Backyard Aquaponics
A place to discuss aquaponics

I didn't realise there was a thing called jail, and a completely different thing called prison.

It seems jail is where the people who are innocent until proven guilty have to spend up to a few years waiting for trial to see if they are guilty enough to spend some time in prison.

At least that's what Louis Theroux tells me.

If I ran a day care centre for toddlers, and the inmates were regularly bashed to within inches of their lives, I think someone would say "duty of care" a few times and the victims of the violence would have some kind of right to sue for damages against the people or institutions that control every aspect of their lives, health, and safety.

If you take away peoples right to self determination, surely you become responsible for their safety.

I don't understand why the streets of London are covered by close circuit TV, but jails have nice little nooks and crannies where the inmates can rape and kill without fear of repercussion.

By definition, if a place exists in maximum security where someone can rape someone and get away with it, the victim hasn't experienced anything that could be called responsible care from the authorities governing the establishment, and also cant possibly been considered to be in maximum security. I would call that something like "we look in from time to time" rather than maximum anything.

The only possible reason we can allow such stuff to happen is because we don't give a shi[p], and we consider that part of the punishment.

Whilst I don't agree with it in this particular case, the majority rules, and if the majority says that rape is part of *prison*, I guess I have to live with it, but if people in *jail* haven't been to trial, how do you allow their constitutional rights to be be so forgotten?

It's also not particularly reassuring when any government, no matter how backward, reinstalls the right to detain people without charge indefinitely.

Indefinitely.

Without trial.

Hilarious.

There's a really good reason they don't give me that power.

And the reason is, I would personally abuse it.

Just imagine it. Your government can walk into your house and put your children in jail until they grow old and die.

Here's a riddle/joke for you....




What's the difference between the United States, and Stalin's Russia?

people can be sentenced to "jail" for misdemeanors, less than 2 years..
people who can't make bail before trial are also held in jail in usually segregated areas.. but it all depends on the jail..
prisons are becoming more and more "privately run" - that is, the "government" pays a company to run them..
in ohio they're basically trying to sell the prisons and the interstate toll road to business associates..
and the thing that bothers me the most is that we put more people in prison than any other country in the world (that gun thing is working out good for us, huh? we're all so much safer) - the vast majority are in for non-violent drug offenses..
somebody's got to make money on it.. that's what it's all about

Yeah. I understand there are deep seeded loop holes and a nearly unbreakable culture of gun ownership in the US. But I'm sorry... I've just never understood why the county as a whole can't see the blatant truth about your gun laws and act appropriately.

I'll admit australia is up there with the records for the biggest massacres, but they are few and far between, and we have made massive law changes since the worst of them. We aren't perfect, but count how many school yard massacres australia has had, scaled by the population. Compare this to the US and you can see there is something wrong. (though I've never done the math..I could be completely incorrect)

I have nothing against sensible and safe gun ownership laws...if there are such things.

There are and I think Australia has got it pretty much nailed.

Firearms are very dangerous tools designed for a very specific purpose, non-repeating rifles are designed for killing animals from a distance, this is a nessesary part of life or occupation for some members of the community so they are allowed a licence to possess them if they can prove their need. Hand guns are designed to kill humans (primarily), very few can provide jusificaton for this need therefore very few are licenced to possess them in our community.

Sounds like pretty sensible gun control laws to me at least.

less mustaches

+1

Guns don't cause any crimes I hope you truly don't believe this. In fact Australias crime rate has not decreased at any new rate since you have instuted very strict gun laws, and the U.S. crime rate has been on a decline since we have allowed right to carry laws in most states. I can't get over the fear of guns some people have, it is really ridiculous. Blaming a gun on crime is like blaming a spoon on obesity. It is beyond stupid.

As far as what happens in jail I don't give a damn. I wish we would issue them ropes so they could hang themselves if they wanted to. I truly don't care how crapy they have it in there. They got themselves in there. Sure there are some in there that commited no crime and for those I do feel bad. I also don't think drug should get you in prison, but that is beyond my control.

Sure looks like some of you have a problem with us over in the U.S. I always thought we where friends, but comments like above piss me off. I probably hate my government more than anyone on this site, but to knock Americans because of a few hundred politicians is stupid. I could point out lots about your country, but I will not.

And please explain to me how a gun law prevents a criminal from commiting a crime? Heck they get guns inside of prisons. Gun laws only restrict the law abiding citizen. Just because your countrymen have given up the means to protect yourselves does not mean we will. I will always have my guns.

Actually all of our crime rates have been on a huge decline since the mid 90's, where Australia has remained fairly consistent. Every possible crime rate has dropped, lots of them have actually been cut in half in the last decade.

This might sound odd coming out of a liberal like myself, but I do not believe in gun control. It is in our bill of rights for a valid reason. The bill of rights is built like a many walled fortress. The last and final wall to protect it's people from it's government is guns. It is not about household security, hunting, or just wanting to have them. It is about making sure that if the government gets out of hand that the people have recourse to protect themselves from it. Unfortunately, the gun laws that exist create an inadequacy between the population and government, so we are kind of screwed if the fit really hits the shan. Should an individual be allowed to own a bazooka? If their government can own them, than yes. During our revolution, individuals owned cannons. The right to bear arms has become the right to bear some arms, but not as much as the bill of rights intended.

Can't outlaw guns here in the us. Only law-abiding citizens would hand them over....leaving only bad guys with guns. No thank you. The War on Drugs has really knocked out drug use, right?? Nope. A War on guns would do nothing but keep the honest unarmed and make them much easier targets for the criminally minded.

Yes we Aussies have nailed it, as a private citizen you are controlled like hell and told what you can own and buy. Meanwhile all the gangs and criminals have as many guns of different calibare and automatic as they want.

Yes we have nailed our foot and rights to the bl..dy floor to get trambled by the goverments and the crims.

I don't agree with the assumption that restricted gun laws will only put law biding citizens at a disadvantage. You are assuming I am only talking a bout control on a per person level. We has laws effecting import and transportation.

The harder you make anything to acquire and move around the harder you will make it for everyone.

I also go back to my point on school yard killings...yep.... those criminals are definitely in a position to be getting their hands on gun even under stricter gun laws. What about that guy shot at the corner buy a junkie with barely any cash, resources, or skills to acquire a gun in advanced through organized crime networks. I'm have no hard facts on your gun crime rates but I bet a large portion of them are committed by people who are not in a position to get the guns after such laws are past.

Organized criminals are not going to sell guns to these people willy nilly, as these people are likely to get caught, and hence increase the chances of the crime gang being caught. And really.... Do the big gangs really give crap about robbing you on the corner, robbing the local liqure shop, or killing a bunch of shook kids? I doubt it.

I have no reply to Ron, he has a valid point to some extent. But I really think that level of paranoir by a civilized society is realy doing them less favours than they think. What are the odds that the govenement will turn in a snap instance like that? Disadvantages outweighs advantages in my view.

I don't live in discomfort wearing a cup, full body armor, and a helmet just incase I fall off a roof. The odds of it happening are just too slim to justify the stupidity of preparing for it.

Go to Surfers Paradise on a Weekend, $500 for a handgun and they do not care who they sell to. You see this on the news in Queensland often enougth.

Mean while my mate is fighting to keep his rifle which is used to kill the pigs raises.

It is rarely the junkies that have the guns. Common crack heads are not really that resourceful. I do not expect our government to turn snap in an instance. It knows we have guns.