Ethical question - how do you feel about second chance??

Criminal behavior? It all depends on the offence, doesnt it? Stealing a slab of beef and getting put in prison is not the same as raping a child and getting a second chance. Your comparisons are not compatiblè.

Galaxy

Certainly when my children were young, I did not allow them to go to a house where there was a variety of criminal behaviour, the child was very welcome at our house.
In terms of child abuse material , they will offend again.

That’s simply common sense and being a good parent, I would have done the same.

foxie48

I totally agree Gwyllt prison is the punishment and offenders deserve a chance to get on with their lives and put their crime behind them. There are checks in place to ensure that sex offenders are not employed in certain roles or have easy access to children etc and I think we should also give them a chance of restitution. I listened to a radio programme recently about the work that is being done with sex offenders and it was helpful to me hearing their stories. Many sex offenders have been abused themselves as children.

👍👍👏👏👏👏👏

I've no problem at all with being served by an ex offender in a shop.

I've always been pleased with any purchases and the service received in Timpson shops. The male staff are not young and are usually cheerful and friendly.

The Timpson family are imo, too. E thanked and admired for their commitment to supporting vulnerable people. As well as their stores where ex offenders are employed, they fostered many children. The care they gave was excellent. Mts Timpson was also compassionate and avoiding judgement of the birth mothers

lixy

A friend of mine has been a prison visitor for many years, and consequently I have met people who have been released.

I agree that a second chance is a good thing but it needs to be properly supported in a positive way. Too often people arrive out of gaol to find their world is upside-down, even after a shortish sentence.

I always use Timpsons for watch repairs and keys for that very reason. They actively support ex-offenders.

stopped using Timpsons for keys years ago because of that very reason. Plus they started taking the Mickey big time on prices.

Saw the boss of Timpsons being interviewed on our local TV news.
He seemed to think the ex Cocaine Dealers were the best employees..
They had thee right attributes

Make of that what you will.

MissAdventure

I believe we all have boundaries that we'd be unwilling or unble to put to one side.

For dog lovers, would you be happy for someone who had tortured their dog to death to look after yours for a weekend?

If not, why?

I believe we all have boundaries that we'd be unwilling or unble to put to one side.

I think that's true Miss A.

Torturers and rapists - especially those who hurt and abuse babies and children... yes, and animals - are not those I would willingly interact with.

I do believe it's worth attempting to rehabilitate them via whatever systems and programmes exist (of which I admit I no zilch), but I don't want to be a part of their community. I might have been, without knowing it, but that's a different argument.

Selfish? Yes, of course. I might be influenced by the TV programme I watched recently. I can't recall the name, Louis Theroux was investigating the case of a girl abducted and repeatedly raped and abused. The utter depravity of these men, not to mention the effect it had on those investigating, is something that I can't forget and it still lingers in my mind.

I don't pretend to have the answers to the question(s) of how these men - and it is mostly men - are integrated back into society. There may be exceptions, but I'm not sure they can ever be rehabilitated into 'normal' society, rather any real remorse would compel them to some form of atonement. I don't know, I just know I don't want to be any part of their world, these men fill me with awful dread and fear.

I think everyone needs to know they have a second chance. But some need greater supervision and support and rehabilitation. Sadly this is lacking in prisons and after release.

If people draw the line, though, that means they are judging.
Just deciding whoch crimes are forgivable and which are not.

I definitely wouldn't judge someone in the fact they'd just got out of prison, although I draw the line at sex offenders of any kind. People end up in prison for lots of reasons and they've done their tone. I'd judge them in their current and future behaviour.

I believe we all have boundaries that we'd be unwilling or unble to put to one side.

For dog lovers, would you be happy for someone who had tortured their dog to death to look after yours for a weekend?

If not, why?

If any of you went to see the play “ Punch” you would recognise that a second chance can be very beneficial to the community.
Or how Jimmy Boyle turned his life around after completing his sentence and has written astounding plays.

People need to be given a chance to build back up their life after a prison sentence. After all they’ve done their time. You have no idea of everyone you meets past so they shouldn’t be judged on past misdemeanours.

If we don't give all ex-prisoners a chance to rehabilitate themselves, with help, then we need the Isle of Wight to become a penalty colony. We must allow people who have served their sentences a way back to communities.

In the age of social media, it is now far harder for offenders to move to another area and go unrecognised, I would say - especially when it comes to crimes such as rape or child abuse. There are groups which focus on exposing these people.

AuntieE, thank you - what you have written is very much how I feel.
If people who have committed serious crimes come out of prison and return to the same area in which they were originally - and then try to join social groups - someone is likely to recognise them.

I think many of such offenders do move well away from their original areas, and - obviously - it is therefore highly unlikely that someone will know who they are or the crime they committed.

Perhaps it 'arrogance' of someone, who comes out prison, having served their sentence (which many consider was too short), and then within the matter of months try to join local groups, that really can offend people

Perhaps we should stop to consider that the entire principle behind punishing crimes is to stop them re-occurring and to punish the criminal. Once a person has served his or her sentence, he or she re-enters society and is deemed to have atoned for their offence.

This is the theory, and abiding by this, obviously, if we know the person's history we should try to forget it, and treat them as we treat any others we meet.

I realise that there is a great gap between theory and practise, in that not all who serve a prison sentence have to use a very old-fashioned term "seen the error of their ways".

However, if law-abiding people ostracize those who have been found guilty of an offence and served their term, when they are returned to society, we surely leave them little choice but to continue to be around former criminals, or those still living by crime.

So, to me it seems only fair that we should try to treat people as we find them, We all have acquaintances who never become more than that, and some whom we drop quickly because we do not feel any desire for their company. This must surely apply to those who have a murky past as well as to the blameless.

Personally, I would reserve the right not to try to get to know someone who had abused a child, or committed rape or murder or any other atrocity. But I cannot rule out the possiblity that I, unknown to myself , have been in contact with those who have done these things.

So surely the way forward is to take people at their own evaluation - do any of us tell a casual acquaintance all the details of our past, or indeed or present?

I have never been in conflict with the law, but I do not go around telling people whom I voted for in the last general election, the intimate details of my life. or that I am a regular church-goer. This being so, I can hardly expect a new member of say a book club to announce that he has just been released from Barlinnie!

Isn't that what Timpsons do? 10% of their workforce are ex-cons and the success rate is very good.

Even with sex and/or violence, dependng on the nature and extent of the crime, I might be willing to do so.

How can we expect people who have committed crimes not to reoffend if we do not take them back into society.

the people they killed dont get a second chance, life should mean life

Cardamom

^Were both those laws bought in after lobbying from the victims' familes?^

Yes MissAdventure; Sarah's Law was introduced in 2000, following the abduction and murder of little Sarah Payne, by convicted paedophile Roy Whiting.
Clare's Law was set up after Clare Wood was murdered and set on fire by George Appleton in 2009.

Thank you.
I would not be around those errrm "people".
Perhaps they can see the error of their ways, be rehabilitated, but I would choose to leave rather than be in their company.

Gran22boys

Everyone can make mistakes and should be given a second chance. But not if the offence was violent.

This... you just wouldn't know.

NotSpaghetti

How would you know Gran22boys?

Presumably if (say) Jaxjacky's friend's son was there you wouldn't know?

Wouldn’t know what?

I’ve worked with juvenile and adult offenders, some of whom responded positively and went on to live good lives. Yes to second chances, more for some

I’d never trust a sex offender. Sexual attraction to children doesn’t go away. Men who are violent including sexual violence rarely truly rehabilitate. There are always exceptions. I know of one who killed his wife, was not imprisoned and went on to remarry happily and bring up two lovely children

However if people aren’t given a second chance what does the future hold for then and society ?

In the cases of paedophilia, child sex abuse, child murder and rape, it holds a safer, better future for children and society. As for the perpetrators of those crimes; frankly, they can rot in hell as far as I’m concerned.