SA Footy

The next state election will be the first time I vote Libs infront of Labour. The ALP exists in name only and not in spirit in SA. Foley is a pig, Rann not far behind. Off you go boys.

The Big Shrek wrote:The next state election will be the first time I vote Libs infront of Labour. The ALP exists in name only and not in spirit in SA. Foley is a pig, Rann not far behind. Off you go boys.

why is Foley a "pig"?
I happen to think he is quite a decent fellow, having met him on a few occasions.

My latest peeve is the overcrowding of jails. Foley of course mad the infamous rack 'em and stack em" remark.

Due to the current governments law and order campaign jail populations have exploded. At the same time funding has decreased and there are less prison guards. To cope with the staffing problems they just lockdown the jail a few hours earlier than they used to. I believe prisoners are in their cells at 4:30pm now.

Never mind the fact that at the remand centre the cells were built at the minimum size required. Just stick two people in there, and when we need more space stick a third in. Prisons are degrading enough for the people in them without this.

Never mind the fact that locking people up makes them more likely to reoffend. Just put them in a cell and forget about them. Don't worry about their mental health don't worry about human dignity.

Before someone arcs up, not all prisoners are vile people. Lots of people are in jail for non-violent offences. All people deserve dignity though.

More rants about Kevin 'oink oink' Foley coming up!

The problem in TBS that people in general are not to worried about "Prisioner Rights" enabling governments to "treat them like Mushrooms".

What should be of concern is that the Remand Centre is completley full and people on remand who havent even remotely been proven guilty are being sent to maximum security wings at Yatala and getting minimal excersize through the day as the staff are not given the time to supervise it. Bad luck if someone actually proves to be innocent and is put through all of that!

I can understand the State Goverment saying that the new Jail will sort out the issues, yet it still has not been started yet and something has to be done now to ease the current situation.

We clearly need to build a new remand centre with expanded capacity irrespective of what happens with the new Jail at Murray Bridge, so the Goverment ought to be getting onto it or organising extensions to the current one. I also dont see why they have not organised the lease on the Baxter Detention Centre to run until the new jail is opened enableing the additional prisioners to be placed there in the meantime?

My last point is that I feel that enough resources should be allocated to prisions to make sure that Reading and Writing is compulsory for those that cannot read or write. Studies have shown in Britian that Re-Offending drops dramatically when illiterate criminals are taught to read and write and can actually function in society without having to rely on their criminal mates to help them out! - How many of the "Gang of 49" can Read and Write? I am guessing probably not to many, making it compulsory instantly then breaks the power of the leadership of the gang over its younger illiterate members and it would be the single most quickest way of solving the problem!

I realise no-one cares (or understands) about prisoner rights, but Foley does and ignoring them makes him a pig. It obviously doesn't sell enough copies of the Advertiser to make it a worthy issue.

What I do find even more offensive is that the govt. runs this'War on Crime' but ignores the causes of crime and the effect that the current prison system has on it. They simply run an emotive campaign void of any scientific enquiry based on locking more people up for longer.

Watch what happens to the mental health situation once they move everything out to Murray Bridge too. How do they expect people to integrate back into the community when they are removed from all of the non government support services in Adelaide? What do we expect the people who work in mental health to do? All move out to Murray Bridge. Never mind the fact they aren't increasing the number of beds. But hey, selling off Glenside as housing is a more popular move.

I'm struggling to think of a tradition ALP value that the current government still represents.

Sojourner wrote:The problem in TBS that people in general are not to worried about "Prisioner Rights" enabling governments to "treat them like Mushrooms".

What should be of concern is that the Remand Centre is completley full and people on remand who havent even remotely been proven guilty are being sent to maximum security wings at Yatala and getting minimal excersize through the day as the staff are not given the time to supervise it. Bad luck if someone actually proves to be innocent and is put through all of that!

I can understand the State Goverment saying that the new Jail will sort out the issues, yet it still has not been started yet and something has to be done now to ease the current situation.

We clearly need to build a new remand centre with expanded capacity irrespective of what happens with the new Jail at Murray Bridge, so the Goverment ought to be getting onto it or organising extensions to the current one. I also dont see why they have not organised the lease on the Baxter Detention Centre to run until the new jail is opened enableing the additional prisioners to be placed there in the meantime?

My last point is that I feel that enough resources should be allocated to prisions to make sure that Reading and Writing is compulsory for those that cannot read or write. Studies have shown in Britian that Re-Offending drops dramatically when illiterate criminals are taught to read and write and can actually function in society without having to rely on their criminal mates to help them out! - How many of the "Gang of 49" can Read and Write? I am guessing probably not to many, making it compulsory instantly then breaks the power of the leadership of the gang over its younger illiterate members and it would be the single most quickest way of solving the problem!

I strongly agree with you Sojourner.
While I am generally in favour of not being soft on crime, and of being tough on repeat offenders in terms of sentencing, basic humanity is necessary, and rehabilitation efforts should be real and early, not token.

I also agree with the comments above about the issue of isolating the mentally ill, and think it is appalling that so many now land in the prisons because there is not other first port of call, that could prevent that.

"Treatment in the community" was always going to be more expensive than providing a central hospital. It only freed up capital.
Psych. units in public hospital get low priority in the budget, and Emergency staff prefer to send people away rather than have to keep them in Emergency and tie up staff until the too few Psych Triage people are eventually available. This location of small units in large public hospitals, and isolating some staff to even smaller outreach centres, demoralises and demotivates them, and reduces their opportunity to be supported and re-educated by mixing with colleagues, in what is a very stressful area of work.

A separate Psych. receiving unit and back up hospital with medium stay beds is needed - most severe Psych conditions take weeks or even a few months to stabilise.
Anything else becomes a revolving door or a bypass to the prison system.

Psyber have you come across Dr Ken O'Brien in your time. He's given a couple of lectures at Uni during Sentencing and Criminology courses. Great lectures both times.

If we were to introduce islamic law prisons could become largely redundant, removal of limbs for less serious crime makes it more difficult to be a thief or be violent, removal of the head means those guilty of very serious crimes will not reoffend Actually TBS after your rant Mr Foley has gone up in my estimation seriously it is wrong that people on remand should be placed in the main prison system, but as far as those convicted of serious crimes "rack and stack em"

The Big Shrek wrote:Psyber have you come across Dr Ken O'Brien in your time. He's given a couple of lectures at Uni during Sentencing and Criminology courses. Great lectures both times.

Yes, I knew Ken fairly well. We were on a committee together in the mid 1990s. We were a bit far apart politically, as he is well to the left.
I also knew Andy Czechowicz who chaired ANZAPPL [Aust & NZ Assoc'n for Psychiatry, Psychology, and the Law.]
Andy was also Medical Superintendent of Glenside and fought its potentially being bulldozed for the land value.
I was in charge of the team that ran the two forensic wards at Hillcrest Hospital for a while before James Nash House was created.
I think they used one of the same buildings, but it was after I'd left the public service.

mick wrote:If we were to introduce islamic law prisons could become largely redundant, removal of limbs for less serious crime makes it more difficult to be a thief or be violent, removal of the head means those guilty of very serious crimes will not reoffend Actually TBS after your rant Mr Foley has gone up in my estimation seriously it is wrong that people on remand should be placed in the main prison system, but as far as those convicted of serious crimes "rack and stack em"

Well I know people like you don't respnd well to arguments about human dignity, but what about increased recidivism due to prison conditions?

Psyber wrote:

The Big Shrek wrote:Psyber have you come across Dr Ken O'Brien in your time. He's given a couple of lectures at Uni during Sentencing and Criminology courses. Great lectures both times.

Yes, I knew Ken fairly well. We were on a committee together in the mid 1990s. We were a bit far apart politically, as he is well to the left.
I also knew Andy Czechowicz who chaired ANZAPPL [Aust & NZ Assoc'n for Psychiatry, Psychology, and the Law.]

Ha ha. Is there anyone not to the left of you? At least your right wing views are educated unlike Foley.

The Big Shrek wrote:

Psyber wrote:

The Big Shrek wrote:Psyber have you come across Dr Ken O'Brien in your time. He's given a couple of lectures at Uni during Sentencing and Criminology courses. Great lectures both times.

Yes, I knew Ken fairly well. We were on a committee together in the mid 1990s. We were a bit far apart politically, as he is well to the left.
I also knew Andy Czechowicz who chaired ANZAPPL [Aust & NZ Assoc'n for Psychiatry, Psychology, and the Law.]

Ha ha. Is there anyone not to the left of you? At least your right wing views are educated unlike Foley.

I'm a liberal conservative mate, more like the Labor party of the 1920s, not right wing in the true "authoriarian" sense at all.
Adolf Hitler awas a right wing [authoritarian] socialist. Calling conservatives "right wing" and socialists "left wing" is a modern obfuscation.
It was the authoritarianism of the Labor Party in Australia that prompted me to join the Libs, where you can stand up to the party machine, as I did.
I didn't join any political party before 1995, and I did vote for Gough Whitlam - a liberal socialist.

Anyone read the article by Rex Jory in the paper earlier in the week about Brendan Abbott, the so-called Postcard Bandit. He basically provided support to Abbott's right to not be in solitary confinement basically 24/7, and that he was virtually a political prisoner. Personally i think he's only got himself to blame for his situation, his past history of escapes shows that he can't be given more freedoms in jail. It really hard to have sympathy for someone who's caused so much grief to so many people innocently involved in his bank robberies as well.

The Big Shrek wrote:

mick wrote:If we were to introduce islamic law prisons could become largely redundant, removal of limbs for less serious crime makes it more difficult to be a thief or be violent, removal of the head means those guilty of very serious crimes will not reoffend Actually TBS after your rant Mr Foley has gone up in my estimation seriously it is wrong that people on remand should be placed in the main prison system, but as far as those convicted of serious crimes "rack and stack em"

Well I know people like you don't respnd well to arguments about human dignity, but what about increased recidivism due to prison conditions?

No just not an apologist for criminals

The Big Shrek wrote:All people deserve dignity though.

Don't know that I (personally) agree with that

Enjoying reading everyone's points in this thread btw.

I'd be interested to find out what people believe the purpose of incarceration is.

By the way, back to Foley being a pig. Good to see the govt. offering a pay rise above that's not less than inflation this time. Still not good enough though.

The Big Shrek wrote:I'd be interested to find out what people believe the purpose of incarceration is.

By the way, back to Foley being a pig. Good to see the govt. offering a pay rise above that's not less than inflation this time. Still not good enough though.

I would have thought it was a last resort, but necessary to keep the public safe from those who are beyond rehabilitation or retraining after it has been given an adequate trial, and safe from the relatively few true sociopaths, of whom I have met a few...

There are also a few untreatable and unsafe to be around people with chronic psychotic disorders - like the girl who stabbed 6 people in the Norwood area in the 1970s.
I interviewed her and looked after her in the old Psychiatric Unit that was attached to Yatala for a short time before they closed it down, while Carl Radeski who usually ran the place was on holiday.

If protection from these people were the purpose, why do we lock up people who have committed mercy killings? What about someone who killed another driving recklessly, presumably taking away their licence would suffice? Shouldn't sentence's be indeterminate then and release based upon rehabilitation?

The Big Shrek wrote:If protection from these people were the purpose, why do we lock up people who have committed mercy killings? What about someone who killed another driving recklessly, presumably taking away their licence would suffice? Shouldn't sentence's be indeterminant then and release based upon rehabilitation?

What about revenge? society believes in revenge - hence as you say why not just take away their licence? Just imagine if someone close to you or someone you loved was killed by a crimininally reckless driver, would you be happy with them just losing their licence? As far as incarceration is concerned I believe in lieu of execution that violent career criminals and sociopaths should be kept permanently out of society in the prison system. However, I don't believe all murderers should get life as many are basically decent people who have made a bad decision when angry or provoked, however, I think society and the vistims family deserve their pound of flesh.

mick wrote:

The Big Shrek wrote:If protection from these people were the purpose, why do we lock up people who have committed mercy killings? What about someone who killed another driving recklessly, presumably taking away their licence would suffice? Shouldn't sentence's be indeterminate then and release based upon rehabilitation?

What about revenge? society believes in revenge - hence as you say why not just take away their licence? Just imagine if someone close to you or someone you loved was killed by a crimininally reckless driver, would you be happy with them just losing their licence? As far as incarceration is concerned I believe in lieu of execution that violent career criminals and sociopaths should be kept permanently out of society in the prison system. However, I don't believe all murderers should get life as many are basically decent people who have made a bad decision when angry or provoked, however, I think society and the vistims family deserve their pound of flesh.

I disagree with you mick that revenge should be the purpose of incarceration but I think you represent what a lot of people think these days. The law hasn't justified prison sentences as revenge but it is heading that way with the increasing importance placed on victim impact statements. Unfortunately Uni beckons and I will have to explain my position later.