vance | Homepage | 17.06.08 – 4:00 pm |
He’s what we need here in the UK!
Be careful what you ask for – you might end up with pink jailhouse-issue boxer shorts being the latest fashion statement in all the council estates.
DP (USA) — just listened to Sheriff Joe interviewed on KSFO radio about 30 minutes ago!
Jack Bauer,
He can be very amusing, no? He used to threaten to run for governor. I don’t think he’s doing that these days.
David Vance,
Robin’s thoughtful comments deserve more than your rather hostile response.
Follow your argument a bit further and you’d be stoning lashing and cutting off hands and feet.
What do you think is responsible for evil and barbarism? Original sin I suppose.
Of course our sick society, government-ruined schools, inconsistent policing, atrocious parenting, and our upside down values are to blame, and of course offenders ought to be made to accept responsibility for their actions as well.
Simply imposing harsh punishment (as a deterrent) and imprisonment (to protect society from them) will not do that on its own. Your scorn shows little understanding of the problem and sounds as barbaric as those thugs you think are just ‘evil’.
Rants from people who know very little about something but are very very angry put me in mind of the comments on HYS and CiF that we all despise.
You and some of your sycophantic cronies can be outrageous bullies when you get together and go for someone, as you will probably do for me now.
I usually stick to the subject I think is the most damaging and egregious of the BBC’s bias, i.e. its vilification of Israel and the Jews, and your input on this is much appreciated.
My views on other subjects often disagree with the majority here so I mainly keep my trap shut on those subjects. But this time I’m risking it.
Hi Sue,
Sorry if you think I was being discourteous to Robin. I did not seek to be but neither do I seek agreement with the position he takes!
I take issue with you on a range of points you make.
First you dismiss many B-BBC contributors as “sycophantic cronies”. How rude is that?
Second you suggest I seek brutalised treatment for young convicts. I do not. I seek them to be punished to the letter of the law. I consistently talk about the rule of law and you seem to have missed that.
Third, here’s my concern. Gary Newlove was kicked to death by three teenage scumbags – in front of his young 12 year old daughter Amy. MY desire is to see such wicked behaviour punished in such a way that it sends a message to others who may think twice before indulging in such behaviour. I do not see the setting up of Academies for criminals as acheiving this.
So, I think you have missed the mark and gone off on a rant of your own. You are welcome to comment, of course, just don’t expect me to take this guff from you.
David,
Ramsbotham, (formerly my Brigade commander in NI) advocated, when he was inspector of prisons, that prisoners should be punished, kept busy with constructive training and rehabilitated so they can re-enter society as useful individuals. Just like the Army does.
The methodology might differ, but the aims are the same.
smallheathen,
The Army mentality is a good one but I see no evidence of this in his comments today. Do you?
DV,
I never suggested that the Army mentality/methodology was evident in his comments, however, it is something worth considering when assessing his views.
smallheathen,
Worth considering, yes? Detectable, No.
“Worth considering, yes? Detectable, No.”
“Detectable, No” (or “evident”, as I said) merely repeats what I have already said.
Cue Thesaurus!
Excuse the tautology.
“Worth considering, yes? Detectable, No.”
You’ve previously attacked Ramsbotham as a bleeding heart liberal.
Is that really as good as deep as your analysis goes – parsing comments for anything you find offensive and then inferring that you know *exactly* what someone’s policy and political positioning is.
Face it David, for all your pretensions of being a sword of truth in a sea of bias, you’re a lightweight who’s out of his depth. No wonder you disliked Reith so much: he took you to the cleaners most times he got here.
P and a chip and on both shoulders,
Thanks for that important contribution – you punch way above your weight.
No, David, thank you, for your contribution. May you never let rest the sword of truth as you take the battle to the devil.
David Vance writes:
The thing is that Ramsbotham is never off the BBC, pontificating ever more ludicrous schemes to shift responsibility for crime away from the criminal and onto the victims of crime.
David, would you please cite three occasions in the past five years when Ramsbotham has done any such thing?
If you cannot, please would you withdraw this slur?
David Vance | Homepage | 17.06.08 – 7:56 pm | #
Mr. Vance,
“First you dismiss many B-BBC contributors as “sycophantic cronies”. How rude is that?
Quite rude, but I didn’t ‘dismiss’ them, but indicated that I feared their intimidating presence. I apologise for the rude phrase.
Murdering psychopaths urgently need to be kept away from the public. However, punishment rarely acts as a deterrent especially with the damaged and deranged.
Given the current climate, – that crime pays, plus a combination of ‘uman rights, early release, the mad legal system, inability to deport subversive foreigners, the obvious lack of structure affecting practically everything from family life, education, dole dependency etc etc…..How can you then leap to the conclusion that teenage hooligans are simply evil. That looks like a lazy and uncharacteristically reactionary stance. Do you not agree that if something was found to help, not just hurt, it would benefit us all.
You were much ruder “just don’t expect me to take this guff from you.”
An apology would be graciously accepted. Not with sarky “Hi” greeting please.
I admire your concern for the horrendous continual unremitting bias in the BBC’s portrayal of Israel. I appreciate your latest post on the subject which makes another valuable contribution towards revealing this.
p and a tale of one chip | 18.06.08 – 10:26 am |
May you never let rest the sword of truth as you take the battle to the devil.
Is it a singing sword, with jewels and everything, like in Prince Valiant? Or is it more black and inscribed with runes, like Elric’s ‘Stormbringer’?
Sue,
We won’t agree on this but I want to be agreeable and therefore I am sorry if my views on this offend you. Feral youth are a menace to our society and I do not see Lord Ramsbotham addressing this element of the issue.
I think we may find other issues to agree upon and therefore thanks for your considered comment, which like Robin’s, contributes to the debate (unlike P without a clue) I take the view that civil people can differ and still remain friendly and I hope you may take this response in that spirit.
DV,
Of course I will, and thank you.
I can easily accept swearing or the odd sarky rebuke, but I hate when people join forces and bully someone into retiring, hurt. Flouncing off even.
Pointless I know as having said goodbye they can easily save face and sneak back as someone else.
I am beginning to admire the resilience of Joel, and the aforementioned P thingy. And now the new Alex/Victoria, Mr/Ms Korosive. They must have skins like rhinoceroses. Or would that be rhinocerosi.
Adjutant | 18.06.08 – 12:12 pm
David, would you please cite three occasions in the past five years when Ramsbotham has done any such thing?
Seems he can’t.
“I think we may find other issues to agree upon and therefore thanks for your considered comment, which like Robin’s, contributes to the debate (unlike P without a clue)”
Given that you’ve slurred Ramsbotham with some singularly unconsidered comments, that’s pretty rich.
Flinging shit at anyone who doesn’t meet your rather black and white view of the world isn’t especially considered, is it?
I mean, how is this,”You see Sir David is the kind of guy who thinks a criminal is just a friend you haven’t met yet” the kind of considered, civil comment you claim to cherish?
Grossly miscontruing Ramsbotham’s position to make some weak, and wholly wrong, point that the BBC is part of a conspiracy to remove responsibility for crime from perpetrators is the kind of flatulent, lazy rhetoric one would expect from someone who doesn’t care for facts, not someone who claims to spend his days bathing in moral clarity with the facts on his side.
P and a tale of half a brain,
I am disinterested in your drivel.
Nice response. Thanks for the heavyweight comment. I notice you’ve not bothered to respond to anyone else’s criticism of your Ramsbotham comments either.
P and a tale of fury signifing nothing,
Isn’t it time you had a rest? Yes, I think so…
Ever since socialism was introduced to this country, crime has been on the rise. The solution is always “more socialism”.