Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Prisons ARE cruel and hellish; the problem is that they are cruel and hellish in the wrong way. The Japanese model (much more solitary confinement, no amenities whatsoever, less contact with the outside world but also less chance for prisoners to collaborate or develop relationships no inmate-generated gang activity or ethnic affiliations or sexual/physical/psychological brutalization of weaker inmates) is much more effective than the prisons' hellish nature we have now.
Actually, a model similar to that model was tried in the US. It was called the Pennsylvania System (after Eastern State Penitentiary in Philadelphia, where it was first tried). It didn't work out so well either.
If you want to deter criminals, increasing penalties isn't the way to do it; increasing the certainty of penalty is the way to do it. And increasing penalties might keep particular criminals out of circulation, but there's always more criminals.
I want to start with taking today's violent offenders and locking them away for much longer periods of time.
Hmmm, I thought you were for smaller government and fewer services. But in this topic, you want more governmental control and higher expenses to pay for incarceration.
It seems to me that a lot of folks who claim they want reduced government actually want more, but they expect that they will get it for free.
Hmmm, I thought you were for smaller government and fewer services. But in this topic, you want more governmental control and higher expenses to pay for incarceration.
It seems to me that a lot of folks who claim they want reduced government actually want more, but they expect that they will get it for free.
Nice dream.
Smaller government is not no government. Government has certain legitimate functions that are proper. One of those functions is a monopoly on the use of physical force. Citizens cannot be allowed to assault other citizens in a free society. When they do, it is right and proper for government to capture, prosecute, and incarcerate such citizens. Which is what it does. Bot not to the degree I would like to see. A criminal who jacks some random driver is someone I want to see put away for 25 years. Perhaps, being released at 50, and realizing that time is indeed limited, he will not lapse into such behavior again. If not, re-incarcerate for another 50.
The other citizens who would like to engage in carjacking will see their co-conspirators consistently disappearing from the streets. This will deter many of them, and I do not care what anyone says to the contrary or how many wrong books they recommend. Those few that are not deterred can simply do the crime, get the time, and rot in prison until the end of their days. It is not their lives or their welfare that I am concerned with. Only the victims.
Actually, a model similar to that model was tried in the US. It was called the Pennsylvania System (after Eastern State Penitentiary in Philadelphia, where it was first tried). It didn't work out so well either.
If you want to deter criminals, increasing penalties isn't the way to do it; increasing the certainty of penalty is the way to do it. And increasing penalties might keep particular criminals out of circulation, but there's always more criminals.
Now some people say increasing the duration of penalties is the way to do it. Others say increasing the certainty of penalty is the way to do it. I say: Is it too much too ask for both?
Each criminal that is put away is one less to commit future crimes. Will we ever get every last one? No. But 80-90% is fine with me. There is no perfection in crime prevention or anything else in life. But we can do much better than we are doing now.
Let's not forget the ancient wisdom: Felonus absentia equus criminalis reductum
This is Latin for: A criminal in prison equals a reduction in crime.
That's fine. But we have to start somewhere. I want to start with taking today's violent offenders and locking them away for much longer periods of time.
By the way locking them away has ancillary benefits. They don't get to do other irresponsible things like buying drugs, teaching others how to do crimes, siring multiple children that end up growing up fatherless, etc, etc, etc. There are a lot of social benefits to locking felons away and throwing away the key, beyond the more obvious benefit of keeping good people safe from bad people.
yeah, because there are no drugs in prison. they also don't have any interaction with other human beings, who get out before they do. your perception of the prison system is so far from reality that it would be comical if it wasn't so scary that people are this misinformed, if that's even the right word to use here.
Actually, a model similar to that model was tried in the US. It was called the Pennsylvania System (after Eastern State Penitentiary in Philadelphia, where it was first tried). It didn't work out so well either.
If you want to deter criminals, increasing penalties isn't the way to do it; increasing the certainty of penalty is the way to do it. And increasing penalties might keep particular criminals out of circulation, but there's always more criminals.
exactly. so to decrease the number of potential criminals, you have to focus on the things that are believed to be commonly associated with criminals.
Hmmm, I thought you were for smaller government and fewer services. But in this topic, you want more governmental control and higher expenses to pay for incarceration.
It seems to me that a lot of folks who claim they want reduced government actually want more, but they expect that they will get it for free.
Nice dream.
shocking? no...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Paolella
Smaller government is not no government. Government has certain legitimate functions that are proper. One of those functions is a monopoly on the use of physical force. Citizens cannot be allowed to assault other citizens in a free society. When they do, it is right and proper for government to capture, prosecute, and incarcerate such citizens. Which is what it does. Bot not to the degree I would like to see. A criminal who jacks some random driver is someone I want to see put away for 25 years. Perhaps, being released at 50, and realizing that time is indeed limited, he will not lapse into such behavior again. If not, re-incarcerate for another 50.
The other citizens who would like to engage in carjacking will see their co-conspirators consistently disappearing from the streets. This will deter many of them, and I do not care what anyone says to the contrary or how many wrong books they recommend. Those few that are not deterred can simply do the crime, get the time, and rot in prison until the end of their days. It is not their lives or their welfare that I am concerned with. Only the victims.
sure, citizens can't assault other citizens in a free society, but they can lie, cheat, and swindle them as much as they want, as long as they get a label of corporation or llc.
it's wonderful to watch people talk out of their ass.
Now some people say increasing the duration of penalties is the way to do it. Others say increasing the certainty of penalty is the way to do it. I say: Is it too much too ask for both?
Each criminal that is put away is one less to commit future crimes. Will we ever get every last one? No. But 80-90% is fine with me. There is no perfection in crime prevention or anything else in life. But we can do much better than we are doing now.
Let's not forget the ancient wisdom: Felonus absentia equus criminalis reductum
This is Latin for: A criminal in prison equals a reduction in crime.
except it doesn't. it only reduces the crime that criminal would commit in the future. doesn't reduce the crime that other criminals will commit that aren't caught yet. i can type that sentence in latin for you if you'd like me to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
