• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Den Tandt: Make St. Patrick's rioters do military service

When I read this article I thought what a great idea!  Send all of them our way, issue them shovels and send them to Toronto for the winter.  Not like we have a large waiting list to get in and we do have that enormous shortage of members even though we are all sitting around doing nothing but wait for the snow so we can dig Toronto out.  Of course we will have to hide the cost factor otherwise the 99% would be very upset that we are spending so much money on forcing these poor misunderstood people to become good citizens instead of handing it over to them for more tents and whatever else they want.

Geez, sometimes I wonder why we bother.
 
Reading about the Occupy movement, various riots, protests and the employment situation, I wonder if something like the old American Civilian Conservation Corps C.C.C. of the 1930's will ever be re-considered?
The U.S. Army was in charge of the camps, but there was no military training.
 
mariomike said:
Reading about the Occupy movement, various riots, protests and the employment situation, I wonder if something like the old American Civilian Conservation Corps C.C.C. of the 1930's will ever be re-considered?
The U.S. Army was in charge of the camps, but there was no military training.

Nor should there be.

Back in the day, basic training was well known as "boot camp".
Perhaps that terminology is still used today, but I have my doubts.
The "boot camps" described below have nothing to do with military service

If Canada decided to build such facilities, lots of prime real estate in the "Far North".

The following is shared with provisions of The Copyright Act 

Sentencing - Alternative Sentencing - Programs, Offenders, Community, and Prison

http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/2553/Sentencing-ALTERNATIVE-SENTENCING.html

Forms of sentencing other than probation, prison, or a combination of the two (split sentences) also exist and are widely used in virtually every state. The most recent compilation of such approaches was published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics in 2000 in cooperation with the Conference of State Court Administrators (David B. Rottman, et al., State Court Organization 1998, Bureau of Justice Statistics, June 2000).

The BJS identified eleven forms of distinct alternative sentences, although some of these are functionally similar. With the exception of boot camps for young or adult offenders, they all provide offenders more freedom than incarceration but less freedom than ordinary probation. Alternative sentencing is, in part, a response to calls by penal reformers for, as suggested in Americans behind Bars, a "continuum of punishments with probation at one end, more severe community-based sanctions in the middle, and incarceration at the most restrictive end" (New York: Edna McConnell Clark Foundation, 1993) and in part a response to crowding in prisons. Thus, for instance, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, many states use halfway houses as a way of relieving crowding. Alternative sentencing is, of course, applied to offenders whose absence of prior criminal history or general characteristics indicate that they can be trusted not to abuse their greater freedom. Opponents, however, see prison sentencing as the only "real punishment" for criminals.

State departments of correction, the District of Columbia, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons offer a range of alternative sentencing options for criminal offenders. Although programs can vary among regions, those options include work release and weekend sentencing, shock incarceration (sometimes called boot camp), community service programs, day fines, day reporting centers, electronic monitoring and house arrest, residential community corrections, and diversionary treatment programs. There is also more variation in the availability of other types of alternative sentencing options, such as mediation and restitution.
---
---
---
Shock Incarceration (Boot Camps)

Shock incarceration is another name for reformatories or "boot camps" operated under military discipline for juveniles and adults. The name comes from William Whitelaw, British Home Secretary (1979–83), who called for a"short, sharp shock" that would end teenagers' criminal careers. Boot camps established in Great Britain attracted youths who liked the challenge, but the facilities did not lower the recidivism rate according to testimony presented to the British Parliament by corrections officials in February 2002

According to Alexander W. Pisciotta in Benevolent Repression (New York: New York University Press, 1994), the prototype of such a facility in the United States was established at the Elmira Reformatory in New York as far back as 1876. The first modern, correctional boot camp was established in Georgia in 1983. Faced with unprecedented overcrowding in its prisons and jails, Georgia was looking for alternatives to incarceration for adult offenders. Oklahoma began its program in 1984 and, by the end of 1988, fifteen programs were operating in nine states. The majority of programs started in the 1990s. By 1998, thirty-three correctional agencies (state and federal) operated forty-nine camps for adult inmates. Sentences are usually short (three to five months) and intended to be rehabilitative by instilling self-respect and discipline in the offender.

Boot camps are intended to be both punitive in their rigid discipline and rehabilitative in the self-esteem they claim to confer upon successful completion of the program. Shock incarceration is intended to motivate prisoners, teach respect for oneself and others, and break destructive cycles of behavior. Virtually all work on the assumption that a military regimen is beneficial.

The major selling points for boot camps have been saving money and reducing prison crowding. However, the major factor contributing to reduced costs and less overcrowding is that the boot camp programs are shorter in duration than traditional sentences, and thus participants are released earlier. In addition, studies of boot camps have indicated that the facilities have not had a major effect on recidivism.

Many adult boot camps claim to be oriented toward developing programs aimed at offender rehabilitation. Typically, boot camp programs include physical training and regular drill-type exercise, housekeeping and maintenance of the facility, and often hard labor. Some programs include vocational, educational, or treatment programs. Drug and alcohol counseling, reality therapy, relaxation therapy, individual counseling, and recreation therapy are often incorporated into such programs. Because some offenders in boot camps have drug problems, many programs devote time to drug treatment each week. Programs closely regulate dress, talking, movement, eating, hygiene, etc. Obedience to rules reinforces submission to authority and forces the prisoners to handle a challenge that is both tedious and demanding.
---
---
---
Other alternatives at link....
                      ______________________________________
*spacing
 
Don't we have enough pot smokers, rapists, kiddy porners and all round gangtras now without importing already proven such from the general population?  Let the civies deal with their social ills and we will deal with ours.  I am too old to babysit.
 
Colin P said:
Singapore prepares it's youth for the day they enter the forces, so they know what to expect (or should) If you go to Singapore check out the "Discovery Centre" Military Museum and "education centre" to teach youths about Singapore and their ideals.
http://www.sdc.com.sg/

Of course all systems have their issues http://kementah.blogspot.ca/2011/04/maid-in-singapore-singapore-armed.html  :nod:

Would not work here, Canadian ideals seem to change everytime a different political party gets in.
 
I remember reading years ago that during WWII the Brits recruited a bunch of criminals into a military unit (a la The Dirty Dozen ) thinking that because the criminals had grown up in a harsh, ruthless environment they would make excellent soldiers/commandos. Needless to say, the experiment was a total failure. What they found was that the criminals main concern was personal survival/enrichment and that they had no attachment whatsoever to any kind of espirt de corp  or loyalty to their country/units/comrades, etc. 

Not exactly someone who you want to go into combat with.
 
Retired AF Guy said:
I remember reading years ago that during WWII the Brits recruited a bunch of criminals into a military unit (a la The Dirty Dozen ) thinking that because the criminals had grown up in a harsh, ruthless environment they would make excellent soldiers/commandos. Needless to say, the experiment was a total failure. What they found was that the criminals main concern was personal survival/enrichment and that they had no attachment whatsoever to any kind of espirt de corp  or loyalty to their country/units/comrades, etc. 

Not exactly someone who you want to go into combat with.

That sounds like some of the units I served with. Sort of.

We had alot of minor criminals who turned into outstanding soldiers (and Officers). It's all about the leadership.

 
umphrey: You know what happens: nice young lady comes up to you. Obviously you want to create a good impression, you don't want to look a fool, do you? So she starts asking you some questions: " Mr. Woolley, are you worried about the number of young people without jobs?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Are you worried about the rise in crime among teenagers?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Do you think there is a lack of discipline in our Comprehensive schools?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Do you think young people welcome some authority and leadership in their lives?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Do you think they respond to a challenge?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Would you be in favour of reintroducing National Service?"
Bernard: Oh...well, I suppose I might be.
Humphrey: "Yes or no?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: Of course you would, Bernard. After all you told her you can't say no to that. So they don't mention the first five questions and they publish the last one.
Bernard: Is that really what they do?
Humphrey: Well, not the reputable ones no, but there aren't many of those. So alternatively the young lady can get the opposite result.
Bernard: How?
Humphrey: "Mr. Woolley, are you worried about the danger of war?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Are you worried about the growth of armaments?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Do you think there is a danger in giving young people guns and teaching them how to kill?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Do you think it is wrong to force people to take up arms against their will?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Would you oppose the reintroduction of National Service?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: There you are, you see Bernard. The perfect balanced sample.
 
Maybe I'm talking out of my ass here, but isn't it Society's responsibility to ensure these people are instilled with morals and values from day one?

As a father of 3, I hope to God that people don't see it as the Government's job to instil morals, teach self control,  and demand respect for others' person and property. If by 22 little Johnny has no problem lighting Mrs. X's station wagon on fire because he's had too much green ale, I think the boat was missed 20 year ago. Forcing him into a uniform doesn't change behaviours learned and enabled over a lifetime.

I often tell my wife that parents have a more crucial role in society than anyone else. They have to ensure that our little ones become contributing members of society and raise them in such a way that they don't become a scourge.

We reap the seeds of entitlement and selfishness in times like these, using a sharper knife doesn't change the crop.

Just my  :2c:
 
rmc_wannabe said:
Maybe I'm talking out of my *** here, but isn't it Society's responsibility to ensure these people are instilled with morals and values from day one?

No, it's the parent's responsibility. Society acts to reinforce the basic tenets of good behaviour already learned at home.
 
Society(culture), community and parents have always played a combined role in raising the next generation. Been that way since the first tribe formed. What changes is the dominant role that each part plays. At this point our western culture makes it difficult for parents or community to deal with kids who don't comply to "soft cultural training"
 
AJFitzpatrick said:
umphrey: You know what happens: nice young lady comes up to you. Obviously you want to create a good impression, you don't want to look a fool, do you? So she starts asking you some questions: " Mr. Woolley, are you worried about the number of young people without jobs?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Are you worried about the rise in crime among teenagers?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Do you think there is a lack of discipline in our Comprehensive schools?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Do you think young people welcome some authority and leadership in their lives?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Do you think they respond to a challenge?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Would you be in favour of reintroducing National Service?"
Bernard: Oh...well, I suppose I might be.
Humphrey: "Yes or no?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: Of course you would, Bernard. After all you told her you can't say no to that. So they don't mention the first five questions and they publish the last one.
Bernard: Is that really what they do?
Humphrey: Well, not the reputable ones no, but there aren't many of those. So alternatively the young lady can get the opposite result.
Bernard: How?
Humphrey: "Mr. Woolley, are you worried about the danger of war?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Are you worried about the growth of armaments?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Do you think there is a danger in giving young people guns and teaching them how to kill?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Do you think it is wrong to force people to take up arms against their will?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: "Would you oppose the reintroduction of National Service?"
Bernard: Yes
Humphrey: There you are, you see Bernard. The perfect balanced sample.

"Yes Minister" and "Yes, Prime Minister" rule!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Colin P said:
Society(culture), community and parents have always played a combined role in raising the next generation. Been that way since the first tribe formed. What changes is the dominant role that each part plays. At this point our western culture makes it difficult for parents or community to deal with kids who don't comply to "soft cultural training"

Gonna have to disagree with that a tad.  Seems to be more of a shift of parents putting the responsibility of teaching morals and responsibility on the public school system and society.  Said system is not there for that and thus kids don't have the same sense of respect and responsibility when they grow up.  This gets passed on to their kids and so on and so forth resulting in the current crop of generation "ME!"
 
You nailed it STRIKER.  Sounds like you are speaking from experience....
 
Sorry, I should clarify that when I said speaking from experience, I meant dealing with / raising  kids  :facepalm:
 
I know a lot of parents that are fearful (cautious) of bringing discipline to their kids in public for fear of being reported. More so in immigrant families than domestic ones. However I think there is a raising concern that the parents ablity to correct their kids is being hindered to much by PC from the "thought police" in the education services.
 
One of the biggest issues with parents raising there kids is that the kids are intended to be raised with a sense of fear which makes them behave orders and follow the rules. The problem is that what exactally are they afraid of? If a kid gets sent to his room, so what he has all the technology they could want. If they break the law who cares, if your underaged they can't do much to you at all. If you get in a fight at school they (the teachers/principals) call the cops and/or suspend you immediately (even if you were only using self defence). The way kids are being punished has a direct relation to respect and discipline. Physical discipline would have a greater effects as then there would be a consequence for your actions. I'm not saying beat the kids but spanking is reasonable. In response to having criminals do military service it would be pointless. There are hard working people that want to be in the military and are unable at the moment as there is only so many positions. So why would we give those positions to someone who doesn't even deserve it?
 
Journeyman said:
      :nod:  Ya baby!!


Oh damn, wrong website.  Nevermind.   :-[

:rofl:

Don't you hate it when you have more than one tab open?  ;)
 
Somebody going to get a hurt real bad....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVcePxjFujs
 
Back
Top