The Forum > Article Comments > How maximum-security jails make the baddest of men even worse > Comments
How maximum-security jails make the baddest of men even worse : Comments
By Bernie Matthews, published 5/11/2003Bernie Matthews reveals how maximum-security incarceration has made some criminals worse
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
-
- All
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
-
- All
And would Bernie's solution meet all 4 aims of punishment: deterrence, retribution, community protection & rehab? Obviously there were many others who went through Grafton, had similar experiences, but made better decisions than Crump & co.
As Bernie himself says, he did his crime out of greed & makes no excuses for it whatsoever. Bottom line is people do have choices and when they make the wrong decisions, there have to be sobering consequences.
Bernie knows better than most because he has been there done that. He would have mixed with the baddest. So he must have some theories on how best to deter crim behaviour. We havn't the time to wait unil all of society's ills are cured before we implement an ideal system. We have bad people out there now (for all sorts of reasons) who have to be dealt with in the here and now. I'm sure there are many wicked crimes that can't be explained away by the 'Graftons'. A penny for your thoughts, Bernie.
I'm a supporter of harsh, but swift (not the never-ending, mind-dumbing experiences of Grafton) punishment (eg Singapore - yes, it's not perfect) with the emphasis on retribution & deterrence and protection rather than rehab. For me, the rights of society take precedence over the rights of the individual. Rehab is good, but even if they will not reoffend (& there is no guarantee), the punishment still has to fit the crime and be carried through to completion. That's my definition of justice, and I'm sure the vast majority of people agree. This is what people like Peter McInerney don't recognise & never will.