By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Re-educating prisoners

Seems amost everyone agrees that core education in jail is good but giving them guitar lessons is wrong. I agree 2.



Around the Network

What a stupid waste of money.

Yeah I see your argument, if you give him a hobby/skill then some people think he'll be better off and less likely to commit crimes, but that's ridiculous.

I think we should be much harder on people who commit serious crimes and mentally break them down (keep them in isolation in a dark room if they misbehave at all), rather than spend money on giving them hobbies and skills they won't use.



Is a murderer going to get out? Either way it all depends on whether you think the main purpose of prison is to punish or to rehibilitate.

If it's to punish, then obviously no.

If it's primarily to rehibilitate... yes for SOME criminals. Others already have skills they need. Although if it's to rehibilitate it makes me wonder why some people go to jail. For example someone who in a fit of rage kills his life when she is cheating on him. Is he ever going to murder again? It seems very unlikely and keeping them in jail 20+ years is going to make it less likely they can be functional to society.

As for my opinion... don't really have one. The way we do prisons now makes it seem pointless either way. I'd have to see a cost/benefit analysis of said programs to decide. Really we need to change the prison system and break it up into two specific groups. One for rehibilitation and one for punishment.



tombi123 said:
He could become a guitar teacher...

I do believe prisoners should be taught skills in prison so they can fit into society when they get released rather than go back to crime. Learning to cook would have been a better option then guitar in my opinion.

You honestly think he will ever be allowed to work with children?

---

Learning to play an instrument, or some other kind of creative skill, can provide for outlets for violent criminals outside of, you know, violence.

 

I think we often forget, particularly in the Bulger case, that it's not all black-and-white: Venables and Thompson were just children, who were sexually abused, and were under observation of psychiatrist who noted suicidal tendencies and self harm. Should retribution really be the only purpose for prison in this case?



Carl2291 said:
highwaystar101 said:
Carl2291 said:
My thoughts -

I think prisoners (especially ones who commit serious crimes) are in prison to be punished, not to learn an art, play PS3 and/or generally have a good time...

Ok, I will present you with two scenarios.

A. A man gets involved in crime during his school days, he goes to jail without an education. Whilst in jail he gets punished. When he leaves he gets involved in crime again because he can't get a job.

B. A man gets involved in crime during his school days, he goes to jail without an education. Whilst in jail he gets another chance at his GCSEs, which he takes. When he leaves he gets a job using his new skills and doesn't turn to crime again.

I would rather have the latter.

I do think agree with you that luxuries like Playstations should be kept to a minimum though.

Learning to play the guitar is a lot different than learning English, Maths, History Etc... Or even trade skills if they haven't done anything too serious.

Learning to play the guitar is IMO a luxury (although you could argue being taught anything is a luxury) just like having for example, PS3's, and i think it shouldn't be allowed.

Murderers, Rapists... Etc. IMO don't deserve any luxury treatment. No matter what the age.

Guitar lessons may seem like a luxury, but it is still a skill as well. Learning an instrument requires a lot of skills that are directly applicable to real work, it allows prisoners to learn about dedication, obedience, structure, etc. If you mix playing guitar with other subjects such as maths or science then it would lead to a well rounded education.

I think unconstructive things such as playing computer games is the type of luxury they should do without, because it is fairly pointless; where as guitar lessons are a constructive use of an inmates time.



Around the Network
Sqrl said:
highwaystar101 said:
Carl2291 said:
My thoughts -

I think prisoners (especially ones who commit serious crimes) are in prison to be punished, not to learn an art, play PS3 and/or generally have a good time...

...

I do think agree with you that luxuries like Playstations should be kept to a minimum though.

If by minimum you mean zero, then I agree =P

Yeah, basically zero. If I was feeling generous I would perhaps allow a few minutes on a community Playstation as a reward for good behaviour. But that's if I was feeling generous.



Boy my grammar sucks tonight.



Kasz216 said:
Is a murderer going to get out? 

Perhaps I should explain the case a little more. Jon Venables, the man in this article, was convicted of murder in 1993 of a child named James Bulger. The catch is that Jon Venables was a child himself at the time. So he was sent to juvenile prison until he was 18. The case was very high profile in the UK. Earlier this year John Venables was sent back to prison for allegedly possessing child pornography (although to me this appears to be more tabloid hearsay than fact), either way his latest crime was enough to send him back to prison.

So he's not in prison for murder, but another offence.



This is the kind of subject that exposes the authoritarian mindset.

Authoritarian: "Punish them"; "They deserve to suffer"; "Let 'em rot"...

You treat someone like an animal, they become an animal. (or worse)

Criminals are broken people, you can't fix them by slamming them into the ground.



Switch: SW-5066-1525-5130

XBL: GratuitousFREEK

highwaystar101 said:
Kasz216 said:
Is a murderer going to get out? 

Perhaps I should explain the case a little more. Jon Venables, the man in this article, was convicted of murder in 1993 of a child named James Bulger. The catch is that Jon Venables was a child himself at the time. So he was sent to juvenile prison until he was 18. The case was very high profile in the UK. Earlier this year John Venables was sent back to prison for allegedly possessing child pornography (although to me this appears to be more tabloid hearsay than fact), either way his latest crime was enough to send him back to prison.

So he's not in prison for murder, but another offence.

Ah, that explains things better anyway.  Still not sure I have an opinion honestly.

The truth is... the majority of prisoners probably aren't recoverable, most in prison learn how to be better criminals.

We don't have the money to reform them all, and instead it gets spread out like it is now.  It would be more effective to focus that money in on people who have the best shot of being reformed, but that's all based on personal judgements and likely to cause problems due to racism, favoritism and just administrator opinion.


Doing a bit of research... this guy does seem actually repentant for what he did as it sounds like the lead up to his rearrest was a mental breakdown from the guilt.

Of course he seems so guilty and selfdestructive it's hard to say if he can really be "reclaimed" to be useful in society.