We do not know the percentage of recidivism (the incarcerated persons released into the general populace committing fresh crimes); but the larger point is the tone set from the get-go.
Hoyte was the anti-Burnham regarding the kick-down-the-door banditry. He ordered the TSU (the famed Black Clothes police/para-military) to shoot on site (okay not de jure but de facto).
The Interior Minister (Ramjattan) is responsible for the larger law and order situation and is an important cog in the anti-crime efforts. Even if measures are being taken to strengthen security, the message has to be loud and clear. (Oh gaddo-laaad here comes Nehru with his house slaves nonsense).
were i David Granger, i would not have done what he did at the time
much of what this man does, when he does it, and what he does not do, still puzzles me
however, let me be clear . . . there is no evidence - NONE - that any of those released had been or currently are a danger to society
David Granger is well known as a disciplined Law and Order military man
please be clear what exactly is this (implied) bad "tone" you are talking about
But the message was wrong to the criminal enterprise as a whole. Those individuals may not represent a mortal risk but unconditional release sends a wrong message in general.
Baseman was one who was in favor of some leniency for youthful petty criminals however, I was clear, any amnesty must be conditional with specific obligations and strict monitoring for compliance over a set period.
nonsense!
you can make your sensible latter points without resort to this petty foolishness
Prove me wrong!
why is that my freakin responsibility?
i already told u that u and Ksazma are shitting self-evident nonsense
y'all 2 are not that important that i need to risk spelunking up your stinking ass to point out disease