Have You Tried Storing Them Upright?
From the Telegraph, on crime, incarceration, and dubious conclusions:
The law change, recommended by an independent review headed by David Gauke, the former Tory justice secretary, will order courts to only jail offenders for less than a year in “exceptional circumstances,” including domestic abuse, stalking, and breaching orders linked to violence against women and girls.
The analysis also reveals that up to 1,500 killers, rapists and other serious sexual and violent offenders will be eligible for early release each year under the shake-up, which is designed to free up nearly 10,000 prison spaces.
Readers will note the odd implication that the level of serious criminal behaviour at any given time should somehow conform to the amount of prison space you have at that time. As if the moral gravity of a criminal act, and likelihood of recidivism and danger to the public, should be determined by whether or not you can be bothered to build another dungeon.
Speaking of recidivism, it’s perhaps worth revisiting this:
Other, related statistics, linked above, may widen the eyes.
Update via the comments:
Regarding burglary and its devotees, this came to mind:
An illustration, one of many, of how a very large fraction of crime could be prevented by dealing decisively with a surprisingly small number of persistent offenders.
Needless to say, there’s more to chew on in the linked piece. Likewise here, where friends and relatives of the three burglars – the ones with over 200 convictions between them – claim, somewhat improbably, that the deceased were “too good for this stupid, shitty world.” As if the trio – whose other activities included assaulting and mugging elderly couples and bedridden cancer patients – were, unlike their numerous victims, somehow deserving of public sympathy.
And which, I suspect, tells us something about the quality of those friends and relatives, their moral orientation.
In the comments, Geoff quotes this from the recidivism link, above:
Then adds,
Well, indeed.
Via Tim Worstall.
Previously in the world of crime and punishment, a trilogy of sorts – parts one, two, and three.
This blog is kept afloat by the tip jar buttons below.
Or we could just build more prisons.
And what about violence against men and boys?
It’s as if Our Betters have forgotten, or never quite understood, that the fundamental function of prisons, besides punishment, is to keep dangerous and predatory people away from their law-abiding prey. For as long as should prove necessary.
See also this, and this, and this, which offer a reminder that prisons do not exist for the benefit of the prisoner. Note, too, the quite vivid illustrations of criminal behaviour, the mindset in play. Because I think it’s rather important to have real-world examples in mind. Lest we forget.
I will never stop tiring of referring to Jordan McSweeney.
For anyone unfamiliar with that name, before the age of 29 McSweeney had racked up:
The reference to “previous convictions” is previous to his kicking to death a 35 year-old woman called Zara Aleena, who had been going home after a night out with a friend.
The reference to his 28 convictions including “assaults on police” probably explains how he was caught so easily:
And just how was it that McSweeney was out and about in London on the night of the murder?
The murder of Zara Aleena happened four days after the Probation Service had started trying to look for him.
And they only raised the alarm after he had missed his second probation appointment despite that being a condition of his being free on licence.
(All quotes from the BBC News article on it here)
This may seem an exceptional case, but the point is – it’s not:
When a state systematically fails to protect its population from such obvious predators as this, but at the same time ruthlessly punishes any member of the public who attempts to defend themselves – and there are many cases like that – that is a state which …
… well, I’ll let you draw your own conclusions from that.
Or we could allow people to defend themselves.
Don’t worry.
They don’t actually give a shit about women and girls either.
[ Rolls shelled, boiled egg to Nikw211. As it travels, fluff accumulates. ]
From the first “this”, David’s post Just Like You:
I’ve mentioned Jordan McSweeney in another post in the thread (a sexual predator dangerous to women with 28 convictions for 69 offences who murdered a woman while allowed out on licence and after missing two probation meetings).
Here is an update in which the parlous state of the British justice system is yet again exposed as a complete and utter failure at every level of the system:
(From here)
Ah! Breakfast!
One small but telling incident from some years ago involved a neighbour who discovered that the catalytic converter on his car – parked briefly outside his home in broad daylight – had been removed and stolen minutes earlier.
What struck me at the time was the obvious air of impotence and resignation. The assumption that nothing would be done, no-one would be caught, that defending yourself or your property was taboo, and that one simply had to put up with being preyed upon. With ever greater boldness.
The sense of demoralisation was hard to miss, and morally infuriating.
For some reason, I felt a need to leave this here:
Needless to say, there’s more in the linked piece.
And in other, grimly surreal prison-related news.
Or we could just build more prisons.
Shipping them off to an island worked in the past.
Technically, Britain is an island.
In the comments over at Tim’s, some lively suggestions were offered:
And,
I have to say, I’m not entirely unsympathetic.
Rachel works at the University of Nottingham School of Law.
I hope you count leftist intellectuals among those persistent offenders.
What I just said about dealing decisively with persistent offenders.
I will never tire of saying that there might be fewer repeat offenders on the streets if more judges and politicians were their victims.
Or we could allow people to defend themselves.
There is always the question of proportional response, and for that, a solution for all occasions.
“Young scholars.”
How long until each of them is dead or in prison?
By such measures dictatorship is established, not by imposition but by popular demand. When disorder becomes too great, the populace will support most any measure to establish order.
Paging Dick the Butcher.
[ Browses menu of local curry house. ]
Immigration is important for the exotic cuisine, what could possibly go wrong?
I suppose gratitude was too much to ask for.
[ Orders curries, paces back and forth, checking watch. ]
Calvin goes woke:
The unanswered question: Just why is he unemployed? (Or claims to be.) One generally has to work very hard to become unemployable.
[ Wafts smell of curries. ]
Not Calvin.
More Calvin:
Crime: looks like 11 people were arrested for helping those guys escape from prison a few days ago. 11.
Isn’t that more than escaped?
The family the preys together stays together.
Caught one!
If I lived in the UK, would I get a visit from the
Stasipolice for posting this?I don’t think people understand it takes a lot of work to end up in prison.
Well, indeed.
Likewise, the common assumption that someone who, finally, belatedly, ends up in prison is just like you, an average person who was having a bad day or who made a mistake. A fanciful blank-slate conceit that bears no relationship to the overwhelming majority of prison occupants, or to violent thugs generally.
And then we have the army of progressive fantasists telling us that such creatures – say, the kinds of ferals who gleefully sucker-punch elderly women because they happen to be of East Asian descent – will somehow be morally redeemed by more free stuff and are only behaving as they do, as they choose to do, because they didn’t have better Wi-Fi, or enough theatre in schools.
As I said in the linked thread,
And which results in the odd experience of being expected to identify with, and sympathise with, creatures who repeatedly demonstrate, as vividly as one can imagine, that they would not return the favour. And who, given the chance, would happily prey on you.
[ Post updated. ]
Oh, and in watching-Andor-in-the-hope-that-it-gets-better news, I’ve made it to episode 7, of 12, and it does improve, a bit. It’s currently… okay, a 7-out-of-10. Not compelling, but watchable. Some of the principal characters are now, finally, on the same planet and look likely to bump into each other.
So there’s that.
Caught one!
It was a propaganda coup to have insinuated the term “small boats” into the news reports of this Camp of the Saints. It presents the invaders as underdogs. It subverts the British mythology of the small boats of Dunkirk. And it promises a future where the Small Boaters will be as mythologized as the Windrushers.
In other pattern recognition news not approved by the Central Committee, I propose a study to see if female or male lesbians are more violent.
Meanwhile in The City of Angels, there was a “large group disturbance”, “…no arrests have been made”. Of course not.
If I have to sit through 6 unwatchable episodes before the 7th becomes marginally acceptable, then I am never going to watch any.
“Police said officers had to fire rubber bullets…”
Lead bullets would be more effective.
It’s not unwatchable – just slow and insufficiently compelling, so far – and I should add that The Other Half is finding it more engaging than I am. There are good aspects – the world-building – or rather, worlds-building – the invented pseudo-French language of the Ghorman resistance; the title music made of transmission fragments; the look of the series generally. Lots of the stylistic stuff is very good.
It’s just the unengaging title character, his mopey girlfriend, and the sluggish pacing that hobble it. For me, at least.
It takes a Little Village.
What struck me was the repeated mention of a “temporary do-not-hire list.”
Apostasy?
“I don’t want it to get good later. I want it to be good now.“
I’m currently watching Orphan Black and Yellowstone and it’s striking how much better the writing and direction is. Show-don’t-tell, foreshadowing, leaning into the genre conventions rather than trying to subvert them, no ironic self-awareness.
I was watching Superman & Lois and punched out at S02E02 when the teenage girl refugee from a world destroyed by rogue Kryptonians loudly announced at breakfast she couldn’t eat the bacon and eggs because she was vegan.
Sorry, honey, I know you’re used to rat stew and starvation. Let me whip up a quinoa protein shake for you.
One of the reasons most genre media has gone to shit of late is precisely this – the prioritization of the lorrrrrr over everything else. It’s catering to the faux-autistic portion of the fanbase at the expense of decent characterization, writing and direction. I’m not sure if the problem is that there’s simply so much media being produced right now that Sturgeon’s Law is running on overdrive or if the overall quality of writing has permanently plummeted across the board.