This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
g4s
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 Spiderman  Horsham 04 Sep 17 4.27pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Spiderman
The sort of response I expected. Let's see why those Immigrants were in there before casting aspirtions. Unless of course, those just released from prison should be let back out on the streets until their plane departs! I am not making excuses for any unacceptable behaviour and have not seen the programme. All I hope (but doubt) that this is a balanced programme and outlines the difficult circumstances the, underpaid, overworked staff face everyday. I know some have been suspended "pending" the programme
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| jamiemartin721 Reading 04 Sep 17 4.37pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Spiderman
The sort of response I expected. Let's see why those Immigrants were in there before casting aspirtions. Unless of course, those just released from prison should be let back out on the streets until their plane departs! Detention and prison services should be accountable, and only the operation of the state. The very idea that companies can profit from detaining people is absurd. Only the state should have the power and the authority to detain individuals, and the responsibility for their care and rights during that time can only be that of the states. To turn this into a 'for profit' outsourced scheme defeats the concept of state accountability for its authority and power. Only the state can have the power to take away someone's freedom, and only the state can be responsible for those people and their detention. Prisoners (of all kinds) represent vulnerable people in society by nature of their seclusion and controlled environments. It must surely fall upon the state to be responsible for such people, directly.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 04 Sep 17 4.39pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Spiderman
The sort of response I expected. Let's see why those Immigrants were in there before casting aspirtions. Unless of course, those just released from prison should be let back out on the streets until their plane departs! You've misconstrued what I meant. There will be those that don't give a flying feck how the inmates are treated cos they're foreigners.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 04 Sep 17 4.43pm |
 |
|---|---|
|
The protection of the public should be the responsibility of the state. This is apart of why we pay tax.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 04 Sep 17 4.57pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
The protection of the public should be the responsibility of the state. This is apart of why we pay tax. And? Are you implying that public services should be state run?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 04 Sep 17 5.04pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
The protection of the public should be the responsibility of the state. This is apart of why we pay tax. Most certainly, its why many public services and organisations should not be outsourced. Using G4S is like hiring mercenaries, it creates a separate motivation from the protection of the public (i.e. profit and loss). The prison service (and detention services) have to both balance the duty of care to individuals in their custody, and the duty of protection they have to the public - An only a government accountable body can do that. The only room for private enterprise in relation to such things is in the provision of independent oversight, to assure that both the duty of protection to the public and the duty of care to the individual are being met. Regardless of how we feel about people in prison, they are still people. Treating them like animals (see the US Prison system) will only create greater problems when the time comes to release them.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 04 Sep 17 5.05pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
And? Are you implying that public services should be state run? It depends upon the service. However, the tax payer to the state is paying for services. A reasonable level of protection should be one of those services. In my eyes this makes the tax payer more important than the non tax payer, which is something I believe....with exceptions of children, retirees, disabled. More important doesn't mean that the state doesn't have responsibility for non tax payers...but it does mean tax payers are more important. Perhaps non tax payers shouldn't get to vote. Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Sep 2017 5.06pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 04 Sep 17 5.08pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Spiderman
The sort of response I expected. Let's see why those Immigrants were in there before casting aspirtions. Unless of course, those just released from prison should be let back out on the streets until their plane departs! It doesn't matter what they did before hand. If they have been exposed to assaults and abuse, that is unacceptable, and it demeans the service and the country that if they have been. Prisoners should not be subject to 'arbitrary justice' at the hands of their guards, and nor should guards allow such things to occur at the hands of other convicts. No matter how much it might feel deserved.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 04 Sep 17 5.15pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
It doesn't matter what they did before hand. If they have been exposed to assaults and abuse, that is unacceptable, and it demeans the service and the country that if they have been. Prisoners should not be subject to 'arbitrary justice' at the hands of their guards, and nor should guards allow such things to occur at the hands of other convicts. No matter how much it might feel deserved. As is probably known on here by now, I'm very pro the state in security matters but I look forward to the day that body cams are compulsory so that the state or indeed private companies can ensure that its actors perform its duties honestly...which I'm sure the vast majority of them do. It also acts as protection for that worker against false claims.....It all works unless the state or company sets unreasonable demands. Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Sep 2017 5.16pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 04 Sep 17 5.18pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
It depends upon the service. However, the tax payer to the state is paying for services. A reasonable level of protection should be one of those services. In my eyes this makes the tax payer more important than the non tax payer, which is something I believe....with exceptions of children, retirees, disabled. More important doesn't mean that the state doesn't have responsibility for non tax payers...but it does mean tax payers are more important. Perhaps non tax payers shouldn't get to vote. Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Sep 2017 5.06pm) I think everyone, who is a UK citizen, who is 16 or older should be able to vote. Even prisoners, who are the only people with UK citizenship who are not enfranchised (even the mentally ill are entitled to vote). In denying them this, we've effectively allowed them to be of 'no significance to politicians' and the only citizens to whom politicans have no accountability. Correspondingly we've seen continual cuts in the prison services, a drop in prison safety and an increase in the number of people we imprison, and what we do with those people. True, to an extent, but the end result of the prison service and criminal justice system, should be to produce tax paying citizens. Prisoners and those detained by the authorities are generally rendered non-tax paying citizens, by the actions of the criminal justice system. The problem of the prison system is often that the individuals within it, are regarded as 'less important'.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 04 Sep 17 5.20pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Most certainly, its why many public services and organisations should not be outsourced. Using G4S is like hiring mercenaries, it creates a separate motivation from the protection of the public (i.e. profit and loss). The prison service (and detention services) have to both balance the duty of care to individuals in their custody, and the duty of protection they have to the public - An only a government accountable body can do that. The only room for private enterprise in relation to such things is in the provision of independent oversight, to assure that both the duty of protection to the public and the duty of care to the individual are being met. Regardless of how we feel about people in prison, they are still people. Treating them like animals (see the US Prison system) will only create greater problems when the time comes to release them. Nope Often the private run organisations that look after vulnerable or dangerous people are held to a far higher standard than the public sector organisations. They can be more efficient too. Saying there is no place for the private sector is simple dogmatism. We have a mixed economy and in the round it works. Problems arise when the procurement and contract management processes are too strongly weighted in favour of saving money and not enough towards quality. That in itself is not the fault of the private sector which in many cases is both less expensive and higher quality than its public sector equivalent.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Hrolf The Ganger 04 Sep 17 5.22pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Detention and prison services should be accountable, and only the operation of the state. The very idea that companies can profit from detaining people is absurd. Only the state should have the power and the authority to detain individuals, and the responsibility for their care and rights during that time can only be that of the states. To turn this into a 'for profit' outsourced scheme defeats the concept of state accountability for its authority and power. Only the state can have the power to take away someone's freedom, and only the state can be responsible for those people and their detention. Prisoners (of all kinds) represent vulnerable people in society by nature of their seclusion and controlled environments. It must surely fall upon the state to be responsible for such people, directly.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.