Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With Rubio faltering John Kasich could be the favoured non-

245

Comments

  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. 63, Cameron working hard to get me to vote for someone else.

    Won't be Labour or the Lib Dems. There are local parties, UKIP, the Loonies, perhaps the Pirates. Or I could despoil my ballot with an amusing limerick.

    Rehabilitation of prisoners is important, but they're there because they broke the law (often seriously). Retribution is also a legitimate aspect of the prison system.

    The reason our prisons are full is because of people like the dozen who got jailed in Keighley, not because of people who get jailed for non-payment of fines or TV licences.
    “Prisoners” is a generic term, of course. There are in our prisons some seriously evil people, who need to be kept out of circulation for a long time, if not for ever, and who may well be unreformable. Therer are also some, especially younger, prisoners, who have for whatever reason fallen into evil company and consequently way and are capable of reform. It’s quite instructive to look at the history of penal colonies in Australia. Many of those sent there were very quickly released on “ticket of leave” and carried out their former honest trades to the benefit of all, themselves included.
    Yep, as I said earlier, I'm all for the rehabilitation of young offenders. But Cameron goes too far with the non disclosure nonsense.

    Its part of the bigger picture in terms of who/what he stands for, he's a Green/Liberal in a blue rosette.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,946
    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,002
    edited February 2016

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. 63, Cameron working hard to get me to vote for someone else.

    Won't be Labour or the Lib Dems. There are local parties, UKIP, the Loonies, perhaps the Pirates. Or I could despoil my ballot with an amusing limerick.

    Rehabilitation of prisoners is important, but they're there because they broke the law (often seriously). Retribution is also a legitimate aspect of the prison system.

    The reason our prisons are full is because of people like the dozen who got jailed in Keighley, not because of people who get jailed for non-payment of fines or TV licences.
    “Prisoners” is a generic term, of course. There are in our prisons some seriously evil people, who need to be kept out of circulation for a long time, if not for ever, and who may well be unreformable. Therer are also some, especially younger, prisoners, who have for whatever reason fallen into evil company and consequently way and are capable of reform. It’s quite instructive to look at the history of penal colonies in Australia. Many of those sent there were very quickly released on “ticket of leave” and carried out their former honest trades to the benefit of all, themselves included.
    Yep, as I said earlier, I'm all for the rehabilitation of young offenders. But Cameron goes too far with the non disclosure nonsense.

    Its part of the bigger picture in terms of who/what he stands for, he's a Green/Liberal in a blue rosette.
    What did he say about non-disclosure? Should DMOR I know!
  • Options
    Wanderer said:

    DavidL said:

    watford30 said:

    Clueless Thornberry on Radio 4 waffling about the threat to submarines from underwater drones *that haven't been developed*, and might not be for a decade or longer. If at all.

    Lord West has already called the programme to say that she's talking complete nonsense.

    Who to believe? An Admiral or a professional pie eater?

    Underwater drones? Seriously?

    I remember Spy Story by Len Deighton about 30 years ago commenting that there were listening posts underwater between Greenland, Iceland and Norway to detect the movement of nuclear submarines and I can believe things might have moved on since but oceans are big and detectability is short range.

    As I understand it the next generation of Trident can hit anywhere from anywhere. That is an even bigger place to look.
    I guess it depends on how small and cheap such drones could be. You could imagine something that works a bit like the immune system, whereby a very small and cheap marker drone (of which you have millions) attaches to the hull of a submarine and then calls in a killer-drone which follows the submarine and destroys it if you tell it to.
    Like a torpedo?
  • Options
    Mortimer said:

    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.

    Indeed. Is why I'm such a fan of Michael Gove.

    Gove for leader.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850
    Mortimer said:

    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.

    To get into prison, you either have to do something pretty nasty, or else be a repeat offender. By all means try to rehabilitate prisoners, but the safety of the public comes first.
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited February 2016

    Cameron is now saying that prisons should be places "of care not punishment" and that criminal records need not be entered on CVs. That will go down well with White Van Man, he's sounding more like his mate Clegg everyday.Yesterday Nick Palmer said the PM was making mistakes and "needed some time out".

    Cameron's prison reform speech: - "I want prisons to be places of care, not just punishment; where the environment is one conducive to rehabilitation and mending lives."
    Yep, they only have to go at weekends.
    The quote you provided was incorrect and misleading. The full speech is linked below. Perhaps you should read it more thoroughly before posting on the subject.

    http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2016/02/08/cameron-prison-reform-speech-in-full
    I found the first few paragraphs interesting, then I got to:

    Of course, there is one group I do want out of prison much more quickly, instead of British taxpayers forking out for their bed and breakfast: and that is foreign national offenders.

    Are you really still falling for this nonsense? Several pb tories are seeing the light, you'll get there in the end.
    You are perfectly entitled to your opinion, but if there is to be a discussion on PB wrt to prison reform, then I don’t think it is too much to ask that the “quotes” provided are accurate.
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    Mr. 63, Cameron working hard to get me to vote for someone else.

    Won't be Labour or the Lib Dems. There are local parties, UKIP, the Loonies, perhaps the Pirates. Or I could despoil my ballot with an amusing limerick.

    Rehabilitation of prisoners is important, but they're there because they broke the law (often seriously). Retribution is also a legitimate aspect of the prison system.

    The reason our prisons are full is because of people like the dozen who got jailed in Keighley, not because of people who get jailed for non-payment of fines or TV licences.
    I actually am a supporter of prison reform, which might seem surprising to some as a right-winger.

    Whilst I don't think prisoners should be treated with kid gloves, illiteracy, drug addiction and broken homes are behind much of it.

    If it were possible, I'd stick a good chunk of the non-violent ones into a 'bad lads army' type regime for 2 years, because I think it could be the making of them and gives them the family they might never have had.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,946
    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.

    To get into prison, you either have to do something pretty nasty, or else be a repeat offender. By all means try to rehabilitate prisoners, but the safety of the public comes first.
    It is not an either or.

    Public safety is increased with rehabilitation.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,313

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. 63, Cameron working hard to get me to vote for someone else.

    Won't be Labour or the Lib Dems. There are local parties, UKIP, the Loonies, perhaps the Pirates. Or I could despoil my ballot with an amusing limerick.

    Rehabilitation of prisoners is important, but they're there because they broke the law (often seriously). Retribution is also a legitimate aspect of the prison system.

    The reason our prisons are full is because of people like the dozen who got jailed in Keighley, not because of people who get jailed for non-payment of fines or TV licences.
    “Prisoners” is a generic term, of course. There are in our prisons some seriously evil people, who need to be kept out of circulation for a long time, if not for ever, and who may well be unreformable. Therer are also some, especially younger, prisoners, who have for whatever reason fallen into evil company and consequently way and are capable of reform. It’s quite instructive to look at the history of penal colonies in Australia. Many of those sent there were very quickly released on “ticket of leave” and carried out their former honest trades to the benefit of all, themselves included.
    As a crim you have got to try really really hard to get yourself sent to prison.

    The idea of the young lad with a good heart falling into bad ways being banged up for 10 years where he turns into a hardened felon is more myth than reality.
  • Options

    Mortimer said:

    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.

    Indeed. Is why I'm such a fan of Michael Gove.

    Gove for leader.
    Agreed, provided he stays sound on immigration control.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,035
    edited February 2016
    Wanderer said:

    DavidL said:

    watford30 said:

    Clueless Thornberry on Radio 4 waffling about the threat to submarines from underwater drones *that haven't been developed*, and might not be for a decade or longer. If at all.

    Lord West has already called the programme to say that she's talking complete nonsense.

    Who to believe? An Admiral or a professional pie eater?

    Underwater drones? Seriously?

    I remember Spy Story by Len Deighton about 30 years ago commenting that there were listening posts underwater between Greenland, Iceland and Norway to detect the movement of nuclear submarines and I can believe things might have moved on since but oceans are big and detectability is short range.

    As I understand it the next generation of Trident can hit anywhere from anywhere. That is an even bigger place to look.
    I guess it depends on how small and cheap such drones could be. You could imagine something that works a bit like the immune system, whereby a very small and cheap marker drone (of which you have millions) attaches to the hull of a submarine and then calls in a killer-drone which follows the submarine and destroys it if you tell it to.
    AIUI the problem there is that communication under water is very difficult because water (esp. salt water) absorbs 'useful' frequencies - which is exactly how microwaves work.

    Sound travels well in water, but has other problems.

    Therefore most comms by submarines has to be via via low frequency signals (which work to about 60 feet depth), which are slow. To communicate deeper, you need to go to extremely low frequency (ELF).

    Communication between drones at ELF would be exceptionally difficult because you would need an antennae many kilometres long.

    (ALL AIUI, IANAE. But my wife is. ;) )

    Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremely_low_frequency
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,343
    edited February 2016
    When I was on the Justice Committee I swotted up on rehabilitation. Therre were then several significant problems in Britain (and I've not heard they've gone away):

    1. One reason that prisons are bulging is that a lot of prisoners are on the sort of indeterminate release arrangements that DavidL is I think suggesting - release them when you're satisfied that they've addressed their problems and attitudes. The sytem suffers from a *severe* shortage of people to make the necessary thorough assessment, so loads of prisoners who would probably pass the test are hanging around in prison waiting for assessment, someimes for years. It's expensive, demoralising, and good example of the problems of micro-economies - whoever is responsible for budgeting assessors is probably not the same person who would benefit from having fewer prisoners to pay to lock up.

    2. Education programmes are plentiful, but very hit and miss. Prisoners often get moved around because of overcrowding ("ah, they've got 5 spaces in Hampshire, that'll help here in Essex"), without any regard to whether they're in mid-course, and lots of participants in the courses aren't very interested and just doing them to pass the time, as well as having wildly different levels of literacy etc. Consequently, the classes are horribly difficult to run and they rarely lead to any qualification whatever.

    When we compared with other countries, these points were the glaring differences from places like Norway with a reoffending rate more than twice as low as ours. Norway treats prisoners as problems, much like a hospital system, and takcles them individually until they think the problem is addressed. We treat them mainly as items for safe warehousing. It's probably a false economy, because it means we need to spend more on big prisons and we have more reoffending when they get out. This is a purely practical matter, and nothing to do with being liberal or wet or having illusions that criminals are ofen nice people, which is how the issue is usually framed.

  • Options
    On the topic of rehabilitation of offenders and whether prisons should be "just punishment" or "places of care, not just punishment" there was an excellent speech made by a rehabilitated offender at the last Tory Conference before Gove's speech on Justice.

    In it he made the excellent point that there are (from memory) over 80,000 prisoners at any one time but there are less than a hundred who are on whole life tariffs who'll never be released. It is in our own self-interest for us to take the opportunity of these prisoners being in our custody to ensure their lives get turned around rather than just having a revolving door of crime and punishment.
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.

    To get into prison, you either have to do something pretty nasty, or else be a repeat offender. By all means try to rehabilitate prisoners, but the safety of the public comes first.
    There's no conflict between those points. The safety of the public has to include the offender's time after their release as well. Minimising the risk of reoffending is in everyone's interest. The tricky bit is how you reform the system to best do that.
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838

    Wanderer said:

    DavidL said:

    watford30 said:

    Clueless Thornberry on Radio 4 waffling about the threat to submarines from underwater drones *that haven't been developed*, and might not be for a decade or longer. If at all.

    Lord West has already called the programme to say that she's talking complete nonsense.

    Who to believe? An Admiral or a professional pie eater?

    Underwater drones? Seriously?

    I remember Spy Story by Len Deighton about 30 years ago commenting that there were listening posts underwater between Greenland, Iceland and Norway to detect the movement of nuclear submarines and I can believe things might have moved on since but oceans are big and detectability is short range.

    As I understand it the next generation of Trident can hit anywhere from anywhere. That is an even bigger place to look.
    I guess it depends on how small and cheap such drones could be. You could imagine something that works a bit like the immune system, whereby a very small and cheap marker drone (of which you have millions) attaches to the hull of a submarine and then calls in a killer-drone which follows the submarine and destroys it if you tell it to.
    Like a torpedo?
    I'm supposing that the killer-drone would be able to follow the submarine at depth and over long distance, essentially accompanying it on patrol.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.
  • Options
    watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    edited February 2016
    Wanderer said:

    DavidL said:

    watford30 said:

    Clueless Thornberry on Radio 4 waffling about the threat to submarines from underwater drones *that haven't been developed*, and might not be for a decade or longer. If at all.

    Lord West has already called the programme to say that she's talking complete nonsense.

    Who to believe? An Admiral or a professional pie eater?

    Underwater drones? Seriously?

    I remember Spy Story by Len Deighton about 30 years ago commenting that there were listening posts underwater between Greenland, Iceland and Norway to detect the movement of nuclear submarines and I can believe things might have moved on since but oceans are big and detectability is short range.

    As I understand it the next generation of Trident can hit anywhere from anywhere. That is an even bigger place to look.
    I guess it depends on how small and cheap such drones could be. You could imagine something that works a bit like the immune system, whereby a very small and cheap marker drone (of which you have millions) attaches to the hull of a submarine and then calls in a killer-drone which follows the submarine and destroys it if you tell it to.
    Or dolphins that hunt them down, and send messages to the surface using flying fish. Or squid that send semaphore signals to trained seagulls.

    Hunting submarines is phenomenally difficult. They hide in deep water, thermoclines, in areas where detection is difficult due to underwater rock formations in thousands of cubic miles of ocean. All the while highly trained crew with huge power resources are looking for things, looking for them.

    Drones should they ever work, are a long, long way into the future. Thornberry and Co think they can talk up their argument using big techno words, but the reality is somewhat different and she ends up looking like a buffoon.
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited February 2016

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. 63, Cameron working hard to get me to vote for someone else.

    Won't be Labour or the Lib Dems. There are local parties, UKIP, the Loonies, perhaps the Pirates. Or I could despoil my ballot with an amusing limerick.

    Rehabilitation of prisoners is important, but they're there because they broke the law (often seriously). Retribution is also a legitimate aspect of the prison system.

    The reason our prisons are full is because of people like the dozen who got jailed in Keighley, not because of people who get jailed for non-payment of fines or TV licences.
    I actually am a supporter of prison reform, which might seem surprising to some as a right-winger.

    Whilst I don't think prisoners should be treated with kid gloves, illiteracy, drug addiction and broken homes are behind much of it.

    If it were possible, I'd stick a good chunk of the non-violent ones into a 'bad lads army' type regime for 2 years, because I think it could be the making of them and gives them the family they might never have had.
    Agree with your thoughts on a “bad lads army” – Keeps em busy and instils camaraderie. More importantly, it separates them from the older and hardened criminals that are beyond help.
  • Options

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. 63, Cameron working hard to get me to vote for someone else.

    Won't be Labour or the Lib Dems. There are local parties, UKIP, the Loonies, perhaps the Pirates. Or I could despoil my ballot with an amusing limerick.

    Rehabilitation of prisoners is important, but they're there because they broke the law (often seriously). Retribution is also a legitimate aspect of the prison system.

    The reason our prisons are full is because of people like the dozen who got jailed in Keighley, not because of people who get jailed for non-payment of fines or TV licences.
    I actually am a supporter of prison reform, which might seem surprising to some as a right-winger.

    Whilst I don't think prisoners should be treated with kid gloves, illiteracy, drug addiction and broken homes are behind much of it.

    If it were possible, I'd stick a good chunk of the non-violent ones into a 'bad lads army' type regime for 2 years, because I think it could be the making of them and gives them the family they might never have had.
    That's a very good idea. Some serious discipline and leadership is what is required and can be part and parcel of rehabilitation. This is a complicated issue not a wet/dry one.
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,994
    edited February 2016
    DavidL said:

    watford30 said:

    Clueless Thornberry on Radio 4 waffling about the threat to submarines from underwater drones *that haven't been developed*, and might not be for a decade or longer. If at all.

    Lord West has already called the programme to say that she's talking complete nonsense.

    Who to believe? An Admiral or a professional pie eater?

    Underwater drones? Seriously?

    I remember Spy Story by Len Deighton about 30 years ago commenting that there were listening posts underwater between Greenland, Iceland and Norway to detect the movement of nuclear submarines and I can believe things might have moved on since but oceans are big and detectability is short range.

    As I understand it the next generation of Trident can hit anywhere from anywhere. That is an even bigger place to look.
    Yes seriously. There is a lot of effort going into developing very small smart autonomous drones that are released into the wild, carrying the characteristics of their target, which they relently seek out and destroy. They are not controlled from base. They are autonomous.

    Here is one example. You can search for others. http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2014/12/military-wants-smarter-insect-spy-drones/101970/

    These can as small as golf balls, able to navigate through windows and rooms and deliver a fatal punch to a human head.

    Although I have no doubt that autonomous submarine seeking drones will be developed in the next several years, I think a much more effective and morally supportable nuclear deterrent would be autonomous drones aimed at anyone who authorises the use of a nuclear bomb.

    Instead of threatening to kill millions of citizens in cities, the deterrent threat is the release of millions of automonous drones, containing the bio details of the target, that will relentlessly seek out and destroy the perpetrator of a nuclear attack.
  • Options

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Have recidivism rates though?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
  • Options

    Mortimer said:

    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.

    Indeed. Is why I'm such a fan of Michael Gove.

    Gove for leader.
    Agreed, provided he stays sound on immigration control.
    I thought the most liberal, understanding Justice Secretary in my lifetime would be Ken Clarke, I'm delighted I was wrong.
  • Options
    watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474

    Wanderer said:

    DavidL said:

    watford30 said:

    Clueless Thornberry on Radio 4 waffling about the threat to submarines from underwater drones *that haven't been developed*, and might not be for a decade or longer. If at all.

    Lord West has already called the programme to say that she's talking complete nonsense.

    Who to believe? An Admiral or a professional pie eater?

    Underwater drones? Seriously?

    I remember Spy Story by Len Deighton about 30 years ago commenting that there were listening posts underwater between Greenland, Iceland and Norway to detect the movement of nuclear submarines and I can believe things might have moved on since but oceans are big and detectability is short range.

    As I understand it the next generation of Trident can hit anywhere from anywhere. That is an even bigger place to look.
    I guess it depends on how small and cheap such drones could be. You could imagine something that works a bit like the immune system, whereby a very small and cheap marker drone (of which you have millions) attaches to the hull of a submarine and then calls in a killer-drone which follows the submarine and destroys it if you tell it to.
    AIUI the problem there is that communication under water is very difficult because water (esp. salt water) absorbs 'useful' frequencies - which is exactly how microwaves work.

    Sound travels well in water, but has other problems.

    Therefore most comms by submarines has to be via via low frequency signals (which work to about 60 feet depth), which are slow. To communicate deeper, you need to go to extremely low frequency (ELF).

    Communication between drones at ELF would be exceptionally difficult because you would need an antennae many kilometres long.

    (ALL AIUI, IANAE. But my wife is. ;) )

    Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremely_low_frequency
    Think how much energy you'd need to move a drone through powerful underwater currents over long distances in seawater. How large would the power source need to be?
  • Options

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Have recidivism rates though?
    Yes but is part of a wider package
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    watford30 said:

    Wanderer said:

    DavidL said:

    watford30 said:

    Clueless Thornberry on Radio 4 waffling about the threat to submarines from underwater drones *that haven't been developed*, and might not be for a decade or longer. If at all.

    Lord West has already called the programme to say that she's talking complete nonsense.

    Who to believe? An Admiral or a professional pie eater?

    Underwater drones? Seriously?

    I remember Spy Story by Len Deighton about 30 years ago commenting that there were listening posts underwater between Greenland, Iceland and Norway to detect the movement of nuclear submarines and I can believe things might have moved on since but oceans are big and detectability is short range.

    As I understand it the next generation of Trident can hit anywhere from anywhere. That is an even bigger place to look.
    I guess it depends on how small and cheap such drones could be. You could imagine something that works a bit like the immune system, whereby a very small and cheap marker drone (of which you have millions) attaches to the hull of a submarine and then calls in a killer-drone which follows the submarine and destroys it if you tell it to.
    Or dolphins that hunt them down, and send messages to the surface using flying fish. Or squid that send semaphore signals to trained seagulls.

    Hunting submarines is phenomenally difficult. They hide in deep water, thermoclines, in areas where detection is difficult due to underwater rock formations in thousands of cubic miles of ocean. All the while highly trained crew with huge power resources are looking for things, looking for them.

    Drones should they ever work, are a long, long way into the future. Thornberry and Co think they can talk up their argument using big techno words, but the reality is somewhat different and she ends up looking like a buffoon.
    I guess the idea would be to deploy clouds of several million drones around the exits of submarine bases. No need to go searching in the deep oceans.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,703
    edited February 2016
    Janan Ganesh:
    In diplomacy no less than romance, a lack of emotional engagement allows you to hedge and keep options open while the other party subjugates their judgment to enthusiasm. Britain has navigated the EU’s many-angled maze with some success because it is not mesmerised by the teleology of ending centuries of war. The UK’s benign experience of self-government means it can judge supranational experiments by their merits not as steps to a certain destiny. If you are not running away from the past, you do not crash into stuff.

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ac2cae0c-cc22-11e5-a8ef-ea66e967dd44.html#ixzz3zf7631Eh
  • Options
    philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    Can the success of prison as a treatment and deterrent be measured by the change in prison population over time?

    I consider full prisons to be a failure of education, family, culture, social care and opportunity.

    Reform prisons and address the reasons for people going there in the first place, please.
  • Options
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/syria-putin-assad_b_9169998.html

    Another good article by Alastair Crooke on the ME. It is a brave new world, does Cameron have the vision and integrity to adapt to it? I doubt it.
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,002
    edited February 2016

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. 63, Cameron working hard to get me to vote for someone else.

    Won't be Labour or the Lib Dems. There are local parties, UKIP, the Loonies, perhaps the Pirates. Or I could despoil my ballot with an amusing limerick.

    Rehabilitation of prisoners is important, but they're there because they broke the law (often seriously). Retribution is also a legitimate aspect of the prison system.

    The reason our prisons are full is because of people like the dozen who got jailed in Keighley, not because of people who get jailed for non-payment of fines or TV licences.
    I actually am a supporter of prison reform, which might seem surprising to some as a right-winger.

    Whilst I don't think prisoners should be treated with kid gloves, illiteracy, drug addiction and broken homes are behind much of it.

    If it were possible, I'd stick a good chunk of the non-violent ones into a 'bad lads army' type regime for 2 years, because I think it could be the making of them and gives them the family they might never have had.
    How well,or badly, did Borstal work?

    Answering my own question, the re-offending rate, according to Wikipedia was about 30%, less thatn currently for youth custody.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    Mortimer said:

    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.

    Oh well, at least you felt awful, I'm sure wringing your hands kept them warm.

    I've spent loads of time with ex addicts and criminals, some tragic cases, they are not always the same thing. Of course they need help, but before rehabilitation works an acceptance of guilt is required. The debate over rehabilitation goes far deeper than educating prisoners, its about what happens BEFORE they get to prison. A large majority of crime is drug related, penal reform must work alongside drug reform, most politicians would cross the road to avoid a smackhead.

    Leave users alone, execute the peddlars of death ie drug dealers, they are filth. Until the drug problems are addressed everything else is irrelevant.
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I thought that was to prevent drugs being smuggled in book bindings.

    I'd have no problem with access to a prison TV channel containing educational programmes. For good behaviour, like school telly. Why books can't be checked by sniffer dogs is beyond me.
    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929

    I thought that was to prevent drugs being smuggled in book bindings.

    I'd have no problem with access to a prison TV channel containing educational programmes. For good behaviour, like school telly. Why books can't be checked by sniffer dogs is beyond me.

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    :+1:
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    Cameron is now saying that prisons should be places "of care not punishment" and that criminal records need not be entered on CVs. That will go down well with White Van Man, he's sounding more like his mate Clegg everyday.Yesterday Nick Palmer said the PM was making mistakes and "needed some time out".

    Cameron's prison reform speech: - "I want prisons to be places of care, not just punishment; where the environment is one conducive to rehabilitation and mending lives."
    Yep, they only have to go at weekends.
    The quote you provided was incorrect and misleading. The full speech is linked below. Perhaps you should read it more thoroughly before posting on the subject.

    http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2016/02/08/cameron-prison-reform-speech-in-full
    I found the first few paragraphs interesting, then I got to:

    Of course, there is one group I do want out of prison much more quickly, instead of British taxpayers forking out for their bed and breakfast: and that is foreign national offenders.

    Are you really still falling for this nonsense? Several pb tories are seeing the light, you'll get there in the end.
    You are perfectly entitled to your opinion, but if there is to be a discussion on PB wrt to prison reform, then I don’t think it is too much to ask that the “quotes” provided are accurate.
    I humbly thank you for your blessing. My original post, entirely accurate in its premise, was about Cameron's stance. Your link makes my point nicely. He's been PM for a long time, how many foreign prisoners has he deported?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    edited February 2016
    Prison talk brings out my inner puritan :)
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,035
    watford30 said:

    Wanderer said:

    DavidL said:

    watford30 said:

    Clueless Thornberry on Radio 4 waffling about the threat to submarines from underwater drones *that haven't been developed*, and might not be for a decade or longer. If at all.

    Lord West has already called the programme to say that she's talking complete nonsense.

    Who to believe? An Admiral or a professional pie eater?

    Underwater drones? Seriously?

    I remember Spy Story by Len Deighton about 30 years ago commenting that there were listening posts underwater between Greenland, Iceland and Norway to detect the movement of nuclear submarines and I can believe things might have moved on since but oceans are big and detectability is short range.

    As I understand it the next generation of Trident can hit anywhere from anywhere. That is an even bigger place to look.
    I guess it depends on how small and cheap such drones could be. You could imagine something that works a bit like the immune system, whereby a very small and cheap marker drone (of which you have millions) attaches to the hull of a submarine and then calls in a killer-drone which follows the submarine and destroys it if you tell it to.
    AIUI the problem there is that communication under water is very difficult because water (esp. salt water) absorbs 'useful' frequencies - which is exactly how microwaves work.

    Sound travels well in water, but has other problems.

    Therefore most comms by submarines has to be via via low frequency signals (which work to about 60 feet depth), which are slow. To communicate deeper, you need to go to extremely low frequency (ELF).

    Communication between drones at ELF would be exceptionally difficult because you would need an antennae many kilometres long.

    (ALL AIUI, IANAE. But my wife is. ;) )

    Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremely_low_frequency
    Think how much energy you'd need to move a drone through powerful underwater currents over long distances in seawater. How large would the power source need to be?
    Large, but how large would depend on the mission. If war breaks out (or is about to), you could 'seed' likely parts of the ocean with mines. This capability is already there. Add detectors, and the ability to release a torpedo, and you have the US CAPTOR (I think).

    This is one reason it is so important to have subs on patrol, already hidden before trouble starts - it's easier to find them when they're near port.

    The Russians and others (though I think not the US) also have high-speed cavitating torpedoes, although the Russian ones are mainly anti-torpedo torpedoes.
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838

    Wanderer said:

    DavidL said:

    watford30 said:

    Clueless Thornberry on Radio 4 waffling about the threat to submarines from underwater drones *that haven't been developed*, and might not be for a decade or longer. If at all.

    Lord West has already called the programme to say that she's talking complete nonsense.

    Who to believe? An Admiral or a professional pie eater?

    Underwater drones? Seriously?

    I remember Spy Story by Len Deighton about 30 years ago commenting that there were listening posts underwater between Greenland, Iceland and Norway to detect the movement of nuclear submarines and I can believe things might have moved on since but oceans are big and detectability is short range.

    As I understand it the next generation of Trident can hit anywhere from anywhere. That is an even bigger place to look.
    I guess it depends on how small and cheap such drones could be. You could imagine something that works a bit like the immune system, whereby a very small and cheap marker drone (of which you have millions) attaches to the hull of a submarine and then calls in a killer-drone which follows the submarine and destroys it if you tell it to.
    AIUI the problem there is that communication under water is very difficult because water (esp. salt water) absorbs 'useful' frequencies - which is exactly how microwaves work.

    Sound travels well in water, but has other problems.

    Therefore most comms by submarines has to be via via low frequency signals (which work to about 60 feet depth), which are slow. To communicate deeper, you need to go to extremely low frequency (ELF).

    Communication between drones at ELF would be exceptionally difficult because you would need an antennae many kilometres long.

    (ALL AIUI, IANAE. But my wife is. ;) )

    Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremely_low_frequency
    You could use a third type of relay drone perhaps, or rather a chain of them connecting the killer drone to the surface and thence to "home".

    Obviously you really want it to be autonomous if you can figure out under what circumstances it should make a kill.
  • Options
    philiph said:

    Can the success of prison as a treatment and deterrent be measured by the change in prison population over time?

    I consider full prisons to be a failure of education, family, culture, social care and opportunity.

    Reform prisons and address the reasons for people going there in the first place, please.

    Rising prison populations can be a GOOD thing in being a result of better capturing and putting away of criminals, which means those criminals are not committing crimes while behind bars. The twin facts that prison population is going up at the same time as crime rates are going down may not be unrelated.

    We should do rehabilitation in addition to punishment not instead of it. But I don't think Cameron or Gove are proposing doing it instead.
  • Options

    Mr. 30, and who's going to develop them? For what purpose? How would you tell, at long range, a submarine was there?

    Maybe it's a long-term plan. Labour uses underwater (and fictional) drones to excuse having no subs*, and then actual drones to excuse a policy of disbanding the army.

    *Except Labour do want subs. Just without nukes. So even if Thornberry were making a valid point about submarines and drones (she isn't), Labour's policy would still be to have the apparently vulnerable submarines.

    If Corbyn weren't, well, Corbyn, Labour might perhaps point out which party is actually cutting our armed forces.
  • Options

    Cameron is now saying that prisons should be places "of care not punishment" and that criminal records need not be entered on CVs. That will go down well with White Van Man, he's sounding more like his mate Clegg everyday.Yesterday Nick Palmer said the PM was making mistakes and "needed some time out".

    Cameron's prison reform speech: - "I want prisons to be places of care, not just punishment; where the environment is one conducive to rehabilitation and mending lives."
    Yep, they only have to go at weekends.
    The quote you provided was incorrect and misleading. The full speech is linked below. Perhaps you should read it more thoroughly before posting on the subject.

    http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2016/02/08/cameron-prison-reform-speech-in-full
    I found the first few paragraphs interesting, then I got to:

    Of course, there is one group I do want out of prison much more quickly, instead of British taxpayers forking out for their bed and breakfast: and that is foreign national offenders.

    Are you really still falling for this nonsense? Several pb tories are seeing the light, you'll get there in the end.
    You are perfectly entitled to your opinion, but if there is to be a discussion on PB wrt to prison reform, then I don’t think it is too much to ask that the “quotes” provided are accurate.
    I humbly thank you for your blessing. My original post, entirely accurate in its premise, was about Cameron's stance. Your link makes my point nicely. He's been PM for a long time, how many foreign prisoners has he deported?
    Quite a few, I don't know exactly how many do you?
  • Options
    watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    edited February 2016
    Wanderer said:

    watford30 said:

    Wanderer said:

    DavidL said:

    watford30 said:

    Clueless Thornberry on Radio 4 waffling about the threat to submarines from underwater drones *that haven't been developed*, and might not be for a decade or longer. If at all.

    Lord West has already called the programme to say that she's talking complete nonsense.

    Who to believe? An Admiral or a professional pie eater?

    Underwater drones? Seriously?

    I remember Spy Story by Len Deighton about 30 years ago commenting that there were listening posts underwater between Greenland, Iceland and Norway to detect the movement of nuclear submarines and I can believe things might have moved on since but oceans are big and detectability is short range.

    As I understand it the next generation of Trident can hit anywhere from anywhere. That is an even bigger place to look.
    I guess it depends on how small and cheap such drones could be. You could imagine something that works a bit like the immune system, whereby a very small and cheap marker drone (of which you have millions) attaches to the hull of a submarine and then calls in a killer-drone which follows the submarine and destroys it if you tell it to.
    Or dolphins that hunt them down, and send messages to the surface using flying fish. Or squid that send semaphore signals to trained seagulls.

    Hunting submarines is phenomenally difficult. They hide in deep water, thermoclines, in areas where detection is difficult due to underwater rock formations in thousands of cubic miles of ocean. All the while highly trained crew with huge power resources are looking for things, looking for them.

    Drones should they ever work, are a long, long way into the future. Thornberry and Co think they can talk up their argument using big techno words, but the reality is somewhat different and she ends up looking like a buffoon.
    I guess the idea would be to deploy clouds of several million drones around the exits of submarine bases. No need to go searching in the deep oceans.
    If the technology ever reaches that level, nuclear weapons will likely be autonomous and capable of reaching targets undetected via sea and air.

    This is all fantasy stuff for now.
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    watford30 said:

    Wanderer said:

    DavidL said:

    watford30 said:

    Clueless Thornberry on Radio 4 waffling about the threat to submarines from underwater drones *that haven't been developed*, and might not be for a decade or longer. If at all.

    Lord West has already called the programme to say that she's talking complete nonsense.

    Who to believe? An Admiral or a professional pie eater?

    Underwater drones? Seriously?

    I remember Spy Story by Len Deighton about 30 years ago commenting that there were listening posts underwater between Greenland, Iceland and Norway to detect the movement of nuclear submarines and I can believe things might have moved on since but oceans are big and detectability is short range.

    As I understand it the next generation of Trident can hit anywhere from anywhere. That is an even bigger place to look.
    I guess it depends on how small and cheap such drones could be. You could imagine something that works a bit like the immune system, whereby a very small and cheap marker drone (of which you have millions) attaches to the hull of a submarine and then calls in a killer-drone which follows the submarine and destroys it if you tell it to.
    AIUI the problem there is that communication under water is very difficult because water (esp. salt water) absorbs 'useful' frequencies - which is exactly how microwaves work.

    Sound travels well in water, but has other problems.

    Therefore most comms by submarines has to be via via low frequency signals (which work to about 60 feet depth), which are slow. To communicate deeper, you need to go to extremely low frequency (ELF).

    Communication between drones at ELF would be exceptionally difficult because you would need an antennae many kilometres long.

    (ALL AIUI, IANAE. But my wife is. ;) )

    Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremely_low_frequency
    Think how much energy you'd need to move a drone through powerful underwater currents over long distances in seawater. How large would the power source need to be?
    That's a good point and strikes me as a real problem. Not sure it's insuperable.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,002
    edited February 2016

    Mortimer said:

    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.

    Oh well, at least you felt awful, I'm sure wringing your hands kept them warm.

    I've spent loads of time with ex addicts and criminals, some tragic cases, they are not always the same thing. Of course they need help, but before rehabilitation works an acceptance of guilt is required. The debate over rehabilitation goes far deeper than educating prisoners, its about what happens BEFORE they get to prison. A large majority of crime is drug related, penal reform must work alongside drug reform, most politicians would cross the road to avoid a smackhead.

    Leave users alone, execute the peddlars of death ie drug dealers, they are filth. Until the drug problems are addressed everything else is irrelevant.
    Many years ago a senior Manchester policeman told a conference I was attending that decriminalising (then heroin) and allowing the supply of a standardised product, as with alcohol, would, in his educated opinion, result in a 70% or so reduction in petty crime.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    Cameron is now saying that prisons should be places "of care not punishment" and that criminal records need not be entered on CVs. That will go down well with White Van Man, he's sounding more like his mate Clegg everyday.Yesterday Nick Palmer said the PM was making mistakes and "needed some time out".

    Cameron's prison reform speech: - "I want prisons to be places of care, not just punishment; where the environment is one conducive to rehabilitation and mending lives."
    Yep, they only have to go at weekends.
    The quote you provided was incorrect and misleading. The full speech is linked below. Perhaps you should read it more thoroughly before posting on the subject.

    http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2016/02/08/cameron-prison-reform-speech-in-full
    I found the first few paragraphs interesting, then I got to:

    Of course, there is one group I do want out of prison much more quickly, instead of British taxpayers forking out for their bed and breakfast: and that is foreign national offenders.

    Are you really still falling for this nonsense? Several pb tories are seeing the light, you'll get there in the end.
    You are perfectly entitled to your opinion, but if there is to be a discussion on PB wrt to prison reform, then I don’t think it is too much to ask that the “quotes” provided are accurate.
    I humbly thank you for your blessing. My original post, entirely accurate in its premise, was about Cameron's stance. Your link makes my point nicely. He's been PM for a long time, how many foreign prisoners has he deported?
    Quite a few, I don't know exactly how many do you?
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/553732/EU-plan-deport-foreign-prisoners-UK-branded-worthless

    This could get interesting
  • Options
    SandraMSandraM Posts: 206
    On the subject of "Delilah", the song was written by Barry Mason and his-then wife Sylvan Whittingham, who bought George Harrison's house "Kinfauns" in Esher. I once interviewed Sylvan there and she showed me all the psychedelic murals they had kept from George's time.

  • Options
    Wanderer said:

    watford30 said:

    Wanderer said:

    DavidL said:

    watford30 said:

    Clueless Thornberry on Radio 4 waffling about the threat to submarines from underwater drones *that haven't been developed*, and might not be for a decade or longer. If at all.

    Lord West has already called the programme to say that she's talking complete nonsense.

    Who to believe? An Admiral or a professional pie eater?

    Underwater drones? Seriously?

    I remember Spy Story by Len Deighton about 30 years ago commenting that there were listening posts underwater between Greenland, Iceland and Norway to detect the movement of nuclear submarines and I can believe things might have moved on since but oceans are big and detectability is short range.

    As I understand it the next generation of Trident can hit anywhere from anywhere. That is an even bigger place to look.
    I guess it depends on how small and cheap such drones could be. You could imagine something that works a bit like the immune system, whereby a very small and cheap marker drone (of which you have millions) attaches to the hull of a submarine and then calls in a killer-drone which follows the submarine and destroys it if you tell it to.
    Or dolphins that hunt them down, and send messages to the surface using flying fish. Or squid that send semaphore signals to trained seagulls.

    Hunting submarines is phenomenally difficult. They hide in deep water, thermoclines, in areas where detection is difficult due to underwater rock formations in thousands of cubic miles of ocean. All the while highly trained crew with huge power resources are looking for things, looking for them.

    Drones should they ever work, are a long, long way into the future. Thornberry and Co think they can talk up their argument using big techno words, but the reality is somewhat different and she ends up looking like a buffoon.
    I guess the idea would be to deploy clouds of several million drones around the exits of submarine bases. No need to go searching in the deep oceans.
    Wouldn't that be dangerously close to a first strike in effect - a disabling move against a nuclear arsenal (except that even were that done, there'd still be at least one sub on patrol in the deep ocean).
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Let's all be friends

    Jeremy Corbyn is blocking Jack Straw from being awarded a peerage, the @guardian reports https://t.co/I6cp9kIPCm https://t.co/S0KBV2v5kQ
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
    So where does the private contractor get his money from?
  • Options

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
    So where does the private contractor get his money from?
    The private contractor charges the MOJ at the rate of providing freeview
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    watford30 said:

    Clueless Thornberry on Radio 4 waffling about the threat to submarines from underwater drones *that haven't been developed*, and might not be for a decade or longer. If at all.

    Lord West has already called the programme to say that she's talking complete nonsense.

    Who to believe? An Admiral or a professional pie eater?

    The Admiral has a vested interest in preserving the importance of the RN and trying to ensure (in conjunction with the army) that the RAF is wound up. There's a perfectly rational argument that (a) ICBMs are a weapon of the cold war; and (b) in the case of Trident etc, little more than disguised corporatism supporting the military-industrial complex.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
    So where does the private contractor get his money from?
    The private contractor charges the MOJ at the rate of providing freeview
    OK so taxpayers ARE paying, thanks.
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838

    Wanderer said:

    watford30 said:

    Wanderer said:

    DavidL said:

    watford30 said:

    Clueless Thornberry on Radio 4 waffling about the threat to submarines from underwater drones *that haven't been developed*, and might not be for a decade or longer. If at all.

    Lord West has already called the programme to say that she's talking complete nonsense.

    Who to believe? An Admiral or a professional pie eater?

    Underwater drones? Seriously?

    I remember Spy Story by Len Deighton about 30 years ago commenting that there were listening posts underwater between Greenland, Iceland and Norway to detect the movement of nuclear submarines and I can believe things might have moved on since but oceans are big and detectability is short range.

    As I understand it the next generation of Trident can hit anywhere from anywhere. That is an even bigger place to look.
    I guess it depends on how small and cheap such drones could be. You could imagine something that works a bit like the immune system, whereby a very small and cheap marker drone (of which you have millions) attaches to the hull of a submarine and then calls in a killer-drone which follows the submarine and destroys it if you tell it to.
    Or dolphins that hunt them down, and send messages to the surface using flying fish. Or squid that send semaphore signals to trained seagulls.

    Hunting submarines is phenomenally difficult. They hide in deep water, thermoclines, in areas where detection is difficult due to underwater rock formations in thousands of cubic miles of ocean. All the while highly trained crew with huge power resources are looking for things, looking for them.

    Drones should they ever work, are a long, long way into the future. Thornberry and Co think they can talk up their argument using big techno words, but the reality is somewhat different and she ends up looking like a buffoon.
    I guess the idea would be to deploy clouds of several million drones around the exits of submarine bases. No need to go searching in the deep oceans.
    Wouldn't that be dangerously close to a first strike in effect - a disabling move against a nuclear arsenal (except that even were that done, there'd still be at least one sub on patrol in the deep ocean).
    Very dangerous and destabilising like everything that *partially* screws up someone's strategic nuclewr weapons.
  • Options
    Mr. Matt, that's still no justification for the Corbynista position of having a fleet of nuclear submarines, and no nukes.
  • Options

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
    So where does the private contractor get his money from?
    The private contractor charges the MOJ at the rate of providing freeview
    OK so taxpayers ARE paying, thanks.
    Only for the freeview element, the contractor is subsidising the cost of Sky.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,002
    SandraM said:

    On the subject of "Delilah", the song was written by Barry Mason and his-then wife Sylvan Whittingham, who bought George Harrison's house "Kinfauns" in Esher. I once interviewed Sylvan there and she showed me all the psychedelic murals they had kept from George's time.

    TBH I’d never really thought about the words until Bryant made his remarks. Can see his point though.
    Tom Jones made a bit of habit of singing about people about to be executed, of course. See the “Green, Green Grass of Home."
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
    So where does the private contractor get his money from?
    The private contractor charges the MOJ at the rate of providing freeview
    OK so taxpayers ARE paying, thanks.
    Only for the freeview element, the contractor is subsidising the cost of Sky.
    I guess I'll have to spell it out. The private contractor gets his money from the taxpayer, whether he gives the cons steak or gruel we're paying for it.

  • Options
    King Cole, it's a fair point.

    After listening to Queen's Ogre Battle it's not unusual for me to fight mythical monsters.
  • Options

    SandraM said:

    On the subject of "Delilah", the song was written by Barry Mason and his-then wife Sylvan Whittingham, who bought George Harrison's house "Kinfauns" in Esher. I once interviewed Sylvan there and she showed me all the psychedelic murals they had kept from George's time.

    TBH I’d never really thought about the words until Bryant made his remarks. Can see his point though.
    Tom Jones made a bit of habit of singing about people about to be executed, of course. See the “Green, Green Grass of Home."
    The things people worry about. I suppose I'm going to have to stop listening to "Banks of the Ohio", "Folsom Prison Blues" and "I Can't Feel My Face" in order to keep the fun police happy.
  • Options

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
    So where does the private contractor get his money from?
    The private contractor charges the MOJ at the rate of providing freeview
    OK so taxpayers ARE paying, thanks.
    Only for the freeview element, the contractor is subsidising the cost of Sky.
    I guess I'll have to spell it out. The private contractor gets his money from the taxpayer, whether he gives the cons steak or gruel we're paying for it.

    Yes we are paying for Freeview or gruel as you put it. If the contractor gives steak then that's not at our cost.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    edited February 2016

    SandraM said:

    On the subject of "Delilah", the song was written by Barry Mason and his-then wife Sylvan Whittingham, who bought George Harrison's house "Kinfauns" in Esher. I once interviewed Sylvan there and she showed me all the psychedelic murals they had kept from George's time.

    TBH I’d never really thought about the words until Bryant made his remarks. Can see his point though.
    Tom Jones made a bit of habit of singing about people about to be executed, of course. See the “Green, Green Grass of Home."
    Should probably ban all national anthems as they sing of war.

    Bryant is a grade A clown.
  • Options

    SandraM said:

    On the subject of "Delilah", the song was written by Barry Mason and his-then wife Sylvan Whittingham, who bought George Harrison's house "Kinfauns" in Esher. I once interviewed Sylvan there and she showed me all the psychedelic murals they had kept from George's time.

    TBH I’d never really thought about the words until Bryant made his remarks. Can see his point though.
    Tom Jones made a bit of habit of singing about people about to be executed, of course. See the “Green, Green Grass of Home."
    The things people worry about. I suppose I'm going to have to stop listening to "Banks of the Ohio", "Folsom Prison Blues" and "I Can't Feel My Face" in order to keep the fun police happy.
    What's wrong 'I Can't Feel My Face'?

    Am I missing something.

    I love that song.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    Mortimer said:

    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.

    Oh well, at least you felt awful, I'm sure wringing your hands kept them warm.

    I've spent loads of time with ex addicts and criminals, some tragic cases, they are not always the same thing. Of course they need help, but before rehabilitation works an acceptance of guilt is required. The debate over rehabilitation goes far deeper than educating prisoners, its about what happens BEFORE they get to prison. A large majority of crime is drug related, penal reform must work alongside drug reform, most politicians would cross the road to avoid a smackhead.

    Leave users alone, execute the peddlars of death ie drug dealers, they are filth. Until the drug problems are addressed everything else is irrelevant.
    Many years ago a senior Manchester policeman told a conference I was attending that decriminalising (then heroin) and allowing the supply of a standardised product, as with alcohol, would, in his educated opinion, result in a 70% or so reduction in petty crime.
    I've had similar conversations, the police view is that politicians don't have the bottle to address it. I spoke with a senior policeman about Wet Rooms, he is all in favour.

    Prison reform without drug reform is a waste of time, they are one and the same. As Fry says, drugs become a problem when you can't afford them.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,946

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
    So where does the private contractor get his money from?
    The private contractor charges the MOJ at the rate of providing freeview
    OK so taxpayers ARE paying, thanks.
    Only for the freeview element, the contractor is subsidising the cost of Sky.
    I guess I'll have to spell it out. The private contractor gets his money from the taxpayer, whether he gives the cons steak or gruel we're paying for it.

    It is a shame that time machines don't exist. Because you'd obviously be happier in Victorian Britain.

    I know having a fully paid up season ticket for the outrage bus means you have to spout such views, but I am proud to be in a party that treats prisoners, people, as reformable, and not just ground-down-able.
  • Options

    SandraM said:

    On the subject of "Delilah", the song was written by Barry Mason and his-then wife Sylvan Whittingham, who bought George Harrison's house "Kinfauns" in Esher. I once interviewed Sylvan there and she showed me all the psychedelic murals they had kept from George's time.

    TBH I’d never really thought about the words until Bryant made his remarks. Can see his point though.
    Tom Jones made a bit of habit of singing about people about to be executed, of course. See the “Green, Green Grass of Home."
    The things people worry about. I suppose I'm going to have to stop listening to "Banks of the Ohio", "Folsom Prison Blues" and "I Can't Feel My Face" in order to keep the fun police happy.
    What's wrong 'I Can't Feel My Face'?

    Am I missing something.

    I love that song.
    The title is a pretty outrageously obvious drugs reference.
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838

    Mortimer said:

    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.

    Oh well, at least you felt awful, I'm sure wringing your hands kept them warm.

    I've spent loads of time with ex addicts and criminals, some tragic cases, they are not always the same thing. Of course they need help, but before rehabilitation works an acceptance of guilt is required. The debate over rehabilitation goes far deeper than educating prisoners, its about what happens BEFORE they get to prison. A large majority of crime is drug related, penal reform must work alongside drug reform, most politicians would cross the road to avoid a smackhead.

    Leave users alone, execute the peddlars of death ie drug dealers, they are filth. Until the drug problems are addressed everything else is irrelevant.
    "Peddlars of death"? I thought you were a Libertarian?
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    Mortimer said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
    So where does the private contractor get his money from?
    The private contractor charges the MOJ at the rate of providing freeview
    OK so taxpayers ARE paying, thanks.
    Only for the freeview element, the contractor is subsidising the cost of Sky.
    I guess I'll have to spell it out. The private contractor gets his money from the taxpayer, whether he gives the cons steak or gruel we're paying for it.

    It is a shame that time machines don't exist. Because you'd obviously be happier in Victorian Britain.

    I know having a fully paid up season ticket for the outrage bus means you have to spout such views, but I am proud to be in a party that treats prisoners, people, as reformable, and not just ground-down-able.
    Listen princess, when you've finished drying your eyes perhaps you could explain where private prison contractors get their money?

    Do you think the cons are paying?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    edited February 2016
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
    So where does the private contractor get his money from?
    The private contractor charges the MOJ at the rate of providing freeview
    OK so taxpayers ARE paying, thanks.
    Only for the freeview element, the contractor is subsidising the cost of Sky.
    I guess I'll have to spell it out. The private contractor gets his money from the taxpayer, whether he gives the cons steak or gruel we're paying for it.

    Yes we are paying for Freeview or gruel as you put it. If the contractor gives steak then that's not at our cost.
    OK, help me out - who is paying?
  • Options
    KippleKipple Posts: 17
    Barnesian said:

    the deterrent threat is the release of millions of automonous drones, containing the bio details of the target, that will relentlessly seek out and destroy the perpetrator of a nuclear attack.

    When we reach the point we can do that then nuclear weapons will be viewed as quaint, highly targeted devices.
  • Options

    SandraM said:

    On the subject of "Delilah", the song was written by Barry Mason and his-then wife Sylvan Whittingham, who bought George Harrison's house "Kinfauns" in Esher. I once interviewed Sylvan there and she showed me all the psychedelic murals they had kept from George's time.

    TBH I’d never really thought about the words until Bryant made his remarks. Can see his point though.
    Tom Jones made a bit of habit of singing about people about to be executed, of course. See the “Green, Green Grass of Home."
    The things people worry about. I suppose I'm going to have to stop listening to "Banks of the Ohio", "Folsom Prison Blues" and "I Can't Feel My Face" in order to keep the fun police happy.
    What's wrong 'I Can't Feel My Face'?

    Am I missing something.

    I love that song.
    The title is a pretty outrageously obvious drugs reference.
    I took it to mean something else.

    http://www.kappit.com/img/pics/201601_2018_bbiec.jpg
  • Options

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
    So where does the private contractor get his money from?
    The private contractor charges the MOJ at the rate of providing freeview
    OK so taxpayers ARE paying, thanks.
    Only for the freeview element, the contractor is subsidising the cost of Sky.
    I guess I'll have to spell it out. The private contractor gets his money from the taxpayer, whether he gives the cons steak or gruel we're paying for it.

    Yes we are paying for Freeview or gruel as you put it. If the contractor gives steak then that's not at our cost.
    OK, help me out - who is paying?
    For Freeview? Us, we are.
  • Options

    SandraM said:

    On the subject of "Delilah", the song was written by Barry Mason and his-then wife Sylvan Whittingham, who bought George Harrison's house "Kinfauns" in Esher. I once interviewed Sylvan there and she showed me all the psychedelic murals they had kept from George's time.

    TBH I’d never really thought about the words until Bryant made his remarks. Can see his point though.
    Tom Jones made a bit of habit of singing about people about to be executed, of course. See the “Green, Green Grass of Home."
    The things people worry about. I suppose I'm going to have to stop listening to "Banks of the Ohio", "Folsom Prison Blues" and "I Can't Feel My Face" in order to keep the fun police happy.
    What's wrong 'I Can't Feel My Face'?

    Am I missing something.

    I love that song.
    The title is a pretty outrageously obvious drugs reference.
    Ah, that would explain it.

    Being an innocent, I've never done drugs.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
    So where does the private contractor get his money from?
    The private contractor charges the MOJ at the rate of providing freeview
    OK so taxpayers ARE paying, thanks.
    Only for the freeview element, the contractor is subsidising the cost of Sky.
    I guess I'll have to spell it out. The private contractor gets his money from the taxpayer, whether he gives the cons steak or gruel we're paying for it.

    Yes we are paying for Freeview or gruel as you put it. If the contractor gives steak then that's not at our cost.
    OK, help me out - who is paying?
    For Freeview? Us, we are.
    And the steak?
  • Options
    philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    Yep, I'm in the Tim school for reform of drug laws.

    Take them out of the black market by legalisation. Control (and tax) of sales, restrictions on the place of use for some drugs. Grow cannabis legally. Those that remain illegal (some of the legal highs? - I'm not an expert on drugs...), if any, should be clobbered with draconian and life changing consequences for users, suppliers and manufacturers.

    There is no plus side to the current prohibition, as it isn't working in any meaningful way.

    While you are at it, can you legalise prostitution and try to remove the pimps, slave labour, crime and coercion in that trade as well? (I'm not an expert there either, I hasten to add!)
  • Options

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
    So where does the private contractor get his money from?
    The private contractor charges the MOJ at the rate of providing freeview
    OK so taxpayers ARE paying, thanks.
    Only for the freeview element, the contractor is subsidising the cost of Sky.
    I guess I'll have to spell it out. The private contractor gets his money from the taxpayer, whether he gives the cons steak or gruel we're paying for it.

    Yes we are paying for Freeview or gruel as you put it. If the contractor gives steak then that's not at our cost.
    OK, help me out - who is paying?
    For Freeview? Us, we are.
    And the steak?
    Not us.
  • Options
    philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
    So where does the private contractor get his money from?
    The private contractor charges the MOJ at the rate of providing freeview
    OK so taxpayers ARE paying, thanks.
    Only for the freeview element, the contractor is subsidising the cost of Sky.
    I guess I'll have to spell it out. The private contractor gets his money from the taxpayer, whether he gives the cons steak or gruel we're paying for it.

    Yes we are paying for Freeview or gruel as you put it. If the contractor gives steak then that's not at our cost.
    OK, help me out - who is paying?
    For Freeview? Us, we are.
    And the steak?
    Not us.
    CAP?
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,983

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think prison needs to be hard, but fair. Chris Grayling banning books was a daft move, and counterproductive - but I'm with Philip Davies on TV for prisoners.

    God no, since they introduced TVs in cells, the number of prison suicides declined.
    Well there certainly shouldn't be a penny spent on PPV, and apparently if a prisoner smashes a TV up they get a new one !
    But they have to pay for it from their prison wages/allowances they get from the outside.

    PPV they don't, Pay TV (ie Sky) sometimes is the only option, where there isn't a decent freeview signal, but the cost is borne by the private prison contractor not the taxpayer
    So where does the private contractor get his money from?
    The private contractor charges the MOJ at the rate of providing freeview
    OK so taxpayers ARE paying, thanks.
    Only for the freeview element, the contractor is subsidising the cost of Sky.
    I guess I'll have to spell it out. The private contractor gets his money from the taxpayer, whether he gives the cons steak or gruel we're paying for it.

    Yes we are paying for Freeview or gruel as you put it. If the contractor gives steak then that's not at our cost.
    OK, help me out - who is paying?
    Easy. The shareholders of the contractor due to profits being less than they otherwise would be.

  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    Wanderer said:

    Mortimer said:

    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.

    Oh well, at least you felt awful, I'm sure wringing your hands kept them warm.

    I've spent loads of time with ex addicts and criminals, some tragic cases, they are not always the same thing. Of course they need help, but before rehabilitation works an acceptance of guilt is required. The debate over rehabilitation goes far deeper than educating prisoners, its about what happens BEFORE they get to prison. A large majority of crime is drug related, penal reform must work alongside drug reform, most politicians would cross the road to avoid a smackhead.

    Leave users alone, execute the peddlars of death ie drug dealers, they are filth. Until the drug problems are addressed everything else is irrelevant.
    "Peddlars of death"? I thought you were a Libertarian?
    It is an individual's right to ingest whatever he or she chooses. The state has one main objective: to protect its citizens. Dealers know that users (almost exclusively vulnerable people) will go to great lengths to get drugs, it is the scourge of society.

    I'm not sure why you're questioning my libertarianism, I simply want to punish lawbreakers.
  • Options
    philiph said:

    Yep, I'm in the Tim school for reform of drug laws.

    Take them out of the black market by legalisation. Control (and tax) of sales, restrictions on the place of use for some drugs. Grow cannabis legally. Those that remain illegal (some of the legal highs? - I'm not an expert on drugs...), if any, should be clobbered with draconian and life changing consequences for users, suppliers and manufacturers.

    There is no plus side to the current prohibition, as it isn't working in any meaningful way.

    While you are at it, can you legalise prostitution and try to remove the pimps, slave labour, crime and coercion in that trade as well? (I'm not an expert there either, I hasten to add!)

    Yep. Agree with that.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    OK lets put this private contractors nonsense to bed. The govt gives a firm money to run a prison, what they don't spend is profit. Muddy the water with gruel, freeview or PPV, the contractor has ONE source of income.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,479
    edited February 2016
    philiph said:

    Yep, I'm in the Tim school for reform of drug laws.

    Take them out of the black market by legalisation. Control (and tax) of sales, restrictions on the place of use for some drugs. Grow cannabis legally. Those that remain illegal (some of the legal highs? - I'm not an expert on drugs...), if any, should be clobbered with draconian and life changing consequences for users, suppliers and manufacturers.

    There is no plus side to the current prohibition, as it isn't working in any meaningful way.

    While you are at it, can you legalise prostitution and try to remove the pimps, slave labour, crime and coercion in that trade as well? (I'm not an expert there either, I hasten to add!)

    So long as we had the death penalty for those who sold/gave drugs to children.
  • Options
    shadsy said:

    Latest Ladbrokes odds
    New Hampshire (without Trump)
    6/4 Kasich
    6/4 Rubio
    5/1 Bush
    6/1 Cruz
    25/1 Christie
    https://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-gb/betting/politics/american/presidential-election/2016-presidential-election-winner/216136503/

    Kasich has been putting all his eggs into the one basket that is New Hampshire ..... probably a smart move for a candidate who to date has had limited funds. But to progress further he absolutely needs to gain second place and a good second place at that, with a GOP vote share approaching 20% to gain sufficient name and face recognition to carry his campaign on to a seriously competitive level.
    Both Rubio and Cruz on the other hand already have the recognition but need to start making inroads into the Donald's lead which doesn't appear to be happening in either case.
    Were Trump to win NH by a factor of 2:1 or more over all his opponents, it's difficult to see him being caught, notwithstanding that these are early days in the primary contests.
  • Options
    watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474

    Mortimer said:

    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.

    Oh well, at least you felt awful, I'm sure wringing your hands kept them warm.

    I've spent loads of time with ex addicts and criminals, some tragic cases, they are not always the same thing. Of course they need help, but before rehabilitation works an acceptance of guilt is required. The debate over rehabilitation goes far deeper than educating prisoners, its about what happens BEFORE they get to prison. A large majority of crime is drug related, penal reform must work alongside drug reform, most politicians would cross the road to avoid a smackhead.

    Leave users alone, execute the peddlars of death ie drug dealers, they are filth. Until the drug problems are addressed everything else is irrelevant.
    Many years ago a senior Manchester policeman told a conference I was attending that decriminalising (then heroin) and allowing the supply of a standardised product, as with alcohol, would, in his educated opinion, result in a 70% or so reduction in petty crime.
    Decriminalising assault would doubtless improve the crime figures too, and make life easier for him.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    philiph said:

    Yep, I'm in the Tim school for reform of drug laws.

    Take them out of the black market by legalisation. Control (and tax) of sales, restrictions on the place of use for some drugs. Grow cannabis legally. Those that remain illegal (some of the legal highs? - I'm not an expert on drugs...), if any, should be clobbered with draconian and life changing consequences for users, suppliers and manufacturers.

    There is no plus side to the current prohibition, as it isn't working in any meaningful way.

    While you are at it, can you legalise prostitution and try to remove the pimps, slave labour, crime and coercion in that trade as well? (I'm not an expert there either, I hasten to add!)

    Having been to Colorado it's very well regulated.

    Show ID - no ID then you are not allowed on the premises.

    Study menu.

    Await call to secure bonded area where you buy your merch.

    No imbibing on the premises - only in your own home and not on the front porch.

    No more dealers nor deals - and lots of lovely tax revenue for the state.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    philiph said:

    Yep, I'm in the Tim school for reform of drug laws.

    Take them out of the black market by legalisation. Control (and tax) of sales, restrictions on the place of use for some drugs. Grow cannabis legally. Those that remain illegal (some of the legal highs? - I'm not an expert on drugs...), if any, should be clobbered with draconian and life changing consequences for users, suppliers and manufacturers.

    There is no plus side to the current prohibition, as it isn't working in any meaningful way.

    While you are at it, can you legalise prostitution and try to remove the pimps, slave labour, crime and coercion in that trade as well? (I'm not an expert there either, I hasten to add!)

    Who's Tim?

    In essence I agree, but having spent a deal of time with users it really isn't straightforward. The problem is who becomes the supplier/provider and who pays? But I believe you're on the right lines.
  • Options
    TGOHF said:

    philiph said:

    Yep, I'm in the Tim school for reform of drug laws.

    Take them out of the black market by legalisation. Control (and tax) of sales, restrictions on the place of use for some drugs. Grow cannabis legally. Those that remain illegal (some of the legal highs? - I'm not an expert on drugs...), if any, should be clobbered with draconian and life changing consequences for users, suppliers and manufacturers.

    There is no plus side to the current prohibition, as it isn't working in any meaningful way.

    While you are at it, can you legalise prostitution and try to remove the pimps, slave labour, crime and coercion in that trade as well? (I'm not an expert there either, I hasten to add!)

    Having been to Colorado it's very well regulated.

    Show ID - no ID then you are not allowed on the premises.

    Study menu.

    Await call to secure bonded area where you buy your merch.

    No imbibing on the premises - only in your own home and not on the front porch.

    No more dealers nor deals - and lots of lovely tax revenue for the state.
    Its so painfully common sense that its very frustrating how it is held back by the Mary Whitehouse element in society.
  • Options

    Wanderer said:

    Mortimer said:

    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.

    Oh well, at least you felt awful, I'm sure wringing your hands kept them warm.

    I've spent loads of time with ex addicts and criminals, some tragic cases, they are not always the same thing. Of course they need help, but before rehabilitation works an acceptance of guilt is required. The debate over rehabilitation goes far deeper than educating prisoners, its about what happens BEFORE they get to prison. A large majority of crime is drug related, penal reform must work alongside drug reform, most politicians would cross the road to avoid a smackhead.

    Leave users alone, execute the peddlars of death ie drug dealers, they are filth. Until the drug problems are addressed everything else is irrelevant.
    "Peddlars of death"? I thought you were a Libertarian?
    It is an individual's right to ingest whatever he or she chooses. The state has one main objective: to protect its citizens. Dealers know that users (almost exclusively vulnerable people) will go to great lengths to get drugs, it is the scourge of society.

    I'm not sure why you're questioning my libertarianism, I simply want to punish lawbreakers.
    "Oh well, at least you felt awful, I'm sure wringing your hands kept them warm."
    No good deed or thought should be left unpunished.
  • Options
    philiph said:

    Yep, I'm in the Tim school for reform of drug laws.

    Take them out of the black market by legalisation. Control (and tax) of sales, restrictions on the place of use for some drugs. Grow cannabis legally. Those that remain illegal (some of the legal highs? - I'm not an expert on drugs...), if any, should be clobbered with draconian and life changing consequences for users, suppliers and manufacturers.

    There is no plus side to the current prohibition, as it isn't working in any meaningful way.

    While you are at it, can you legalise prostitution and try to remove the pimps, slave labour, crime and coercion in that trade as well? (I'm not an expert there either, I hasten to add!)

    It will happen when politicians realise they can tax it.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,343
    Also on prison reform - I agree with Blackburn that drugs are heavily inter-related with crime: it's one reason I favour allowing GPs to prescribe heroin, as in Switzerland (where it slashed the already-low crime rate). It's possible, though, that both drugs and crime reflect the generally grim environment of many criminals, with few opportunities and peer pressure to make money by illegitimate means.

    One of the things that I'm happiest about in my time in Parliament was the Justice Committee report comparing a wide variety of prison regimes internationally to find out what worked. Neither purely severe systems (the chain gang stuff that you see in some bits of the States) nor purely liberal systems seemed very effective. What consistently worked better were systems with a lot of individual attention. It didn't seem to matter all that much who was giving the attention - American prisons with priests coming to advise, Scandi-systems with social workers, etc. The decisive fact that someone not themselves involved in crime and with some training was taking an interest in you and discussing your options made a very significant difference, compared with systems that just treated you like prisoner 17.

    There was some evidence that very severe systems without that element were counter-productive (so we need to be careful with the boot camp idea), which we were told in evidence was because it then became a matter of prestige - when you finally got out, you could say you'd been through the chain gang and they hadn't broken you 'cos you were way tough, man...and then you'd have a reputation to keep up by violence and aggression. But a tough regime with lots of well-structured courses to keep you busy all day and personal advice on top seemed to work well.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    philiph said:

    Yep, I'm in the Tim school for reform of drug laws.

    Take them out of the black market by legalisation. Control (and tax) of sales, restrictions on the place of use for some drugs. Grow cannabis legally. Those that remain illegal (some of the legal highs? - I'm not an expert on drugs...), if any, should be clobbered with draconian and life changing consequences for users, suppliers and manufacturers.

    There is no plus side to the current prohibition, as it isn't working in any meaningful way.

    While you are at it, can you legalise prostitution and try to remove the pimps, slave labour, crime and coercion in that trade as well? (I'm not an expert there either, I hasten to add!)

    So long as we had the death penalty for those who sold/gave drugs to children.
    Now we're talking, which is my original point. I don't want to waste time or money on rehabilitating adults who exploit children. Just shoot them.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    edited February 2016

    philiph said:

    Yep, I'm in the Tim school for reform of drug laws.

    Take them out of the black market by legalisation. Control (and tax) of sales, restrictions on the place of use for some drugs. Grow cannabis legally. Those that remain illegal (some of the legal highs? - I'm not an expert on drugs...), if any, should be clobbered with draconian and life changing consequences for users, suppliers and manufacturers.

    There is no plus side to the current prohibition, as it isn't working in any meaningful way.

    While you are at it, can you legalise prostitution and try to remove the pimps, slave labour, crime and coercion in that trade as well? (I'm not an expert there either, I hasten to add!)

    So long as we had the death penalty for those who sold/gave drugs to children.
    An 18 year old smokes pot with his 15 year old girlfriend......
  • Options
    Lights the blue touch paper

    Today's @welt leader argues "Tusk and Cameron have negotiated something sensational yet few have noticed" Poesner also argues that "Forget about the Franco-German engine, the EU's direction is now being set by Poland and the UK"

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CaxAd6nW4AAIwTP.jpg:large
  • Options

    Wanderer said:

    Mortimer said:

    I am more proud of Cameron for his prison speech than I have ever been. Prison is outdated and hasn't worked for decades.

    We send too many people to prison and by doing so often make lives worse. Reoffending rates need to be cut. If you're not sympathetic to this, I suggest you spend a week at your local mags court and listen to the situations of a few recidivists.

    One of the kindest acts I've ever witnessed was just before Christmas 2014, when a shivering chap who had just been released from Winchester was waiting for a train at Basingstoke. He had a ticket home, but no jumper or overcoat. One chap gave him his jumper, another his scarf. I felt awful for not thinking to help him myself. The chap welled up with the kindness of strangers.

    Oh well, at least you felt awful, I'm sure wringing your hands kept them warm.

    I've spent loads of time with ex addicts and criminals, some tragic cases, they are not always the same thing. Of course they need help, but before rehabilitation works an acceptance of guilt is required. The debate over rehabilitation goes far deeper than educating prisoners, its about what happens BEFORE they get to prison. A large majority of crime is drug related, penal reform must work alongside drug reform, most politicians would cross the road to avoid a smackhead.

    Leave users alone, execute the peddlars of death ie drug dealers, they are filth. Until the drug problems are addressed everything else is irrelevant.
    "Peddlars of death"? I thought you were a Libertarian?
    It is an individual's right to ingest whatever he or she chooses. The state has one main objective: to protect its citizens. Dealers know that users (almost exclusively vulnerable people) will go to great lengths to get drugs, it is the scourge of society.

    I'm not sure why you're questioning my libertarianism, I simply want to punish lawbreakers.
    Taking or possessing illegal drugs is also illegal. If you want to simply punish lawbreakers then logically you have to punish user and supplier.

    You are right, however, that hitting suppliers is one major part to the solution. Ending prohibition would go further than anything.
  • Options
    Mr. Eagles, German newspapers have not, this year, been notable for accurately reporting the news.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    philiph said:

    Yep, I'm in the Tim school for reform of drug laws.

    Take them out of the black market by legalisation. Control (and tax) of sales, restrictions on the place of use for some drugs. Grow cannabis legally. Those that remain illegal (some of the legal highs? - I'm not an expert on drugs...), if any, should be clobbered with draconian and life changing consequences for users, suppliers and manufacturers.

    There is no plus side to the current prohibition, as it isn't working in any meaningful way.

    While you are at it, can you legalise prostitution and try to remove the pimps, slave labour, crime and coercion in that trade as well? (I'm not an expert there either, I hasten to add!)

    It will happen when politicians realise they can tax it.
    That's where it falls down which was my earlier point. If govt controls the supply of drugs it becomes a competitor with some very nasty people. Its an unholy mess, but rehabilitating criminals really means weaning them off drugs, until govt accepts that we're going nowhere.
This discussion has been closed.