Abolishing prisons

Rehabilitation over punishment. Crime is, except in very few cases which are better dealt with utilizing psychiatric help, a symptom of the society's inability to provide for its needy.

And better than thy stroke; why swellest thou then?

The 3 strikes law just baffles me sometimes...I understand it's purpose, but the opposition that confuses me.

Without reading up on it, I ASSUME it has to do with sending a person to prison for getting in trouble with the police no matter how small the offense.

If that's the case, how hard is it to NOT get all 3 strikes? Or heck, even a single strike at all.

edited 2nd May '11 9:29:41 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

"Because of how overly liberal our society is in regards to capital punishment, prison is the only thing we have for criminals. And even that is insultingly soft in modern days anyways. Notice how we added a BASKETBALL COURT in a prison.◊ And prisoners aren't exactly locked up. There are periods everyday where prisoners could walk out of their cells thanks to the attempts to soften prison."

Don't cast those stones so quickly. You don't know what people are in there for, and you don't know whether you wouldn't have reenacted their mistakes had you been in their place. Our prisons aren't "soft," and the reason certain freedoms are allowed is that study after study demonstrates that prisons which attempt a semblance of regular life as opposed to inhumane routine are better suited for rehabilitation and do not create as many repeat offenders.

And better than thy stroke; why swellest thou then?

Really kaschei? Got a link to any of that information by chance? I'd like to do some reading on that.

edited 2nd May '11 9:35:35 PM by Usht

The thing about making witty signature lines is that it first needs to actually be witty.

You know what I find really funny?...in one thread I'm arguing that we're being too humane, and in another thread, I'm arguing we were being too in-humane. And both fit directly into my values of life.

^^ In that case, we should have different prisons for different criminals. I don't mean stuff like young offfenders and old offenders. I mean murderers/rapists for one prison, and...graffiti-ers/bootleg pirates in a softer one.

edited 2nd May '11 9:39:25 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

The different grades of prison do sorta cover that, but there's still some overlap.

The number of prisoners I'd subject to Supermax solitary is pretty low though.

And there would be a shitstorm when it comes to deciding the borderline criminals...

Should this guy be sent to moderate prison or prison-rape prison?

Well, atleast we'll all agree that the intentionally murderous types should be sent to supermax.

Although to be perfectly honest...if we could separate criminals into moderate and hard prison...why not just execute all the criminals sent into Hard prison to begin with? Keep the ones in moderate and soft alive, have them rehabilitated. Execute the ones in hard.

edited 2nd May '11 9:50:23 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

Cuz you can't take it back.

Also, I don't trust the government that much. So no, I won't give it that authority if I can help it.

edited 2nd May '11 9:53:19 PM by blueharp

For the same reason why liberals and conservatives are arguing about the death penalty. Plus, you'll notice the waiting line for sparky is rather long because people will keep trying to get a new appeal at court because death is the absolute worst and they know they got nothing to lose resulting in sometimes even more money being wasted on them.

The thing about making witty signature lines is that it first needs to actually be witty.

I thought the most popular form of execution is injection now? Apparently the electric chair is "inhumane". Geez, they're criminals who committed crimes that warrant death, and now they argue that it's inhumane?

Since I'm not too familiar with american court procedures, I won't comment too much on repeals, except ask...is there a limit?

---

As for money. Seriously, it SHOULDN'T cost so much money to go to court. That's a flaw in the system that should be addressed, not the death penalty.

It's the equivalent of opposing polygamy by saying it's the same thing as child abuse. Just because a single religious sect that practices polygamy ALSO happens marry their underage daughters to grown men, doesn't mean the problem is polygamy.

edited 2nd May '11 9:58:01 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

Sparky or injection, it was just a general reference to death.

And, no, it's the waiting and such that incurs such high costs. People should have a limited number of trials on a subject or something before no more can be accepted.

EDIT: Kinda sorta, we'll just say American Lawyers are creative little fuckers when it comes to appeals and other loop holey areas.

edited 2nd May '11 10:01:01 PM by Usht

The thing about making witty signature lines is that it first needs to actually be witty.

repeals?? Well, we can't repeal the bill of rights.

Appeals, well, there are limits, but how quickly do you want to let the state kill anybody? Haste is the last thing I want. I don't want it to be cheap. If we're going to let them do it, then I want it to be thorough. That will be expensive, but doing things right is rarely cheap and quick.

If you don't want to pay that cost, fair enough, I'm willing to accept less thoroughness when it comes to life in prison. That would actually be preferable to me, given that the system is still flawed.

edited 2nd May '11 10:01:35 PM by blueharp

In a perfect world we'd have prisons for those of lesser crimes who honestly need rehabilitation instead of throwing em to the wolves and say "Have fun trying to get into a gang or getting shanked!"

Prisons are effing terrible, and if you ever end up in prison you will NEVER be able to get back into society ever again. Guess what your only option is? Yep, more crime.

@Usht

http://cjjr.georgetown.edu/pdfs/ebp/lipsey_cullen2007.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/magazine/14prisons-t.html?pagewanted=1 - An article I read a couple of years ago I found very interesting

http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Rehabilitation_vs_retribution - Some key points outlined by laymen

@Signed, is there a very compelling reason that forces you not to look at the issue critically, blunting your worldview into a delusion that people are either GOOD or BAD and that BAD people deserve the harshest punishment the status quo can dole out?

edited 2nd May '11 10:05:21 PM by kashchei

And better than thy stroke; why swellest thou then?

Life in Prison is far too expensive and inefficient. We'll be feeding, sheltering, and taking care of a criminal for the rest of his life while he just sits there laughing at the fact that society is taking care of him after whatever deeds he just did.

While I want the investigation to be thorough, I would just love to see where all that excessive amount of cash is going. Whose pocket are they dropping into? Because the amount it takes to assasinate someone is clearly too high. SOMETHING has to be done about the procedure, not the execution itself.

edited 2nd May '11 10:04:02 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

I'm sure he'll be laughing what with the lack of ever being free again. Ever.

He gets to live like a farm animal, basic needs like a roof water and food and an hour of air. And I'm sure even farm animals get better treatment. I'm sure he finds that HIIIILARIOUS.

And appeals are what are so expensive. And as fun as it would be to get rid of that, we'd suddenly be no better than China.

edited 2nd May '11 10:05:06 PM by Thorn14

I'd MUCH rather live like a farm animal than crawling in the streets and eating out of garbage cans.

Or live in poverty worrying about paying the bills and buying food.

---

And when it comes to this subject matter, I actually respect China...to a certain extent*

^{not a big fan of their censorship though}

. They managed to find a good way to deal with the lack of organ donors! Atleast they know how to make use of their criminals.

edited 2nd May '11 10:07:40 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

"I'd MUCH rather live like a farm animal than crawling in the streets and eating out of garbage cans."

Which is why some people resort to crime, oh, the irony.

"In that case, we should have different prisons for different criminals. I don't mean stuff like young offfenders and old offenders. I mean murderers/rapists for one prison, and...graffiti-ers/bootleg pirates in a softer one."

We do, but apart from white-collar prisons, the conditions are still not quite as humane as they should be.

edited 2nd May '11 10:11:35 PM by kashchei

And better than thy stroke; why swellest thou then?

The money is going into the operators of the prison industry, which is why a lot of bogus laws remain on the books.

Relatively few people are in federal prison for violent crime.

I can't pin you down. One moment you are saying we are too in humane, next thing I know you want the government to kill freely.

And I think that says more about our infrastructure and way we treat our homeless than our prisons.

Also I can't imagine alot of homeless people are committing crimes that would put them in life in prison.

edited 2nd May '11 10:11:35 PM by Thorn14

Do remember that it's still supposed to be prison.

---

^ I already pointed that out. Yet both cases, this is going along with my world view. This is why I hate the term "left wing" and "right wing". Because I find myself leaping to both sides continuously.

I'll just say...I choose manners over acting like a dick when I visit other people's houses. When I go to other's house, I play follow THEIR rules whether I agree with them or not. When I'm in my own house, I do what I want according to MY rules, and I expect visitors to respect them too, whether they agree with them or not.

PS-it's inhumane, no spaces.

edited 2nd May '11 10:18:11 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

"Do remember that it's still supposed to be prison."

You're being tautological. A prison is whatever we deem an appropriate center for correction. The current American system leaning on the punitive side does not convince me that punishment is the more effective than rehabilitation.

"PS-it's inhumane, no spaces."

PS stands for post scriptum; if you haven't signed your post, PS does not belong in it. Can we cut the pedantry now?

edited 2nd May '11 10:20:25 PM by kashchei

And better than thy stroke; why swellest thou then?

See, part of the problem is that there's a disconnect between the people who think prison needs to meet certain standards of humanity and those who think it just needs to be opposite of Disneyworld.

Yep.

Some people won't be satisfied until every single prisoner is forced to starve and risk dying of dysentery.

I'm not saying let them free but DAMN I bet a good 50% honestly need help and could honestly turn around if the cards weren't so stacked against them.

Is it really worth helping some of them. If they were sent in for graffiti, sure, help him get back off his feet.

But there are others who just aren't worth keeping alive.

---

So...anyone wanna answer my question regarding the 3 strikes rule at the top of the page?

In my opinion, if you had 3 chances, and blew all 3 up, it's your own fault. I don't care if your race/class/gender is bad or whatever.

edited 2nd May '11 10:26:47 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."