Why does Charles Clarke feel it necessary to reward ex-offenders with assistance in finding accommodation and jobs?
The reward of not going back to prison should be a sufficient incentive.
Will the assistance available to ex-offenders be greater than for those on the edge of society who do not offend?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Snafu - I think it's called prevention of crime. If an ex-con has a job and somewhere to live, they are many many times less likely to re-offend.
Lascivious, how many employers want to employ ex-offenders when they can employ non-offenders?
If only the homeless were offenders, the prevention of crime argument would have some merit but I suspect many offenders already have accommodation.
Remember, folks somebody who consciously and deliberately exercises free will to commit a crime is 'a victim', too! No doubt too, the victim of the crime should spare a thought for the 'unfortunate circumstances' of the poor offender!
Never mimd that those very much on the margins, who nevertheless do not offend are effectively kicked in the teeth for their inaction, that is just the inexorable logic of a sinister NuLabour government playing to its pernicious ideology.
Yeah, you guys are right; it's clear you've completely thought it out. Having released a person from prison, it's obviously in the interests of society to see to it's a difficult as possible for him to find a place to live and a means of support. His clear goal ought to be to reconnect with his former friends and criminal associates and use what he's learned in prison to get it right this time and continue to degrade society WITHOUT getting caught. Brilliant, fellahs.
Post a Comment