COMMENTS:
The recitivism (sp?) rates speak for themselves.
Keeping criminals in jail for long period of time is the better option rather than just give them a short sentence, community service or an electronic tagging device (to let the authorities know where they are) because i feel that a long time in jail is a better form of punishment. I dont think "correcting" criminals with the examples mentioned above work because it sends out the message that you can kill or murder someone and get just a slap on the wrist.
Prison keeps the honest people honest.
Prison is a punishment not a deterrent. What other option is there? Certainly not just letting criminals go unpunished. It is a deterrent in that as long as they are locked up they aren't committing crimes on the outside.
exactly
Good question. I guess it all depends. Some people really do just make a mistake once and learn their lesson. For really serious crimes, long prison sentences are called for. I know this may be unrealistic, but I'd like to think that rehabiliation can still work.
ceejjj: What other option is there?
How about the presidency of the United States
Well over 50% of offenders do not recommit crimes. For that reason and the reason that it keeps others from committing crimes, I would say yes. But capital punishment has no statistical effect on murders or murder rates.
For some it probably does, but I don't think it's the best deterent. The best system for punishment is singapores, they have very little crime. Why? Because they appeal to these criminals lowest instincts; pain avoidance. Imagine if you tried to raise a puppy the way we treat our felons. He shits in the corner once you tell him to go sit outside and think about what he's done for an hour. The next time you give him two, then three. Will he ever learn? And puppies have a better developed sense of moral decency then most of these criminals.
For some people, like say most hardened crminals, jail isn't so bad. They get decent food, a bed, tv, exercise, they can anally rape anyone they want, etc etc. But getting beaten to the point of passing out is both unpleasant and humiliating. You can brag about going to jail (in some circles) but nobody brags about having to drop drawers and get a particularly nasty spanking.
LSD: how many executed murders have gone on to commit more murders, or more crimes of any sort?
Well, Robin, let me say first that I seriously doubt that "prison seems to be making smarter criminals." Consider: Learning how to commit a crime from someone who has been caught doing it is roughly equivalent of learning to swim from a drowning victim. The folks who are good at committing crimes rarely show up in prison (like CEO's, CFO's, COO's, et al. :>)). And then let's talk about how "smart" most criminals are when they do get out of prison: according to the U.S. Department of Justice Statistics, 64 percent of felons return to prison within two years. Not too smart.
Now as to whether or not prison deters criminals from committing crimes, it seems clear that it does not. Why? Simple reason: none of these genuises thinks he/she is going to be caught. They have to be the world's most irrational optimists: they believe they can outsmart the largest, most sophisticated police apparatus in the history of the world! And, no prison doesn't improve them. They generally get out worse than when they went in. Why? Cage a dog in your back yard and torment him daily: would you like to be in the yard with him when he's freed?
Can prisons improve inmates? Of course, but currently they are asked by society to achieve two contradictory goals: to punish inmates while improving them. Silly, really. It's like trying to teach someone a foreign language while you tighten down the thumbscrews. Can't expect much foreign language to be learned, eh?
Lots of problems, but society needs to agree on whether they are better served by punishing or rehabiliting convicts. We can't expect our prisons to do both.
Enjoyed thinking about this. Thanks.
It would seem that no amount of compassionate arguments, would ever change the mind of those on the hard right, when it comes to prison and the rehabilitation of offenders.
So lets speak their language...
It costs around 1000 pounds a week to keep someone in prison, it cost a tenth of that to rehabilitate them using methods that attempt to train and help them to find a trade in which t become a useful citizen in society.
At the end of the day, a large percentage of those who commit crime, are usually from desperately poor, possibly abusive backgrounds. The will usually be poor students and find thems selves turningto crime as a reaction to the society that they feel abandoned them (wether this is the case is a wholedifferent argument, but perception can be just as compelling as reality).
If we we to use resources more efficiently, then we would have a far better result in those reoffending.
Stop being difficult elvis and stick to the topic at hand.
I actually agree with Zerhog, for once. I believe that for petty crimes, a system of corporal punishment would work better. If done properly, it is effective and it would keep young offenders out of the hands of long-term criminals.
As for capital punishment, in Texas, they like it so much that they execute lots of innocent people, just to stay in practice!
Singapore also provides a good standard of living for everyone, unlike the banana republic style of the US.
There is defintely less of a chance that the criminal will perpetuate violence on the general population if he/she is in prison. So, by virtue that the person is removed from society, yes it reduces crime.
If you are correct and criminals in jail reduce crime, why hasnt crime been eliminated altogether?
Locking up and throwing away the key, doesnt solve societies problems, it just stores up future trouble and even more crime.
I didn't say that it solves all the crime problems fuzzy thinker.
Lets try this. I will talk slowly. I am not advocating this. I am simply asking you a question. Okay? Now slowly.
If I committed a crime, say stealing bubble gum, and I was locked up for the rest of my life would I ever be able to steal chewing gum again?
No.
Now breath my left wing friend. I AM NOT ADVOCATING THAT. It would be impossible and imbecilic. However it would guaranteed work if not for impossiblity.
Let me tell you something. I live the San Francisco Bay Area in Northern California. This is the state where Hollywood and Los Angeles is although I live in the NORTHERN part. This would be like equivalent to say LONDON and GLASGOW okay.
In the Bay Area is a city called San Jose California. In this City (and others) they have had a problem with what is known as MaraSalvatrucha-13 and Mara-18thStreet.
They used a comprehensive attack on these incredibly violent Latino supergangs which included education, incarceration, financial support and other aspects. They were successful.
Now, I know in Jolley Olde England your primary concern is the overturning of trash bins so it is hard for you to fathom the real types of crime that take place in the US. Also I understand that you come from a very, very, very small island and it is hard for you to concieve of such a big land as the USA and the myriad problems that would present for law enforcement. I mean a program that works in LA would work in San Jose. But there are different problems in NYC and the strategy employed here in California might not work in New York. I make this analogy because a strategy to stop the overturning of trash bins in London will work just as well in Glasgow but probably they would have different problems in Athens. You see. There is a big country here that is incredibly diverse.
Its not clever to patronise, especially if you are not very good at it.
I know from experience how prison affects those who go through the system, and you're over simplistic explanation, just shows total ignorance.
When you havea coherent argument to make, by all means please let me know, I might be interested to read it.
yes and your response was so "cogent" and legitimate. Give it a rest. You are not that smart and you keep setting yourself up as an expert on things like prison, communism etc. Well if you know so much and are such a great intellect then why don't you demonstrate it?
Also if my argument or parody, or sarcasm is so facile then why do you respond? Because you are not really that smart.
I dont pretend to be an 'expert' on communism or an other 'ism'.
I merely point out that your 'facts' are at best unresearched or at best just outright wrong.
Having worked in the UK prison system for 3 years, I feel I can speak from experience on the subject.
While the criminals are in prison you can't argue that they aren't committing as many crimes. The reason crimes still exist is because criminals don't stay in prison forever, people don't get caught and new criminals are born everyday.
|
