Crime And Punishment.

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

What should be the purpose of a criminal sentance?

To justly punish a wrong doing.
11
22%
To prevent re-occurance.
14
29%
To re-normalise individual ethical behaviour.
14
29%
Other..
10
20%
 
Total votes: 49

t3hcanadian
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 1:00 pm UTC

Postby t3hcanadian » Fri Mar 16, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

...i'm not saying that we are 'magically instilled' but it is human nature to know what right v wrong is... if you ask the people most if not all will say murder is wrong...they will say theft is wrong...the will say rape is wrong...the will say that abuse is wrong
if you draw conclusions about me go ahead...but my methods of cleansing(for lack of better terms) the derranged from the populace before they infect the rest of society are to brought upon those who did the most heinous crimes...killing, raping and other crimes that directly affect the peoples of a society...for the more petty crimes...theft, speeding and whatnot...all that is needed is a sort of 'training school' that attempts to rehabilitate criminals into normal people who will fit back into society and not cause further damage to said society...

@tractor what is being taught by the society/family other than being instilled with those peoples beleifs (brainwashing basically...)

@fjanfjan I am man... and i have no intention of leading any nation or anything...noone else that I know shares these beleifs with me... they are my own and I will not try to convert any peoples to my thoughts because its just not what I do :p and I am only sharing another way of thinking on how to deal with crime and the prevention of it... not only that but I do not think that everyone is wrong and/or that my way is the only way...because me being human means I make mistakes in my life and especially in my train of thought#1 is true, by human nature they know what is right and wrong...#2 depending on the crime...yes they should not be allowed to contaminate the society with their malicious ideals...because once you commit a crime you are saying I have no respect for human nature and/or i am mentally defunct and therefore do not deserve to share in the greatness of society unless I get rehabilitated

@wisnij it is human nature to know what right v wrong is...ask all people of all ages and you'll get the answer that killing, stealing, raping, whatever crime is wrong... and yes I admit i may not have experienced the world as you have but i have based my ideas on years of thinking(since about when i was 14) and contemplating how to help society out and remove the black marks on society

User avatar
Tractor
Posts: 2467
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: no

Postby Tractor » Fri Mar 16, 2007 3:27 pm UTC

t3hcanadian wrote:if you draw conclusions about me go ahead...but my methods of cleansing(for lack of better terms) the derranged from the populace before they infect the rest of society are to brought upon those who did the most heinous crimes...killing, raping and other crimes that directly affect the peoples of a society...for the more petty crimes...theft, speeding and whatnot...all that is needed is a sort of 'training school' that attempts to rehabilitate criminals into normal people who will fit back into society and not cause further damage to said society...


So you're describing the current system with the death penalty brought in for much less severe crimes. (Equating your 'training school' to jail/rehab). It seems a bit too harsh in my opinion.

t3hcanadian wrote:@tractor what is being taught by the society/family other than being instilled with those peoples beleifs (brainwashing basically...)
[...]
@wisnij it is human nature to know what right v wrong is...ask all people of all ages and you'll get the answer that killing, stealing, raping, whatever crime is wrong... and yes I admit i may not have experienced the world as you have but i have based my ideas on years of thinking(since about when i was 14) and contemplating how to help society out and remove the black marks on society

By your definition how do we know that killing/raping/stealing/etc/etc/etc aren't just more 'brainwashed' values? These are just more things taught to kids at a very young age. Perhaps it is young enough that it seems like 'human nature', but that isn't necessarily the case.
9 x 6 = 42

Note: Randall kicks ass.

User avatar
Roffle
Posts: 804
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 1:28 pm UTC
Location: Here.
Contact:

Postby Roffle » Fri Mar 16, 2007 7:28 pm UTC

t3hcanadian wrote:...i'm not saying that we are 'magically instilled' but it is human nature to know what right v wrong is... if you ask the people most if not all will say murder is wrong...they will say theft is wrong...the will say rape is wrong...the will say that abuse is wrong
if you draw conclusions about me go ahead...but my methods of cleansing(for lack of better terms) the derranged from the populace before they infect the rest of society are to brought upon those who did the most heinous crimes...killing, raping and other crimes that directly affect the peoples of a society...for the more petty crimes...theft, speeding and whatnot...all that is needed is a sort of 'training school' that attempts to rehabilitate criminals into normal people who will fit back into society and not cause further damage to said society...

@tractor what is being taught by the society/family other than being instilled with those peoples beleifs (brainwashing basically...)

@fjanfjan I am man... and i have no intention of leading any nation or anything...noone else that I know shares these beleifs with me... they are my own and I will not try to convert any peoples to my thoughts because its just not what I do :p and I am only sharing another way of thinking on how to deal with crime and the prevention of it... not only that but I do not think that everyone is wrong and/or that my way is the only way...because me being human means I make mistakes in my life and especially in my train of thought#1 is true, by human nature they know what is right and wrong...#2 depending on the crime...yes they should not be allowed to contaminate the society with their malicious ideals...because once you commit a crime you are saying I have no respect for human nature and/or i am mentally defunct and therefore do not deserve to share in the greatness of society unless I get rehabilitated

@wisnij it is human nature to know what right v wrong is...ask all people of all ages and you'll get the answer that killing, stealing, raping, whatever crime is wrong... and yes I admit i may not have experienced the world as you have but i have based my ideas on years of thinking(since about when i was 14) and contemplating how to help society out and remove the black marks on society


Yes, well... What you're suggesting is quite frankly monstrous.

Firstly, there's this little thing called human rights, which vehemently opposes any kind of death penalty, a treaty that Canada has signed.

Secondly, the kind of society that would result from such a horrible abuse of power, and inhuman morals, would closely resemble the "justice" system of China, where you are convicted in a kangaroo court, and taken out back, and shot in the head. The price of the bullet, your family pays. Only your version is much worse.

Life is sacred, and the kind of sociopathic ideals you're spouting would lead to a society where people would be so afraid of the police, and "justice", you'd probably have a nation-wide uprising in a matter of weeks.

But that doesn't matter. What's important is that "kill them all" is not an answer to anything. Humanity does not consist of monsters and facists, and murdering people is no way to make justice.

My country has less than 10 murders a year, nation wide. Our most severe penalty is 21 years (murder), of which you are released after 14, as each "prison year" is 8 months. We practice heavy reintegration and councelling policies. And we are very proud of our justice system, though it is occasionally lacking. The death penalty was banned almost 100 years ago.

It's humane. And it works. And our criminals go back to beeing productive members of society. Repeat offenders are only common within narcotics/petty crimes.

Of course, I shouldn't even reply, as your "kill everyone" idea is ridiculous to the point of absurd. Would you be proud of living in a country that did that? Would you feel safe? What if your neighbour framed you? What if the chick you just dumped accuses you of rape, and you're wrongfully convicted? I'm sorry, but your "idea" is not very well thought through, it would be highly inefficient, inhumane, and I hope you're not really sitting there entertaining notions like these. If you are, you have issues.

Oh, yes, by the way, I'm quite familiar with legal systems, crime and punishment. I'm currently studying Law at uni now... Gonna be a lawyer.
"Error juris semper nocet"

User avatar
saxything43
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 4:03 pm UTC
Location: The band room, probably.
Contact:

Postby saxything43 » Tue Mar 20, 2007 6:22 pm UTC

I voted other, becuase I feel it really should be a combination of the three above. If someone commits a murder, they should be imprisoned a) to prevent them from doing so again. b) to give them a chance to reform, if that's even possible in prison. c) to be punished so they know they won't get away with things that many people consider to be morally and ethically wrong(i.e. are illegal).
This post brought you to by the number 42.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Postby Belial » Tue Mar 20, 2007 6:29 pm UTC

b) to give them a chance to reform, if that's even possible in prison.


I think we should be reforming the prison system so that that's more likely.

Most times, prison just teaches you how (forces you) to be more vicious and antisocial.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
fjafjan
THE fjafjan
Posts: 4766
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:22 pm UTC
Location: Down south up north in the west of eastern west.
Contact:

Postby fjafjan » Tue Mar 20, 2007 7:08 pm UTC

I am only sharing another way of thinking on how to deal with crime and the prevention of it

That's prefectly fine, sorry if I came off harsh, it's better that you discuss your ideas than.. not :P


is true, by human nature they know what is right and wrong[/quot]

See this is what you will never be able to prove, simply because nothing suggests this.
Let's look at some laws from a while ago that are morally repugnant now

In the bible, if a child disobeys his parents, he should be stoned to death
A woman should not be allowed to own property
If one man kills the slave of another man, he is to pay a fine of [x materials/wealth]

These were all more or less practised on society with virtually no one speaking out against them, obviously they thought them to be right and juste, just as you do with your views.
Your theory assumes that all societies with justice systems different from htat of yours, was aware of this fault, but for some reason, practicallity perhaps, or some inherant evil, refused to do anything about it.
It also means that the work of a lawmaker, judge or Jury will never be hard, they all know what is right or wrong, or atleast if you get a jury of young children who have not been corrupted

I guess I could formulate it more elegantly as this;
All people know what is right or wrong, unless they have been corrupted, in which case they should be executed, but who decides what is actually "right" and "wrong" and who is corrupting who? Who is this moral person, and why is she or he so special?


...#2 depending on the crime...yes they should not be allowed to contaminate the society with their malicious ideals...because once you commit a crime you are saying I have no respect for human nature and/or i am mentally defunct and therefore do not deserve to share in the greatness of society unless I get rehabilitated


That ends with an interesting bit, "unless I get rehabilitated". You earlier seemed to suggest the only cure for these malicious ideals was death, but here is some way of rehabilitation.
And really you incredibly oversimplify the choices of criminals, let's give you an example, which is not very likely in modern society, but definatly a case in some parts of the world.

A woman and her young child are homeless, wandering the streets, they see a wealthy couple eating a large meal, as they have not eaten for a long time and have no means other than prostitution to survive, she decides to steal it to save her and her childs life

So she should be executed, and is saying "I have no respect for human nature". I think survival is an essential part of human nature, and historically has been one that trumphs "right and wrong".
//Yepp, THE fjafjan (who's THE fjafjan?)
Liza wrote:Fjafjan, your hair is so lovely that I want to go to Sweden, collect the bit you cut off in your latest haircut and keep it in my room, and smell it. And eventually use it to complete my shrine dedicated to you.

User avatar
RealGrouchy
Nobody Misses Me As Much As Meaux.
Posts: 6704
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 7:17 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Postby RealGrouchy » Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:56 am UTC

This thread seems to be progressing the same way as criminology did.

First, people thought that if there were punishments just slightly more painful than the crime is beneficial, people will be deterred from crime.

While some people have realized that 150 years of testing this theory has shown that it's patently false, there are still many who believe it, because they think that everyone is perfectly logical. Deterrence only works if the punishment is swift, certain and severe, and it is simply impossible to ensure that all crimes are prosecuted (despite the RIAA's recent attempts), and our overpriced "justice" system is too backlogged to give a speedy and fair trial to those accused of a crime.

There is also the matter of who is a "criminal". If someone committed a crime, and they were sentenced to prison, and they served that sentence, are they still a "criminal"? The stigma of that label keeps that person from becoming a productive member of society. In Canada (which, by the way, is nowhere near being a shining star in criminal justice policy) such people may apply for a pardon. When you apply for a job, you may get asked, "have you ever been convicted of a crime for which you have not received a pardon?"

Further, what is a crime? That has been reasonably covered. Why is it illegal to smoke marijuana but legal to smoke tobacco? Etc.

Someone asked how many Americans are in jail. The answer is about 2.2 million. The US has the highest per-capita incarceration rate of the western world, higher than Russia, at over 700 per 100K. The lowest is Norway, with about 30 per 100K. (Canada and the UK are around 125 and rising)

Let me quote from Jeffrey Reiman's book "The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison", which I am reading for my criminology class:

Jeffrey Reiman wrote:"[T]he social order (shaped decisively by the economic system) bears responsibility for most of the crime that troubles us. This is true of all classes in the society, because a competitive economy that refuses to guarantee its members a decent living places pressures on all members to enhance their economic position by whatever means available. It degrades and humiliates the poor while encouraging the greed of the well off." (7th edition, Introduction, p.7)


In the poll, I voted "other", because the current North American criminal "justice" model only deals with crime after the fact, and does nothing to prevent it. (Deterrence doesn't work, and don't think that releasing someone into society with no support after ten years in jail will make them less likely to commit crime upon release!)

It costs anywhere from $20,000 to $100,000 dollars to keep a person in jail for a year, not counting the price of the police and courts that got them there. This money would be far better spent to remove the factors that drive these people to crime, factors such as poverty, lack of skills/education, and job opportunities.

I could go on...

- RG>
Jack Saladin wrote:etc., lock'd
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:At least he has the decency to REMOVE THE GAP BETWEEN HIS QUOTES....
Sungura wrote:I don't really miss him. At all. He was pretty grouchy.


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests