The Importance of Punishment - DPChallenge Forums

08/11/2008 10:26:32 PM · #51

Originally posted by SDW:

But wait! not so simple. Now we are going to have to deal with triple the amount of DUI and possibly DUI related fatalities. I don't see much savings; money or lives.

Driving on drugs would still be illegal. Just the consumption at home would be legalized. According to your argument, we'd have to outlaw alcohol completely (again).

We could discuss whether legalization would lead to more people taking drugs. Even if it did it might still be more desirable for the society as a whole than the current situation (taking into account all the drug related crime and costs and assuming that legalization would be accompanied by prevention measures and treatment of addicts).

08/11/2008 10:26:36 PM · #52

Originally posted by Sam94720:

[quote=SDW] I have read the complete OP and it's theories.

1) What would the guy say who lost his job because now we let a convict do it for free?

That guy may say the same thing that the guy who lost his job to an illegal says.

Our citizens lose jobs all the time to lower paid workers (whether legal or not).

The system does need tuning. And it needs to start at an early childhood level. Like in pre-school. Start teaching the value of community and self sacrifice for the good of others..etc... Teach our kids to GIVE and not WANT all the time. To volunteer out of the goodness of our hearts, and not want money for doing something that should be done in the first place.

We most definitely need to focus on education. the US is falling way behind on education as it is. We have more and more teenage drop outs. A good majority of those drop outs go on to commit crimes and end up in the "system".

dacrazyrn

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

08/11/2008 10:27:49 PM · #53

Originally posted by Sam94720:

An alternative approach would be to legalize drugs, thereby destroying the black market, dramatically reducing crime and saving a lot of money on law enforcement. Part of this money could be used for prevention, for the treatment of addicts, etc.

I see plenty of marijuana induced "accidents" also. And they can be violent, too.

I agree. Legalize it all. Government taxes the crap out of it. go to your local pharmacy and get whatever you want for the week, along with your Narcan pen. Have fun. But you are responsible for your own overdose...no medical services, no ambulance services. Hope your friends know how to use the Narcan. Accidents, DUI's, felonies, etc..you automatically go to jail for mandatory sentences. no pleas, no nothing. Death Penalties reinstated everywhere and actually carried out.

08/11/2008 10:32:55 PM · #54

Originally posted by dacrazyrn:

Originally posted by Sam94720:
An alternative approach would be to legalize drugs, thereby destroying the black market, dramatically reducing crime and saving a lot of money on law enforcement. Part of this money could be used for prevention, for the treatment of addicts, etc.

I see plenty of marijuana induced "accidents" also. And they can be violent, too.

I agree. Legalize it all. Government taxes the crap out of it. go to your local pharmacy and get whatever you want for the week, along with your Narcan pen. Have fun. But you are responsible for your own overdose...no medical services, no ambulance services. Hope your friends know how to use the Narcan. Accidents, DUI's, felonies, etc..you automatically go to jail for mandatory sentences. no pleas, no nothing. Death Penalties reinstated everywhere and actually carried out.

Marijuana isnt as mellow of a drug as people think. It causes hallucinations and paranoid delusions. These hallucinations can be violent and dangerous to that person or others.

Also habitual marijuana use most likely leads to other drug use, harder drugs... cocaine, heroin..etc... Those drugs lead to behaviors that are criminal like stealing to get money for drugs, then robbery to get money for drugs, maybe murder for drugs...etc... Its a domino effect.

Also street drugs are not controlled enough to be legal. People die of cocaine overdoses from 1 hit because its cut with something else, or too pure....etc.. To legalize street drugs would mean the FDA control those drugs, which would mean that we have producers to grow the drugs, which would mean more resources taken up to control how and what is grown.

08/11/2008 10:36:16 PM · #55

Originally posted by gwe21:

We most definitely need to focus on education. the US is falling way behind on education as it is. We have more and more teenage drop outs. A good majority of those drop outs go on to commit crimes and end up in the "system".

I fully agree with you. Education is probably one of the most effective tools to reduce crime.

It's the stupid criminals you have to be afraid of. Deterrent won't work for them and they may risk other people's lives for nothing. Not all are harmless like this one.

08/11/2008 10:38:01 PM · #56

Originally posted by Sam94720:

Originally posted by gwe21:
We most definitely need to focus on education. the US is falling way behind on education as it is. We have more and more teenage drop outs. A good majority of those drop outs go on to commit crimes and end up in the "system".

I fully agree with you. Education is probably one of the most effective tools to reduce crime.

It's the stupid criminals you have to be afraid of. Deterrent won't work for them and they may risk other people's lives for nothing. Not all are harmless like this one.

oy vey!! That deserves a different type of punishment... LOL

08/11/2008 10:41:05 PM · #57

Originally posted by dacrazyrn:

I agree. Legalize it all. Government taxes the crap out of it. go to your local pharmacy and get whatever you want for the week, along with your Narcan pen. Have fun. But you are responsible for your own overdose...no medical services, no ambulance services. Hope your friends know how to use the Narcan. Accidents, DUI's, felonies, etc..you automatically go to jail for mandatory sentences. no pleas, no nothing. Death Penalties reinstated everywhere and actually carried out.

Well, you're going a bit too far here for my taste. But I agree that ambulance services for drug users should be "low priority". We don't want someone who got hit by a car to die because the ambulance was taking care of someone having "fun" with drugs. But for other medical services, maybe we would decide that we'd rather provide them then letting things get totally out of hand.

dacrazyrn

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

08/11/2008 10:42:32 PM · #58

Originally posted by Sam94720:

It's the stupid criminals you have to be afraid of. Deterrent won't work for them and they may risk other people's lives for nothing. Not all are harmless like this one.

Bery Edumacated! Can we teach common sense, too? LOL

08/11/2008 10:44:44 PM · #59

Originally posted by Sam94720:

Originally posted by dacrazyrn:
I agree. Legalize it all. Government taxes the crap out of it. go to your local pharmacy and get whatever you want for the week, along with your Narcan pen. Have fun. But you are responsible for your own overdose...no medical services, no ambulance services. Hope your friends know how to use the Narcan. Accidents, DUI's, felonies, etc..you automatically go to jail for mandatory sentences. no pleas, no nothing. Death Penalties reinstated everywhere and actually carried out.

Well, you're going a bit too far here for my taste. But I agree that ambulance services for drug users should be "low priority". We don't want someone who got hit by a car to die because the ambulance was taking care of someone having "fun" with drugs. But for other medical services, maybe we would decide that we'd rather provide them then letting things get totally out of hand.

But in reality we couldnt limit services to drug users. That would be like saying an ambulance wont come if you are over 80 and having a heart attack or an ambulance wont come if you have aids and are bleeding.

We cant discriminate (especially first responders) because that sets us up to a whole new can of worms.

And people do die every day because ambulances dont get there in time because of other 'non emergent' calls.

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

08/11/2008 10:47:23 PM · #60

Originally posted by gwe21:

Yes, it's a very tricky issue... But we are straying off topic... (This always happens! ;-) )

Message edited by author 2008-08-11 22:48:09.

SDW

Canon EOS-60D

08/11/2008 10:52:41 PM · #61

Originally posted by Sam94720:

Originally posted by SDW:
I have read the complete OP and it's theories.

Want my thoughts?

America should stop spending more per year housing a criminal than educating a child. How can we do this? Stop giving them everything they want such as a gym, cable TV, conjugal visit, access to libraries that are more comprehensive than we have for our schools. Make them pay for the cost of their sentence per year by making them do manual labor outside of society that we are currently pay people to do. If they wish to become educated while in jail then they can work and pay for their education. Why should they get it free, when most college students are out working their finger to the bone to get a higher education. Crime is not a sickness it's a choice and they are not going to change their ways by sitting in front of a councilor. But if they want to be counciled; they can work to pay for that too. If they owe more than they paid while in prison they will have to pay their Convict Loan over years just like a student loan.

All the free money we have been giving them while in jail can now go toward education in hopes that we can fix the problem before it happens.

Then when their sentence is up they would not want to go back; EVER!

I really like your creative approach.

I agree that it is difficult to understand that criminals are "rewarded" with things other people have to work hard for. However, I see two problems with your suggestion:

1) What would the guy say who lost his job because now we let a convict do it for free?

2) Our goal is not only to reduce the cost of prisons, we would also like to make sure that people leaving prison after serving their sentence become commendable members of society and refrain from committing any additional crimes. If a convict knows he'll have to pay back money for his education he might choose not to get one. And having to pay back a loan would put a strain on his financial situation. Both would make him more likely to turn to crime again.

I think your idea has potential. But we'd have to fix some details and fine-tune it. ;-)

Fair! However I see two problems with your two problems.

1. In your original post what would the guy say who lost his job because of your theoretical "A"? (A) We let all criminals out of prison. We stop looking for those not caught yet. However, you'd be guaranteed that they won't ever commit another crime. Crime rates will be at zero. (Yes, this is unrealistic. Please just accept it as given for the purpose of the thought experiment.)

2.A. Cutting prison cost would help in reducing crime. We could use that money to educate our children from K-12 giving them a better chance for a prosperous future without having to result to criminal activity to achieve their goal.

2.B. Their are a lot of people that have student loans that put a strain on their financial situation but they don't go out committing crimes.

Message edited by author 2008-08-11 22:54:14.

yanko

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

08/11/2008 11:01:41 PM · #62

Originally posted by Sam94720:

But I agree that ambulance services for drug users should be "low priority". We don't want someone who got hit by a car to die because the ambulance was taking care of someone having "fun" with drugs. But for other medical services, maybe we would decide that we'd rather provide them then letting things get totally out of hand.

How would you determine priority on say a 911 call? Even if you could wouldn't you have to also set low priorities for other medical situations derived from risky behavior? In other words, just about any injury from a sport or recreation would apply.

Message edited by author 2008-08-11 23:02:52.

08/11/2008 11:07:02 PM · #63

Originally posted by SDW:

Yes, there's a trade-off. Less crime will mean less jobs in law enforcement. Should we therefore keep crime high? Should we encourage people to smoke to create more jobs in the tobacco industry and in the medical sector? You always have to consider the net effect on society.

Originally posted by SDW:

2.A. Cutting prison cost would help in reducing crime. We could use that money to educate our children from K-12 giving them a better chance for a prosperous future without having to result to criminal activity to achieve their goal.

I'm all for education. But I'm skeptical when it comes to severly cutting costs by reducing services offered at prisons. If you make the inmates miserable I don't think they will be more friendly people when they leave. At the same time you don't want to spoil them at taxpayers' expense. I guess the optimum lies somewhere in the middle.

Originally posted by SDW:

2.B. Their are a lot of people that have student loans that put a strain on their financial situation but they don't go out committing crimes.

Yes, but they probably come from a different social background, live in different areas and earn higher salaries. As a former convict, it might be more difficult to find a job, you'll earn less and you are more likely to interact with people who still commit crime. I think it would be great if former prisoners proudly paid back their "convict loan". However, they might be more likely to feel that they are being further punished and in an act of defiance do something stupid.

What would you do if a former prisoner refused to pay back his loan? Send them to prison thereby incurring more costs?

08/11/2008 11:08:55 PM · #64

Originally posted by yanko:

Yes, tricky issue, as I said. How is this usually handled? First come first served? (ahh, this is so off-topic...)

08/11/2008 11:38:52 PM · #65

Originally posted by Sam94720:

Originally posted by yanko:
How would you determine priority on say a 911 call? Even if you could wouldn't you have to also set low priorities for other medical situations derived from risky behavior? In other words, just about any injury from a sport or recreation would apply.

Yes, tricky issue, as I said. How is this usually handled? First come first served? (ahh, this is so off-topic...)

well it depends on the situation. 911 calls are 'triaged' as they come in. 911 operators are trained in how to dispatch the calls depending on the priority.

If 2 calls come in at the same time,call 1 a 3 car pile up with injuries on the freeway, call 2 a possible drug overdose, they are going to look at response times, units available, location....etc.

08/12/2008 01:21:03 AM · #66

Originally posted by Sam94720:

We've had discussions about taxes, welfare and law enforcement in other threads (usually completely off-topic). I'd like to start a little thought experiment here on the issue of punishment.

The topic is something I've been wanting to write about for a long time and this is kind of a "trial run" in a small circle. I'm curious to hear what your thoughts are. This is supposed to be a civilized discussion and not a rant, so please be nice. ;-)

Here we go:

Let's say you had the choice between two theoretical futures:

A) We let all criminals out of prison. We stop looking for those not caught yet. However, you'd be guaranteed that they won't ever commit another crime. Crime rates will be at zero. (Yes, this is unrealistic. Please just accept it as given for the purpose of the thought experiment.)

B) You are guaranteed that every single criminal is eventually caught and punished. However, crime rates would remain at the same level they are at now. (Again, please just accept this as a premise of the though experiment.)

The question now is: Which future would you prefer?

We could make the scenarios a bit more realistic by changing them slightly:

A*) Most criminals get caught, some don't. Those caught each spend one year in some kind of treatment facility where they are treated well, are educated and are taught social values. They enjoy this time, are better people afterwards and are unlikely to commit a crime again. Crime rates are low. (Again: Please just accept this for the experiment.)

B*) Most criminals get caught, some don't. Those caught each spend years in prison, where they are punished, humiliated, raped. This time is a horrible experience for them. When they get out, they are often in worse condition than before. Many of them continue to commit crimes. Crime rates are high. (Again, you know the story...)

Which scenario would you prefer? A* or B*?

What this boils down to is: What is more important to you, a safe society or punishment of criminals?

And as bonus questions:

If you chose B*:

Let's again consider two scenarios (independent of the previous ones):
C) Someone rapes a girl, is never caught, but also never commits a crime again. He leads a happy life afterwards.
D) Someone rapes a girl, continues to rape girls afterwards, is eventually caught and put in jail for decades.

If you had these two (theoretical) scenarios to choose from, which one would you prefer? If you chose D), would you reconsider if you knew your daughter was among the later girls?

If you chose A*:

Which scenario do you think our current situation is closer to, A* or B*? And what could we do to move it closer to A*?

Again: Please try and see these as theoretical scenarios and discuss them accordingly. Please don't say something like "But this is unrealistic!" or change the scenarios by writing something like "But he would certainly rape again if he did it once!".

I hope we'll have an interesting discussion...

P.S.: I expect some people to mention the importance of punishment as a deterrent. Please consider that once someone has committed a crime and got caught the deterrent already failed. And in light of our current prison population and crime rates the deterrent doesn't seem to be very effective. In this thought experiment, deterrent is not an issue because crime rates are considered given for the different scenarios.

(edited for spelling and clarity)

I don't think this is a proper 'experiment'. Why? Because it has absolutely no basis in reality.

It is a proven fact that some people are born(to be more specific...biologicaly inclined to be..) criminals. You may be asking yourself, How so? Let me give you a 'for instance': Most serial killers start out by killing and/or maiming small animals in their late childhood-teenage years before they go through with actual human torture/rape/murder. Many of these people have psychological disorders that would never allow them to be productive members of society. Even if I held their hand for ten years and we passed around smores during 'We are the World'. This 'experiment' is flawed because it starts out on an unprovable assumption that everyone is basicly decent and can get better with a little TLC.

Unfortunately, we live in the real world. There are some crazy people that just get their jollies off by killing people, raping small children or just inflicting harm or monetary damage.

Scenario 2 is also flawed. You assume that ALL criminals are 'humiliated' and 'raped' in prison. In fact, there are quite a few programs currently that allow felons the ability to improve their education and make a life for themselves afterwards. It isn't the prison system that dissaffects these people...it is their inability to obtain good work upon release. Your scenario two...doesn't take into account that these people would still be labeled 'felons' and would have trouble getting work...etc....which is the primary reason most people reoffend. (besides those that are just off their rockers)

Message edited by author 2008-08-12 01:24:28.

08/12/2008 01:25:53 AM · #67

Originally posted by kenskid:

C) Someone rapes a girl, is never caught, but also never commits a crime again. He leads a happy life afterwards.

D) Someone rapes a girl, continues to rape girls afterwards, is eventually caught and put in jail for decades.

How about E?
If you are caught raping a child or teenager. You are put to death. That way they would never commit that crime again.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

08/12/2008 01:28:42 AM · #68

Originally posted by Sam94720:

Like what? Cutting the hands of thiefs off, for example? Do you think that would lower crime rates?

I think you are way off base with the majority of Americans. I don't want to be rude..and I am trying not to be.

But, kissing a serial killer and tucking him into bed every night for a year isn't going to change the fundamental psychology of a person that stalks, rapes, tortures and murders their victims.

Message edited by author 2008-08-12 01:29:04.

Judi

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

08/12/2008 01:33:37 AM · #69

Originally posted by egamble:

Originally posted by kenskid:

C) Someone rapes a girl, is never caught, but also never commits a crime again. He leads a happy life afterwards.

D) Someone rapes a girl, continues to rape girls afterwards, is eventually caught and put in jail for decades.

How about E?
If you are caught raping a child or teenager. You are put to death. That way they would never commit that crime again.

Decades??? I wish....! I know someone who was put away for 15 years 3 months for kidnap, strangulation (attempted murder), rape and other charges (9 altogether) on a juvenile girl. He served 6 years 9 months. The victim was not to be told when he was released but did find out on the side...their excuse for that was the law didn't want the offender to be in danger from the victim and her family. He was from an incredibly wealthy family who refused to pay over $100,000 bail....he was disowned. He was treated very roughly in jail...only what he deserved. The girl....she suffered terribly, physically and mentally and still does. She looks over her shoulder constantly....even though she has been led to believe that he has been dealt with long term. Her family still holds a grudge over what it did to her family. This case was the cause for the change of the jail terms in that state and years later the case is still being spoken of in parliament and media.

The victim got a lifetime sentence....and in this case...so did he...but not in the way the courts dealt with it. How do I know all this?

I am the girl!

Message edited by author 2008-08-12 01:34:02.

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

08/12/2008 01:37:11 AM · #70

Originally posted by Judi:

Absolute bullshit! I am sorry you had to go through that. I can't believe this guy only got six years......how can that judge live with him/her self?

I had two baby cousins that were molested and raped by their dad (my uncle) and I can't stand that son of a &%(#^. There are certain people in society that step over a line that they can never be redeemed from (in this life, by most humans). They need to be locked away for life or just have them put out of this world..for the victims sake.

"But under scenario one of this thread..we could just give him a rainbow sucker and all would be well."

Message edited by author 2008-08-12 01:39:02.

Patrick_R

Canon EOS-60D

08/12/2008 01:38:43 AM · #71

Choice E.

Man tries to commit crime.... but in the nick of time batman comes and kicks bad guy butt!

Seriously though these are all catch 22 questions. I believe that in the end we all face a higher court so whether or not you get caught here is not going to matter. I take choice C. Only one person is hurt and the offender can answer to God when he dies. fair enough?

08/12/2008 02:42:11 AM · #72

Originally posted by egamble:

I don't think this is a proper 'experiment'. Why? Because it has absolutely no basis in reality.

It's not meant to be an "experiment" in the scientific sense. Just a theoretical thought experiment to consider.

Originally posted by egamble:

It is a proven fact that some people are born(to be more specific...biologicaly inclined to be..) criminals.

You are telling me that there are babies of just a few days who are already "criminals" and nothing will ever change that? Some people are born evil? Yes, there may be biological factors that make it more likely that someone shows aggressive tendencies, for example, but upbringing is a much more significant factor for criminality. (People who rape have often been victims of similar crimes in their youth, for example.)

Originally posted by egamble:

Many of these people have psychological disorders that would never allow them to be productive members of society.

Yes, there are such cases, as I acknowledged in a previous post. However, they only make up a tiny fraction of all criminals imprisoned.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

08/12/2008 02:49:27 AM · #73

Originally posted by Judi:

Terrible story. I'd like to ask you a question if I may. Obviously you wished that the perpetrator stayed in prison longer. Is that because you are still afraid of him and it would make you feel safer if you knew he was behind bars or because you want him to suffer longer? Would it make you feel better if he were say beat up every day?

Judi

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

08/12/2008 03:15:19 AM · #74

Originally posted by Sam94720:

Originally posted by Judi:
Decades??? I wish....! I know someone who was put away for 15 years 3 months for kidnap, strangulation (attempted murder), rape and other charges (9 altogether) on a juvenile girl. He served 6 years 9 months. The victim was not to be told when he was released but did find out on the side...their excuse for that was the law didn't want the offender to be in danger from the victim and her family. He was from an incredibly wealthy family who refused to pay over $100,000 bail....he was disowned. He was treated very roughly in jail...only what he deserved. The girl....she suffered terribly, physically and mentally and still does. She looks over her shoulder constantly....even though she has been led to believe that he has been dealt with long term. Her family still holds a grudge over what it did to her family. This case was the cause for the change of the jail terms in that state and years later the case is still being spoken of in parliament and media.

The victim got a lifetime sentence....and in this case...so did he...but not in the way the courts dealt with it. How do I know all this?

I am the girl!

Terrible story. I'd like to ask you a question if I may. Obviously you wished that the perpetrator stayed in prison longer. Is that because you are still afraid of him and it would make you feel safer if you knew he was behind bars or because you want him to suffer longer? Would it make you feel better if he were say beat up every day?

No. When my day in court came around....I remember sitting in bed having a cuppa in the morning before going to work....! I lived on the farm in those days. I suddenly got a call from my cousin who told me that he had been slipped in the back door of the courts without anyone been told. He had a good lawyer (his family at least covered that). I was in shock. I rang the Police Department who were covering my case. We lived 2 hours from where the court case was. They had no idea what I was talking about, until my Detective Sergeant got on the phone to me. He had read about it in the paper that morning. They hadn't even been informed. I went to work furious and upset. My bosses couldn't understand why. I explained....when I was locked in the car boot for 9 hours, gagged and bound....he was the cat and I was the mouse. I didn't even know his name. That day in court was my turn to be the cat and watch his face, being the mouse. That got taken away from me. He stole from my soul during the event and he stole my chance to have my revenge that day in court.

When my day in court for compensation came....we were not told until 5 minutes before the case, whether he was going to be there. He apparently had the right to be there!!!! I was a juvenile...and I had no rights...but he did.

So in answer to your question....I wanted him to suffer....but not in the way you think. I wanted him to see and feel for what he has done...not for what another would do to him in jail. I wanted him to stay there....as he told me the morning he was cleaning out his car....he was hiding the weapons...and he would be going to jail, but, he will be back to finish the job off. Do you know how that plays on ones mind?

Yes my injuries healed...but your innerself never does. What you do is find strength to make something of yourself. I can't forgive or forget, but I have learnt from it.

togtog