British Prison Smoking Ban Riot Fears As 'Stability' Concerns Overshadow Health Implications

First topic message reminder :

Authorities in Australia thought they were "very ready" for a smoking ban to kick-in at a remand prison in the state of Victoria on July 1.
The ban came with 18-months notice and the government had worked with anti-smoking group Quit Victoria to tailor programs specifically for inmates. And it appeared to be working. On June 30, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation reported that just 10 percent of inmates would be going cold turkey when the ban came into force the following day. Previously, it was thought that 85 percent of them smoked, so if nothing else, before the ban even came into effect, authorities had cut smoking-rates by 75 percent. But that very day inmates at Ravenhall Prison chose a fitting way to let politicians in the nation's capital, Canberra, some 660km (410miles) away, know what they really thought of the ban - they sent a smoke signal. -Plumes of black smoke could be seen billowing from the correctional facility around midday, after fires were lit in cells, and outdoor wheelie bins were set ablaze. Two further fires were lit at the nearby Port Phillip Prison.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/07/27/riot-fears-over-uk-prison-smoking-ban_n_7879234.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

Very interesting article with lots to read.
Smoking is most definately a privilege for a prisoner and I am stunned they are still allowed to smoke inside their cells.
Like everyone else throughout the UK there should be smoking areas outside for them. That would be the best compremise, but am stunned they have smoking privileges over law abiding citizens.

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Are you in the right thread?

Yes very much so Rags, if you have no point then stop wasting my time, as I am bored with your inane disruptions

I've been very much on topic, but you seem to be drifting off at a tangent.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Yes very much so Rags, if you have no point then stop wasting my time, as I am bored with your inane disruptions

I've been very much on topic, but you seem to be drifting off at a tangent.

That is because you understand very little, because many things lead to criminal acts.
Its very much on topic and as per usual you are just posting crap/
If you have nothing to counter the points stop wastingg everyones time with drivel

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I've been very much on topic, but you seem to be drifting off at a tangent.

That is because you understand very little, because many things lead to criminal acts.
Its very much on topic and as per usual you are just posting crap/
If you have nothing to counter the points stop wastingg everyones time with drivel

Here "we" go with the "we" game again.

Perhaps you could be more specific about these criminal acts.

Also, who is being a hypocrite in this thread?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

That is because you understand very little, because many things lead to criminal acts.
Its very much on topic and as per usual you are just posting crap/
If you have nothing to counter the points stop wastingg everyones time with drivel

Here "we" go with the "we" game again.

Perhaps you could be more specific about these criminal acts.

How much more specific do you want to be with hate directed against groups of people that leads to violence?
Seriously how thick are you?

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Here "we" go with the "we" game again.

Perhaps you could be more specific about these criminal acts.

How much more specific do you want to be with hate directed against groups of people that leads to violence?
Seriously how thick are you?

Stop picking a fight Didge.

It is a crime in this country to incite people to violence by using hate speech, is it not?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

How much more specific do you want to be with hate directed against groups of people that leads to violence?
Seriously how thick are you?

Stop picking a fight Didge.

Its not a fight I am just going to take anymore nonsense from you anymore, debate the points, which you never did.
You jumped in being a complete twat yet again.
The point being made is people are getting away with inciting violence, now I know this maybe too much information for you to take on board, so allow the grown ups to talk about it.

Thanks

It's not necessarily individuals who are stigmatizing those who have been released from prison. If you have to declare a criminal record, that's down to the Government isn't it? Employers don't have to act upon that declaration in a negative way of course, but would they give a job minding children to someone who had been convicted of child abuse, for example? I don't think so.

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Stop picking a fight Didge.

Its not a fight I am just going to take anymore nonsense from you anymore, debate the points, which you never did.
You jumped in being a complete twat yet again.
The point being made is people are getting away with inciting violence, now I know this maybe too much information for you to take on board, so allow the grown ups to talk about it.

Thanks

I am debating the points, but you're so up your own arse and spoiling for a fight that you are ignoring them.

Raggamuffin wrote:It's not necessarily individuals who are stigmatizing those who have been released from prison. If you have to declare a criminal record, that's down to the Government isn't it? Employers don't have to act upon that declaration in a negative way of course, but would they give a job minding children to someone who had been convicted of child abuse, for example? I don't think so.

Its very much society and how they view people, that these stereotypes are formed, you see it daily here with how people are so judgmental.
There are specific crimes that will effect some being able to work in some industries that is a no brainer and not what is being talked about

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Its not a fight I am just going to take anymore nonsense from you anymore, debate the points, which you never did.
You jumped in being a complete twat yet again.
The point being made is people are getting away with inciting violence, now I know this maybe too much information for you to take on board, so allow the grown ups to talk about it.

Thanks

I am debating the points, but you're so up your own arse and spoiling for a fight that you are ignoring them.

Blah blah blah yes you are starved of attention
You jumped in stating I was on the wrong thread, spoiling for yet another spat as you always do, when my points had every relevance

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:It's not necessarily individuals who are stigmatizing those who have been released from prison. If you have to declare a criminal record, that's down to the Government isn't it? Employers don't have to act upon that declaration in a negative way of course, but would they give a job minding children to someone who had been convicted of child abuse, for example? I don't think so.

Its very much society and how they view people, that these stereotypes are formed, you see it daily here with how people are so judgmental.
There are specific crimes that will effect some being able to work in some industries that is a no brainer and not what is being talked about

I don't think everyone feels that way. I know people who have been in prison, and I don't hold that against them.

Why is it a no-brainer that some won't be able to work in particular industries? Are you suggesting that they will commit the same crime again and are not rehabilitated?

The problem is that a lot of people do re-offend, so that makes people naturally a bit wary. I don't know how you can tell who will and who won't - other than by talking to them and trying to work out if they're genuine or not.

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I am debating the points, but you're so up your own arse and spoiling for a fight that you are ignoring them.

Blah blah blah yes you are starved of attention
You jumped in stating I was on the wrong thread, spoiling for yet another spat as you always do, when my points had every relevance

Oh shut up, you vile creature. Perhaps you'd like to wait for Sassy to be online so you can pick a fight with her instead.

You were bleating on about Hamas and Muslims, etc - isn't there enough of that on here already?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:


Its very much society and how they view people, that these stereotypes are formed, you see it daily here with how people are so judgmental.
There are specific crimes that will effect some being able to work in some industries that is a no brainer and not what is being talked about

I don't think everyone feels that way. I know people who have been in prison, and I don't hold that against them.

Why is it a no-brainer that some won't be able to work in particular industries? Are you suggesting that they will commit the same crime again and are not rehabilitated?

The problem is that a lot of people do re-offend, so that makes people naturally a bit wary. I don't know how you can tell who will and who won't - other than by talking to them and trying to work out if they're genuine or not.

Its a no brainer because some crimes enforce an act like the sex register, because of the nature of the crime
Second just because you claim to be a certain way does not mean society as a whole is very judgmental onto people
You never even look to why some may re-offend, because of the lack of options that society provides them because they are stigmatized.
Cause and effect.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:


Blah blah blah yes you are starved of attention
You jumped in stating I was on the wrong thread, spoiling for yet another spat as you always do, when my points had every relevance

Oh shut up, you vile creature. Perhaps you'd like to wait for Sassy to be online so you can pick a fight with her instead.

You were bleating on about Hamas and Muslims, etc - isn't there enough of that on here already?

Going on about Hamas is a particular group of Muslims, not all Muslims and this group of Muslims wishes the annihilation of all Jews/
Which shows how utterly and incredibly stupid you are.
You came in and started the fight and never recognise when you do because you never see yourself do anything wrong, that is where your problems stem from and your need of constant attention.
My post had every relevance and yet you had to make a snide comments as per usual/
Grow the fuck up, I am bored with your attention seeking all the time and I will point it out everytime you are looking to shit stir as you do now

Debate the points or I will continue to show you up for the pathetic spoil brat that you are, as you clearly get off from all the attention

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I don't think everyone feels that way. I know people who have been in prison, and I don't hold that against them.

Why is it a no-brainer that some won't be able to work in particular industries? Are you suggesting that they will commit the same crime again and are not rehabilitated?

The problem is that a lot of people do re-offend, so that makes people naturally a bit wary. I don't know how you can tell who will and who won't - other than by talking to them and trying to work out if they're genuine or not.

Its a no brainer because some crimes enforce an act like the sex register, because of the nature of the crime
Second just because you claim to be a certain way does not mean society as a whole is very judgmental onto people
You never even look to why some may re-offend, because of the lack of options that society provides them because they are stigmatized.
Cause and effect.

So it been has decided that people on the sex register will not be able to get certain jobs. That's my point - the implication is that they will likely re-offend.

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Oh shut up, you vile creature. Perhaps you'd like to wait for Sassy to be online so you can pick a fight with her instead.

You were bleating on about Hamas and Muslims, etc - isn't there enough of that on here already?

Going on about Hamas is a particular group of Muslims, not all Muslims and this group of Muslims wishes the annihilation of all Jews/
Which shows how utterly and incredibly stupid you are.
You came in and started the fight and never recognise when you do because you never see yourself do anything wrong, that is where your problems stem from and your need of constant attention.
My post had every relevance and yet you had to make a snide comments as per usual/
Grow the fuck up, I am bored with your attention seeking all the time and I will point it out everytime you are looking to shit stir as you do now

Debate the points or I will continue to show you up for the pathetic spoil brat that you are, as you clearly get off from all the attention

And I will point out your vile, vulgar, obnoxious behaviour every time you display it. You grow up, learn some manners, and stop being such an arse.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Its a no brainer because some crimes enforce an act like the sex register, because of the nature of the crime
Second just because you claim to be a certain way does not mean society as a whole is very judgmental onto people
You never even look to why some may re-offend, because of the lack of options that society provides them because they are stigmatized.
Cause and effect.

So it been has decided that people on the sex register will not be able to get certain jobs. That's my point - the implication is that they will likely re-offend.

Its a no-brainer to ensure safety, as safety comes first, in regards to children, its part of looking to protect children even if that person may not offend, the rish is there that they might and so children will always have a need of protection. Children's rights will always supersede grown ups in regards to their well being,

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Going on about Hamas is a particular group of Muslims, not all Muslims and this group of Muslims wishes the annihilation of all Jews/
Which shows how utterly and incredibly stupid you are.
You came in and started the fight and never recognise when you do because you never see yourself do anything wrong, that is where your problems stem from and your need of constant attention.
My post had every relevance and yet you had to make a snide comments as per usual/
Grow the fuck up, I am bored with your attention seeking all the time and I will point it out everytime you are looking to shit stir as you do now

Debate the points or I will continue to show you up for the pathetic spoil brat that you are, as you clearly get off from all the attention

And I will point out your vile, vulgar, obnoxious behaviour every time you display it. You grow up, learn some manners, and stop being such an arse.

Yes \i will be even viler the more you continue to be a spoil brat, so now you know, best you shut the fuck up and get on with debating or I will make your time here as unpleasant as possible, its that simple, the ball is in your court to start acting with some maturity because I am sick to death of your attention seeking/ So think of me as a nasty ---- all you like, that is not going to save you when you act like a twat. Now you have been warned.

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

So it been has decided that people on the sex register will not be able to get certain jobs. That's my point - the implication is that they will likely re-offend.

Its a no-brainer to ensure safety, as safety comes first, in regards to children, its part of looking to protect children even if that person may not offend, the rish is there that they might and so children will always have a need of protection. Children's rights will always supersede grown ups in regards to their well being,

But you object to the same principle being applied for other crimes. You don't want to be judged on your past crime and the fact you went to prison, but you think that it's OK for others to be judged.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Its a no-brainer to ensure safety, as safety comes first, in regards to children, its part of looking to protect children even if that person may not offend, the rish is there that they might and so children will always have a need of protection. Children's rights will always supersede grown ups in regards to their well being,

But you object to the same principle being applied for other crimes. You don't want to be judged on your past crime and the fact you went to prison, but you think that it's OK for others to be judged.

Really when we are talking about children where rightly exceptions will be made, being the point children need to have more rights to protect them, or did that go above your head?

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

And I will point out your vile, vulgar, obnoxious behaviour every time you display it. You grow up, learn some manners, and stop being such an arse.

Yes \i will be even viler the more you continue to be a spoil brat, so now you know, best you shut the fuck up and get on with debating or I will make your time here as unpleasant as possible, its that simple, the ball is in your court to start acting with some maturity because I am sick to death of your attention seeking/ So think of me as a nasty ---- all you like, that is not going to save you when you act like a twat. Now you have been warned.

You complained that you are being judged for your past crime. Well now I see why - you're still a thug, only you have to be satisfied with being one on a forum instead.

Don't bother to threaten me - I'm not some wilting violet who is intimidated by thugs like you.

Its not about me judging but the protection of children, showing how utterly removed you are from understanding anything.

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

But you object to the same principle being applied for other crimes. You don't want to be judged on your past crime and the fact you went to prison, but you think that it's OK for others to be judged.

Really when we are talking about children where rightly exceptions will be made, being the point children need to have more rights to protect them, or did that go above your head?

A risk is a risk. There's a risk that you might still beat someone up.

Cuchulain wrote:Its not about me judging but the protection of children, showing how utterly removed you are from understanding anything.

So you think that ex-prisoners are not rehabilitated then. You're going against your own argument.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Yes \i will be even viler the more you continue to be a spoil brat, so now you know, best you shut the fuck up and get on with debating or I will make your time here as unpleasant as possible, its that simple, the ball is in your court to start acting with some maturity because I am sick to death of your attention seeking/ So think of me as a nasty ---- all you like, that is not going to save you when you act like a twat. Now you have been warned.

You complained that you are being judged for your past crime. Well now I see why - you're still a thug, only you have to be satisfied with being one on a forum instead.

Don't bother to threaten me - I'm not some wilting violet who is intimidated by thugs like you.

Yeah I am a thug to those who are nasty vile creatures who get off on starting fights because they are starved of attention.
You just prove that you do judge and that you are in fact a hypocritical twat after all then.
Its not a threat but a promise, which you fail to grasps mainly because you are as thick as shit

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:Its not about me judging but the protection of children, showing how utterly removed you are from understanding anything.

So you think that ex-prisoners are not rehabilitated then. You're going against your own argument.

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights?

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You complained that you are being judged for your past crime. Well now I see why - you're still a thug, only you have to be satisfied with being one on a forum instead.

Don't bother to threaten me - I'm not some wilting violet who is intimidated by thugs like you.

Yeah I am a thug to those who are nasty vile creatures who get off on starting fights because they are starved of attention.
You just prove that you do judge and that you are in fact a hypocritical twat after all then.
Its not a threat but a promise, which you fail to grasps mainly because you are as thick as shit

Awwww, a promise eh? Do your best, but you will fail. Perhaps you will take out your temper on a helpless person in the street instead.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Yeah I am a thug to those who are nasty vile creatures who get off on starting fights because they are starved of attention.
You just prove that you do judge and that you are in fact a hypocritical twat after all then.
Its not a threat but a promise, which you fail to grasps mainly because you are as thick as shit

Awwww, a promise eh? Do your best, but you will fail. Perhaps you will take out your temper on a helpless person in the street instead.

|It will be my pleasure as you seem to think I am a thug. So I am going to centre my attention onto you until you learn some manners and civility/ The sad fact is you crave attention, and its pathetic

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

So you think that ex-prisoners are not rehabilitated then. You're going against your own argument.

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights?

So you think that rehabilitation doesn't mean someone won't offend again. Why then are you so keen for people to give you another chance?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights?

So you think that rehabilitation doesn't mean someone won't offend again. Why then are you so keen for people to give you another chance?

That did not answer my question:

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Awwww, a promise eh? Do your best, but you will fail. Perhaps you will take out your temper on a helpless person in the street instead.

|It will be my pleasure as you seem to think I am a thug. So I am going to centre my attention onto you until you learn some manners and civility/ The sad fact is you crave attention, and its pathetic

Oooooh, are you going chase me around the forum posting furiously at me?

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

So you think that rehabilitation doesn't mean someone won't offend again. Why then are you so keen for people to give you another chance?

That did not answer my question:

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights

So to you, rehabilitation doesn't mean that someone won't re-offend? I presume they thought you wouldn't.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

|It will be my pleasure as you seem to think I am a thug. So I am going to centre my attention onto you until you learn some manners and civility/ The sad fact is you crave attention, and its pathetic

Oooooh, are you going chase me around the forum posting furiously at me?

Thank you for proving my point you are only here to disrupt, well I can be 1000 times worse so best you change or get used to it

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

That did not answer my question:

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights

So to you, rehabilitation doesn't mean that someone won't re-offend? I presume they thought you wouldn't.

Never claimed anything, I asked which you have not answered:

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Oooooh, are you going chase me around the forum posting furiously at me?

Thank you for proving my point you are only here to disrupt, well I can be 1000 times worse so best you change or get used to it

I'm not going to change to please thugs like you. You'd better just accept that.

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

So to you, rehabilitation doesn't mean that someone won't re-offend? I presume they thought you wouldn't.

Never claimed anything, I asked which you have not answered:

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights

Answer my question.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Thank you for proving my point you are only here to disrupt, well I can be 1000 times worse so best you change or get used to it

I'm not going to change to please thugs like you. You'd better just accept that.

Then you are going to suffer the consequences for your actions/
People like you will only learn the hard way it seems

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Never claimed anything, I asked which you have not answered:

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights

Answer my question.

Try again

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights?

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Answer my question.

Try again

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights?

Answer my question.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Try again

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights?

Answer my question.

When you have answered mine which at every step you have avoided:

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I'm not going to change to please thugs like you. You'd better just accept that.

Then you are going to suffer the consequences for your actions/
People like you will only learn the hard way it seems

I won't suffer at all, I'll just laugh at your pathetic attempts to disrupt this forum by chasing me around.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Then you are going to suffer the consequences for your actions/
People like you will only learn the hard way it seems

I won't suffer at all, I'll just laugh at your pathetic attempts to disrupt this forum by chasing me around.

Its already working by your replies
That is why you are not so bright

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Answer my question.

When you have answered mine which at every step you have avoided:

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights

Answer my question.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

When you have answered mine which at every step you have avoided:

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights

Answer my question.

Try again

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights?

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I won't suffer at all, I'll just laugh at your pathetic attempts to disrupt this forum by chasing me around.

Its already working by your replies
That is why you are not so bright

You're the one in a temper Didge. I'm laughing at you.

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Answer my question.

Try again

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights?

Answer my question.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Try again

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights?

Answer my question.

Still no answer

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights?

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Answer my question.

Still no answer

This is why you are so thick, what has rehabilitation got to do with protecting children s rights?

I was done and served six months for the stupidity of footie violence

Are you proud of that Didge?