Increasingly, offenders are seriously mentally-ill and/or drug abusers, to a much larger proportion than in the good old days. In considering earlier suggestions by arrsers, the question remains, would a present-day jury convict an armed robber if the alleged robber faced a mandatory death sentence for being armed? So, the return of Diplock-style courts? That will be popular I'm sure . . . The best that can be hoped for is a strong increase in numbers of police officers (including armed-response bods), an increase in (and massive improvement in security of) prison places, an increase in mental health provision and a prudent simplification of legislation. None of which will happen, but never mind, I emigrated.
You seem to be hearing voices. I did not argue for those things.
Prisons should be places of punishment without the rife violence, sex and drug abuse now found in those dreadful places. Reopen mental hospitals for the mentally ill - I'm no monster. Thatcher closed the asylums (while leaving the House of Commons open for business).
For the mentally well-enough, prison should be austere - humane but a place of punishment and shame. If that means being more heavy-handed with prisoners and more rigid with discipline, so be it. No one should want to go back, but no one should be abused either.