Scottish Prison Service orders 1600 LCD TVs for it's prisoners - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

Scottish Prison Service orders 1600 LCD TVs for it's prisoners

schizoboy Avatar
6y, 3w agoPosted 6 years, 3 weeks ago
To meet energy saving targets... those damn CRTs.....
Shouldn't prisoners be rehabilitating in prison?
Learning/Studying (Criminality BSc etc)
What would happen if they had NO TVs and did some reading instead? lol

If the prisoners worked to pay for them.... I might not care.
Why is it so horrific to suggest prisons be self sustaining cost wise?
Someone tell me...
Tags:
schizoboy Avatar
6y, 3w agoPosted 6 years, 3 weeks ago
Options

All Comments

(63) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
#2
Isn't in the Bill of Human Rights that they are able to view Eastenders in luxurious WideScreen?
#3
Can't see a problem here...
"the TV sets would not cost the taxpayer any money as prisoners were charged for television access."

Hope they don't forget quidco though!
banned#4
Carley
Can't see a problem here...
"the TV sets would not cost the taxpayer any money as prisoners were charged for television access."

Hope they don't forget quidco though!

thats BS as they have TVs already so they have to fork out for new ones.
#5
csiman
Carley
Can't see a problem here...
"the TV sets would not cost the taxpayer any money as prisoners were charged for television access."

Hope they don't forget quidco though!

thats BS as they have TVs already so they have to fork out for new ones.


The spokesman added: "Prisoners are charged £1 per week for televisions and we have around 7,800 prisoners at the moment. There is, therefore, no cost to the taxpayer.
1 Like #6
Who pays the prisoners wages though?
banned#7
Carley
csiman
Carley
Can't see a problem here...
"the TV sets would not cost the taxpayer any money as prisoners were charged for television access."

Hope they don't forget quidco though!

thats BS as they have TVs already so they have to fork out for new ones.


The spokesman added: "Prisoners are charged £1 per week for televisions and we have around 7,800 prisoners at the moment. There is, therefore, no cost to the taxpayer.

eh? tvs are ALREADY in place and prisoners pay for them. Replacement TVs are being paid for by the taxpayer. Its pulling the wool over some peoples eyes to say the prisoners pay as they get charged. They would still have got charged with the old tvs.

Dont know how you cant see that!
#8
£52/year, for a TV that costs what £100? ongoing electrical costs... etc

Again I ask, why do prisoners have TV?

It's inevitable that'll translate to computer/internet access in time which would be even worse.
1 Like #9
Hospital patients are charged £7 per day
#10
The tv's have been there since 1999,
£1 per week x 7,800 prisoners = £405,600 per year
£4,461,600 over 11 years, should be just about enough to cover 1,600 new tv's
#11
It's probably needed as their blu ray players will look so much better then.

Disgusting really when you think there are decent working families paying all their dues who can't afford one.
#12
greg_68
It's probably needed as their blu ray players will look so much better then.

Disgusting really when you think there are decent working families paying all their dues who can't afford one.


I doubt any working family can't afford a TV?
banned#13
schizoboy
£52/year, for a TV that costs what £100? ongoing electrical costs... etc

Again I ask, why do prisoners have TV?

It's inevitable that'll translate to computer/internet access in time which would be even worse.


to give the prison service an element of control.
I suppose paying for extra prison officers would be much cheaper....oh wait...
banned#14
greg_68
It's probably needed as their blu ray players will look so much better then.

Disgusting really when you think there are decent working families paying all their dues who can't afford one.


really? I don't know a single person who doesn't have a tv, how many do you know?
#15
Carley
greg_68
It's probably needed as their blu ray players will look so much better then.

Disgusting really when you think there are decent working families paying all their dues who can't afford one.


I doubt any working family can't afford a TV?


Then you are either very stupid or very naive to think that there are not working families out there that cannot afford a brand new LCD tv.
#16
colinsunderland
greg_68
It's probably needed as their blu ray players will look so much better then.

Disgusting really when you think there are decent working families paying all their dues who can't afford one.


really? I don't know a single person who doesn't have a tv, how many do you know?


I didn't say who haven't got a tv, I said who can't afford to upgrade to an LCD.
banned 1 Like #17
Carley
The tv's have been there since 1999,
£1 per week x 7,800 prisoners = £405,600 per year
£4,461,600 over 11 years, should be just about enough to cover 1,600 new tv's

then subtract the electricity costs of a tv on 16 hours a day 365 days a year lol

so I guess they have got a point in replacing them if it brings the electric down :)
#18
greg_68
Then you are very stupid or very naive to think that every working family can afford a brand new LCD tv.


If there is a working family in the UK who cant afford a TV then they're the stupid ones.
#19
Don't forget the cost of the anti ligature damageproof cabinet for every tv as well!
#20
Carley
If there is a working family in the UK who cant afford a TV then they're the stupid ones.
well that's me told then and my crt tv.
#21
boydent999
Carley
If there is a working family in the UK who cant afford a TV then they're the stupid ones.
well that's me told then and my crt tv.


There is a difference between not having one and not being able to afford one (or wanting to buy one, some people prefer CRT's) I'm sure if you wanted to you could afford to buy a 19" LCD tv, available for less than £100 from any high street / online merchant.
1 Like #22
Carley
There is a difference between not having one and not being able to afford one (or wanting to buy one, some people prefer CRT's) I'm sure if you wanted to you could afford to buy a 19" LCD tv, available for less than £100 from any high street / online merchant.
Is that cos i'm not stupid then or cos you know and understand my finances better than i do?
You cannot label someone stupid for not being able to spend £100 of their cash, it is a gross generalisation. Actually, calling anyone stupid isn't the nicest thing really is it now?
banned#23
greg_68
Carley
greg_68
It's probably needed as their blu ray players will look so much better then.

Disgusting really when you think there are decent working families paying all their dues who can't afford one.


I doubt any working family can't afford a TV?


Then you are either very stupid or very naive to think that there are not working families out there that cannot afford a brand new LCD tv.


They should work harder then.

If you accept that prisoners should have access to television so they can keep up with 'culture' as they will eventually be released, then I don't really see the issue if it doesn't cost us anything and is just a 'green' move.
banned#24
boydent999
Carley
There is a difference between not having one and not being able to afford one (or wanting to buy one, some people prefer CRT's) I'm sure if you wanted to you could afford to buy a 19" LCD tv, available for less than £100 from any high street / online merchant.
Is that cos i'm not stupid then or cos you know and understand my finances better than i do?
You cannot label someone stupid for not being able to spend £100 of their cash, it is a gross generalisation. Actually, calling anyone stupid isn't the nicest thing really is it now?


I think he meant to say that in the marketplace of work, your skills aren't commensurate with earning a wage that would provide you with the disposable income needed to purchase a new tv.

Feel better now?
#25
boydent999
Is that cos i'm not stupid then or cos you know and understand my finances better than i do?
You cannot label someone stupid for not being able to spend £100 of their cash, it is a gross generalisation.


I can label someone stupid for not being able to manage their finances to the tune of £2 a week over a year.
#26
FilthAndFurry
I think he meant to say that in the marketplace of work, your skills aren't commensurate with earning a wage that would provide you with the disposable income needed to purchase a new tv.

Feel better now?
I am thinking you could have let the person I questioned answer for themselves but since you felt obliged to answer for them......what skills i have and the line of work i do, are not entirely mutually exclusive but it is not what i trained for. However, since, given the employment market right now, it seems better to have a less paid job that what i had before, than to have a job at all. In the current climate, i feel both lucky and privileged to have a job, as should anyone else.
My skills are not up for debate here, my reply was based on how someone on here, can call someone "stupid" for being unable to finance a £100 television without knowing the in and outs of the entire UK workforce, which, was how the post could be interpreted.........

Carley
I can label someone stupid for not being able to manage their finances to the tune of £2 a week over a year.

But why do you feel the need to? Does that make you feel better as a person, make you say, well done me today? Why not be like other's and give said £2 away to a charity of something more important than one's self? Perhaps buy yourself a feel good book, or, a how to be civilised and not resort to calling someone stupid?


Edited By: boydent999 on Nov 13, 2010 10:57
banned#27
boydent999
Carley
There is a difference between not having one and not being able to afford one (or wanting to buy one, some people prefer CRT's) I'm sure if you wanted to you could afford to buy a 19" LCD tv, available for less than £100 from any high street / online merchant.
Is that cos i'm not stupid then or cos you know and understand my finances better than i do?
You cannot label someone stupid for not being able to spend £100 of their cash, it is a gross generalisation. Actually, calling anyone stupid isn't the nicest thing really is it now?


But if you had a tv that you had paid £50 for 11 years ago, and had rented it out every week for £1, you would have £572, out of which I am sure you could afford to spend £70/£80 on a new set that would save money on electric, and generate the same level of income over the next 10 years.
Add to that the fact that the tv's help to keep good order, then the savings are even more obvious.

Edited By: colinsunderland on Nov 13, 2010 10:59
#28
Should we not be blaming the government's energy department, afterall they're doing it to reduce emissions in line with their recommendations ........
#29
@colin, not sure why the posts you quoted were quoted but does make sense what you posted. Simple economics show a very healthy return on outlay......
banned#30
sorry I'm at work using a laptop that I spilt a cup of coffee on, barely works and quoted the wrong posts lol
Was just to illustrate its not black and white that prisoners shouldn't have tvs cos it costs taxpayers money
#31
No worries :)
Made me smile your choice of words. Imagine the outrage if prisoner's had black and white TV's?
#32
boydent999
But why do you feel the need to? Does that make you feel better as a person, make you say, well done me today? Why not be like other's and give said £2 away to a charity of something more important than one's self? Perhaps buy yourself a feel good book, or, a how to be civilised and not resort to calling someone stupid?


The word was originally in reply to @greg_68 who labelled me stupid for thinking that any working person in the uk could afford a £100 tv set if they wanted too, but you seemed to have jumped on the word and are blowing it out of all context, maybe my choice word would have been more empathic? fact is i don't know of any person, working or not that can't afford to spend £100 on a tv, whether they spend that money in other outlets is their choice but they can all afford to spend £100 if they wanted too.
#33
schizoboy
£52/year, for a TV that costs what £100? ongoing electrical costs... etc

Again I ask, why do prisoners have TV?

It's inevitable that'll translate to computer/internet access in time which would be even worse.


Why shouldnt they? You would have to be an idiot to just throw your authoritah around and say "these people are bad, lets give them zero rights" not thinking about the main reason they are in there for rehabilitation and that certain things are needed as a reward for hard work and good behaviour inside and can be taken away for bad behaviour.

I suppose you are one of the people who believes all the stupid media hype that prisons are luxurious and prisoners eat slap up meals and amazing facilities, when that isnt the case.
#34
Carley
The word was originally in reply to @greg_68 who labelled me stupid for thinking that any working person in the uk could afford a £100 tv set if they wanted too, but you seemed to have jumped on the word and are blowing it out of all context, maybe my choice word would have been more empathic? fact is i don't know of any person, working or not that can't afford to spend £100 on a tv, whether they spend that money in other outlets is their choice but they can all afford to spend £100 if they wanted too.
That's fair enough, you don't know of any person etc etc, doesn't mean those folks do not exist does it? It's very insular to try and suggest that everyone can afford it, do you not seem what i mean? If you don't, fair enough and i can accept that you can't but there are folks, working or not, who do not have the money, due to no fault of their own alas.
#35
ryouga
schizoboy
£52/year, for a TV that costs what £100? ongoing electrical costs... etc

Again I ask, why do prisoners have TV?

It's inevitable that'll translate to computer/internet access in time which would be even worse.


Why shouldnt they? You would have to be an idiot to just throw your authoritah around and say "these people are bad, lets give them zero rights" not thinking about the main reason they are in there for rehabilitation and that certain things are needed as a reward for hard work and good behaviour inside and can be taken away for bad behaviour.

I suppose you are one of the people who believes all the stupid media hype that prisons are luxurious and prisoners eat slap up meals and amazing facilities, when that isnt the case.


I never said I disagreed with it, but for all prisoners to have it I'm afraid I do, as I agree with your premise, well behaved rewarded prisoners should get a TV, so long as it's not out of the taxpayers pocket, but to give all prisoners carte blanche benefits such as a TV, sorry I don't.

Also I would rather more prisoners meet, apologise and pay compensation to their victims than get new TVs.

I wonder if ex cons should be burdened with the cost of their imprisonment just as students are burdened with loans etc.

Seems to be the other side of the coin?
#36
ryouga
schizoboy
£52/year, for a TV that costs what £100? ongoing electrical costs... etc

Again I ask, why do prisoners have TV?

It's inevitable that'll translate to computer/internet access in time which would be even worse.


Why shouldnt they? You would have to be an idiot to just throw your authoritah around and say "these people are bad, lets give them zero rights" not thinking about the main reason they are in there for rehabilitation and that certain things are needed as a reward for hard work and good behaviour inside and can be taken away for bad behaviour.

I suppose you are one of the people who believes all the stupid media hype that prisons are luxurious and prisoners eat slap up meals and amazing facilities, when that isnt the case.


They are luxurious conditions in comparison to what I would give them, Straw on the floor and chained to the wall broken up with periods of hard labor and meals of gruel.
Or if that is deemed to harsh, privatise the prison service to the Thais, they know how to treat the turds of society.
banned#37
schizoboy


I never said I disagreed with it, but for all prisoners to have it I'm afraid I do, as I agree with your premise, well behaved rewarded prisoners should get a TV, so long as it's not out of the taxpayers pocket, but to give all prisoners carte blanche benefits such as a TV, sorry I don't.

Also I would rather more prisoners meet, apologise and pay compensation to their victims than get new TVs.

I wonder if ex cons should be burdened with the cost of their imprisonment just as students are burdened with loans etc.

Seems to be the other side of the coin?


all prisoners don't have tv's, they are supplied as part of the IEPS in prisons
#38
schizoboy
ryouga
schizoboy
£52/year, for a TV that costs what £100? ongoing electrical costs... etc

Again I ask, why do prisoners have TV?

It's inevitable that'll translate to computer/internet access in time which would be even worse.


Why shouldnt they? You would have to be an idiot to just throw your authoritah around and say "these people are bad, lets give them zero rights" not thinking about the main reason they are in there for rehabilitation and that certain things are needed as a reward for hard work and good behaviour inside and can be taken away for bad behaviour.

I suppose you are one of the people who believes all the stupid media hype that prisons are luxurious and prisoners eat slap up meals and amazing facilities, when that isnt the case.


I never said I disagreed with it, but for all prisoners to have it I'm afraid I do, as I agree with your premise, well behaved rewarded prisoners should get a TV, so long as it's not out of the taxpayers pocket, but to give all prisoners carte blanche benefits such as a TV, sorry I don't.

Also I would rather more prisoners meet, apologise and pay compensation to their victims than get new TVs.

I wonder if ex cons should be burdened with the cost of their imprisonment just as students are burdened with loans etc.

Seems to be the other side of the coin?


The problem there is what if the person was innocent of the crime and to compound what they already have been through they have to pay compensation and apologise(basically admitting) a crime they didnt commit.

Its bad enough as it is, as I knew someone in jail which is why I know its nothing like the media portrays it(ready meals quality food, any games consoles bought at RRP which could be double another store has it for etc) and only earning about £10 a week for a lot of work so if a games console cost £100 then if they didnt spend a penny buying "luxuries" like biscuits, or milk they then could afford a console and no games.

I was waffling a bit there but basically in the current system if you want to be considered for early release you have to admit you did the crime, even the friend I had who was in prison was refused therapy(they became suicidal after losing everything) until they admitted they did the crime but they were suicidal because they were convicted of a crime they didnt commit!
#39
DKLS
ryouga
schizoboy
£52/year, for a TV that costs what £100? ongoing electrical costs... etc

Again I ask, why do prisoners have TV?

It's inevitable that'll translate to computer/internet access in time which would be even worse.


Why shouldnt they? You would have to be an idiot to just throw your authoritah around and say "these people are bad, lets give them zero rights" not thinking about the main reason they are in there for rehabilitation and that certain things are needed as a reward for hard work and good behaviour inside and can be taken away for bad behaviour.

I suppose you are one of the people who believes all the stupid media hype that prisons are luxurious and prisoners eat slap up meals and amazing facilities, when that isnt the case.


They are luxurious conditions in comparison to what I would give them, Straw on the floor and chained to the wall broken up with periods of hard labor and meals of gruel.
Or if that is deemed to harsh, privatise the prison service to the Thais, they know how to treat the turds of society.


So someone in prison who may have a perfect record and be a really nice and friendly person and makes one mistake deserves treated like a slave rather than the scum who arent in prison who do some vile things, legal or illegal small or big.

Would love to see how much you would enjoy that lifestyle.
#40
schizoboy
ryouga
schizoboy
£52/year, for a TV that costs what £100? ongoing electrical costs... etc

Again I ask, why do prisoners have TV?

It's inevitable that'll translate to computer/internet access in time which would be even worse.


Why shouldnt they? You would have to be an idiot to just throw your authoritah around and say "these people are bad, lets give them zero rights" not thinking about the main reason they are in there for rehabilitation and that certain things are needed as a reward for hard work and good behaviour inside and can be taken away for bad behaviour.

I suppose you are one of the people who believes all the stupid media hype that prisons are luxurious and prisoners eat slap up meals and amazing facilities, when that isnt the case.


I never said I disagreed with it, but for all prisoners to have it I'm afraid I do, as I agree with your premise, well behaved rewarded prisoners should get a TV, so long as it's not out of the taxpayers pocket, but to give all prisoners carte blanche benefits such as a TV, sorry I don't.

Also I would rather more prisoners meet, apologise and pay compensation to their victims than get new TVs.

I wonder if ex cons should be burdened with the cost of their imprisonment just as students are burdened with loans etc.

Seems to be the other side of the coin?


"Televisions are not a right but a privilege, and prisoners have them at the discretion of the governor."

and you can bet it's the same in most, if not all prisons in the country.

The prisons have probably made a packet out of charging for TV access since 1999 so the cost is irrelevant. As Ryouga points out, it gives them something to work for and something to have taken away if they're out of line. The fact is a new shiny LCD doesn't matter really... they've had TVs since 1999 anyway.

It's all to meet energy saving guidelines anyway so if your angry about this, be angry at the people who set the targets.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!