It's a difficult job, the guy who's hearing was postponed because the PO hadn't prepared properly was a disgrace, yer right about his gal, ah would be more scared of her than him. We try to guess who would or wouldn't get parole at the end and we've not had many right so far.
It is a very difficult job. Every prisoner wants to get out. Every parole officer wants to avoid an ar5e kicking for each time one of them is recalled. This makes the whole process difficult. Drink and drugs seemed to play a big part in many of their lives, both inside and outside prison. You would think it would be fairly easy to set up a system where prisoners are unable to access alcohol and drugs.
On the ear biting guy. I would find it difficult to believe in his good intentions. He has already had a massive result in only having to serve three and a half years for manslaughter. Yet after getting out he goes on to bite a guys ear off. Hard to say any lessons were learnt.
People who commit crimes under the influence of drink or drugs seem to be more likely to reoffend unless they can stay off them.
You might think that. But you would be entirely wrong. It is next to impossible. And it is even more difficult to stop once people are paroled.
They manage to solve that 1 about 3 years after Brexit is resolved
Why do think it is virtually impossible?
Because it is a problem that all Governments have tried to solve for decades. With zero success. There are hundreds of different ways of accessing hundreds of different drugs. That it would cost £billions even to create a proper system of monitoring after the event. Which no Government has any intention of funding. And, in any event, would only target some (not all) drugs.
Even without the dramatic falls in spending in these areas, there is no way of solving this problem. It might be possible to stop 1 drug-but it would just be replaced with another.
Just take alcohol, as an example. You could spend a lot of money ensuring ex-offenders do not go to licensed premises. But supermarkets? Friends/family buying for them? Going round other's houses? Probation Officers are so underfunded they cannot cope now. Never mind a whole load of new rules. Which would only change where the problems arose-not resolve them.
No, I was thinking just stopping them getting into prisons.
Just 1 example. Do you wish to insist that every visitor, including Minors, has intimate rectal searches? Every single visit? Including the 10-year-olds?
Not really. I would prefer to see a similar system to that used in the US. Where there is no contact between prisoners and visitors. There is a partition between them, and they use a phone to communicate.
Then there is the fun of drone deliveries/throwing stuff over the wall.
We now have the ability to deal with drones around airports, why not prisons?
You say that "in the US ... there is no contact between prisoners and visitors".
That is simply not true. In the US there are limited occasions where that may happen (like here). But the general rule is exactly the same as the UK. Even in places known for their harsh rules, like Texas.
Except on TV, of course.
In relation to drones. Airports are generally in their own grounds, well away from towns. Rather easier to police. Unlike a lot of prisons-for example HMP Chelmsford is right in the middle of the City.
I dont really care whether it is true in real life, or just happens on the telly, if you want to stop visitors smuggling drugs in, that is how you would do it. Drones can apparently be disabled, or you could use nets. Surely you are not suggesting we are unable in 2023 to put a stop to to drug deliveries via drones. As I said earlier one the guys was caught with 20 litres of hooch. I dont think that was delivered by drone, or secreted about the person of a visitor.
You believe that a lot of complex issues are, in reality, very simple. Sorry to have to break it to you, but there are only 2 options:-
1. The finest specialist minds have collectively all failed to grasp for decades how simple a problem is; or 2. You do not grasp the complexities
However much you try to complicate this, if there is absolutely no contact between a prisoner and their visitors, drug smuggling by visitors stops.
However much you try and simplify this, the reality is different. There are certain Prisoners who, due to their previous behaviour, are restricted to "Closed Visits". This is where the Visitor cannot touch the Prisoner, and there is a pane of glass between them.
And they still get their drugs. From other prisoners, via other Prisoners' visitors, via Prison Officers, via dead drops.
Do you propose stopping all Prisoners touching their wives/children? The ones who haven't even been found Guilty of anything yet? Do you think all the heroin addicts shouldn't be given Methadone?
Do you think no-one has considered your sort of solution? And rejected it, for being both unworkable and a "cure" that is worse than the disease?
It's a difficult job, the guy who's hearing was postponed because the PO hadn't prepared properly was a disgrace, yer right about his gal, ah would be more scared of her than him. We try to guess who would or wouldn't get parole at the end and we've not had many right so far.
It is a very difficult job. Every prisoner wants to get out. Every parole officer wants to avoid an ar5e kicking for each time one of them is recalled. This makes the whole process difficult. Drink and drugs seemed to play a big part in many of their lives, both inside and outside prison. You would think it would be fairly easy to set up a system where prisoners are unable to access alcohol and drugs.
On the ear biting guy. I would find it difficult to believe in his good intentions. He has already had a massive result in only having to serve three and a half years for manslaughter. Yet after getting out he goes on to bite a guys ear off. Hard to say any lessons were learnt.
People who commit crimes under the influence of drink or drugs seem to be more likely to reoffend unless they can stay off them.
You might think that. But you would be entirely wrong. It is next to impossible. And it is even more difficult to stop once people are paroled.
They manage to solve that 1 about 3 years after Brexit is resolved
Why do think it is virtually impossible?
Because it is a problem that all Governments have tried to solve for decades. With zero success. There are hundreds of different ways of accessing hundreds of different drugs. That it would cost £billions even to create a proper system of monitoring after the event. Which no Government has any intention of funding. And, in any event, would only target some (not all) drugs.
Even without the dramatic falls in spending in these areas, there is no way of solving this problem. It might be possible to stop 1 drug-but it would just be replaced with another.
Just take alcohol, as an example. You could spend a lot of money ensuring ex-offenders do not go to licensed premises. But supermarkets? Friends/family buying for them? Going round other's houses? Probation Officers are so underfunded they cannot cope now. Never mind a whole load of new rules. Which would only change where the problems arose-not resolve them.
No, I was thinking just stopping them getting into prisons.
Just 1 example. Do you wish to insist that every visitor, including Minors, has intimate rectal searches? Every single visit? Including the 10-year-olds?
Not really. I would prefer to see a similar system to that used in the US. Where there is no contact between prisoners and visitors. There is a partition between them, and they use a phone to communicate.
It's a difficult job, the guy who's hearing was postponed because the PO hadn't prepared properly was a disgrace, yer right about his gal, ah would be more scared of her than him. We try to guess who would or wouldn't get parole at the end and we've not had many right so far.
It is a very difficult job. Every prisoner wants to get out. Every parole officer wants to avoid an ar5e kicking for each time one of them is recalled. This makes the whole process difficult. Drink and drugs seemed to play a big part in many of their lives, both inside and outside prison. You would think it would be fairly easy to set up a system where prisoners are unable to access alcohol and drugs.
On the ear biting guy. I would find it difficult to believe in his good intentions. He has already had a massive result in only having to serve three and a half years for manslaughter. Yet after getting out he goes on to bite a guys ear off. Hard to say any lessons were learnt.
People who commit crimes under the influence of drink or drugs seem to be more likely to reoffend unless they can stay off them.
You might think that. But you would be entirely wrong. It is next to impossible. And it is even more difficult to stop once people are paroled.
They manage to solve that 1 about 3 years after Brexit is resolved
Why do think it is virtually impossible?
Because it is a problem that all Governments have tried to solve for decades. With zero success. There are hundreds of different ways of accessing hundreds of different drugs. That it would cost £billions even to create a proper system of monitoring after the event. Which no Government has any intention of funding. And, in any event, would only target some (not all) drugs.
Even without the dramatic falls in spending in these areas, there is no way of solving this problem. It might be possible to stop 1 drug-but it would just be replaced with another.
Just take alcohol, as an example. You could spend a lot of money ensuring ex-offenders do not go to licensed premises. But supermarkets? Friends/family buying for them? Going round other's houses? Probation Officers are so underfunded they cannot cope now. Never mind a whole load of new rules. Which would only change where the problems arose-not resolve them.
No, I was thinking just stopping them getting into prisons.
Just 1 example. Do you wish to insist that every visitor, including Minors, has intimate rectal searches? Every single visit? Including the 10-year-olds?
Not really. I would prefer to see a similar system to that used in the US. Where there is no contact between prisoners and visitors. There is a partition between them, and they use a phone to communicate.
Then there is the fun of drone deliveries/throwing stuff over the wall.
We now have the ability to deal with drones around airports, why not prisons?
You say that "in the US ... there is no contact between prisoners and visitors".
That is simply not true. In the US there are limited occasions where that may happen (like here). But the general rule is exactly the same as the UK. Even in places known for their harsh rules, like Texas.
Except on TV, of course.
In relation to drones. Airports are generally in their own grounds, well away from towns. Rather easier to police. Unlike a lot of prisons-for example HMP Chelmsford is right in the middle of the City.
I dont really care whether it is true in real life, or just happens on the telly, if you want to stop visitors smuggling drugs in, that is how you would do it. Drones can apparently be disabled, or you could use nets. Surely you are not suggesting we are unable in 2023 to put a stop to to drug deliveries via drones. As I said earlier one the guys was caught with 20 litres of hooch. I dont think that was delivered by drone, or secreted about the person of a visitor.
You believe that a lot of complex issues are, in reality, very simple. Sorry to have to break it to you, but there are only 2 options:-
1. The finest specialist minds have collectively all failed to grasp for decades how simple a problem is; or 2. You do not grasp the complexities
However much you try to complicate this, if there is absolutely no contact between a prisoner and their visitors, drug smuggling by visitors stops.
However much you try and simplify this, the reality is different. There are certain Prisoners who, due to their previous behaviour, are restricted to "Closed Visits". This is where the Visitor cannot touch the Prisoner, and there is a pane of glass between them.
And they still get their drugs. From other prisoners, via other Prisoners' visitors, via Prison Officers, via dead drops.
Do you propose stopping all Prisoners touching their wives/children? The ones who haven't even been found Guilty of anything yet?
Yes.
Do you think all the heroin addicts shouldn't be given Methadone?
No.
Do you think no-one has considered your sort of solution? And rejected it, for being both unworkable and a "cure" that is worse than the disease?
Silly me. I thought smuggling drugs into prisons was illegal. As is taking them.
It's a difficult job, the guy who's hearing was postponed because the PO hadn't prepared properly was a disgrace, yer right about his gal, ah would be more scared of her than him. We try to guess who would or wouldn't get parole at the end and we've not had many right so far.
It is a very difficult job. Every prisoner wants to get out. Every parole officer wants to avoid an ar5e kicking for each time one of them is recalled. This makes the whole process difficult. Drink and drugs seemed to play a big part in many of their lives, both inside and outside prison. You would think it would be fairly easy to set up a system where prisoners are unable to access alcohol and drugs.
On the ear biting guy. I would find it difficult to believe in his good intentions. He has already had a massive result in only having to serve three and a half years for manslaughter. Yet after getting out he goes on to bite a guys ear off. Hard to say any lessons were learnt.
People who commit crimes under the influence of drink or drugs seem to be more likely to reoffend unless they can stay off them.
You might think that. But you would be entirely wrong. It is next to impossible. And it is even more difficult to stop once people are paroled.
They manage to solve that 1 about 3 years after Brexit is resolved
Why do think it is virtually impossible?
Because it is a problem that all Governments have tried to solve for decades. With zero success. There are hundreds of different ways of accessing hundreds of different drugs. That it would cost £billions even to create a proper system of monitoring after the event. Which no Government has any intention of funding. And, in any event, would only target some (not all) drugs.
Even without the dramatic falls in spending in these areas, there is no way of solving this problem. It might be possible to stop 1 drug-but it would just be replaced with another.
Just take alcohol, as an example. You could spend a lot of money ensuring ex-offenders do not go to licensed premises. But supermarkets? Friends/family buying for them? Going round other's houses? Probation Officers are so underfunded they cannot cope now. Never mind a whole load of new rules. Which would only change where the problems arose-not resolve them.
No, I was thinking just stopping them getting into prisons.
Just 1 example. Do you wish to insist that every visitor, including Minors, has intimate rectal searches? Every single visit? Including the 10-year-olds?
Not really. I would prefer to see a similar system to that used in the US. Where there is no contact between prisoners and visitors. There is a partition between them, and they use a phone to communicate.
It's a difficult job, the guy who's hearing was postponed because the PO hadn't prepared properly was a disgrace, yer right about his gal, ah would be more scared of her than him. We try to guess who would or wouldn't get parole at the end and we've not had many right so far.
It is a very difficult job. Every prisoner wants to get out. Every parole officer wants to avoid an ar5e kicking for each time one of them is recalled. This makes the whole process difficult. Drink and drugs seemed to play a big part in many of their lives, both inside and outside prison. You would think it would be fairly easy to set up a system where prisoners are unable to access alcohol and drugs.
On the ear biting guy. I would find it difficult to believe in his good intentions. He has already had a massive result in only having to serve three and a half years for manslaughter. Yet after getting out he goes on to bite a guys ear off. Hard to say any lessons were learnt.
People who commit crimes under the influence of drink or drugs seem to be more likely to reoffend unless they can stay off them.
You might think that. But you would be entirely wrong. It is next to impossible. And it is even more difficult to stop once people are paroled.
They manage to solve that 1 about 3 years after Brexit is resolved
Why do think it is virtually impossible?
Because it is a problem that all Governments have tried to solve for decades. With zero success. There are hundreds of different ways of accessing hundreds of different drugs. That it would cost £billions even to create a proper system of monitoring after the event. Which no Government has any intention of funding. And, in any event, would only target some (not all) drugs.
Even without the dramatic falls in spending in these areas, there is no way of solving this problem. It might be possible to stop 1 drug-but it would just be replaced with another.
Just take alcohol, as an example. You could spend a lot of money ensuring ex-offenders do not go to licensed premises. But supermarkets? Friends/family buying for them? Going round other's houses? Probation Officers are so underfunded they cannot cope now. Never mind a whole load of new rules. Which would only change where the problems arose-not resolve them.
No, I was thinking just stopping them getting into prisons.
Just 1 example. Do you wish to insist that every visitor, including Minors, has intimate rectal searches? Every single visit? Including the 10-year-olds?
Not really. I would prefer to see a similar system to that used in the US. Where there is no contact between prisoners and visitors. There is a partition between them, and they use a phone to communicate.
Then there is the fun of drone deliveries/throwing stuff over the wall.
We now have the ability to deal with drones around airports, why not prisons?
You say that "in the US ... there is no contact between prisoners and visitors".
That is simply not true. In the US there are limited occasions where that may happen (like here). But the general rule is exactly the same as the UK. Even in places known for their harsh rules, like Texas.
Except on TV, of course.
In relation to drones. Airports are generally in their own grounds, well away from towns. Rather easier to police. Unlike a lot of prisons-for example HMP Chelmsford is right in the middle of the City.
I dont really care whether it is true in real life, or just happens on the telly, if you want to stop visitors smuggling drugs in, that is how you would do it. Drones can apparently be disabled, or you could use nets. Surely you are not suggesting we are unable in 2023 to put a stop to to drug deliveries via drones. As I said earlier one the guys was caught with 20 litres of hooch. I dont think that was delivered by drone, or secreted about the person of a visitor.
You believe that a lot of complex issues are, in reality, very simple. Sorry to have to break it to you, but there are only 2 options:-
1. The finest specialist minds have collectively all failed to grasp for decades how simple a problem is; or 2. You do not grasp the complexities
However much you try to complicate this, if there is absolutely no contact between a prisoner and their visitors, drug smuggling by visitors stops.
However much you try and simplify this, the reality is different. There are certain Prisoners who, due to their previous behaviour, are restricted to "Closed Visits". This is where the Visitor cannot touch the Prisoner, and there is a pane of glass between them.
And they still get their drugs. From other prisoners, via other Prisoners' visitors, via Prison Officers, via dead drops.
Do you propose stopping all Prisoners touching their wives/children? The ones who haven't even been found Guilty of anything yet?
As far as I am aware prisoners arent allowed to touch visitors during visits anyway.
Do you think all the heroin addicts shouldn't be given Methadone?
Methadone is neither smuggled in nor illegal.
Do you think no-one has considered your sort of solution? And rejected it, for being both unworkable and a "cure" that is worse than the disease?
Surely prisoners that have been stopped from taking drugs, and drinking during their sentence would have a better chance of surviving on the outside subsequent to their release.
It's a difficult job, the guy who's hearing was postponed because the PO hadn't prepared properly was a disgrace, yer right about his gal, ah would be more scared of her than him. We try to guess who would or wouldn't get parole at the end and we've not had many right so far.
It is a very difficult job. Every prisoner wants to get out. Every parole officer wants to avoid an ar5e kicking for each time one of them is recalled. This makes the whole process difficult. Drink and drugs seemed to play a big part in many of their lives, both inside and outside prison. You would think it would be fairly easy to set up a system where prisoners are unable to access alcohol and drugs.
On the ear biting guy. I would find it difficult to believe in his good intentions. He has already had a massive result in only having to serve three and a half years for manslaughter. Yet after getting out he goes on to bite a guys ear off. Hard to say any lessons were learnt.
People who commit crimes under the influence of drink or drugs seem to be more likely to reoffend unless they can stay off them.
You might think that. But you would be entirely wrong. It is next to impossible. And it is even more difficult to stop once people are paroled.
They manage to solve that 1 about 3 years after Brexit is resolved
Why do think it is virtually impossible?
Because it is a problem that all Governments have tried to solve for decades. With zero success. There are hundreds of different ways of accessing hundreds of different drugs. That it would cost £billions even to create a proper system of monitoring after the event. Which no Government has any intention of funding. And, in any event, would only target some (not all) drugs.
Even without the dramatic falls in spending in these areas, there is no way of solving this problem. It might be possible to stop 1 drug-but it would just be replaced with another.
Just take alcohol, as an example. You could spend a lot of money ensuring ex-offenders do not go to licensed premises. But supermarkets? Friends/family buying for them? Going round other's houses? Probation Officers are so underfunded they cannot cope now. Never mind a whole load of new rules. Which would only change where the problems arose-not resolve them.
No, I was thinking just stopping them getting into prisons.
Just 1 example. Do you wish to insist that every visitor, including Minors, has intimate rectal searches? Every single visit? Including the 10-year-olds?
Not really. I would prefer to see a similar system to that used in the US. Where there is no contact between prisoners and visitors. There is a partition between them, and they use a phone to communicate.
Comments
And they still get their drugs. From other prisoners, via other Prisoners' visitors, via Prison Officers, via dead drops.
Do you propose stopping all Prisoners touching their wives/children? The ones who haven't even been found Guilty of anything yet? Do you think all the heroin addicts shouldn't be given Methadone?
Do you think no-one has considered your sort of solution? And rejected it, for being both unworkable and a "cure" that is worse than the disease?
To be fair, Dolly Dewdrop had the answer.
I thought smuggling drugs into prisons was illegal.
As is taking them.