Could all internet troll messages be routinely forwarded to Psychology therapists and Counsellors, for a win-win outcome?
Would the level of prison re-offending reduce if we had more (voluntary) hypnotherapy in prisons?
Prison beds are arguably therapy couches, silently waiting for the counsellor, or therapist, to be appointed. If so, why don’t taxpayers lobby politicians to follow through on the rehabilitation process?
Personal comfort zones are footprints in a circle, that become one foot in the grave. Opportunity zones are footprints leading to the horizon, that leave one foot high ripples in a pond.
Trend mapping with a moral compass is the answer. What was the question?
Train hard, track safe. Train easy, train coming. Track dangerous.
Hope is like gravity. It anchors us to a great Planet, surrounded by people we can help. And those who will reach out to us, if we let them.
If you equip yourself with the right skills, retire early and enjoy the good life, without money worries.
Wealthy people are just philanthropists still in their wrapping paper.
The worst thing about prison is how inflexible the hierarchies are. The best thing about going straight is how many hierarchies you can choose to follow.
Match fixing in sport is at best, the height of short-term thinking. Sport by definition is about competitive, but fair play. Changing the players’ incentives dissolves the purpose of the event.
What’s worse; UK football players (Sturridge, Wellbeck & Sterling excepted) with no real hunger to win for their country in the World Cup, or the UK national selectors who simply don’t have the courage to select a team with less apparent talent, but hugely more hunger to win?
Rags to riches to rags in 3 generations. Parental fulfilment; riches to rags to riches in the first 3 decades of your children’s lives.
Countries that construct laws that they don’t apply rigorously and fairly, cease being taken seriously by outsider onlookers (especially potential investors & skilled migrants).
Why in this day and age, do some governments appear to willingly let default rule over design? The UK is facing persistent (and successful) immigration of illegal migrants, who fled their home country because of persecution and prejudice. Yet when those illegal migrants arrive in the UK, ironically they see evidence of police corruption (eg London Met Police), significant criminal re-offending & hardliners taking over UK school curriculums with impunity (Birmingham).
Justice isn’t rocket science. For justice to be fair, it needs to have logic, be honourable, be affordable, be consistent and ensure people learn quickly from past mistakes.
If justice is supposed to be about some combination of offender deterrence, restitution to the victim and rehabilitation of the offender, then in the clear absence of the two R’s, taxpaying society at least deserves a deterrence outcome from their Justice system and the political party in charge of it. And in the case of dangerous and unreformed offenders, imprisonment at least keeps them from committing further serious crime.
‘Don’t do the time if you can’t do the crime’ means little when light sentencing doesn’t actually deter criminals.
High speed car chases of criminals through built-up areas should automatically land them an attempted murder charge and a fine to fully cover the pursuit costs.
If sentencing gave a further weighting, based on the vulnerability of the victims (pensioners being swindled out of their life savings, crimes against children, animal cruelty etc), fairer justice may be achieved.
If justice is honourable, honour crimes will be chased out of the honour zone and seen for what they really are.
Lying to the police should automatically incur a 24 hour police cell visit and a fixed notice financial fine that is effective in stopping criminals from wasting precious police time.
Perhaps as Malcolm Gladwell in his book ‘David and Goliath’ says, penalties act as a deterrent up to a point and only when a limited number of people from a community go to prison. However, beyond that point, for dangerous and repeat offenders, prison at least reduces the immediate threat, even if prison time has little effect on the offender as a deterrent.
If we give serial killers a severe penalty the first time they are caught and convicted, then why not give habitual offenders that same penalty too (three serious strikes and you’re out of freedom)? The cost and damage to society is similar in both cases.
Re-offending should automatically mean significantly larger sentences than for first time offenders, for the same gravity of crime.
If we have to build more prisons to cope with longer sentencing, so be it. The cost is still less than the loss of life, theft and trauma caused to the victims.