Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Celtic Radio Community > General Discussion > Prisons


Posted by: Rindy1202 16-Dec-2004, 09:49 AM
Sheriff Joe Arpaio (in Arizona) who created the "tent city jail":
He has jail meals down to 40 cents a serving and charges the inmates for them
He stopped smoking and porno magazines in the jails.
Took away their weights.
Cut off all but "G" movies.
He started chain gangs so the inmates could do free work on county and city projects.
Then he started chain gangs for women so he wouldn't get sued for discrimination.
He took away cable TV until he found out there was a federal court order that required cable TV for jails. So he hooked up the cable TV again but only let in the Disney channel and the weather channel.
When asked why the weather channel he replied, so they will know how hot it's gonna be while they are working on my chain gangs.
He cut off coffee since it has zero nutritional value
When the inmates complained, he told them, "This isn't the Ritz/Carlton. If you don't like it, don't come back.
He bought Newt Gingrich' lecture series on videotape that pipes into the jails.
When asked by a reporter if he had any lecture series by a Democrat, he replied that a democratic lecture series might explain why a lot of the inmates were in his jails in the first place.

More on the Arizona Sheriff:
With temperatures being even hotter than usual in Phoenix (116 degrees just set a new record), the Associated Press reports:
About 2,000 inmates living in a barbed-wire-surrounded tent encampment at the Maricopa County Jail have been given permission to strip down to their government-issued pink boxer shorts.
On Wednesday, hundreds of men wearing boxers were either curled up on their bunk beds or chatted in the tents, which reached 138 degrees inside the week before.
Many were also swathed in wet, pink towels as sweat collected on their chests and dripped down to their pink socks. "It feels like we are in a furnace" said James Zanzot, an inmate who has lived in the tents for 1 1/2 years. "It's inhumane."
Joe Arpaio, the tough-guy sheriff who created the tent city and long ago started making his prisoners wear pink, and eat bologna sandwiches, is not one bit sympathetic
He said Wednesday that he told all of the inmates: "It's 120 degrees in Iraq and our soldiers are living in tents too, and they have to wear full battle gear, but they didn't commit any crimes, so shut your damned mouths!"
Way to go, Sheriff! Maybe if all prisons were like this one, there would be a lot less crime and/or repeat offenders. Criminals should be punished for their crimes - not live in luxury until it's time for their parole, only to go out and commit another crime so they can get back in to live on taxpayers money and enjoy things taxpayers can't afford to have for themselves.

Posted by: susieq76 16-Dec-2004, 10:02 AM
Amen! I think most of what he said was fine. I would disagree with letting them watch the Disney channel - that wouldn't be punishment for the child molesters. Maybe the Cooking Channel or some other channel that might be punishment for them.

I don't think they should be in tents in that kind of weather, though. And the Newt Gingrich thing could definitely be perceived as cruel and unusual punishment biggrin.gif

Posted by: HeatherMarie 16-Dec-2004, 10:30 AM
Life of luxury? How is being a prisoner luxurious? Let me ask you this: Imagine you lived in a palace. The palace is huge, has cable TV, a sauna, swimming pool, gym, library, and other amenities to make your stay more comfortable. However, you're not allowed to leave the palace. And you know that you'll be stuck there for let's say the next 15 years. All the freedom you had before you moved into the palace is gone. You can only see your friends and family during certain hours of the day on certain days of the week. On top of all this, there's also another 1000 people that live in the palace with you, some of which are not the nicest characters and are apt to pick fights with you for no apparent reason. You have virtually no privacy or time to yourself because the palace is so crowded. You don't even have your own bedroom, you have to sleep with a complete stranger.

Would you consider this life luxurious?

Now I'm not trying to say that prisoners in the current Federal system have things too hard, but I don't think things need to be made harder either, especially not as hard as Mr. Arpaio is making things. Being a prisoner and having your freedoms removed is punishment enough. Prison's purpose in society is not only to punish criminals, but also rehabilitate them. By increasing the punitive aspect and minimizing the rehabiliatation aspect to nearly none, Mr. Arpaio is rendering the prison useless. These prisoners will have no idea how to reenter society. Telling them "Don't come back if you don't like it" will not deter them because if they commit another crime after they are released, the chance is small that they will be sent to that same prison. Not only is this prison inhumane, it's ineffective and a waste of taxpayer money.

Posted by: Aragorn 16-Dec-2004, 11:32 AM
Who is more apt to return to such luxurious surroundings?? Prison is just that and always should be, a very terrible place to be and stay for any period of time. The reason we have such a high crime rate is the way the criminals are treated on the inside. Prisons have gotten to be like a country club for bad people. Please....They all should adopt a Turkish prison atmosphere where you would hate to ever go back. Prisoners have it way too easy and they have it better then any homeless person does. We should spend more money on the homeless and take care of them then to even spend one dime on prisoners.

They chose that life style and they need to pay for what they did in the worst possible fashion, no pun intended but I like the pink idea. I fully support what this sheriff is doing.

No, the prisoners will not know how to reenter society after spending time with his prison but they still don't know after spending time in a major prison either so that argument is a mute point. There is not enough done to make any prisoner ready to rejoin society as a productive citizen. If we creat a prison system where it would be the worst thing known to man to be placed in one then I think there will be a lot less crime in the streets. Please oh please bring back capital punishment and get rid of the prisoners on death row for good.

Just my opinion.

Posted by: oldraven 16-Dec-2004, 11:57 AM
It's prison. Meant to be a punishment where you're cut off from society and get to keep your head. I don't see a problem with this at all.

Posted by: HeatherMarie 16-Dec-2004, 12:05 PM
QUOTE
Please oh please bring back capital punishment and get rid of the prisoners on death row for good.

There's at least a http://www.patrickcrusade.org/100TH_INNOCENT_SPEAKS.html who think we should do otherwise. We convict http://www.innocenceproject.org/case/display_cases.php?sort=last_name who later walk free, but once you kill someone, you cannot take it back.

Prison-as-punishment does not work. Virginia is learning this for itself right now. They focus on punishing prisoners, don't educate them or ready them for real life work, and wonder why their prisons are full of repeat offenders. Sure, we get the criminal off the streets for a short time, but they will be let out eventually. It's in society's best interest to try to ensure newly freed prisoners will have the knowledge and skills to live a new crime-free life.

Posted by: oldraven 16-Dec-2004, 12:15 PM
It's also in the best intrest of society for these ex-cons to not want to go back. this reminds me of the people who think spanking will never work as good as a reasuring talk about why they should be good.

Posted by: Aragorn 16-Dec-2004, 12:18 PM
Well, things happen....

I agree we should be reconditioning the prisoners and educating them so they can be a productive part of society, as of right now this is not happening and just how much do you want to ask from tax payers?? What about those who could careless about being educated and find the life of crime their best advantage in life?? Should we let them go so they can do the same things over again? Prison should be a dungeon where no one would ever want to go. There should never be any comforts unless it is in a class room. The criminal has a better life then the victim does. Our society is srewed up as a whole when it comes to prisons and prisoners...

Posted by: maisky 16-Dec-2004, 12:31 PM
QUOTE (Aragorn @ 16-Dec-2004, 12:18 PM)
What about those who could careless about being educated and find the life of crime their best advantage in life??

They become preachers, used car salesmen and politicians.

Posted by: Rindy1202 16-Dec-2004, 01:29 PM
QUOTE (Aragorn @ 16-Dec-2004, 11:18 AM)
Well, things happen....

I agree we should be reconditioning the prisoners and educating them so they can be a productive part of society, as of right now this is not happening and just how much do you want to ask from tax payers?? What about those who could careless about being educated and find the life of crime their best advantage in life?? Should we let them go so they can do the same things over again? Prison should be a dungeon where no one would ever want to go. There should never be any comforts unless it is in a class room. The criminal has a better life then the victim does. Our society is srewed up as a whole when it comes to prisons and prisoners...

Well said Aragorn, I believe they shouldn't have any comforts of any kind. It is sad some are innocent. But the majority are not. The costs of prisions are unreal. Other countries chop off your hand if you are caught stealing and the crime rate is much less than ours. The town where I live was going to get a medium security prison and the people fought back and we one.

sad.gif

Posted by: bubba 16-Dec-2004, 04:12 PM
How many of you actually know anyone that's done time? I do and if anyone thinks the average prison is a "country club" they're not looking at reality. Yeah, politicians and the wealthy get to go to those country club jails, but the average person doesn't. Overcrowding is normal, 6 in a cell designed for 4. The food can charitably be called crap. It ain't fun. As for cable TV, that's a joke. The trustees might have access to TV in a dayroom, but often there isn't any. A friend of mine served 3 years. I've heard the other side.

Posted by: erickbloodax 16-Dec-2004, 04:49 PM
A while back, a gentleman we will call Mr. Dumas, tried to get by a U.S. Border Patrol check point with some drugs. The agent on duty called me after his K-9 pointed at Mr. Dumas and said "Je acuse!" Well we can't have people trying to get dope past the check point so I took him to jail. The other day Mr. Dumas went to court for sentencing, and when he left the court he got into his car a proceeded to drive. . . to the U.S. Border Patrol check point. . .with some drugs in his car. . .where the K-9 said "Dude, would you give it a rest!". . .and we took him to jail. . .




Posted by: Aragorn 16-Dec-2004, 04:55 PM
I have no pity for prisoners....You get what you pay for plain and simple. Don't like it do not do the time.....

Posted by: HeatherMarie 16-Dec-2004, 06:18 PM
Bubba, did your friend serve in a state or federal penitentiary?

I think it's sad how it's ok to use prisoners as whipping boys for our desire for retribution. No thought is given to how some criminals have been http://www.crimrehab.com/chainsaw.shtml to begin with, or how our current prison system teaches convicts how to become more efficient criminals, or to try and think up better ways to rid ourselves of the crime problem. After all, convicts are hopeless cases who have chosen to spend their time in jail rather than become productive members of society, right? They chose to do the crime, so they deserve whatever sadistic punishment we can think up. After all, there are innocents living in worse conditions than these rapists and serial killers, so let's make sure they REALLY regret whatever they did! ...All said with an evil gleam in the eye and very little thought about how punishment works, psychologically.

But anyway, http://www.crimrehab.com/index.shtml can explain it much better than I can. He's actually been there. If anyone wants to hear how it really is, from an insider, that site is a great read. Otherwise, please...continue with the torture chamber designing.

Posted by: bubba 16-Dec-2004, 10:03 PM
My friend did time in the State prison for robbery. Some might not believe it, but he got out and got a job through a rehab program. He's now a supervisor in a paper mill and a helluva great guy. Yeah, he did something stupid and he ain't proud of it but he was determined not to make any more of that kind of mistake. He did the time, stuck out the parole with a parole officer that took great pleasure in revoking his "clients" and made it. Frankly, I'd trust him before I'd trust most "pillars of the community".

Posted by: Rindy1202 16-Dec-2004, 10:06 PM
QUOTE (bubba @ 16-Dec-2004, 09:03 PM)
My friend did time in the State prison for robbery. Some might not believe it, but he got out and got a job through a rehab program. He's now a supervisor in a paper mill and a helluva great guy. Yeah, he did something stupid and he ain't proud of it but he was determined not to make any more of that kind of mistake. He did the time, stuck out the parole with a parole officer that took great pleasure in revoking his "clients" and made it. Frankly, I'd trust him before I'd trust most "pillars of the community".

Hello bubba,

These are the stories I like to hear. It would be great if the majority of these people could be turnned loose in society. The problem is they don't care in the first place. Some are mentally ill also. That is a entire different subject. I am glad to hear a positive here. thumbs_up.gif By the way my brother did time and said it woke him up changed his life, it was so harsh. He said he would never go back. He is now a Dr. of Naturopathy, has a health food store, massage therapist. He was in for drugs how bazzare huh? smile.gif

Posted by: bubba 17-Dec-2004, 09:44 AM
There was some trouble with Arpaio a few years back and his style of incarceration. He put cameras in the womens jail (no, they weren't in the tent compound). You could log on via the intenet and watch the women inmates and, if you subscribed at the top membership level, you could watch them changing and showering. It didn't last long, the courts made him stop that. His argument back then was "So what. They're all whores anyway". Arpaio is after 2 things, publicity and a fast buck.

Posted by: Rindy1202 17-Dec-2004, 10:07 AM
QUOTE (bubba @ 17-Dec-2004, 08:44 AM)
There was some trouble with Arpaio a few years back and his style of incarceration. He put cameras in the womens jail (no, they weren't in the tent compound). You could log on via the intenet and watch the women inmates and, if you subscribed at the top membership level, you could watch them changing and showering. It didn't last long, the courts made him stop that. His argument back then was "So what. They're all whores anyway". Arpaio is after 2 things, publicity and a fast buck.

Hello bubba,

You could be right. That is a awful thing to do also. Did these women know this was happening to them, as a type of punishment? I say send the prisoners to Iraq let them fight. This is a very deep subject. Thanks for you input.

Slainte
Rindy

Posted by: Rindy1202 17-Dec-2004, 10:09 AM
QUOTE (bubba @ 17-Dec-2004, 08:44 AM)
There was some trouble with Arpaio a few years back and his style of incarceration. He put cameras in the womens jail (no, they weren't in the tent compound). You could log on via the intenet and watch the women inmates and, if you subscribed at the top membership level, you could watch them changing and showering. It didn't last long, the courts made him stop that. His argument back then was "So what. They're all whores anyway".  Arpaio is after 2 things, publicity and a fast buck.

Hello bubba,

You could be right. That is a awful thing to do also. Did these women know this was happening to them, as a type of punishment? I say send the prisoners to Iraq let them fight. Instead of these honest volenteering young people. This is a very deep subject. Thanks for you input.

Slainte
Rindy

Posted by: bubba 17-Dec-2004, 12:43 PM
Rindy, funny thing. Lately judges in a few places have been giving some offenders the option of enlisting rather than jail. Last time that happened was during Vietnam and, I think, in some cases it's a good idea. Crime and punishment is a tough call. Which can be turned around and which can't. What works best for the benefit of society. There simply aren't any pat answers. There's nothing simple about it. re, Arpaios cameras, he rubbed their noses in it. Personally I think Arpaio is a borderline sadist. Convicts shouldn't get off easy, on that I agree with most, but there has to be some though given to salvaging those that can be rehabilitated. Sometimes one might need mental therapy, others might need education. Some thought and provision needs to be given to that. Like my friend who was allowed to finish high school in prison and take a couple other courses. The result was a benefit to society as a whole.

Posted by: Rindy1202 17-Dec-2004, 12:49 PM
Yes I totally agree with you bubba. We are not God. smile.gif

Posted by: single speed 18-Dec-2004, 09:13 AM
We can sit here at our laptops all we want and talk about how those who break the law should be punished. What if we gave these men and women the opportunity to not break the law at all?

What do you think would happen if school funding were equatible so that EVERY child had an equal educational opportunity no matter waht the conditions of the neighborhood. That is school facilities in public schools would be equal no matter how rich or poor the nieghborhood.

What would happen if all companies paid a minimum wage that was a living wage and benefits? In other words, a parent with low skills could make enough money that one job could provide the funds so that the parent could be home when their kids came home, and provide them with a traditional family environment, instead of having to work two or three jobs?

What would happen if our society actuall tried to educate its teenagers about their own sexuality and provide them with the answers to their questions about how their bodies work. Our kids would take ownership of their sexuality and understand the true consequences of teen pregnancy BEFORE teen pregnancy.

What if our national drug policy sought to educate students about drugs and their concequences. How about if we sentenced drug offenders equatibly no matter what their social status, celebrity, or income? What if our entertaiment industry didnt treat alchol abuse and the use of marajuana as a gag line for an easy laugh?

True, not all prisoners are pproducts of their environment. Many had the same opportunities as you and I had, yet for some reason felt compelled to break the law. For them, we bulid prisons. Many prople endure their poverty to become outstanding citizens. They are lauded and commended. However, for a majority of prisioners, life was stacked against them from the start. they made mistakes, poor decisions, or just gave up. These are the men and women that an equitable educational system, fair wages, and drug education would likely keep out of prison.

While you sit at your compuer screens doling out punnishment for criminals, thaink about the concequences that got many of them there. Poverty, injustice, and neighborhoods that were in themselves, prisons.

By the grace of God, I, you, and most of the members of this site did not face the hardship that most many of the men and women in prison faced grownig up. Think about it before you cast the first stone.


Posted by: celtica 18-Dec-2004, 09:42 AM
Thanks Single Speed, I feel better smile.gif

I totally agree with all you said. The solution for criminality is not in sadistic punishment or humiliation (see how it worked in the past rolleyes.gif ), but in education and prevention. If society failed somewhere, she has to support the consequences, and manage decent conditions of living for the prisonners, otherwise, if they are treated like beasts and have no hope for the future they will act like beasts...you know when you've nothing to loose, not even your dignity...

Posted by: single speed 18-Dec-2004, 10:44 PM
Thanks, Celtica.

You get it!

Posted by: Rindy1202 18-Dec-2004, 11:01 PM
I do agree with both of you to a certain extent. But all the money and education in the world is not going to stop some of these people. It is much easier to sell drugs than go get a small paying job, and yes that is society now. How do we rid the evil? I just don't think there is a answer. The prison population is growing so fast we can't build prisons fast enough. It is a very deep subject , I like hearing what all the others think. Just wish we could fix the problem. sad.gif

Posted by: seadreamer 19-Dec-2004, 11:16 AM
Greetings Everyone,

On a contrary view, who was it that said "The measure of how civilized we are can be guaged by the state of our prisons."

Around Christmas time methinks it wouldn't hurt either to wish Peace and Love to all those people less fortunate than ourselves. Peace and Love to the prisoners, prostitutes, the homeless, the Poor, the abused - to abused children who may grow up to become criminals.
"Great As the Sea is their Sorrow" and what's to hurt in wishing them Peace and Love?

All the best of the Season to You All

GMD

Posted by: dragonboy3611 19-Dec-2004, 11:26 AM
If they want to be treated nice, and have a friendly envirnment...they shouldn't have done the crime to get in jail in the first place! I don't think what that Sheriff did should be wrong or prosecuted in any way, but you know, of course some family of an in-mate will come out to fight it!

Posted by: celtica 19-Dec-2004, 12:17 PM
They have to be treated as human being, that's all. And this sheriff is a mad sadist and should be in jail too.

Posted by: gaberlunzie 19-Dec-2004, 01:00 PM
QUOTE (single speed @ 18-Dec-2004, 10:13 AM)
We can sit here at our laptops all we want and talk about how those who break the law should be punished. What if we gave these men and women the opportunity to not break the law at all?

What do you think would happen if school funding were equatible so that EVERY child had an equal educational opportunity no matter waht the conditions of the neighborhood. That is school facilities in public schools would be equal no matter how rich or poor the nieghborhood.

What would happen if all companies paid a minimum wage that was a living wage and benefits? In other words, a parent with low skills could make enough money that one job could provide the funds so that the parent could be home when their kids came home, and provide them with a traditional family environment, instead of having to work two or three jobs?

What would happen if our society actuall tried to educate its teenagers about their own sexuality and provide them with the answers to their questions about how their bodies work. Our kids would take ownership of their sexuality and understand the true consequences of teen pregnancy BEFORE teen pregnancy.

What if our national drug policy sought to educate students about drugs and their concequences. How about if we sentenced drug offenders equatibly no matter what their social status, celebrity, or income? What if our entertaiment industry didnt treat alchol abuse and the use of marajuana as a gag line for an easy laugh?

True, not all prisoners are pproducts of their environment. Many had the same opportunities as you and I had, yet for some reason felt compelled to break the law. For them, we bulid prisons. Many prople endure their poverty to become outstanding citizens. They are lauded and commended. However, for a majority of prisioners, life was stacked against them from the start. they made mistakes, poor decisions, or just gave up. These are the men and women that an equitable educational system, fair wages, and drug education would likely keep out of prison.

While you sit at your compuer screens doling out punnishment for criminals, thaink about the concequences that got many of them there. Poverty, injustice, and neighborhoods that were in themselves, prisons.

By the grace of God, I, you, and most of the members of this site did not face the hardship that most many of the men and women in prison faced grownig up. Think about it before you cast the first stone.

Thank you, single speed. I agree with all your points and statements. And celtica says it right to my mind...they have the right to be treated as human beings.

Posted by: single speed 19-Dec-2004, 08:20 PM
QUOTE (gaberlunzie @ 19-Dec-2004, 02:00 PM)

Thank you, single speed. I agree with all your points and statements. And celtica says it right to my mind...they have the right to be treated as human beings.

merci!

Posted by: Annabelle 19-Dec-2004, 10:58 PM
Heck. Let's just "hang em high" and save the tax payers money!


Posted by: Keltic 19-Dec-2004, 11:04 PM
Let's not forget about the victims here. We have been arguing about the inhumane treatment of the criminals but don't forget that there are few victimless crimes. Victims can suffer extreme emotional distress which can continue long after the criminal is released. The choice is made to commit the crime, not to be on the receiving end of the act. While there are those that can be rehabilitated, there are ultimately many that will be returning throughout their lives no matter how much money or psychobabble is thrown at the problem.

In Canada, the recidivism rate was cited to be at around 10% for federal prisoners by Corrections Canada. When the method for arriving at this figure was looked at, it was realized that the real figure was around 37%. Corrections Canada doesn't include returns by those who have been out for more than 2 years or those who have completed their full sentence, nor does it include those who end up in a provincial jail. This is in a country where the federal prisons come closer to country clubs. Corrections officers are armed with only handcuffs. All other weapons have been removed because they are said to provoke. They have even been refused stab proof vests because this shows a lack of trust.

This is not to challenge the validity of a number of points that were raised by everyone in this thread but to point out that there are always two sides.

Clifford Olson was arrested 94 times for fraud, armed robbery and sexual assault. When do we say enough is enough. If at one point in that 25 year career, the key was thrown away, 11 children might have lived to see adulthood. Those are the eleven that he lead the police to. There is a belief that there might have been around 20 more. Even in prison, he manages to stir up the pot. I was getting letters from him for some time when I worked in the Canadian Parliament. He was writing to demand the names and addresses of every person who signed petitions calling for the return of the death penalty. The petition used him as the perfect person to welcome the death penalty back. I sent him the text of the petition but no names. Soon after, he had his phone privileges taken away because he was phoning some of his victims families. This was almost 20 years after he had committed the murders.

This is ultimately an extreme case but it is not the only one out there. There are a lot of victims out there who are serving a life sentence. The fact that the person who committed the act might not have been given a fair shake at life, doesn't change things.



Posted by: bubba 19-Dec-2004, 11:23 PM
I don't think anyone here is talking about letting criminals off easy or making their incarceration pleasant. It's more a matter of deciding if we're going to be vengefull or if we want to rehabilitate those that CAN be rehabilitated. It's not a simple matter and needs to be evaluated on a case by case basis. There are some that are truely evil that there is no hope for that should never see daylight again but there are others that are salvagable.

Posted by: freekenny 21-Dec-2004, 02:49 PM
O'siyo,
~ A O'ginalli of mine sent this to me....thought I would post it in this Thread/Forum..for the record, I am only posting it and in no way reflects/has anything to do with my feelings on this particular situation or any other in this forum..

~Do you remember February 1993 when a young 3 yr. old
was taken from a shopping mall in Liverpool, by two
10-year-old boys? Jamie Bulger walked away from his mother
for only a second and Jon Venables took his hand and led him
out of the mall with his friend Robert Thompson.
They took Jamie on a walk for over two and a half
miles. Along the way, they stopped every now and again
to torture the poor little boy who was crying
constantly for his mommy.
Finally they stopped at a railway track where they
brutally kicked him, threw stones at him, rubbed
paint in his eyes and pushed batteries up his
anus. It was actually worse than this... What these
two boys did was so horrendous that Jamie's mother
was forbidden to identify his body.
They then left his beaten small body on the tracks so
a train could run him over to hide the mess they had
created. These two boys, even being boys,
understood what they did was wrong, hence trying to
make it look like an accident.
This week Lady Justice Butler-Sloss has awarded the
two boys anonymity for the rest of their lives
when they leave custody with new identities. We
cannot let this happen. They will also leave early
this year only serving just over half of their sentence.
One paper even stated that Robert may go
on to a University. They are getting away with their
crime. They disgustingly and violently took Jamie's life away.
In return they get a new life.~
~~Sty-U red_bandana.gif

Posted by: bubba 21-Dec-2004, 08:13 PM
FreeKenny, that's an example of evil that should never be let loose on society again, ever.

Posted by: Rindy1202 21-Dec-2004, 10:08 PM
QUOTE (freekenny @ 21-Dec-2004, 01:49 PM)
O'siyo,
~ A O'ginalli of mine sent this to me....thought I would post it in this Thread/Forum..for the record, I am only posting it and in no way reflects/has anything to do with my feelings on this particular situation or any other in this forum..

~Do you remember February 1993 when a young 3 yr. old
was taken from a shopping mall in Liverpool, by two
10-year-old boys? Jamie Bulger walked away from his mother
for only a second and Jon Venables took his hand and led him
out of the mall with his friend Robert Thompson.
They took Jamie on a walk for over two and a half
miles. Along the way, they stopped every now and again
to torture the poor little boy who was crying
constantly for his mommy.
Finally they stopped at a railway track where they
brutally kicked him, threw stones at him, rubbed
paint in his eyes and pushed batteries up his
anus. It was actually worse than this... What these
two boys did was so horrendous that Jamie's mother
was forbidden to identify his body.
They then left his beaten small body on the tracks so
a train could run him over to hide the mess they had
created. These two boys, even being boys,
understood what they did was wrong, hence trying to
make it look like an accident.
This week Lady Justice Butler-Sloss has awarded the
two boys anonymity for the rest of their lives
when they leave custody with new identities. We
cannot let this happen. They will also leave early
this year only serving just over half of their sentence.
One paper even stated that Robert may go
on to a University. They are getting away with their
crime. They disgustingly and violently took Jamie's life away.
In return they get a new life.~
~~Sty-U red_bandana.gif

Yes, I agree this what we need prisons for. Just because they were young what ever they knew right from wrong. God, only knows what they will do in the future. I agree bubba.

Posted by: Annabelle 22-Dec-2004, 06:17 PM
you can't tell me these boys didn't know what they did were normal!!!!!

Need to spank kids more!!!!

biggrin.gif

Posted by: Rindy1202 22-Dec-2004, 06:59 PM
QUOTE (Annabelle @ 22-Dec-2004, 05:17 PM)
you can't tell me these boys didn't know what they did were normal!!!!!

Need to spank kids more!!!!

biggrin.gif

Boy, you got that right Annabelle!

You have a Merry Christmas!
Rindy

Posted by: single speed 24-Dec-2004, 09:01 AM


I agree that there are sociopaths out there that should never see the light of day. Howver, our society being civilized as it is, is also unjust. The injustice of inequatible schools and low minimum wages helps to create crime problems for people who, allowed the chance to achieve through education and a more solid family unit, would not become part of the prison population. The solution in not necessarily putting people away for life, but providing them with the opportunity to have a life.

The sociopaths, serial killers, habitual criminals, and others whom have care not for the laws of civil society, deserve long stays behing proison walls.


Posted by: single speed 24-Dec-2004, 09:03 AM
QUOTE (Annabelle @ 22-Dec-2004, 07:17 PM)

Need to spank kids more!!!!

biggrin.gif



Agreed Annabelle. Parents need to discipline their children. Many do not. Some barely know who their kids are. I wonder why they dont.

Posted by: Rindy1202 24-Dec-2004, 02:15 PM
I agree with both of you on spanking. You can sure tell the kids who have been spanked and the ones that need spanking. But now a days it is considered child abuse. I think it is child abuse when people set their children up for a world that doesn't give them everything they want including temper tantrums to get what they want. Makes me wonder how the next generation of children will be.
unsure.gif

Merry Christmas

Posted by: seadreamer 24-Dec-2004, 05:05 PM
Rindy,

You said:

"I agree with both of you on spanking. You can sure tell the kids who have been spanked and the ones that need spanking. "

I may be wrong on this Rindy, but the ones who have been "spanked" are often the ones who in elementary school feel that aggression and violence have been sanctioned by their parents and are therefore an ok way to solve problems. Every elementary school teacher can tell relatively quickly which of their grade one students are likely to go on for careers in your prisons. It is more likely the kids who have been beaten er "spanked", that ultimately have the most problems.

Check this out at your local elementary school. Ask the teachers, Who in the school system presents the most problems? Is it the kids who have been beaten or the children who come from loving and respectful families that present as the most problematic?

I think it's an absurd notion to believe that you get loving and respectful people out of "spanking" children. By the way, with this spanking notion, is their any measure about how hard you should hit them?????

That's my opinion.

GMd

Posted by: Annabelle 24-Dec-2004, 05:24 PM
I have alot of teacher's who tell me the parents don't want to be bothered with the kids behavior problems anny more.

Let's go back to wacks on the butt!!!!

Problem is the kids are getting to the point they have more personal rights than parents do. And many kids threaten their parents with DFAC's if they do any type of physiscal punishment.

A


Everyone have a wonderful holiday season!


Posted by: Rindy1202 24-Dec-2004, 05:52 PM
QUOTE (seadreamer @ 24-Dec-2004, 04:05 PM)
Rindy,

You said:

"I agree with both of you on spanking.  You can sure tell the kids who have been spanked and the ones that need spanking. "

I may be wrong on this Rindy, but the ones who have been "spanked" are often the ones who in elementary school feel that aggression and violence have been sanctioned by their parents and are therefore an ok way to solve problems. Every elementary school teacher can tell relatively quickly which of their grade one students are likely to go on for careers in your prisons. It is more likely the kids who have been beaten er "spanked", that ultimately have the most problems.

Check this out at your local elementary school. Ask the teachers, Who in the school system presents the most problems? Is it the kids who have been beaten or the children who come from loving and respectful families that present as the most problematic?

I think it's an absurd notion to believe that you get loving and respectful people out of "spanking" children. By the way, with this spanking notion, is their any measure about how hard you should hit them?????

That's my opinion.

GMd

seadreamer,

There is a big difference in "Spanking" and "Child Abuse." Every child is different. This is crap about the ones who have been "Spanked" are the problems. The schools a lot of times want the child to take meds to settle them down. We live in a pill for your problem world. Ask any of the teachers, around here would tell you, yes spanking is needed.

I in no way saying child abuse is ok! That was not my intention, but I still say you can tell the ones who have been and the ones who havent Have you any children? I think a lot of todays teen and up problems are the parents that don't give a crap what their child is doing. They both work, and are not there for them.
I could go on forever with this subject. My last comment "you can be spanked and still come from a very loving family.
smile.gif

Posted by: Rindy1202 24-Dec-2004, 05:58 PM
QUOTE (Annabelle @ 24-Dec-2004, 04:24 PM)
I have alot of teacher's who tell me the parents don't want to be bothered with the kids behavior problems anny more.

Let's go back to wacks on the butt!!!!

Problem is the kids are getting to the point they have more personal rights than parents do. And many kids threaten their parents with DFAC's if they do any type of physiscal punishment.

A


Everyone have a wonderful holiday season!

Hey Annabelle,

Hope your Christmas eve is going well. The threat of the DFAC, yes, but where do we draw the line. That is the hard part. I believe in Spanking, not when your temper is flared up just on the behind, one will do.
Anyhow hope I didn't open up a hole new subject..

Hey Merry Christmas newyear.gif

Posted by: TheCarolinaScotsman 24-Dec-2004, 06:10 PM
When I was a Scout leader, the kids who were the problems came from homes with no discipline of any kind. That, in my opinion, is just as much child abuse as physical abuse. If spanking is done right (not abusively) it can be effective. If "talking to" is done right, it too can be effective. The key is consistency, love and making sure the child understands what the punishment is about. Too many parents today want to either totally ignore their children or else "whack 'em cause they must have done something". Both extremes are, or should be, a crime.

Posted by: bubba 25-Dec-2004, 10:35 AM
We raised 4 sons to adulthood and spanking was used on occassion. It was NOT common. We reserved it for the most serious situations. Our rule on spanking was with the open, bare hand, never use an "implement" of any kind. We spanked for things the kids did that were dangerous that they had already been told not to do but did anyway and for acts of wilfull disobedience. In total we gave spankings to 2 of the boys, (the twins) one time and to our youngest once. It was such a rare occurrance that when it did happen they knew it was serious. It was always followed by a talk a little later. Our basic belief was to give them few "things" , teach them they must earn what they want and supply unlimited pats on the back and hugs. We now have 5 grandchildren and they're being raised in a similar way. They're well behaved and wonderful kids. Looking around it appears to me that children are more of an "accessory" to too many parents, something to bring out, dust off and show off on holidays and for events and irrelevant the rest of the time. Careers and personal wants come first. The worship of the dollar and devotion to material goodies seems to be the focus of far too many lives.

Powered by Invision Power Board (https://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (https://www.invisionpower.com)