Albeit they are poorly administered in many ways, Gaols actually do serve an important purpose. They keep the society we live in just a tad safer than otherwise. Given I have acknowledged poor administration and, will also acknowledge our very flawed society, neither of those issues diminish the intrinsic underlying purpose of a prison, separate those who try mostly to get along from those who try mostly to not get along, often in particularly hazardous ways...

Pho Huc wrote on Sep 11^th, 2015 at 3:09pm:


No they don't prevent crime, however, they do reduce it. Further, you cannot say they don't "improve" inmates as a blanket statement. There are some whose entire life is turned around for the better, just like there are some who will never change whilst they draw breath.

Whatever your argument with another poster is, the reality is OUR system is what is flawed i.e. how we use, abuse and fail to reform the Gaol, legal and justice systems is the real issue. Therefore, acknowledging what works is just as important as highlighting the flaws. It is rather narrow thinking to make such broad scatter gun statements about changes or lack thereof to inmates lives. It does nothing to enhance your argument.

Phemanderac wrote on Sep 11^th, 2015 at 3:23pm:


Good post. I agree that I am making sweeping statements, but in my defense sweeping statements are required in a forum such as this when talking about the overview of a complex subject, otherwise the posts would be epically long winded.

When I state they do not improve inmates lives, I accept that a portion of people incarcerated will benefit from education/rehabilitation programs while they are inside.
These people are not in the majority though.
This is demonstrated by the high levels of recidivism in most countries with conventional prison systems. 
In Australia once you go to prison, you have a 60% chance of re-offending once released.
A system that fails more than half of people who go through it obviously should be re-engineered.

The countries which have reduced recidivism the most are Norway/Sweden, who have attempted to give the shortest possible prison sentences, paired with a focus on education rehabilitation.
Its almost like less prison creates better outcomes for society as a whole.

I accept that segregation of criminals will probably always be required, but its the way we structure the segregation that is most important. Locking people in a box doesn't make them a better person.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/dec/01/why-sweden-closing-prisons
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/feb/25/norwegian-prison-inmates-treated-like-people

Pho Huc wrote on Sep 11^th, 2015 at 3:09pm:


Jails exist to rehabilitate and to protect society from criminals. It also serves to punish and to act as a deterrent.

Now, anyone in year 8 could have come up with that and many, a lot younger.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 11^th, 2015 at 4:42pm:


Technically true, but it is also true that the presence and existence of a gun makes violent death more likely. The gun is not an innocent factor is all of this.

mariacostel wrote on Sep 11^th, 2015 at 5:00pm:



It is the presence of a violent lunatic that is the problem, not the gun.

Of the two women killed by violent lunatics this week, one was with a gun and the other was with a brick, the only consistency was the violent POS.

And in at least one case the woman was turned away by police who couldn't be f...ked helping her.


Guns are nothing more than a bullsh1t excuse by a cowardly little fascist peice of sh1t john howard to use as a distraction.

mariacostel wrote on Sep 11^th, 2015 at 5:00pm:


Actually..YES, the 'gun' IS 'innocent' in the whole gun/death idea..It really is the 'concept' that 'guns don't kill people'... a gun is simply a tool...a gun has zero morality, a gun cannot actually commit ANY 'crime' or any violent act..

BigOl64 wrote on Sep 11^th, 2015 at 5:59pm:


He had an AVO in force against him which means he did not have a licence for his unregistered pistol.
Like Bryant this guy did not have a firearm licence.
The law failed to protect this woman with an AVO along with gun laws.

Guns were not the only thing taken from people,mace,pepper srays and stun guns are illegal.

Our laws have disarmed the weaker members of society from having lethal or non lethal self defence weapons.

A woman was slashed with a machete,another was run off the road and bashed to death, we had a shooting with an unlicensed person with an unregistered gun.

There are seriously disturbed people who prey on women, this is not something new it has been happening throughout human history, the government taking self defence weapons from women was despicable

mothra wrote on Sep 11^th, 2015 at 4:59pm:



By that argument, there is nothing wrong with ice. People taking ice on the other hand may be a problem but the ice itself is inanimate.[/quote]

Yes, that is 'almost' correct. The drug 'ice' is not a problem..the use of Ice is a problem..And 'guns; aren't a problem...misusing guns is, however a however a problem..As with any thing else, the use of guns/knives etc IS something to worry about.