Which type of crime is more heinous? (heroin, lawyer, health care)

[jtur88]

Originally Posted by GregW

[color=black][font=Verdana]I realize that the police are unable to protect me as an individual from a violent assault.]

Your basic premise is false, no matter how many colors and fonts you dress it up in. The presence of a police force on call in your community deters a very large number of people who might become so exasperated by your logic that they want to bash you with a blunt instrument. Not to mention those that covet your lawnmower. The only thing that stops me from calling you what I an tempted to call you is the enforcement presence of a moderator, who has a deterrent effect, saving you the trouble of defending yourself against personal attacks.

[JDTD]

Originally Posted by jtur88

In this extreme example, if it is determined that you are likely to repeat this behavior, you ought to be separated from the the general community. No punishment is necessary. Your life and limb should be protected in that area of confinement with the same diligence that it would be outside. If at some future date, there is a high degree of likelihood that you will not re-offend, you should be released to the community, with the understanding that if you re-offend, you will again be separated from the community. If you have responsible gainful employment or if you are a means of support to innocent family members, effort should be made to return you to the community immediately, depending on the degree of assurance that you will not re-offend. Non-violent or non-threatening offenses or offenses that have no visible impact on another person can be treated easily with probation, with incarceration not necessary.

In no case is the concept of punishment to be regarded as the primary motive.

I remain unconvinced that more than half of all African-American males "need" to be punished at some point in their life.

There. That is how civilized people treat other human beings. Obviously, there will be a tiny few cases in which the above scenario will fail and other measures may need to be employed, to curtail the clinically sociopathic. But these are rare. Certainly a great deal rarer than two-million ongoing incarcerations would suggest.

Hey...look at that. I don't check in for a day or so and find out that you finally at least come up with "something". I'd like to congratulate you for pretty much identifying the current US Criminal Justice System as your "wish-list". Everything that you refer to (but use different words) already happens (Earned good-time, parole, probation, probation in lieu of any time, etc.). When you say a person should be released early and then be "separated" again if they re-offend...already happens. The only thing that you are saying that is any different is the fact that "separation from the general community" is not a form of punishment. You are simply calling loss of liberty something else (re-classifying/re-naming it to make yourself feel better). Loss of liberty is the only form of punishment "the system" currently imposes (with the exception of the death penalty). They got rid of "the rack" and a few days ago. I don't know of any judges sentencing people to daily beatings or anything. They usually just sentence people to time (separation from society), and most of those sentenced rarely do what they are actually sentenced to unless it's "hard-time". And no...this doesn't mean what you are probably thinking. It just means you do the time you are actually sentenced to instead of getting "good-time". Getting hard-time is actually pretty rare. In many places a person gets half off for good-time (depending on the nature of the crime/still most) when they walk through the door whether they are good or not. So...five years is really only 2.5.

Unless you know something I don't????? I'm sure you probably have some theories.

[Huckleberry3911948]

crime is not viewed in the USA as henious. i have run into felons on CDF that had no problem with armed robbery if they needed the money. i have run into a few pedaphiles that viewed the violation of children as a disease and not a crime.
mantra of the 21st century, im not so bad, we not so bad its not so bad.
the sky is cryin

[old_cold]

Everybody has a reason for what they are, how they got to be that way.
It used to be an explanation , now it's an excuse.
Obviously we must convert all jails and prisons in pshyciatric centers.
Or perhaps, all kindergardens should be converted.
Ah, what the hell....let's just remove all babies at birth and raise them in one.

[Houston3]

Originally Posted by jtur88

Your basic premise is false, no matter how many colors and fonts you dress it up in. The presence of a police force on call in your community deters a very large number of people who might become so exasperated by your logic that they want to bash you with a blunt instrument. Not to mention those that covet your lawnmower. The only thing that stops me from calling you what I an tempted to call you is the enforcement presence of a moderator, who has a deterrent effect, saving you the trouble of defending yourself against personal attacks.

We have police officers in the family and they will tell you they cannot protect you from a violent assault, they can only react to it.

[GloryB]

Originally Posted by Houston3

We have police officers in the family and they will tell you they cannot protect you from a violent assault, they can only react to it.

Makes perfect sense to me. Just as they can suggest safety measures in driving, but can't keep wrecks from happening. They can only show up and try to sort it all out after the fact.

[jtur88]

Originally Posted by JDTD

. You are simply calling loss of liberty something else (re-classifying/re-naming it to make yourself feel better). Loss of liberty is the only form of punishment "the system" currently imposes (with the exception of the death penalty)..

I don't know any more ways to say this. My objection is to the mindset that offenders need to be punished. If incarceration is unpleasant, at least it should not be for the reason that the citizenry or the judicial system has the punishment mindset that overrides all other considerations. The objectives of criminal justice ought to be to A) put a protective wall between the general population and those who are inclined to do harm, and B) afford an environment in which to rehabilitate those who can be rehabilitated. Punishment should be collateral damage, not the objective of the system. Go back through this thread and see how many people have said offenders "need to be punished". and if they are not punished, the system is not doing its job. They are the ones I disgree with.

Prison conditions vary, but they systematically deny human dignity, and in geneal are overcrowded and prisoners brutalize each other with impunity, as do some (not all) corrections officers. That is punishment beyond mere incarceration.

[spark240]

Originally Posted by zman0

Animal cruelty likewise doesn't harm society directly, nor does it harm another person. We make a moral judgment that animals should be treated a certain way (for good or ill), but there's no reciprocal benefit. Pigs aren't going to treat humans inhumanely simply because we treat them inhumanely.

The pigs won't, but people in a society that tolerates such, have a greater tendency to treat each other as animals.

[Whyte Byrd]

Originally Posted by zman0

Which should be punished more harshly, crimes against a person or crimes against society?

Why would we have to choose? They're all bad and can be dealt with harshly if there's any justice in our society.

[spark240]

Originally Posted by jtur88

Go back through this thread and see how many people have said offenders "need to be punished". and if they are not punished, the system is not doing its job. They are the ones I disgree with.

I believe I understand where you are coming from. I don't think punishment, as an end in itself, is very practical (there's simply no way to render a "fitting" punishment in many cases), and I also don't believe it's good for our society. The idea that, a wrong having been done to us or to an innocent, can find "justice" by doing something in return to the perpetrator... yes, it is poisonous.

However, I think in some cases use of the "need to be punished" phrase is simply expressing the feeling the something must be done... as opposed to the crime going entirely unaddressed, as is often the case with "white collar" thieves (sometimes they get "bailouts").