11 November 2011

Human Rights Prison keeping inmates "Like Caged Chooks"

| johnboy
Join the conversation
78

When you tell an outsider to Canberra a lot of things about how we run this Territory their jaw tends to start bouncing on the ground.

But one of the harder to believe things is that we decided it would be better for the welfare of our criminal classes to keep them all (male, female, high risk and low risk) in the one facility.

The ABC has a story today on how the official visitor thinks that is working out.

He says a lack of space at the Alexander Maconochie Centre (AMC) means some inmates who need to be separated from other groups are unable to attend programs and activities.

He says the situation in the crisis unit is particularly concerning.

“By law, they must have one hour of exercise so they’re allowed out of their cell. But guess what? They go into a corridor and walk up and down there,” he said.

“There is a tiny, very small area [outside] but it’s kind of meshed and it’s enclosed. I suppose it’s like caged chooks.”

We are, again, thrilled to know this is human rights compliant.

Join the conversation

78
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

poetix said :

They are still people with rights, whatever they have done, and we lower ourselves as a society if we do not treat them with a certain degree of respect.

Respect, like trust, is earned, not given freely… I wish people would remember that.

poetix said :

They are still people with rights, whatever they have done, and we lower ourselves as a society if we do not treat them with a certain degree of respect.

I will begrudgingly admit that these criminals may be entitled to some limited rights, but not one of them deserves any degree of respect.

They should all be held in utter contempt for their own actions which caused them to be incarcerated.

whitelaughter said :

poetix said :

1. ‘Lies on stilts’ is not a philosophical concept; it is merely a colourful phrase.
2. A judge is an not an officer of the Crown. The division between State and Law is central to our judicial system.
3. The sword wielded by Justice (often double-edged) represents reason and justice, and has nothing to do with capital punishment.
4. The United States has the death penalty (in some areas) and also the highest rate of imprisonment in the developed world. Obviously the death penalty doesn’t stop crime, except by the one person executed.

You’re on zero for 4 here.
1. The phrase ‘lies on stilts’ is repeatedly used by philosopher to dismiss inherent rights; as their is no logical basis for inherent rights, philosophers rarely feel the need to go further.
2. There are three arms of government – the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. All are agencies of the crown. This is really, really basic civics!
3. ‘reason’? Hardly, Reason was a completely different goddess – Justice is Themis: and when she doesn’t hold a sword, it’s because she’s holding an axe.
4. No, the US doesn’t. 20 years on death row isn’t ‘the death penalty’. Most of those idiots live *longer* than they would if they’d never been convicted.
Also, your logic is flawed (again). More people die in hospitals than anywhere else – does that mean medicine doesn’t save lives? Of course not. The more crimes there are, the more people clamour for the death penalty, so the harder it is for tyrants to revoke it.
Also, *stuff* deterrent. If you execute criminals, you don’t *need* a deterrent, because they are gone for good.

Here are some minor corrections for the final time:
Re 1. Good to see you trying to define the phrase ‘lies on stilts’, rather than just tossing it in as if it meant something on its own. Not all philosophers take your position. And pure philosophy needs to be translated into practicality, anyway. Inalienable rights are sometimes seen those rights that should never be able to be taken away, that should flow from the mere fact of being human. Doesn’t mean they can’t be. Unfortunately.
Re 2. You originally said a judge is an ‘officer’ of the Crown; ‘a Judge (protected as an officer of the crown)’. This is just wrong. The struggle for an independent judiciary is one of the great threads of English (and by extension Australian) history. You slide onto another matter to avoid what I actually said. Yes, the law is one of the branches of government and it often corrects the excesses of the Crown. Judges can do this because they do not face arbitrary interference from the Executive or from Parliament.
Re 3. Reason is not the name I gave to the figure. Read what I wrote; ‘The sword wielded by Justice (often double-edged) represents reason and justice, and has nothing to do with capital punishment.’ Justice, often traced back to Justicia, also represents the neutral application of reason. She wears a blindfold to show she will apply reason to all equally, and holds a sword to show she will apply the outcome of her deliberations evenly. Though you probably think that the blindfold represents a method of killing people by strangulation, just as the sword represents another means of killing to you.
Re 4. Saying the US doesn’t have the death penalty is hilarious. That’s why where the prisoners are waiting is called Death Row. And the US does have a high level of incarceration. How you can jump from putting people down to the workings of hospitals is beyond me.

‘The more crimes there are, the more people clamour for the death penalty, so the harder it is for tyrants to revoke it.’ Sorry, but this is bizarre. Tyrants tend to be very fond of the death penalty. The only clamour I have heard in favour of it is coming from you.

I hate this sort of indulgent, ongoing correction of corrections, and I am not usually one to engage, but this is a stunning example of misreading what I actually wrote.

Getting back to the matter in hand, here in Canberra, I would say that all prisoners have the right to decent treatment and some exercise or intellectual stimulation. They are still people with rights, whatever they have done, and we lower ourselves as a society if we do not treat them with a certain degree of respect.

That’s what is wrong with Canberra! Not enough criminal gang executions!

What were we talking about, again?

whitelaughter12:57 am 24 Nov 11

poetix said :

1. ‘Lies on stilts’ is not a philosophical concept; it is merely a colourful phrase.
2. A judge is an not an officer of the Crown. The division between State and Law is central to our judicial system.
3. The sword wielded by Justice (often double-edged) represents reason and justice, and has nothing to do with capital punishment.
4. The United States has the death penalty (in some areas) and also the highest rate of imprisonment in the developed world. Obviously the death penalty doesn’t stop crime, except by the one person executed.

You’re on zero for 4 here.
1. The phrase ‘lies on stilts’ is repeatedly used by philosopher to dismiss inherent rights; as their is no logical basis for inherent rights, philosophers rarely feel the need to go further.
2. There are three arms of government – the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. All are agencies of the crown. This is really, really basic civics!
3. ‘reason’? Hardly, Reason was a completely different goddess – Justice is Themis: and when she doesn’t hold a sword, it’s because she’s holding an axe.
4. No, the US doesn’t. 20 years on death row isn’t ‘the death penalty’. Most of those idiots live *longer* than they would if they’d never been convicted.
Also, your logic is flawed (again). More people die in hospitals than anywhere else – does that mean medicine doesn’t save lives? Of course not. The more crimes there are, the more people clamour for the death penalty, so the harder it is for tyrants to revoke it.
Also, *stuff* deterrent. If you execute criminals, you don’t *need* a deterrent, because they are gone for good.

whitelaughter said :

@Wily_Bear – you have attempted to give a courteous and rational response, so I will try to do the same.
There is a term philosophers use for “inalienable rights”: Lies on Stilts. You express confusion at my rejection of them – quite correctly.
Because if they *were* inalienable, I would not be capable of doing so! I would instinctively accept them.
As I do not – as the majority of humans do not, and never have – we have a simple, logical disproof of them being inherent.
So we go to your 2nd position – ‘rights’ are in fact privileges with conditions attached: the Social Contract. If you attempt to claim that rights are anything more than this runs smack into section 116 of the Australian Constitution – you are trying to enforce your beliefs on a Judge (protected as an officer of the crown).
Now your claim that stripping rights is not one of the sanctions available to the law is patently false. The right of liberty is stripped by imprisonment; the right of travel is stripped by removing passports; the right of property is removed (not just with fines, convicted drug dealers are expressly forbidden to possess large amounts of cash); the right to vote is stripped from anyone imprisoned for more than 3 years. Stripping rights is the basic punishment available to the law.
And throughout history, the death penalty has been the right of a national government. Why do you think the statue of justice outside every court carries a sword? Further, it is the definition of a nation – while local authorities possess Low Justice, a soveriegn nation possesses High Justice: the power to excercise the death penalty, to declare war, the power of live and death.
Which, interestingly, means that if a “nation” refuses to use the death penalty, while criminal gangs operating inside it do…then those gangs have a fair claim to consider themselves a higher authority that the civil courts! Not surprisingly, they *do* believe this, rendering law enforcement impractical in gang held territories.
Finally, I will point out the absurdity of basing rights on birth. This is just a return to a class system, albeit with everyone in the ruling class – and allows the obvious exploit of growing humans in vats (sci fi at the moment, but for how much longer?) and exploiting them as slaves/spare parts.

1. ‘Lies on stilts’ is not a philosophical concept; it is merely a colourful phrase.
2. A judge is an not an officer of the Crown. The division between State and Law is central to our judicial system.
3. The sword wielded by Justice (often double-edged) represents reason and justice, and has nothing to do with capital punishment.
4. The United States has the death penalty (in some areas) and also the highest rate of imprisonment in the developed world. Obviously the death penalty doesn’t stop crime, except by the one person executed.

whitelaughter3:18 am 21 Nov 11

@Wily_Bear – you have attempted to give a courteous and rational response, so I will try to do the same.
There is a term philosophers use for “inalienable rights”: Lies on Stilts. You express confusion at my rejection of them – quite correctly.
Because if they *were* inalienable, I would not be capable of doing so! I would instinctively accept them.
As I do not – as the majority of humans do not, and never have – we have a simple, logical disproof of them being inherent.
So we go to your 2nd position – ‘rights’ are in fact privileges with conditions attached: the Social Contract. If you attempt to claim that rights are anything more than this runs smack into section 116 of the Australian Constitution – you are trying to enforce your beliefs on a Judge (protected as an officer of the crown).
Now your claim that stripping rights is not one of the sanctions available to the law is patently false. The right of liberty is stripped by imprisonment; the right of travel is stripped by removing passports; the right of property is removed (not just with fines, convicted drug dealers are expressly forbidden to possess large amounts of cash); the right to vote is stripped from anyone imprisoned for more than 3 years. Stripping rights is the basic punishment available to the law.
And throughout history, the death penalty has been the right of a national government. Why do you think the statue of justice outside every court carries a sword? Further, it is the definition of a nation – while local authorities possess Low Justice, a soveriegn nation possesses High Justice: the power to excercise the death penalty, to declare war, the power of live and death.
Which, interestingly, means that if a “nation” refuses to use the death penalty, while criminal gangs operating inside it do…then those gangs have a fair claim to consider themselves a higher authority that the civil courts! Not surprisingly, they *do* believe this, rendering law enforcement impractical in gang held territories.
Finally, I will point out the absurdity of basing rights on birth. This is just a return to a class system, albeit with everyone in the ruling class – and allows the obvious exploit of growing humans in vats (sci fi at the moment, but for how much longer?) and exploiting them as slaves/spare parts.

Whitelaughter #65, your frustration and anger at the injustices suffered by victims of crime is understandable, we should all share such outrage. What mystifies me however, is the outrage directed at those who would protect human rights. I’d have thought it would be comforting to know they are inalienable. I also thought Lookoutsmithers gave an explanation that would make the concept clear to even the most vocal doubter. Obviously, I was mistaken.
It is at once the eloquence AND the sting in the tail that human rights are due us all by virtue of our birth and shared humanity, even in spite of inhumanity. It follows that we are all entitled to them, or none at all. For those who would violate my rights, there exist a range of sanctions at law, yet stripping rights is not one of them. When we start making exceptions, they cease to become rights, instead becoming privileges with conditions attached. You don’t need to like it, but please try to understand it

Lookout Smithers10:30 pm 20 Nov 11

cleo said :

Lookout Smithers # 45

OMG! What planet are you on, or what are you on is the question. Maybe it’s something you have read.
I find you to be a condescending, insulting little twit, who has no life experiences.

Well I can’t help how you find me, obviously I am not about trying to insult or condescend anyone personally. What I am on? I would happily tell you if it was relevant. I live on the same planet. In canberra at one period in time. In fact all my significant life experience I got from living there. I have been on both sides of it mate, crown witness, complainant. And much more. I have seen enough that nothing at all surprises me anymore. Honest. But I still use reason when it comes to an idea and if I don’t understand it, I go find out. If you care so much about revenge style justice, prove it to us. I actually just think that what you said is about the best you have got. (no offense obviously)

Lookout Smithers10:19 pm 20 Nov 11

Mr Gillespie said :

Lookout Smithers said :

cleo said :

Boo f..king hoo, who gives a sh.t about their rights, they took away other peoples rights, as for human rights, (he do gooders), what about the rights of the victims?
Suck it up Princesses.

Human rights are for everyone living in the modern civilized world.. Just because humans do awful things to each other doesn’t provide a basis for forfeiting their human rights? Does it? Freedom, maybe, credibility, reputation, quality of life? Sure. But generally humans are meant to have human rights so as a level of commonality is always present between us all. Or so I think. It does come from old philosophies I guess but human rights are a given to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being. Crime is not part of it. That is a separate issue altogether. As humans, we have standards, even standards of punishment. During the holocaust a large number of people were denied human rights a decade before, not all of them would have been angels, they got far less in the end too. Do gooders is a lazy term, my dad says it all the time when he refuses to try understand something new to him. When you understand something fully, you become indifferent and only reason is left. That is presumably where human rights evolved.

Nah nah nah nah nah nah nah nah nah nah nah nah nah NOT for those that have forfeited the rights TOTALLY, ie. cold-blooded murderers that are beyond redemption and there is no point rehabilitating them. Dangerous dogs are put to death, I don’t see why the same doesn’t apply to dangerous human beings.

Well if you like those ideas so much, go take residence in saudi arabia, the least democratic country in the world. Or go live under sharia law in the middle east. I hear it is so harmonious they would not dream of leaving, even by boat. Human rights are for humans? Get it? Crime or criminality has nothing to do with it whatsoever. If you want to value judge others in that way, become a judge or public advocate? As for the comparison to dangerous dogs? I don’t know what to say there. *woof*

whitelaughter said :

Lookout Smithers said :

Human rights are for everyone living in the modern civilized world.. .

Except, of course, for victims.

The name Megan Mulquiney ring a bell? No? Lovely lass, I went to school with her. What happened? One of your ruddy criminals, Paul Vincent Phillips, rapes and murders a girl every few years, gets a slap on the wrist from the courts, spends a few months/years in gaol, gets out and rapes and murders another girl. The cops can prove that he was within a block of Megan when she disappeared, but couldn’t make it stick – so Phillips rapes/murders [b]another[/b] girl and goes to gaol for her death!
Why does this happen? Because accessories to murder [i]like you[/i] removed the death penalty. You’re not pro-human rights, you’re pro rapes and murders. And no matter how much you lie to yourself, what you are doing is clear to everyone else.

Noone has the right to take a life and nobody on this thread has said that. On the flip side, supporting the death penalty could also be perceived as being an “accessory to murder” especially if some other person on the “same block” as Megan copped the blame + the green mile, only to leave Mr Phillips? free to strike again.

The current alternative is obvious. We do have a MHU. If a person with a MI needs to be off the streets for their own safety or the safety of others then they should NOT be turned away from the MHU or discharged from the MHU until they are stable and well (eg. sent home on a bus off their heads on meds with a few more boxes of meds to tide them over till they get it together to get a prescription filled). They are supposed to be admitted if they are a risk to themselves, others or their reputation to prevent things escalating to the point where they do something that gets them in trouble with the public or police and subsequently entangled with the legal system. If for some reason, they really MUST go to jail to be punished for their sins, then at the very least, they should be stablised prior to prison entry and kept away from mainstream prisoners (as they can be extremely vulnerable and easily manipulated). An episode usually abates once treated and a long term secure MHU may not be required in every case. (Please do not tell me this is already happening within the system because in my recent experience that would be absolute BS). Even though the current MHU is not the best place to recover, it is still a more therapeutic environment than the jail! To me, this is the only sensible option currently available.

As I’ve said before there are many alternatives, like reducing stigma and encouraging tolerance so the public doesn’t get it’s knickers in a knot if someone is unwell. Like it or not, we have to live with a diverse range of people and this includes people with MI. We can’t just “lock away” the ones we don’t like (although I’d love to see that done as a social experiment. I have a few ppl in mind).

can people learn to trim comments? this place is starting to look like 90s hotmail. Or perhaps it’s just a subtle riot-act intelligence test.

whitelaughter12:48 pm 20 Nov 11

Lookout Smithers said :

Human rights are for everyone living in the modern civilized world.. .

Except, of course, for victims.

The name Megan Mulquiney ring a bell? No? Lovely lass, I went to school with her. What happened? One of your ruddy criminals, Paul Vincent Phillips, rapes and murders a girl every few years, gets a slap on the wrist from the courts, spends a few months/years in gaol, gets out and rapes and murders another girl. The cops can prove that he was within a block of Megan when she disappeared, but couldn’t make it stick – so Phillips rapes/murders [b]another[/b] girl and goes to gaol for her death!
Why does this happen? Because accessories to murder [i]like you[/i] removed the death penalty. You’re not pro-human rights, you’re pro rapes and murders. And no matter how much you lie to yourself, what you are doing is clear to everyone else.

Violet68 said :

Tooks said :

Violet68 said :

Tooks said :

Violet68 said :

Henry82 said :

dvaey said :

What about victimless crimes?

you have to work pretty hard to get into jail for a victimless crime. Perhaps you could point me towards a few people who are currently serving time in an Australian Gaol for committing only victimless crimes?

Inconveniently having a psychosis and pissing off your neighbours, growing marijuana for personal use, forgetting to go to appointments………

Don’t forgot continually breaching bail conditions…

Errr……that would be the forgetting appointments bit combined with the psychosis bit. Quite common to lose track of day and time and behave erratically when youre psychotic. Anyway, I thought we were discussing “victimless crimes”. Obviously you want to keep blaming but weren’t privy to the last court appearance or you would know someone was incarcerated because “experts” said the problem was drugs…….3.5 drug free months later they were proven wrong. I can’t stand knowalls who actually don’t know it all

What on earth are you talking about? I was talking in general terms, what Court case are you on about? You are in your own little world, aren’t you? Don’t assume I’m referring to your family member on every single comment.

What on earth were you talking about when you said breaching bail conditions was a victimless crime then? In general terms, a breach of bail could have included a crime where someone was hurt or had their property stolen. I was obviously giving an example relating to my recent experiences and not speaking in “general terms”. I also didn’t outrightly refer to my “family member” but you did………

You’re full of excuses for why people end up in jail, but you seem to have few answers. Like it or not, some mentally ill people need to be away from the community. With no long term secure psych unit, where would you have them stay?

Not in a fkn jail!

I can’t stand knowalls who actually don’t know it all

You’d better look in a mirror then.

I do every day. I don’t pretend to know all the answers unlike some who vehemently believe locking people up IS the answer.

Sometimes it IS the answer. You didn’t name any alternatives. If a person needs to be off the streets for his own safety (or the safety of others) and that person has been charged with an offence, what current alternatives are in place? The answer is none. Is it ideal? No. Jail is not the best place for these people, but sometimes it is the only sensible option.

TheDancingDjinn said :

merlin bodega said :

This from the same monkeys who have designed the mental health facilities in Canberra.

Why oh why am I not surprised?

I have read quite a few posts, where people are bashing on the mental health facilities here.
Have any of you ever been in one of these places – or are you taking the words of an angry mental health patient?
I have been in these places, i had serious depression as a young teen and tried to hurt myself, and also again while in my early 20’s. After a crime was committed against me, i was diagnosed with PTSD and have been a client of Mental health for a long time. They have supported me, held me as i cried, took me to places i needed to go and held my hand when i had to go into the facilites. Mentally ill people get angry when they are in there.. it’s not nice and they don’t like it, but don’t think that the people there and in the Mental Health department are bad or not doing their jobs, it’s hard work doing their jobs, it is unsafe, it is draining, and it is heartbreaking. Shame on you for thinking just because they don’t let your mentally ill family member or friend do what ever they want, that they are the bad guys!

Yes I have been in one of these places, well four actually. No they are not nice. I’m glad you have had a positive experience with mental health. This would generally mean that you have some insight into your illness and are compliant. Not everyone is the same as you. As for your last sentence, they often do let mentally ill people “do whatever they want” and that leads on to things like people existing without ever leaving their homes or even losing their homes and becoming chronically homeless, poor nutrition, poor quality of life, substance use and abuse, disorganised and chaotic lifestyles, possible Police and legal intervention and even death.

TheDancingDjinn said :

Tooks said :

dvaey said :

cleo said :

Boo f..king hoo, who gives a sh.t about their rights, they took away other peoples rights, as for human rights, (he do gooders), what about the rights of the victims?
Suck it up Princesses.

What about victimless crimes? Not everyone in jail is there for assault, murder, etc.. Not to mention, many inmates are remanded there (ie. they havent had their day in court yet). A mate of mine spent a month in remand for assault, before being released after the witness admitted she made a false report. Do you believe he should have had his rights taken away? You seem to have such a black and white impression of the justice system.

Victim in a domestic violence assault withdraws her statement and does her best to get the case dropped. Wow, never heard that happening before. I guarantee if he was kept in custody for a month, then it wasn’t a slap on the bum he was charged with and that he wasn’t a first offender.

Domestic Violence here has now changed it’s rules.. If the police suspect that a woman is being domestically abused by her partner (or vice versa) or that a brother is hurting another (adults i mean) the police lay the charges, the victim has no say. They changed it so victims couldn’t change their minds and say ” oh no no its ok i fell” if the police believe you hurt someone you live with, then they will charge you. Seen it happen, and was told recently by a lovely blue uniformed officer when they had to remove my drug f*cked brother from my home.

There has been no recent change of rules/law regarding domestic violence. DPP will still drop cases on occasions if the victim is uncooperative and there is insufficient corrobarative evidence to proceed.

Tooks said :

Violet68 said :

Tooks said :

Violet68 said :

Henry82 said :

dvaey said :

What about victimless crimes?

you have to work pretty hard to get into jail for a victimless crime. Perhaps you could point me towards a few people who are currently serving time in an Australian Gaol for committing only victimless crimes?

Inconveniently having a psychosis and pissing off your neighbours, growing marijuana for personal use, forgetting to go to appointments………

Don’t forgot continually breaching bail conditions…

Errr……that would be the forgetting appointments bit combined with the psychosis bit. Quite common to lose track of day and time and behave erratically when youre psychotic. Anyway, I thought we were discussing “victimless crimes”. Obviously you want to keep blaming but weren’t privy to the last court appearance or you would know someone was incarcerated because “experts” said the problem was drugs…….3.5 drug free months later they were proven wrong. I can’t stand knowalls who actually don’t know it all

What on earth are you talking about? I was talking in general terms, what Court case are you on about? You are in your own little world, aren’t you? Don’t assume I’m referring to your family member on every single comment.

What on earth were you talking about when you said breaching bail conditions was a victimless crime then? In general terms, a breach of bail could have included a crime where someone was hurt or had their property stolen. I was obviously giving an example relating to my recent experiences and not speaking in “general terms”. I also didn’t outrightly refer to my “family member” but you did………

You’re full of excuses for why people end up in jail, but you seem to have few answers. Like it or not, some mentally ill people need to be away from the community. With no long term secure psych unit, where would you have them stay?

Not in a fkn jail!

I can’t stand knowalls who actually don’t know it all

You’d better look in a mirror then.

I do every day. I don’t pretend to know all the answers unlike some who vehemently believe locking people up IS the answer.

TheDancingDjinn11:10 am 20 Nov 11

Tooks said :

dvaey said :

cleo said :

Boo f..king hoo, who gives a sh.t about their rights, they took away other peoples rights, as for human rights, (he do gooders), what about the rights of the victims?
Suck it up Princesses.

What about victimless crimes? Not everyone in jail is there for assault, murder, etc.. Not to mention, many inmates are remanded there (ie. they havent had their day in court yet). A mate of mine spent a month in remand for assault, before being released after the witness admitted she made a false report. Do you believe he should have had his rights taken away? You seem to have such a black and white impression of the justice system.

Victim in a domestic violence assault withdraws her statement and does her best to get the case dropped. Wow, never heard that happening before. I guarantee if he was kept in custody for a month, then it wasn’t a slap on the bum he was charged with and that he wasn’t a first offender.

Domestic Violence here has now changed it’s rules.. If the police suspect that a woman is being domestically abused by her partner (or vice versa) or that a brother is hurting another (adults i mean) the police lay the charges, the victim has no say. They changed it so victims couldn’t change their minds and say ” oh no no its ok i fell” if the police believe you hurt someone you live with, then they will charge you. Seen it happen, and was told recently by a lovely blue uniformed officer when they had to remove my drug f*cked brother from my home.

TheDancingDjinn11:05 am 20 Nov 11

merlin bodega said :

This from the same monkeys who have designed the mental health facilities in Canberra.

Why oh why am I not surprised?

I have read quite a few posts, where people are bashing on the mental health facilities here.
Have any of you ever been in one of these places – or are you taking the words of an angry mental health patient?
I have been in these places, i had serious depression as a young teen and tried to hurt myself, and also again while in my early 20’s. After a crime was committed against me, i was diagnosed with PTSD and have been a client of Mental health for a long time. They have supported me, held me as i cried, took me to places i needed to go and held my hand when i had to go into the facilites. Mentally ill people get angry when they are in there.. it’s not nice and they don’t like it, but don’t think that the people there and in the Mental Health department are bad or not doing their jobs, it’s hard work doing their jobs, it is unsafe, it is draining, and it is heartbreaking. Shame on you for thinking just because they don’t let your mentally ill family member or friend do what ever they want, that they are the bad guys!

merlin bodega10:19 am 20 Nov 11

This from the same monkeys who have designed the mental health facilities in Canberra.

Why oh why am I not surprised?

dvaey said :

cleo said :

Boo f..king hoo, who gives a sh.t about their rights, they took away other peoples rights, as for human rights, (he do gooders), what about the rights of the victims?
Suck it up Princesses.

What about victimless crimes? Not everyone in jail is there for assault, murder, etc.. Not to mention, many inmates are remanded there (ie. they havent had their day in court yet). A mate of mine spent a month in remand for assault, before being released after the witness admitted she made a false report. Do you believe he should have had his rights taken away? You seem to have such a black and white impression of the justice system.

Victim in a domestic violence assault withdraws her statement and does her best to get the case dropped. Wow, never heard that happening before. I guarantee if he was kept in custody for a month, then it wasn’t a slap on the bum he was charged with and that he wasn’t a first offender.

Violet68 said :

Tooks said :

Violet68 said :

Henry82 said :

dvaey said :

What about victimless crimes?

you have to work pretty hard to get into jail for a victimless crime. Perhaps you could point me towards a few people who are currently serving time in an Australian Gaol for committing only victimless crimes?

Inconveniently having a psychosis and pissing off your neighbours, growing marijuana for personal use, forgetting to go to appointments………

Don’t forgot continually breaching bail conditions…

Errr……that would be the forgetting appointments bit combined with the psychosis bit. Quite common to lose track of day and time and behave erratically when youre psychotic. Anyway, I thought we were discussing “victimless crimes”. Obviously you want to keep blaming but weren’t privy to the last court appearance or you would know someone was incarcerated because “experts” said the problem was drugs…….3.5 drug free months later they were proven wrong. I can’t stand knowalls who actually don’t know it all

What on earth are you talking about? I was talking in general terms, what Court case are you on about? You are in your own little world, aren’t you? Don’t assume I’m referring to your family member on every single comment.

You’re full of excuses for why people end up in jail, but you seem to have few answers. Like it or not, some mentally ill people need to be away from the community. With no long term secure psych unit, where would you have them stay?

I can’t stand knowalls who actually don’t know it all

You’d better look in a mirror then.

whitelaughter12:28 am 20 Nov 11

poetix said :

The fact that they are deprived of liberty is enough punishment,

“You’ve murdered someone – go to your room!”

If being “deprived of liberty” was a serious punishment, then compulsory education for children would be a human rights violation.
Criminals are locked up to protect the rest of us (although “the rest of us” notably excludes prison guards, poor bastards).
Being gaoled does not in any way pay their debt to society – quite the opposite, as the rest of us have to pay taxes to house the slimeballs. It is not a punishment; the numerous prisoners who deliberately get themselves arrested again the moment they are released is proof of that!

Lookout Smithers # 45

OMG! What planet are you on, or what are you on is the question. Maybe it’s something you have read.
I find you to be a condescending, insulting little twit, who has no life experiences.

Davey # 40

Are you sure about what you were told? Where there’s smoke there’s fire, and he would not have been locked up, maybe someone threatened the girl??

Henry82 said :

Violet68 said :

Inconveniently having a psychosis and pissing off your neighbours, growing marijuana for personal use, forgetting to go to appointments………

Well obviously there’s more to the first, considering every 2nd post here on riotact is about a neighbour making noise and the police doing nothing about it. Marijuana is decriminalised afaik, so you have to be growing a lot to get arrested. As for forgetting appointments, that’s tough luck. If you don’t think you can meet bail/probation conditions then say to the judge “i can’t meet those conditions, sorry”

If you believe that a seriously disorientated person or a person who desperately wants to get out of jail can say to a Magistrate, sorry I can’t meet those bail conditions, I don’t know what else to say without becoming insulting. You asked to hear about someone incarcerated for victimless crimes. I gave you an example and you go off on a tangent looking for an out. These were and are victimless crimes.

Tooks said :

Violet68 said :

Henry82 said :

dvaey said :

What about victimless crimes?

you have to work pretty hard to get into jail for a victimless crime. Perhaps you could point me towards a few people who are currently serving time in an Australian Gaol for committing only victimless crimes?

Inconveniently having a psychosis and pissing off your neighbours, growing marijuana for personal use, forgetting to go to appointments………

Don’t forgot continually breaching bail conditions…

Errr……that would be the forgetting appointments bit combined with the psychosis bit. Quite common to lose track of day and time and behave erratically when youre psychotic. Anyway, I thought we were discussing “victimless crimes”. Obviously you want to keep blaming but weren’t privy to the last court appearance or you would know someone was incarcerated because “experts” said the problem was drugs…….3.5 drug free months later they were proven wrong. I can’t stand knowalls who actually don’t know it all

Violet68 said :

Inconveniently having a psychosis and pissing off your neighbours, growing marijuana for personal use, forgetting to go to appointments………

Well obviously there’s more to the first, considering every 2nd post here on riotact is about a neighbour making noise and the police doing nothing about it. Marijuana is decriminalised afaik, so you have to be growing a lot to get arrested. As for forgetting appointments, that’s tough luck. If you don’t think you can meet bail/probation conditions then say to the judge “i can’t meet those conditions, sorry”

Violet68 said :

Henry82 said :

dvaey said :

What about victimless crimes?

you have to work pretty hard to get into jail for a victimless crime. Perhaps you could point me towards a few people who are currently serving time in an Australian Gaol for committing only victimless crimes?

Inconveniently having a psychosis and pissing off your neighbours, growing marijuana for personal use, forgetting to go to appointments………

Don’t forgot continually breaching bail conditions…

Mr Gillespie4:44 pm 19 Nov 11

Lookout Smithers said :

cleo said :

Boo f..king hoo, who gives a sh.t about their rights, they took away other peoples rights, as for human rights, (he do gooders), what about the rights of the victims?
Suck it up Princesses.

Human rights are for everyone living in the modern civilized world.. Just because humans do awful things to each other doesn’t provide a basis for forfeiting their human rights? Does it? Freedom, maybe, credibility, reputation, quality of life? Sure. But generally humans are meant to have human rights so as a level of commonality is always present between us all. Or so I think. It does come from old philosophies I guess but human rights are a given to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being. Crime is not part of it. That is a separate issue altogether. As humans, we have standards, even standards of punishment. During the holocaust a large number of people were denied human rights a decade before, not all of them would have been angels, they got far less in the end too. Do gooders is a lazy term, my dad says it all the time when he refuses to try understand something new to him. When you understand something fully, you become indifferent and only reason is left. That is presumably where human rights evolved.

Nah nah nah nah nah nah nah nah nah nah nah nah nah NOT for those that have forfeited the rights TOTALLY, ie. cold-blooded murderers that are beyond redemption and there is no point rehabilitating them. Dangerous dogs are put to death, I don’t see why the same doesn’t apply to dangerous human beings.

Henry82 said :

dvaey said :

What about victimless crimes?

you have to work pretty hard to get into jail for a victimless crime. Perhaps you could point me towards a few people who are currently serving time in an Australian Gaol for committing only victimless crimes?

Inconveniently having a psychosis and pissing off your neighbours, growing marijuana for personal use, forgetting to go to appointments………

dvaey said :

What about victimless crimes?

you have to work pretty hard to get into jail for a victimless crime. Perhaps you could point me towards a few people who are currently serving time in an Australian Gaol for committing only victimless crimes?

Lookout Smithers1:24 pm 19 Nov 11

cleo said :

Boo f..king hoo, who gives a sh.t about their rights, they took away other peoples rights, as for human rights, (he do gooders), what about the rights of the victims?
Suck it up Princesses.

Human rights are for everyone living in the modern civilized world.. Just because humans do awful things to each other doesn’t provide a basis for forfeiting their human rights? Does it? Freedom, maybe, credibility, reputation, quality of life? Sure. But generally humans are meant to have human rights so as a level of commonality is always present between us all. Or so I think. It does come from old philosophies I guess but human rights are a given to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being. Crime is not part of it. That is a separate issue altogether. As humans, we have standards, even standards of punishment. During the holocaust a large number of people were denied human rights a decade before, not all of them would have been angels, they got far less in the end too. Do gooders is a lazy term, my dad says it all the time when he refuses to try understand something new to him. When you understand something fully, you become indifferent and only reason is left. That is presumably where human rights evolved.

KeenGolfer said :

dvaey said :

Not to mention, many inmates are remanded there (ie. they havent had their day in court yet).

Total rubbish. Very few are remanded awaiting their day in court. Those that are generally have long criminal histories and are very likely to reoffend, or the court believes they will harass or intimidate witnesses or the victim.

The remand visits are generally quite well attended. The remand section was full in my recent experience. Took 3.5 months of remand to ascertain that there really is an illness there. Not the most humane treatment – having to be locked up to “prove” a health issue.

“Apples and oranges. You don’t ‘choose’ to be incapacitated, however you do choose to commit an armed robbery”.

Not all people are incarcerated for armed robbery and not all people have a “choice” about their circumstances. Get real.

Lookout Smithers12:35 pm 19 Nov 11

Wily_Bear said :

Lookout Smithers said :

ACT Health system has some serious human rights breaches.

My interest is piqued, care to expand?

. Its no secret that you fall under the authority in any health system. But ACT mental health is an absolute menace run by nurses that come with value judgements. . There is even a public account of how they failed one of their own. And she died? Small town plays a part also I think. If you want a decent shrink, you have to go private, in the public system you have one or two choices. Slim chances for the stakes. For shame.

dvaey said :

Not to mention, many inmates are remanded there (ie. they havent had their day in court yet).

Total rubbish. Very few are remanded awaiting their day in court. Those that are generally have long criminal histories and are very likely to reoffend, or the court believes they will harass or intimidate witnesses or the victim.

Lookout Smithers said :

ACT Health system has some serious human rights breaches.

My interest is piqued, care to expand?

cleo said :

Boo f..king hoo, who gives a sh.t about their rights, they took away other peoples rights, as for human rights, (he do gooders), what about the rights of the victims?
Suck it up Princesses.

What about victimless crimes? Not everyone in jail is there for assault, murder, etc.. Not to mention, many inmates are remanded there (ie. they havent had their day in court yet). A mate of mine spent a month in remand for assault, before being released after the witness admitted she made a false report. Do you believe he should have had his rights taken away? You seem to have such a black and white impression of the justice system.

Solitary confinement is particularly bad. The lack of human contact drives people mad, especially when they are locked alone up for long periods.

Because they aren’t getting stimulation from other people they don’t practice important skills like impulse control, judging other people’s intentions, telling their imaginations from reality etc. This results in violent outbursts fuelled by paranoia.

They end up mentally crippled and incapable of functioning in the real world.

Boo f..king hoo, who gives a sh.t about their rights, they took away other peoples rights, as for human rights, (he do gooders), what about the rights of the victims?
Suck it up Princesses.

Violet68 said :

Let’s hope you are never permanently incapacitated and/or unable to earn YOUR money then.

Apples and oranges. You don’t ‘choose’ to be incapacitated, however you do choose to commit an armed robbery.

HenryBG said :

Requiring people collecting the dole to prove they were on contraception before they could score any of OUR money for no effort on their part would do wonders to reduce the problem, too.

And let’s sterilise all the disabled when we’re at it, hm? I’d hate anyone who wasn’t one of US to get any assistance. Are you volunteering to go through unemployed people’s bins looking for used condoms? Or do they have to produce a certificate saying they’ve had an operation along with their Centrelink form? Perhaps you could tattoo them like dogs who’ve been fixed.

I think you’d have a great career as an Ear Inspector.

Australia is a great example of how many criminals can be reintegrated into society and contribute to the development of that society. In fact, that US and THEM are not always so far apart.

HenryBG said :

TheDancingDjinn said :

I-filed said :

Stevian said :

Either you haven’t thought it through or you just don’t care.

Yep – don’t care. I care about people who are the victims of misfortune – not those who create their own.

+ 1 Billion

Add my ++++_++++ to that.

Sick of hearing about poor widdle criminals not getting everything handed to them on a plate.

There are three surefire ways to protect NON-criminals from recidivism:
1/ Capital punishment
2/ Life sentences
3/ Deportation

I don’t give a flying fart what criminals want, I just want the rest of us protected from them WITHOUT vast expenditure of taxpayers’ money.

Requiring people collecting the dole to prove they were on contraception before they could score any of OUR money for no effort on their part would do wonders to reduce the problem, too.

Let’s hope you are never permanently incapacitated and/or unable to earn YOUR money then.

TheDancingDjinn said :

I-filed said :

Stevian said :

Either you haven’t thought it through or you just don’t care.

Yep – don’t care. I care about people who are the victims of misfortune – not those who create their own.

+ 1 Billion

Add my ++++_++++ to that.

Sick of hearing about poor widdle criminals not getting everything handed to them on a plate.

There are three surefire ways to protect NON-criminals from recidivism:
1/ Capital punishment
2/ Life sentences
3/ Deportation

I don’t give a flying fart what criminals want, I just want the rest of us protected from them WITHOUT vast expenditure of taxpayers’ money.

Requiring people collecting the dole to prove they were on contraception before they could score any of OUR money for no effort on their part would do wonders to reduce the problem, too.

Lookout Smithers12:04 pm 17 Nov 11

ACT Health system has some serious human rights breaches.

bigfeet said :

Violet68 said :

Classified said :

Violet68 said :

Treat them like shit and they will respond accordingly.

Behave accordingly and they will be treated like criminals.

Yep……and so the cycle goes. If that’s your attitude then don’t winge about recidivism.

So I assume you support the Singapore model Violet? Floggings with rattans, extended solitary confinement, forced work for prisoners etc.

After all, you keep telling us you are all about stopping recidivism.

So here is a proven system which is working and has reduced the recidivism rate to around 20%, one of the lowest in the world.

It obviously works so you would be a hypocrite if you didn’t support it wouldn’t you?

My curiosity got the better of me. This article is really interesting and challenges your perception of the propaganda perpetuated by the Singapore government. Please do have a look see.

http://yawningbread.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/indictments-from-our-prison-system/

Classified said :

Violet68 said :

Bigfeet…..people are far more important to me than recidivism rates.

Which people? The criminals, or the victims (you know, the people on the other end of those recidivism rates you’re not so interesting it)?

All people, not just the one’s who fit my idea of “deserving” support.

bigfeet said :

So I assume you support the Singapore model Violet? Floggings with rattans, extended solitary confinement, forced work for prisoners etc.

After all, you keep telling us you are all about stopping recidivism.

So here is a proven system which is working and has reduced the recidivism rate to around 20%, one of the lowest in the world.

It obviously works so you would be a hypocrite if you didn’t support it wouldn’t you?

What’s the source for your stats because I’m pretty sure they are incorrect.

Actually you seem to just be lying. This article http://www.score.gov.sg/newsletter/9in10.html claims that Singapores apparent low recidivism is due to a home detention scheme and not your febrile fantasies of Shariah Law

Violet68 said :

Bigfeet…..people are far more important to me than recidivism rates.

Which people? The criminals, or the victims (you know, the people on the other end of those recidivism rates you’re not so interesting it)?

Violet68 said :

Classified said :

Violet68 said :

Treat them like shit and they will respond accordingly.

Behave accordingly and they will be treated like criminals.

Yep……and so the cycle goes. If that’s your attitude then don’t winge about recidivism.

If it were up to me I’d take those who continually reoffend and leave them in their forever. At least then the innocent might finally be protected.

Fortunately for them , it’s not up to me.

So wait, you just totally ignored my post up further on the page where I was saying maybe we have it wrong, or is that me blindly beating law and order drum you half wit.

Buzz, I was responding to your comment about me disliking Police just because I asked about the usefulness of chickens (don’t how the f**k you came to that conclusion!) – not your post on alternative prison systems. Try not to take things so personally!

Bigfeet…..people are far more important to me than recidivism rates. I would be a hypocrite if I did support such an inhumane system. Don’t try and assume “what I’m all about”. I doubt you could grasp the concepts.

Violet68 said :

Classified said :

Violet68 said :

Treat them like shit and they will respond accordingly.

Behave accordingly and they will be treated like criminals.

Yep……and so the cycle goes. If that’s your attitude then don’t winge about recidivism.

So I assume you support the Singapore model Violet? Floggings with rattans, extended solitary confinement, forced work for prisoners etc.

After all, you keep telling us you are all about stopping recidivism.

So here is a proven system which is working and has reduced the recidivism rate to around 20%, one of the lowest in the world.

It obviously works so you would be a hypocrite if you didn’t support it wouldn’t you?

LSWCHP said :

This “ovum eating” talk really cast a shadow over my bacon and eggs this morning. Bacon and ova just didn’t sound right…

I know! But all the talk about chickens, sheep and organ harvesting got me thinking about a mixed grill.

This “ovum eating” talk really cast a shadow over my bacon and eggs this morning. Bacon and ova just didn’t sound right…

Violet68 said :

buzz819 said :

Violet68 said :

Special G said :

Chooks are useful – big difference.

Why? Because you can eat them and their ovum?

Yeah, and they eat worms and stuff, so a multitude of tasks they can do.

Career criminals, well there useful for high insurance premiums, breaking into my car and under ground garages, shop lifting – which inflates retail prices, clogging up the court system, stealing cars, well I think you like them Violet, because they give you a reason to be upset with the Police.

FFS. So a comment about the usefulness of chickens makes me a cop hater? Pffft……
Perhaps they should harvest the organs of the inmates in the AMC or grind them up for pet food or fertiliser. Would that make them more “useful/palatable” in your eyes? I think you like to take any opportunity to blindly defend law enforcement without considering how it could be improved OR the circumstances that bring many disadvantaged people under the scrutiny of law.

Enough about chickens. You are sounding alot like a sheep……not really useful to vegans or the ozone layer, but good for wool and absolutely fantastic at following the “leader”. The people incarcerated at the AMC are not animals. They are human. How dare you joke about their human rights. Treat them like shit and they will respond accordingly.

So wait, you just totally ignored my post up further on the page where I was saying maybe we have it wrong, or is that me blindly beating law and order drum you half wit.

Classified said :

Violet68 said :

Treat them like shit and they will respond accordingly.

Behave accordingly and they will be treated like criminals.

Yep……and so the cycle goes. If that’s your attitude then don’t winge about recidivism.

Violet68 said :

Treat them like shit and they will respond accordingly.

Is it fair to assume they might be separated due to continual bad behaviour?

Violet68 said :

Treat them like shit and they will respond accordingly.

Behave accordingly and they will be treated like criminals.

buzz819 said :

Violet68 said :

Special G said :

Chooks are useful – big difference.

Why? Because you can eat them and their ovum?

Yeah, and they eat worms and stuff, so a multitude of tasks they can do.

Career criminals, well there useful for high insurance premiums, breaking into my car and under ground garages, shop lifting – which inflates retail prices, clogging up the court system, stealing cars, well I think you like them Violet, because they give you a reason to be upset with the Police.

FFS. So a comment about the usefulness of chickens makes me a cop hater? Pffft……
Perhaps they should harvest the organs of the inmates in the AMC or grind them up for pet food or fertiliser. Would that make them more “useful/palatable” in your eyes? I think you like to take any opportunity to blindly defend law enforcement without considering how it could be improved OR the circumstances that bring many disadvantaged people under the scrutiny of law.

Enough about chickens. You are sounding alot like a sheep……not really useful to vegans or the ozone layer, but good for wool and absolutely fantastic at following the “leader”. The people incarcerated at the AMC are not animals. They are human. How dare you joke about their human rights. Treat them like shit and they will respond accordingly.

Violet68 said :

Special G said :

Chooks are useful – big difference.

Why? Because you can eat them and their ovum?

Yeah, and they eat worms and stuff, so a multitude of tasks they can do.

Career criminals, well there useful for high insurance premiums, breaking into my car and under ground garages, shop lifting – which inflates retail prices, clogging up the court system, stealing cars, well I think you like them Violet, because they give you a reason to be upset with the Police.

Violet68 said :

Special G said :

Chooks are useful – big difference.

Why? Because you can eat them and their ovum?

That, and their feathers can be used to stuff delightful little pillows for doggies.

Special G said :

Chooks are useful – big difference.

Why? Because you can eat them and their ovum?

Chooks are useful – big difference.

poetix said :

Stevian said :

I-filed said :

Waiting For Godot said :

Sounds like the so-called “human rights compliant” prison is a disaster. A prison with no gym is ridiculous and having inmates sitting down all day on the Net instead of having proper exercise sessions doesn’t sound like a very desirable atmosphere at all.

I think they should be bored out of their brains for the duration of their sentence, so they think twice before they commit another crime.

Don’t pretend you’re interested in rehabilitation, being bored is one of the biggest precursors to criminal behaviour. Not to mention the mental health issues. Ever hear the term stir-crazy? Either you haven’t thought it through or you just don’t care.

+1
The fact that they are deprived of liberty is enough punishment, and unless we are going to totally write off everyone who is in gaol, there needs to be some attempt at rehabilitation. People who are bored out of their brains are not the best thinkers about their situation, and how they might change their behaviour.

Even those with no prospect of return to society deserve to be treated with basic dignity, exercise, and some entertainment or educational opportunities, simply because they’re locked up for our benefit.

Sounds like the Official Visitor is doing his job.

If they’re bored, it’s probably because they choose not to participate in the many educational (and other) programs offered at AMC. They do get exercise, they do have a gym. Don’t know what they do for entertainment, but the cells have TVs, as I understand it they have limited internet access, and presumably they have access to books and magazines.

From a sentencing transcript, October 4:

Your education was unsettled. You attended four primary schools up to Year 6 due to your parents moving residence. You ceased attending school at age 14 when you decided to leave home. Since being held in custody from April 2009 you have completed a number of educational courses in the AMC including a General Construction Certificate I, Small Business Certificates I, II and III, a First Aid Certificate and a Hairdressing Certificate I. You are currently employed in the Activities building in the Alexander Maconochie Centre. You have personally maintained a high level of physical fitness by attending the prisoners’ gym whenever possible. You are a positive influence on other prisoners using the gym, not only providing advice on appropriate usage of gym equipment, but also providing a calming influence when tempers get out of hand.

I-filed said :

Stevian said :

Either you haven’t thought it through or you just don’t care.

Yep – don’t care. I care about people who are the victims of misfortune – not those who create their own.

Then why pretend that you imagine it has any deterrent effect.? Are you too cowardly to own you own opinions? The answer is yes, by the way, justify it how you want, in the first instance you are plain gutless.

buzz819 said :

The more I look into it, the more I think that maybe Australia is to Americanised when it comes to most things, why do people want to re-offend when they are released?

I haven’t found any stats for ACT alone, but found that Australia, in 2004 had an average recidivism rate or about 58%.

In Norway they have a rate of about %30, a rate of crime per person which is about equal to Canberra as well.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1986002,00.html

Sure, the Norwegian penal system may be great at rehabilitating criminals and turning them into functioning members of society, but it’s useless at satisfying the baying mobs need for vengeance. You’re talking hippy talk.

The more I look into it, the more I think that maybe Australia is to Americanised when it comes to most things, why do people want to re-offend when they are released?

I haven’t found any stats for ACT alone, but found that Australia, in 2004 had an average recidivism rate or about 58%.

In Norway they have a rate of about %30, a rate of crime per person which is about equal to Canberra as well.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1986002,00.html

TheDancingDjinn7:16 pm 12 Nov 11

I-filed said :

Stevian said :

Either you haven’t thought it through or you just don’t care.

Yep – don’t care. I care about people who are the victims of misfortune – not those who create their own.

+ 1 Billion

Stevian said :

I-filed said :

Waiting For Godot said :

Sounds like the so-called “human rights compliant” prison is a disaster. A prison with no gym is ridiculous and having inmates sitting down all day on the Net instead of having proper exercise sessions doesn’t sound like a very desirable atmosphere at all.

I think they should be bored out of their brains for the duration of their sentence, so they think twice before they commit another crime.

Don’t pretend you’re interested in rehabilitation, being bored is one of the biggest precursors to criminal behaviour. Not to mention the mental health issues. Ever hear the term stir-crazy? Either you haven’t thought it through or you just don’t care.

+1
The fact that they are deprived of liberty is enough punishment, and unless we are going to totally write off everyone who is in gaol, there needs to be some attempt at rehabilitation. People who are bored out of their brains are not the best thinkers about their situation, and how they might change their behaviour.

Even those with no prospect of return to society deserve to be treated with basic dignity, exercise, and some entertainment or educational opportunities, simply because they’re locked up for our benefit.

Sounds like the Official Visitor is doing his job.

Stevian said :

Either you haven’t thought it through or you just don’t care.

Yep – don’t care. I care about people who are the victims of misfortune – not those who create their own.

Waiting For Godot3:22 pm 12 Nov 11

Tooks said :

Waiting For Godot said :

Sounds like the so-called “human rights compliant” prison is a disaster. A prison with no gym is ridiculous and having inmates sitting down all day on the Net instead of having proper exercise sessions doesn’t sound like a very desirable atmosphere at all.

No gym? Where’d you get that from?

Just before the AMC was opened The Canberra Times reported that there wasn’t enough money to put a gym in. Oh, I see what you’re getting at. Believing anything published in the Crimes is foolhardy to say the least.

I-filed said :

Waiting For Godot said :

Sounds like the so-called “human rights compliant” prison is a disaster. A prison with no gym is ridiculous and having inmates sitting down all day on the Net instead of having proper exercise sessions doesn’t sound like a very desirable atmosphere at all.

I think they should be bored out of their brains for the duration of their sentence, so they think twice before they commit another crime.

+1

And why have a gym in a jail? I want them coming out spindly weaklings not muscled up.

I-filed said :

Waiting For Godot said :

Sounds like the so-called “human rights compliant” prison is a disaster. A prison with no gym is ridiculous and having inmates sitting down all day on the Net instead of having proper exercise sessions doesn’t sound like a very desirable atmosphere at all.

I think they should be bored out of their brains for the duration of their sentence, so they think twice before they commit another crime.

Don’t pretend you’re interested in rehabilitation, being bored is one of the biggest precursors to criminal behaviour. Not to mention the mental health issues. Ever hear the term stir-crazy? Either you haven’t thought it through or you just don’t care.

Waiting For Godot said :

Sounds like the so-called “human rights compliant” prison is a disaster. A prison with no gym is ridiculous and having inmates sitting down all day on the Net instead of having proper exercise sessions doesn’t sound like a very desirable atmosphere at all.

I think they should be bored out of their brains for the duration of their sentence, so they think twice before they commit another crime.

Waiting For Godot said :

Sounds like the so-called “human rights compliant” prison is a disaster. A prison with no gym is ridiculous and having inmates sitting down all day on the Net instead of having proper exercise sessions doesn’t sound like a very desirable atmosphere at all.

No gym? Where’d you get that from?

Waiting For Godot9:45 am 12 Nov 11

Sounds like the so-called “human rights compliant” prison is a disaster. A prison with no gym is ridiculous and having inmates sitting down all day on the Net instead of having proper exercise sessions doesn’t sound like a very desirable atmosphere at all.

This doesn’t surprise me in the least – the whole place is administered like a pig’s breakfast. They don’t answer the phones on Mondays. That’s just the rules. Seriously. And whether you get through Tuesday to Friday is really luck of the draw. Some days they just don’t feel like answering the phone. And when some sorry bastard actually decides to answer, it’s like he’s never used a phone before. It’s a miracle that place maintains any sense of order.

I tell my kids, don’t go to prison, because I can’t be bothered sitting on the phone for hours a day waiting for them to pick up, just so I can arrange to come and visit you.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.