NationStates Jolt Archive

is it to rehabilatate(sp? wtf im tired gimme a break) or to just keep the really dangerous criminals away from the public where they cant harm people.

Supposidly it's to take people who have shown they can't live in society, out, while punishing them at the same time.

A little of both.

is it to rehabilatate(sp? wtf im tired gimme a break) or to just keep the really dangerous criminals away from the public where they cant harm people.

ideally both, but joe q. public is always gonna be more interested in keeping himself safe from the predators, as opposed to seperating the unfortunate and the foolish from the irredeemable, and that's understandable and probably proper.

is it to rehabilatate(sp? wtf im tired gimme a break) or to just keep the really dangerous criminals away from the public where they cant harm people.

People who will be let back out into society, the purpose should be both. Punish them for their crime.. keep them away from society. However, if they're going to get out some day, we should be very heavy on rehab. Even if it only works on 50%.. it's worth it, don't you think?

nope. just a place to stick them for a time so that they become "better citizens." its basically the governments way of telling criminals to go sit in the corner and think about what they did.

is it to rehabilatate(sp? wtf im tired gimme a break) or to just keep the really dangerous criminals away from the public where they cant harm people.

People who will be let back out into society, the purpose should be both. Punish them for their crime.. keep them away from society. However, if they're going to get out some day, we should be very heavy on rehab. Even if it only works on 50%.. it's worth it, don't you think?

well, what if you get caught for brutally murdering 50 people and then eating them? can you be rehabilated?

is it to rehabilatate(sp? wtf im tired gimme a break) or to just keep the really dangerous criminals away from the public where they cant harm people.

People who will be let back out into society, the purpose should be both. Punish them for their crime.. keep them away from society. However, if they're going to get out some day, we should be very heavy on rehab. Even if it only works on 50%.. it's worth it, don't you think?

well, what if you get caught for brutally murdering 50 people and then eating them? can you be rehabilated?

Probably not.

There's always an exception to every rule.

What I think it, "should be." A place to keep innocent (don't think it doesn't happen) convicts, rather than kill them, until they appeal/what not until they are freed . . . and a place to lock murderers, rapists, corporate thieves till the end of time without maytring them.

is it to rehabilatate(sp? wtf im tired gimme a break) or to just keep the really dangerous criminals away from the public where they cant harm people.

ideally both, but joe q. public is always gonna be more interested in keeping himself safe from the predators, as opposed to seperating the unfortunate and the foolish from the irredeemable, and that's understandable and probably proper.

Yes but what do the people In prison want? What would the compromise between them and Society be? Rehabilitation.

In order of importance:
1) Removal of a threat to civil society.
2) Deterance.
3) Rehabilitation.

is it to rehabilatate(sp? wtf im tired gimme a break) or to just keep the really dangerous criminals away from the public where they cant harm people.

People who will be let back out into society, the purpose should be both. Punish them for their crime.. keep them away from society. However, if they're going to get out some day, we should be very heavy on rehab. Even if it only works on 50%.. it's worth it, don't you think?

well, what if you get caught for brutally murdering 50 people and then eating them? can you be rehabilated?

Well, how likely is it they will ever be getting "out" , probably not very. However, I do think deep mental evaluation would be good to try to understand this type of mind, so that we may spot it in the future. It's essential to profilers.

is it to rehabilatate(sp? wtf im tired gimme a break) or to just keep the really dangerous criminals away from the public where they cant harm people.

People who will be let back out into society, the purpose should be both. Punish them for their crime.. keep them away from society. However, if they're going to get out some day, we should be very heavy on rehab. Even if it only works on 50%.. it's worth it, don't you think?

well, what if you get caught for brutally murdering 50 people and then eating them? can you be rehabilated?

Well, how likely is it they will ever be getting "out" , probably not very. However, I do think deep mental evaluation would be good to try to understand this type of mind, so that we may spot it in the future. It's essential to profilers.

in most european country's they cant hold you in prision for life or, put you to death. so what then?

is it to rehabilatate(sp? wtf im tired gimme a break) or to just keep the really dangerous criminals away from the public where they cant harm people.

People who will be let back out into society, the purpose should be both. Punish them for their crime.. keep them away from society. However, if they're going to get out some day, we should be very heavy on rehab. Even if it only works on 50%.. it's worth it, don't you think?

well, what if you get caught for brutally murdering 50 people and then eating them? can you be rehabilated?

Probably not.

There's always an exception to every rule.
Maybe that person can cut back to 25? I think I must be getting tired!!!

from a philosophical standpoint (i'm a philosophy major) it's very difficult if at all possible to argue for retributive justice (that is, locking people away forever and ever and letting them rot). the best arguments are given for rehabilitative justice, where an active attempt of some sort is made to change the convict's character. sometimes this takes longer than the person's actual life-span, which is unfortunate. but most people agree that punishment should not be retributive.

in most european country's they cant hold you in prision for life or, put you to death. so what then?

then they damn well better be focusing or rehabilitation

In order of importance:
1) Removal of a threat to civil society.
2) Deterance.
3) Rehabilitation.

You know. Colonial england had the same attitude. That system ended with the hulks and desperately searching for new lands to dump their rejects upon.

Not Fun.

is it to rehabilatate(sp? wtf im tired gimme a break) or to just keep the really dangerous criminals away from the public where they cant harm people.

People who will be let back out into society, the purpose should be both. Punish them for their crime.. keep them away from society. However, if they're going to get out some day, we should be very heavy on rehab. Even if it only works on 50%.. it's worth it, don't you think?

well, what if you get caught for brutally murdering 50 people and then eating them? can you be rehabilated?

Somehow I don't think Steph would include serial murderer cannibals among those who will be let back into society. I know I wouldn't.

from a philosophical standpoint (i'm a philosophy major) it's very difficult if at all possible to argue for retributive justice (that is, locking people away forever and ever and letting them rot). the best arguments are given for rehabilitative justice, where an active attempt of some sort is made to change the convict's character. sometimes this takes longer than the person's actual life-span, which is unfortunate. but most people agree that punishment should not be retributive.


punishment only makes sense for rehabilitation, without that function it is merely state sponsored sadism. however incarceration to protect society from a criminal makes sense as well, there is just no sense in this case to make it particularly unpleasant.

the same with execution, it should not be done to punish the criminal, who obviously can learn nothing from this form of correction, but merely to protect society from an individual who can never be allowed to rejoin it. executions should always be done humanely.

is it to rehabilatate(sp? wtf im tired gimme a break) or to just keep the really dangerous criminals away from the public where they cant harm people.

People who will be let back out into society, the purpose should be both. Punish them for their crime.. keep them away from society. However, if they're going to get out some day, we should be very heavy on rehab. Even if it only works on 50%.. it's worth it, don't you think?

well, what if you get caught for brutally murdering 50 people and then eating them? can you be rehabilated?

Somehow I don't think Steph would include serial murderer cannibals among those who will be let back into society. I know I wouldn't.

read the point i made about the europeans

is it to rehabilatate(sp? wtf im tired gimme a break) or to just keep the really dangerous criminals away from the public where they cant harm people.

People who will be let back out into society, the purpose should be both. Punish them for their crime.. keep them away from society. However, if they're going to get out some day, we should be very heavy on rehab. Even if it only works on 50%.. it's worth it, don't you think?

well, what if you get caught for brutally murdering 50 people and then eating them? can you be rehabilated?

Somehow I don't think Steph would include serial murderer cannibals among those who will be let back into society. I know I wouldn't.

No, of course not.

I disagree I think they would need to be sent to a home for the criminallly insane asap

I disagree I think they would need to be sent to a home for the criminallly insane asap

and as soon as they get there be given a nice meal, a cigarette if they smoke, then a sedative and a "vitamin" injection and put to sleep.

Somehow I don't think Steph would include serial murderer cannibals among those who will be let back into society. I know I wouldn't.

read the point i made about the europeans

in most european country's they cant hold you in prision for life or, put you to death. so what then?

So what? That doesn't mean Steph or I agree with that policy.

Going to jail is suppossed to be a deterant against committing a crime. Jails never rehabilitate criminals, and they actually make some criminals worse. That is why I believe in having the death penalty for the third strike. If 2 jail sententances didn't scare them off, nothing will.

Going to jail is suppossed to be a deterant against committing a crime. Jails never rehabilitate criminals, and they actually make some criminals worse. That is why I believe in having the death penalty for the third strike. If 2 jail sententances didn't scare them off, nothing will.

That's ridiculous.

Somehow I don't think Steph would include serial murderer cannibals among those who will be let back into society. I know I wouldn't.

read the point i made about the europeans

in most european country's they cant hold you in prision for life or, put you to death. so what then?

So what? That doesn't mean Steph or I agree with that policy.

Umm, I don't live in Europe.. I live in Canada.

it is generally to keep the people locked up who pose a threat to civilians.

Going to jail is suppossed to be a deterant against committing a crime. Jails never rehabilitate criminals, and they actually make some criminals worse. That is why I believe in having the death penalty for the third strike. If 2 jail sententances didn't scare them off, nothing will.

That's ridiculous.

It wouldn'd sound ridiculous if you were a victim of crime or a taxpayer who didn't like paying to keep repeat criminals in jail.

Going to jail is suppossed to be a deterant against committing a crime. Jails never rehabilitate criminals, and they actually make some criminals worse. That is why I believe in having the death penalty for the third strike. If 2 jail sententances didn't scare them off, nothing will.

That's ridiculous.

It wouldn'd sound ridiculous if you were a victim of crime or a taxpayer who didn't like paying to keep repeat criminals in jail.

But sentencing people to death after going to jail 3 times?

What if they go to jail for theft or something like that.

Surely you have more respect for human life than that.

I'm guessing you've never known anyone who's spent time in prison?

I have a few close friends who have, they're good people, they don't deserve to be put to death for check fraud.

Umm, I don't live in Europe.. I live in Canada.

I know. That was responding to GV's comment about Europe.

Going to jail is suppossed to be a deterant against committing a crime. Jails never rehabilitate criminals, and they actually make some criminals worse. That is why I believe in having the death penalty for the third strike. If 2 jail sententances didn't scare them off, nothing will.

That's ridiculous.

It wouldn'd sound ridiculous if you were a victim of crime or a taxpayer who didn't like paying to keep repeat criminals in jail.

There is no death penalty in my country (thankfully)

But if you look to the states, pretty much one of the last civilized countries in the world to still have it, it costs much more to put them to death then it does to keep them in jail for life. With a death sentence comes automatic appeals.. would of been a lot cheaper to just keep them in jail for life.

A bit of a joke.. but oh sweet irony..

http://www.stephaniesworld.com/Comedy.html

But sentencing people to death after going to jail 3 times?

What if they go to jail for theft or something like that.

Surely you have more respect for human life than that.

I'm guessing you've never known anyone who's spent time in prison?

I have a few close friends who have, they're good people, they don't deserve to be put to death for check fraud.

well maybe they wouldn't keep committing fraud if they knew three strikes and your out and six feet under.

What if they go to jail for theft or something like that.
They KNEW what the consequences of their actions were going to be.

Surely you have more respect for human life than that.
I have much more respect for the lives of the victims.

I'm guessing you've never known anyone who's spent time in prison?
I do, and he kept on repeat offending and putting people's safety at risk.

I have a few close friends who have, they're good people, they don't deserve to be put to death for check fraud.
My friends also don't deserve to have to pay to keep repeat offenders in jail or to have to live in fear of attack by criminals who cannot be rehabilitated.

So minor offenders should be put to death.

Makes a whole lot of sense.

Jackass.

So minor offenders should be put to death.

Makes a whole lot of sense.

Jackass.


until the mid 19th century you could be put to death for your first offense at virtually any property crime. hey just call me a true reactionary, i'm willing to bring back public flogging as well.

So minor offenders should be put to death.

Makes a whole lot of sense.

Jackass.


until the mid 19th century you could be put to death for your first offense at virtually any property crime. hey just call me a true reactionary, i'm willing to bring back public flogging as well.

You're sick.

You're sick.


hey i'm not the one with habitual criminals for friends.

i'm willing to bring back public flogging as well.

Good idea. :twisted:

You're sick.


hey i'm not the one with habitual criminals for friends.

Do you know any criminals?

Do you know any criminals?

sure i've known a few, and you can generally tell after their first serious brush with the law if they are going to get their acts together and fly right, or if they are just going to continue down the road into scumbag career criminals. the ones who can't learn from experience ultimately serve no purpose in a free society. they either need to be placed in a controlled environment where they can do no more harm, or they need to be elliminated.

There is no death penalty in my country (thankfully)

But if you look to the states, pretty much one of the last civilized countries in the world to still have it, it costs much more to put them to death then it does to keep them in jail for life. With a death sentence comes automatic appeals.. would of been a lot cheaper to just keep them in jail for life.

A bit of a joke.. but oh sweet irony..

http://www.stephaniesworld.com/Comedy.html

I am pro-capital punishment. (I am pro-capitol punishment, too! But that's a different topic... ;))
However, I believe it should be limited to cases of horrendous crimes in which there is clear and irrefutable evidence, which is a very small portion of all the cases in the US. I would also note that I was completely appalled by GW Bush's making jokes about executions while he was governor of my state. :evil:

One interesting about your whole "wasting my tax dollars" thing (do you even have a job?), putting people to death costs a huge amount of money.

But I guess you wouldn't know that.

One interesting about your whole "wasting my tax dollars" thing (do you even have a job?), putting people to death costs a huge amount of money.

But I guess you wouldn't know that.

that wasn't at me was it, cuz i'm not arguing any of this based on cost, and under the current government i accept that the vast magority of my tax dollars are wasted.

There is no death penalty in my country (thankfully)

But if you look to the states, pretty much one of the last civilized countries in the world to still have it, it costs much more to put them to death then it does to keep them in jail for life. With a death sentence comes automatic appeals.. would of been a lot cheaper to just keep them in jail for life.

A bit of a joke.. but oh sweet irony..

http://www.stephaniesworld.com/Comedy.html

I am pro-capital punishment. (I am pro-capitol punishment, too! But that's a different topic... ;))
However, I believe it should be limited to cases of horrendous crimes in which there is clear and irrefutable evidence, which is a very small portion of all the cases in the US. I would also note that I was completely appalled by GW Bush's making jokes about executions while he was governor of my state. :evil:

It's a catch 22.. many of us are pro-choice and anti-death penalty.. and many of us are pro-death penalty and pro-choice.. and many of us claim to be Christians.. and many of us claim not to be.. I suppose it's what you claim to be.. I suppose one could certainly argue.. that final judgement such as death is not our right.. but if you don't believe in God, maybe it is.. it's a personal choice, but it does violate human rights. It also violates "Cruel and unusual punishment" ... but we all believe what we believe...

One interesting about your whole "wasting my tax dollars" thing (do you even have a job?), putting people to death costs a huge amount of money.

But I guess you wouldn't know that.

that wasn't at me was it, cuz i'm not arguing any of this based on cost, and under the current government i accept that the vast magority of my tax dollars are wasted.

Ok, then ignore that. I'm talking to the other douche.

One interesting about your whole "wasting my tax dollars" thing (do you even have a job?), putting people to death costs a huge amount of money.

But I guess you wouldn't know that.

that wasn't at me was it, cuz i'm not arguing any of this based on cost, and under the current government i accept that the vast magority of my tax dollars are wasted.

Ok, then ignore that. I'm talking to the other douche.


yes we are cleansing solutions meant to purify your nether regions. purging you of filth, obstructions and unpleasant oders.

One interesting about your whole "wasting my tax dollars" thing (do you even have a job?), putting people to death costs a huge amount of money.

But I guess you wouldn't know that.

that wasn't at me was it, cuz i'm not arguing any of this based on cost, and under the current government i accept that the vast magority of my tax dollars are wasted.

Ok, then ignore that. I'm talking to the other douche.


yes we are cleansing solutions meant to purify your nether regions. purging you of filth, obstructions and unpleasant oders.

:roll:

How creative, no one has ever said that to me in response to me calling them a douche.

One interesting about your whole "wasting my tax dollars" thing (do you even have a job?), putting people to death costs a huge amount of money.

But I guess you wouldn't know that.

that wasn't at me was it, cuz i'm not arguing any of this based on cost, and under the current government i accept that the vast magority of my tax dollars are wasted.

Not as much as feeding a man in jail for life.

One interesting about your whole "wasting my tax dollars" thing (do you even have a job?), putting people to death costs a huge amount of money.

But I guess you wouldn't know that.

that wasn't at me was it, cuz i'm not arguing any of this based on cost, and under the current government i accept that the vast magority of my tax dollars are wasted.

Not as much as feeding a man in jail for life.

People on death row stay in jail for like, 6 years before they're put to death.

If you put a whole bunch of minor offenders on death row, the prison will be PACKED with people on death row, costing the tax payers a whole hell of a lot more.

One interesting about your whole "wasting my tax dollars" thing (do you even have a job?), putting people to death costs a huge amount of money.

But I guess you wouldn't know that.

that wasn't at me was it, cuz i'm not arguing any of this based on cost, and under the current government i accept that the vast magority of my tax dollars are wasted.

Not as much as feeding a man in jail for life.

well if they are compelled to do productive labor, hopefully a signifigant portion of the expense can be defrayed.

One interesting about your whole "wasting my tax dollars" thing (do you even have a job?), putting people to death costs a huge amount of money.

But I guess you wouldn't know that.

that wasn't at me was it, cuz i'm not arguing any of this based on cost, and under the current government i accept that the vast magority of my tax dollars are wasted.

Not as much as feeding a man in jail for life.

well if they are compelled to do productive labor, hopefully a signifigant portion of the expense can be defrayed.

I know if I were in jail I'd be very eager to do work.

well if they are compelled to do productive labor, hopefully a signifigant portion of the expense can be defrayed.

This has been one of the biggest mistakes the US prison system has made. The Texas Department of Corrections used to be self supporting. Now it is a drain.

well if they are compelled to do productive labor, hopefully a signifigant portion of the expense can be defrayed.

I know if I were in jail I'd be very eager to do work.[/quote]

as opposed to being in 23 and a half hour lockdown is solitary confinement with no privilages. that's the general alternative in american prisons, very few people choose it long term.