Prison

Hi,

If he has misinformed the masses of TS then it's off to gaol for him. No minimum tariff.

Seems fair enough to me.........

STS

[Appuleius]

What would a TSs rights be in nick (presume you mean a transexual!!) or a TVs (transvestite)? like would he/she be in a dorm with other ladies or banged up with hairy ars*d brutal men, either brings tears to the eyes, and a wry smile to the fizogg.

[oldboy2000]

If you can't do the time, Don't do The Crime.

[squidgy]

/me splits hairs

If you have a big stockpile of telly's but you never use them - you don't need a TV licence.

It does not have to be capable of receiving BBC, just the fact it is capable of receiving, be it via an Aerial or Satellite dish, or by any other means!

Also not quite true. If you never use it for that purpose - then you don't need a TV licence for it either.

You can stockpile and hoard TV's as much as you like. But you don't legally need a TV licence until you turn it on and start trying to watch TV broadcasts with it.

Yes - I'm aware that TV is a privilege in the nick, and not a basic right. I think they ought to change that.

[squidgy]

Yes - I'm aware that TV is a privilege in the nick, and not a basic right.

Mind you - you do have a basic right to keep a radio, no? TV is crap on a Saturday night anyway. Radio is much better. You have Seb Fontaine and Tall Paul on Radio 1, and John Digweed on Kiss 100, and the Hed Kandi show on Jazz FM. Can't go wrong. Take the radio away - and I'll really go nuts.

[BexTech]

Yes it's true that if you have a stock of TV's etc and you do not use them for TV reception, but you will have TV licensing checking if you are in-fact watching them!

But if you have a monitor and a satellite system and you are watching TV pictures, whether it receives BBC or not, you still require a TV licence.

[squidgy]

I notice that slammers have been in the rag again today.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/st...126756,00.html

"In the worst of our overcrowded local prisons, prisoners may spend 23 hours a day in a shared cell with an unscreened toilet," she says. Even the best local prisons are failing to deliver activity and resettlement opportunities.

Tracy Beaker has given me an idea. If you ever go to prison - then it's a good idea to pee in your bed every now and then. I figure that this will improve your chances of getting a cell to yourself.

Snag is - you might have to wet your bed while on remand too. If you only start wetting the bed when you're convicted, they might see through it. Worse still - if the bed wetting problem you had when you shared a cell miraculously clears up when you're given a private cell - what will they think of that? Could be icky. Which is worse - sharing a cell, or sleeping in your own pee? I guess it depends how hateful the person you have to share with is.

[squidgy]

Britain's prison population rose by 600 in the past week to 73,075. The overcrowding is so acute that the Prison Service may have to hold inmates in police cells by the summer.

The chief inspector's annual report highlights a 30% rise in the number of incidents of "self-harming" by prisoners, such as cutting themselves. There were 7,700 such incidents in the first half of 2003.

Okay so my last post was a bit of a troll - a bit more seriously now. These 7,700 incidents of inmates cutting themselves - how many of them are convicted prisoners, and how many are merely on remand? Why don't they tell us this?

I think that even the most right-wing reactionary among us can see that remand prisoners deserve more rights than convicted prisoners. Maybe it's not such a big deal if convicted prisoners start cutting themselves. But if remand prisoners start doing it - that's scary. Experiments on rats suggest that self-harm is triggered by environmental conditions. So I think that if remand prisoners start cutting themselves, it suggests that their basic human rights are not being respected. If remand prisoners' human rights aren't respected, then can they be expected to be prepared for their trials? And - if they can't get themselves ready for their trial, then is the trial fair? It makes me question the whole justice system.

Sure - I think it would be good to give better health care to prison inmates - not just psychiatric health, but general health. But I don't think that better health just means more Prozac. I think that some things are far more important than medication. Such as clean water. And not having to share your cell with a psycho bully. And having your rights respected. Especially if you're a remand prisoner.

But I'm worried about what's behind this so-called concern for prisoner psychiatric health. Do self-harm incidents constitute grounds for sectioning under the Mental Health Act? What exactly are your rights if you get sectioned? Do you still have all the same rights as a remand prisoner - or can they section you as a way of circumventing the obligation to honour those rights? If there's reason to believe that self-harm is predisposed by environmental conditions, then I think it's very serious indeed - it undermines our whole democracy and justice system.

Well blah - the system screws people over. We know that already. Justice is bunk - and prisons are turning into the kind of workhouses that Charles Dickens used to write about - like they already have in America.

[squidgy]

That all said - if they let out those 54 parents who've been locked up for abusing their children, when they probably died of cot death, then that'll help. Cot death is every parent's worst nightmare. To be thrown in the slammer for it just adds insult to injury.

Oh - but that said too - I think that those 54 parents should all be able to get council housing in nice areas too - if they want it. 54 people isn't that many in the bigger scheme of things. I'm sure the government will be able to find local authorities with some unlet stock - or some stock let to people who really could do with being in some other form of accommodation - eg, a prison. Or mental hospital. Or drug rehab centre. Or something. Surely there's at least one drug addict in a council flat somewhere?

[emmaemu]

Not a chance. The government wont pay out anymore than they have to. The are tight - big time. Trust me, i used to work for the government

[squidgy]

The government wont pay out anymore than they have to. The are tight - big time. Trust me, i used to work for the government

Well quite - but the Daily Mail bleats on about how we're being too soft on criminals, and how we should bang more of them up - but in the other breath, they bleat on about how expensive this all is. They can't have it both ways.

Which is cheaper? Prisons? Or council houses? We're supposed to believe that homeless hostels are more expensive than council houses - well, they pay more housing benefit for it anyway. But I'd have thought that being in prison is more like being in a hostel than being in a council house. So I find it hard to believe that prison is cheaper.

Perhaps council housing is more expensive than hostels. The government fails to mention that if council stock was let on the open market, they would be able to charge much more rent. To my way of thinking, the fact that they don't is a type of subsidy. But homeless hostels charge market rates for their rooms. And that's why we think they're more expensive.

If it was left up to the free market, then I think hostels would be cheaper than council housing.

Which might explain "right to buy" logic. The fact that depletion of housing stock might cause homeless hostel housing benefit charges isn't a problem - because it's probably cheaper to put people in homeless hostels than make council housing available to them.

And perhaps it's cheaper to put them in prison too. Hence the overcrowding / self-harm / suicide problems. I think I'm onto something here.

Hi,

I think I'm onto something here

Too many letters. There are those amongst us who think you're on something!!.

Now that would be more like it....

STS

[squidgy]

Too many letters. There are those amongst us who think you're on something!!.

Now that would be more like it....

Where shall we send the bill?