Serious sexual and violent offenders should be legally confined to specific areas after release from prison

I think this is so the victim has more freedom than the offender. It currently stands that he can't go to a limited number of places (her town, for example) but can go anywhere else. She will worry if she leaves her town.

The restrictions are playing catch up with technology, he can online stalk, find where she holidays, who she visits outside the town etc. then comes the process of adding restrictions.

If he was only allowed in one county, then she could relax and just not go to that county.

He'd be able to change area if he got a job, probably, with limitations and theres no suggestion of putting them all in one place.

This. It'll also be impossible to police.

No I don’t think that’s the case. I could be wrong though.

I heard a woman interviewed about this. She’d been a victim and when her attacker was released, he wasn’t allowed to be in her county (I think) so she felt trapped in that county. She was arguing it should be the other way round - ie he should be restricted to one or two counties and she should be free to go everywhere else, knowing she wouldn’t see him. But it wouldn’t be like they are all put in the same place.

Nightingale courts. Nightingale hospitals. Now Nightingale prisons.

Done

I agree, and very apt comparison. What about the women and children who already live in these places?

If they’re considered dangerous still then just keep these criminals locked up fgs.

So the essay will become “you meet more rapists when you’re poor”?

Fucking hell.
4w.pub/you-meet-more-perverts-when-poor/

Wouldn’t this run the risk of creating areas where property is so devalued that it becomes the only place where particularly vulnerable low income women are able to live thereby forcing the more vulnerable into more dangerous living conditions?

Im thinking of things like what they tried in Holbeck, Leeds where they essentially enabled prostitution and every woman and girl in the area became a target.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-54819248

The obsession will be with the fact that our prisons are failing due to chronic underinvestment over many governments for decades, along with many other aspects of the criminal justice system (courts, probation service). There is no money to increase resources or capacity so they are trying to “ease” use instead.

https://news.sky.com/story/prison-system-came-within-days-of-collapse-and-not-just-once-13406971

This makes little sense to me.

My understanding is there might be be designated roads or HMOs or assisted living places for these men to live? Surely it will just cause worry for those who already live nearby, how are they going to feel comfortable living or raising children in close proximity to these designated areas?

It will basically bring the area down, in that decent people will move away. The area might increase in crime as a result of having a disproportionate amount of offenders living there

Agree with this. What’s the obsession with releasing men who’ve broken the social contract anyway? Lock them up for much, much longer.

Surely if people are considered to be a risk they shouldn't be released, and if they are released then they should have freedom. This seems like it could potentially be a very slippery slope?

How would that work if the offender gets a job? Or gets a hospital appointment out of zone? There are systems like this in the USA where offenders end up living in tent camps under the motorway flyover with no access to jobs of healthcare because they can’t legally live in towns. And that seems crazy.