Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Earthquake Damage]

Also: Slave labor shouldn't be in justice, that I can agree with. But it is also unfair to force society at large to cover for some of the sorts that populate our prisons, and the state should recoup expenses in some way. Perhaps, and I dread to say this because it is far worse than slave labor, but... run the prisons like communes?

Or maybe reduce the expense by not doling out prison time for trivial offenses like, say, minor drug possession charges?

[Criptfeind]

Unskilled laborers can't stare intently out of a window?

Um. Yes. But I do not see how that will help. Correct me if I am wrong, but building watch towers to guard the border is completely useless. You need to go out, stop cars, find people. A prison is also huge ineffective even for a watch tower.

[fqllve]

Or maybe reduce the expense by not doling out prison time for trivial offenses like, say, minor drug possession charges?

That would be ideal since prison time doesn't seem to make anyone more likely to quit using drugs.

Prison communes might actually be a good way to rehabilitate career criminals though. After all, our primary reason for imprisoning them is that they are a detriment to society, so showing them the value and pleasure of being a productive and important member might help.

[Earthquake Damage]

That would be ideal since prison time doesn't seem to make anyone more likely to quit using drugs.

The likelihood of repeat offenses was not my point.  I was questioning the rationale behind spending $foo per year for #bar years to imprison someone for <insert offense here> (which can range from reckless driving to god-knows-what).  Consider that an inmate does not meaningfully contribute to the economy during their incarceration.  Not all prisoners came from the (stereotypical) unemployed dregs of society.

Some offenses, particularly violent ones (e.g. rape, murder, arson, and rape), may warrant the expense.  IMO many do not.

Also, I suggested reducing expenditures (ZOMG letting dangerous petty criminals go free!!!11one) as an alternative to increasing revenue (and violating all manner of rights, real or imagined).

[ed boy]

Well, what on earth would you suggest as a replacement? Prison, along with other possible legal system punishments, serve a role as deterrent instead of punishment (indeed, I personally would say that their role as deterrent is much greater than their role as punishment). Simply saying that modern prisons form an ineffective punishment is not adressing the whole issue.

[fqllve]

The likelihood of repeat offenses was not my point.  I was questioning the rationale behind spending $foo per year for #bar years to imprison someone for <insert offense here> (which can range from reckless driving to god-knows-what).  Consider that an inmate does not meaningfully contribute to the economy during their incarceration.  Not all prisoners came from the (stereotypical) unemployed dregs of society.

No, I understood your point and was just trying to add to it that imprisonment of drug offenders is even further pointless because it cannot be justified as rehabilitation. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

Well, what on earth would you suggest as a replacement? Prison, along with other possible legal system punishments, serve a role as deterrent instead of punishment (indeed, I personally would say that their role as deterrent is much greater than their role as punishment). Simply saying that modern prisons form an ineffective punishment is not adressing the whole issue.

Sticking with drug offenses, are we really so desperate to deter them that we're willing to offer costly prison sentences that do little to correct the behavior or indeed deter people from using drugs? The negative effects of the drugs themselves serve as little deterrent and I would say they are far worse than any prison sentence.

[Earthquake Damage]

Well, what on earth would you suggest as a replacement? Prison, along with other possible legal system punishments, serve a role as deterrent instead of punishment (indeed, I personally would say that their role as deterrent is much greater than their role as punishment). Simply saying that modern prisons form an ineffective punishment is not adressing the whole issue.

I have a strong distaste for disproportionate sentencing, which seems to be a result of political convenience (hard to get reelected if you're soft on crime) and a disconnect between legislators/lobbyists (and sometimes a fevered general public -- judges aren't blameless either) who establish punishments and the convicts who suffer them.  In other words, it's easy to place/raise a cost on others when you've never had to, and probably never will, pay it yourself.

What would I suggest as a replacement?  Hell if I know.  That the status quo sucks doesn't mean I know how best to change it.

[DJ]

Community service instead of imprisonment for non-violent criminals.

[ed boy]

Well, what on earth would you suggest as a replacement? Prison, along with other possible legal system punishments, serve a role as deterrent instead of punishment (indeed, I personally would say that their role as deterrent is much greater than their role as punishment). Simply saying that modern prisons form an ineffective punishment is not adressing the whole issue.

Sticking with drug offenses, are we really so desperate to deter them that we're willing to offer costly prison sentences that do little to correct the behavior or indeed deter people from using drugs? The negative effects of the drugs themselves serve as little deterrent and I would say they are far worse than any prison sentence.

Lots of people consider only the short term. The negative effects of drugs are long-term, and thus lots of people don't consider them fully. Prison sentences and other things kick in a lot quicker, however, so people will be a lot less likely to do drugs if prison serves as a deterrent.

I will be the first to admit that prison is not a perfect solution, and is far from it, but I have yet to come across a better alternative.

Well, what on earth would you suggest as a replacement? Prison, along with other possible legal system punishments, serve a role as deterrent instead of punishment (indeed, I personally would say that their role as deterrent is much greater than their role as punishment). Simply saying that modern prisons form an ineffective punishment is not adressing the whole issue.

I have a strong distaste for disproportionate sentencing, which seems to be a result of political convenience (hard to get reelected if you're soft on crime) and a disconnect between legislators/lobbyists (and sometimes a fevered general public -- judges aren't blameless either) who establish punishments and the convicts who suffer them.  In other words, it's easy to place/raise a cost on others when you've never had to, and probably never will, pay it yourself.

What would I suggest as a replacement?  Hell if I know.  That the status quo sucks doesn't mean I know how best to change it.

You have to consider more than the individual criminal, you have to consider the rest of society. If you consider only the criminal, then yes, disproportionate sentencing is a bad thing. However, as I said, they also play the role of deterrent. Disproportionate sentences work wonderfully as deterrents.

Community service instead of imprisonment for non-violent criminals.

How on earth would you implement something like that? You would need to employ lots of people to observe the prisoners and make sure that they actually do the work. It would be done outside of the controlled environment of the prison, so more overseers would have to be hired to compensate for that. You would have to keep them under constant scrutiny to prevent them from running off, which, once again, requires more people and more costs. Even if you can so that, you then have to contend with the issue of forcing people to work, which would make them effectively slaves.

[GlyphGryph]

How on earth would you implement something like that? You would need to employ lots of people to observe the prisoners and make sure that they actually do the work. It would be done outside of the controlled environment of the prison, so more overseers would have to be hired to compensate for that. You would have to keep them under constant scrutiny to prevent them from running off, which, once again, requires more people and more costs. Even if you can so that, you then have to contend with the issue of forcing people to work, which would make them effectively slaves.

You... uh... DO realize they already DO this, right? And it usually works out fine? If they run off, community service options are removed and they get dumped in jail.
Obviously, it works best for criminals with a low flight risk, but that's actually a very large portion of them, especially with those handy ankle collars and stuff we've got now.

[DJ]

How can your boss be sure you're working in a real paying job? It's called results, if you don't show any you go to jail.

[Earthquake Damage]

You have to consider more than the individual criminal, you have to consider the rest of society. If you consider only the criminal, then yes, disproportionate sentencing is a bad thing. However, as I said, they also play the role of deterrent. Disproportionate sentences work wonderfully as deterrents.

I think that delves into "freedom vs security" territory.  Optionally replace "freedom" with "justice" or "security" with "order", since the trade-offs work roughly the same.  Either way, that land is murky and terrifying.  Here there be monsters and so forth.

[breadbocks]

To whoever said communes were worse than slave labor, think again.

Look at the Kibbutzim (Is that how it's spelled?) that can be found all over Isreal, or the Ashrams that Ghandi made. Those are all communes. Even, look at DF. Small scale communes work just like paper says. Large scale communes is when corruption sneaks into the mix and ruins it all.

[Gantolandon]

As for penal companies, I'll just say that even Soviets (who used something that could basically be called "slave labor") didn't implement this. There is nothing more stupid than giving away a weapon to someone that has every reasons to hate you and sending him somewhere where you can't control him effectively.

"Community service" is rarely implemented because it is hugely ineffective. You don't have to pay the prisoners much, but you need to hire some people who would watch them - and such employees are usually more expensive than unskilled workers. Quality of work would be abysmal, because the imprisoned people don't usually have any relevant experience. They wouldn't also have any motivation to do their job well - most of those people didn't manage to work honestly when they could earn anything. And, of course, they would be taking jobs from decent people who could otherwise earn some money.

[Earthquake Damage]

And, of course, they would be taking jobs from decent people who could otherwise earn some money.

Short-term:  Perhaps.
Long-term:  Fallacy.  Total available jobs is not a constant.