I don't understand...

[ghoti]

But putting them in prison currently is simply removing them from the street.
They are not "locked up" as you put it.
They continue to enjoy access to music, television, gym facilities, team sports, even a university education.
I'm not advocating torture, death, withdrawal of healthcare or nutrition; I am simply suggesting that being locked up should mean just that.....locked away. In a cell. Alone. No radio, no TV, no twice weekly movie nights.
Carry out a crime...any crime...and your punishment will be complete loss of liberty and all the social niceties that go along with that.
And yes I mean any crime. The punishment would be the same. The only thing that would differ would be the length of the sentence.
In an ideal world perhaps things could be learned from these people, but ultimately it would be a hugely expensive and pointless exercise. I believe on a voluntary basis you would have a 0% uptake, and if compulsory you would at best have research based on the lies of people whose lives are based on such, and at worse a long list of pending court cases based on the breaching of "human rights".
A prison sentence should continue to be a punishment until the day of release IMO, and should not end as soon as the gate close upon admittance.

So for you, the prison system is purely punitive and rehabilitation is not a consideration?
You want society to exact retribution on criminals rather than work towards making them functional contributors?
Fair enough. Not a mindset I'll even pretend to understand or sympathise with, but you're entitled to your own priorities.
Personally, I'd rather we left retribution in the dark ages.

 

[viv1969]

Yes, for me the prison system should be purely punitive; one in which the offender should fully serve their sentence.
Should they express a wish to be rehabilitated, then such a process should be made available to them after the punitive sentence has been served.

 

[ghoti]

Yes, for me the prison system should be purely punitive; one in which the offender should fully serve their sentence.
Should they express a wish to be rehabilitated, then such a process should be made available to them after the punitive sentence has been served.

I don't get that mindset at all.
What satisfaction do you get from the idea of pure punishment? How does it comfort you?
It just seems vindictive and primitive to me.

 

[archangel]

I partially agree with viv1969 with removal of total liberty in a 6x8 cell with basic food and no other human contact in most cases but where a human pre meditates abduction, rape or murder they sentence needs to be more severe.....I am not condoning the villagers with Pitch forks or masses of hysteria filled mobs......merely a controlled death sentence or using them for medical trials.

The law in the UK is a totally out of touch with reality......When a person who has over 100 previous burglary charges and conviction get only a 3 month suspended sentence or a carer who physically tortures a vulnerable patient get 3 years when in reality 15 years would be more acceptable and would make other think twice about doing similar.........

We need examples made of a few people as a warning to those other who are hell bent on committing crime and as a society we should have no fear from the wishy washy tree hugging do gooders who fight for the human rights of the scum bags who are literally getting away with "Murder".

Since 2007 Bahrain has had only 3 murders....... Penalty for murder in Bahrain....DEATH BY FIRING SQUAD

Between 2007-2012 England and Wales (not inc Scotland or NI) had 5079 murders (Office of National Statistics) and the Penalty for murder in the UK is a comfy cell, PlayStation, Television, Library, Full medical care (which most OAPS don't get) and not to forget the First class food to their dietary needs and the new look muscular body from hours of down time in the gym.

I think this says it all!

 

[ghoti]

Why do some people get a kick out of the idea of other human beings suffering and dying?
Disgusting and bizarre. No matter what they might have done.

 

[viv1969]

I don't get that mindset at all.
What satisfaction do you get from the idea of pure punishment? How does it comfort you?
It just seems vindictive and primitive to me.

I don't get satisfaction other than the idea that to carry out a crime will result in a truly punitive sentence instead of that which exists now.
I don't consider myself a vindictive person but you are, as we all are, entitled to you opinion.
For the record I am also speaking as someone who has been a victim of crime, and also as the sister of someone sentenced to a laughably easy sentence for a serious crime.

 

[archangel]

Why do some people get a kick out of the idea of other human beings suffering and dying?
Disgusting and bizarre. No matter what they might have done.

The only people who get a kick out of other human beings suffering and dying are the Criminals/ Madmen and Mad women carrying out these hideous crimes to satisfy their perverse needs.

I don't get a kick out of it! but I do believe that if your crime cause others to suffer then these individuals have no place on this earth.....

 

[ghoti]

The only people who get a kick out of other human beings suffering and dying are the Criminals/ Madmen and Mad women carrying out these hideous crimes to satisfy their perverse needs.

I don't get a kick out of it! but I do believe that if your crime cause others to suffer then these individuals have no place on this earth.....

You clearly get some sort of satisfaction from the idea.

 

[Pookeyhead]

But putting them in prison currently is simply removing them from the street.
They are not "locked up" as you put it.

Well.. they are. They can't go anywhere except where they are allowed to go in prison. They have lost their liberty in as much as they are only free to do what is allowed, when it is allowed.

They continue to enjoy access to music, television, gym facilities, team sports, even a university education.

You act as if these are the only things that make our lives what they are. As for education, why not? You propose that your methods would be applicable to any crime, with only the duration differing. So some 18 year old scrotebag assaults someone, and we bang him up in a concrete cell for 23.5 hours a day, then release him 6 months later, what's changed? What you are ignoring is WHY he assaulted someone in the first place? The fact that he may be a totally disenfranchised, desperate person with absolutely no hope or future, and sees absolutely no reason for complying with what we deem to be acceptable behaviour. What will change once he's released? He'll still feel the same. What about those that commit crimes because of drug addiction? You think they're not going to just repeat offend because you locked them in a concrete box for a while? They'll hate authority and society even more. They'll feel even more disconnected with it. Where's the incentive to become productive members of society?

What you seem to neglect in your arguments is that there are countries that DO employ the methods you seem to think will work, and they simply don't. If they were effective, people would only offend once, and then be "corrected" by such institutions. The reality is that they do re-offend, despite the harsh conditions.

I genuinely think people want prisoners to suffer to actually satisfy themselves, not because there's any real need to make them suffer. It sates their feelings of outrage that people can commit offences against them, their loved ones, and property. The reality is usually they will just re-offend if nothing is done to change the way they love their lives. Prison purely as as a punitive system can only ever really work if you never release them, which is not an option for lesser offences.

In an ideal world perhaps things could be learned from these people, but ultimately it would be a hugely expensive and pointless exercise. I believe on a voluntary basis you would have a 0% uptake, and if compulsory you would at best have research based on the lies of people whose lives are based on such,

Only if the research relies on answered questions. Medical evidence can not be refuted. The answer to why some people do not have the ability to feel remorse for killing someone in cold blood, or getting satisfaction from it may well lie in their DNA or chemistry. Maybe.. for all we know, there's a protein that switches on in part of their genome that prevents production of mood modifying chemistry in their brains. That may be identifiable as a part of their DNA. That could be screened for routinely, and corrected through gene therapy. The only way we will ever know that, is if we study those that exhibit that behaviour... i.e, prisoners who have been convicted of that behaviour. The alternative is do nothing, lock them in a cell, and just wait for the next one to come along. That, means more people will get killed by that next one . At some point, we have to find an answer. Your solution does not offer one.

A prison sentence should continue to be a punishment until the day of release IMO, and should not end as soon as the gate close upon admittance.

A prison sentence IS a punishment. They'll never be able to take a walk on a cold, crisp autumn morning. They'll never be able to lead a normal life; Eat a sandwich in a café, meet someone to love; watch their children grow; go for a drive; buy a house, car, or anything else. They'll never be able to go on holiday. They're captive in the same building, day in, day out. You think being able to watch TV some way alleviates all of that? All I can say is, TV must play a really important part of your life I could quite happily live without TV. In fact, I probably watch about 1 hours worth of TV a week. Locking me up in prison with TV would make absolutely no bloody difference. It's my loss of liberty that I'd miss, not stupid facilities like TV or a gym.

The law in the UK is a totally out of touch with reality......When a person who has over 100 previous burglary charges and conviction get only a 3 month suspended sentence or a carer who physically tortures a vulnerable patient get 3 years when in reality 15 years would be more acceptable and would make other think twice about doing similar.........

I agree that the length of sentences is stupid sometimes. Let's get one thing straight... I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I just feel that being banged up IS punishment. You don't meter out MORE punishment while they're in there, as once they are released you've just created an even more disconnected, bitter, and disenfranchised person who will probably re-offend. Nothing has been fixed to make that person's circumstances conducive to wanting to be a better person.

Between 2007-2012 England and Wales (not inc Scotland or NI) had 5079 murders (Office of National Statistics) and the Penalty for murder in the UK is a comfy cell, PlayStation, Television, Library, Full medical care (which most OAPS don't get) and not to forget the First class food to their dietary needs and the new look muscular body from hours of down time in the gym.

I think you're painting a very unrealistic picture of our prisons. You make them sound wonderful. I think I'll go commit a crime The reality is, I'd probably get abused and beaten by other inmates, depressed, quickly very, very bored. I'd be living in fear, and quickly learn I'd have to become like them in order to survive. I'd harden up, and learn to fight. I'd learn that survival of the fittest is essential. I'd learn to leave my emotions behind, and focus on being tough and I'd never let those softer, more empathic emotions surface ever again. Then I'd be released... a hard, tough, sociopathic, poor, unemployed and incompatible individual. You reckon I;d just slot right back in to society? What I'd become is something utterly incompatible with society. What use is survival of the strongest out here in the real world? What use would burying all empathic emotions have out here in reality? I;d be a dangerous time bomb.. that's what I'd be.

Hmmm.....

I think some people need to do some research, as there's a lot of [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER] being talked in here.

 

[archangel]

You clearly get some sort of satisfaction from the idea.

And where do I say that?

 

[ghoti]

I don't get satisfaction other than the idea that to carry out a crime will result in a truly punitive sentence instead of that which exists now.
I don't consider myself a vindictive person but you are, as we all are, entitled to you opinion.
For the record I am also speaking as someone who has been a victim of crime, and also as the sister of someone sentenced to a laughably easy sentence for a serious crime.

I've also been the victim of crime.

If you want to punish and inflict suffering rather than attempt rehabilitation then you are, by definition, a vindictive person.

 

[archangel]

Well.. they are. They can't go anywhere except where they are allowed to go in prison. They have lost their liberty in as much as they are only free to do what is allowed, when it is allowed.



You act as if these are the only things that make our lives what they are. As for education, why not? You propose that your methods would be applicable to any crime, with only the duration differing. So some 18 year old scrotebag assaults someone, and we bang him up in a concrete cell for 23.5 hours a day, then release him 6 months later, what's changed? What you are ignoring is WHY he assaulted someone in the first place? The fact that he may be a totally disenfranchised, desperate person with absolutely no hope or future, and sees absolutely no reason for complying with what we deem to be acceptable behaviour. What will change once he's released? He'll still feel the same. What about those that commit crimes because of drug addiction? You think they're not going to just repeat offend because you locked them in a concrete box for a while? They'll hate authority and society even more. They'll feel even more disconnected with it. Where's the incentive to become productive members of society?

What you seem to neglect in your arguments is that there are countries that DO employ the methods you seem to think will work, and they simply don't. If they were effective, people would only offend once, and then be "corrected" by such institutions. The reality is that they do re-offend, despite the harsh conditions.

I genuinely think people want prisoners to suffer to actually satisfy themselves, not because there's any real need to make them suffer. It sates their feelings of outrage that people can commit offences against them, their loved ones, and property. The reality is usually they will just re-offend if nothing is done to change the way they love their lives. Prison purely as as a punitive system can only ever really work if you never release them, which is not an option for lesser offences.



Only if the research relies on answered questions. Medical evidence can not be refuted. The answer to why some people do not have the ability to feel remorse for killing someone in cold blood, or getting satisfaction from it may well lie in their DNA or chemistry. Maybe.. for all we know, there's a protein that switches on in part of their genome that prevents production of mood modifying chemistry in their brains. That may be identifiable as a part of their DNA. That could be screened for routinely, and corrected through gene therapy. The only way we will ever know that, is if we study those that exhibit that behaviour... i.e, prisoners who have been convicted of that behaviour. The alternative is do nothing, lock them in a cell, and just wait for the next one to come along. That, means more people will get killed by that next one . At some point, we have to find an answer. Your solution does not offer one.




A prison sentence IS a punishment. They'll never be able to take a walk on a cold, crisp autumn morning. They'll never be able to lead a normal life; Eat a sandwich in a café, meet someone to love; watch their children grow; go for a drive; buy a house, car, or anything else. They'll never be able to go on holiday. They're captive in the same building, day in, day out. You think being able to watch TV some way alleviates all of that? All I can say is, TV must play a really important part of your life I could quite happily live without TV. In fact, I probably watch about 1 hours worth of TV a week. Locking me up in prison with TV would make absolutely no bloody difference. It's my loss of liberty that I'd miss, not stupid facilities like TV or a gym.




I agree that the length of sentences is stupid sometimes. Let's get one thing straight... I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I just feel that being banged up IS punishment. You don't meter out MORE punishment while they're in there, as once they are released you've just created an even more disconnected, bitter, and disenfranchised person who will probably re-offend. Nothing has been fixed to make that person's circumstances conducive to wanting to be a better person.



Between 2007-2012 England and Wales (not inc Scotland or NI) had 5079 murders (Office of National Statistics) and the Penalty for murder in the UK is a comfy cell, PlayStation, Television, Library, Full medical care (which most OAPS don't get) and not to forget the First class food to their dietary needs and the new look muscular body from hours of down time in the gym.

I think you're painting a very unrealistic picture of our prisons. You make them sound wonderful. I think I'll go commit a crime The reality is, I'd probably get abused and beaten by other inmates, depressed, quickly very, very bored. I'd be living in fear, and quickly learn I'd have to become like them in order to survive. I'd harden up, and learn to fight. I'd learn that survival of the fittest is essential. I'd learn to leave my emotions behind, and focus on being tough and I'd never let those softer, more empathic emotions surface ever again. Then I'd be released... a hard, touch, sociopathic, poor, unemployed and incompatible individual. You reckon I;d just slot right back in to society? What I'd become is something utterly incompatible with society. What use is survival of the strongest out here in the real world? What use would burying all empathic emotions have out here in reality? I;d be a dangerous time bomb.. that's what I'd be.

Hmmm.....

I think some people need to do some research, as there's a lot of [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER] being talked in here.[/quote]

If you think opinion is "[PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER]" then a lot of People talk a lot of "[PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER]"

 

[ghoti]

And where do I say that?

Well, you've said you want certain criminals killed or made the subjects of medical experiments. It follows that you find the idea satisfying in one way or another.

 

[viv1969]

I've also been the victim of crime.

If you want to punish and inflict suffering rather than attempt rehabilitation then you are, by definition, a vindictive person.

Where did I say I wish to inflict suffering?
Like many Pollyannas in society, you simply twist things to have the read the way you wish them to.

 

[big soft moose]

I'm happy to see rehabilitation for criminals where its possible

but we need to take off the rose tinted glasses and admit that it often isn't - and if it isnt you either have to make them afraid to reoffend, or make sure they can't reoffend (either by keeping them locked up or by executing them)

 

[Pookeyhead]

If you think opinion is "[PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER]" then a lot of People talk a lot of "[PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER]"

I read your opinions on justice.. then look at what you chose as an avatar... and I'm joining the dots

 

[ghoti]

Where did I say I wish to inflict suffering?
Like many Pollyannas in society, you simply twist things to have the read the way you wish them to.

Sorry? You said you wanted criminals banged up in a cell, alone, with nothing to occupy their mind (radio, TV, whatever). Is that not inflicting suffering?
I mean, if not additional suffering, what do you think you would be adding to the prison experience by depriving prisoners of human contact or distraction?

 

[LCPete]

To me the problem is simply that for a lot of crimes like burglary now the criminals don't get locked up unless they are repeat offenders
I would happily pay a bit more in tax to keep them locked up
But agree with David it has to be about trying to change their behaviour / reform them

 

[big soft moose]

Sorry? You said you wanted criminals banged up in a cell, alone, with nothing to occupy their mind (radio, TV, whatever). Is that not inflicting suffering?
I mean, if not additional suffering, what do you think you would be adding to the prison experience by depriving prisoners of human contact or distraction?

Personally i wouldn't go that far - solitary is cruel an unusual punishment - however i basically agree with ruth that prison should be a punishment, that means a basic cell not one that is better appointed than many old peoples homes. As to mental stimulation i'd make them work to pay for their keep,

 

[viv1969]

Well.. they are. They can't go anywhere except where they are allowed to go in prison. They have lost their liberty in as much as they are only free to do what is allowed, when it is allowed.

Are we not all free to do what is allowed when it is allowed?

You act as if these are the only things that make our lives what they are. As for education, why not? You propose that your methods would be applicable to any crime, with only the duration differing. So some 18 year old scrotebag assaults someone, and we bang him up in a concrete cell for 23.5 hours a day, then release him 6 months later, what's changed? What you are ignoring is WHY he assaulted someone in the first place? The fact that he may be a totally disenfranchised, desperate person with absolutely no hope or future, and sees absolutely no reason for complying with what we deem to be acceptable behaviour. What will change once he's released? He'll still feel the same. What about those that commit crimes because of drug addiction? You think they're not going to just repeat offend because you locked them in a concrete box for a while? They'll hate authority and society even more. They'll feel even more disconnected with it. Where's the incentive to become productive members of society?

Being disenfranchised, as you put it, or desperate is absolutely no excuse.
Thousands, if not millions, face hardship on a daily basis, but they do not CHOOSE to go out and commit crimes against another person / persons to get what they want.

What you seem to neglect in your arguments is that there are countries that DO employ the methods you seem to think will work, and they simply don't. If they were effective, people would only offend once, and then be "corrected" by such institutions. The reality is that they do re-offend, despite the harsh conditions.

I don't care about the systems in other countries. I don't live in them.
Using them as an example is a weak argument at best.

I genuinely think people want prisoners to suffer to actually satisfy themselves, not because there's any real need to make them suffer. It sates their feelings of outrage that people can commit offences against them, their loved ones, and property. The reality is usually they will just re-offend if nothing is done to change the way they love their lives. Prison purely as as a punitive system can only ever really work if you never release them, which is not an option for lesser offences.

Yes. It should be punitive.

Only if the research relies on answered questions. Medical evidence can not be refuted. The answer to why some people do not have the ability to feel remorse for killing someone in cold blood, or getting satisfaction from it may well lie in their DNA or chemistry. Maybe.. for all we know, there's a protein that switches on in part of their genome that prevents production of mood modifying chemistry in their brains. That may be identifiable as a part of their DNA. That could be screened for routinely, and corrected through gene therapy. The only way we will ever know that, is if we study those that exhibit that behaviour... i.e, prisoners who have been convicted of that behaviour. The alternative is do nothing, lock them in a cell, and just wait for the next one to come along. That, means more people will get killed by that next one . At some point, we have to find an answer. Your solution does not offer one.

Neither does yours. It is merely a pettycoated attempt to do so.

A prison sentence IS a punishment. They'll never be able to take a walk on a cold, crisp autumn morning. They'll never be able to lead a normal life; Eat a sandwich in a café, meet someone to love; watch their children grow; go for a drive; buy a house, car, or anything else. They'll never be able to go on holiday. They're captive in the same building, day in, day out. You think being able to watch TV some way alleviates all of that? All I can say is, TV must play a really important part of your life I could quite happily live without TV. In fact, I probably watch about 1 hours worth of TV a week. Locking me up in prison with TV would make absolutely no bloody difference. It's my loss of liberty that I'd miss, not stupid facilities like TV or a gym.

This paragraph is just laughable and makes your next one even more so.
I'm not talking about your TV habits, nor mine, and the badly hidden insult would be pathetic if it came from someone else.

I agree that the length of sentences is stupid sometimes. Let's get one thing straight... I'm no bleeding heart liberal. I just feel that being banged up IS punishment. You don't meter out MORE punishment while they're in there, as once they are released you've just created an even more disconnected, bitter, and disenfranchised person who will probably re-offend. Nothing has been fixed to make that person's circumstances conducive to wanting to be a better person.

See above.

I think some people need to do some research, as there's a lot of [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER] being talked in here.

yes, I agree, and many of your posts are amongst them.

 

[ghoti]

A lot of burglars (and blue collar criminals in general) are very vulnerable people themselves. Whether they know it or not. And in a very real sense, we, as a society, have failed them before they even thought about burglary.
We have a responsibility to try to right those failings. That's where rehabilitation rather than vengeance comes in.

 

[big soft moose]

But agree with David it has to be about trying to change their behaviour / reform them

The trouble what do you do if you can't ? - crrent the position is pretend that you have and let them go to reoffend which doesnt serve anyones best interests

 

[viv1969]

Sorry? You said you wanted criminals banged up in a cell, alone, with nothing to occupy their mind (radio, TV, whatever). Is that not inflicting suffering?
I mean, if not additional suffering, what do you think you would be adding to the prison experience by depriving prisoners of human contact or distraction?

And there it is.....the "Prison Experience".
Should we rank it then along side the Gap Year experience? The VSOS experience?
No. It should be punitive.

 

[LCPete]

A lot of burglars (and blue collar criminals in general) are very vulnerable people themselves. Whether they know it or not. And in a very real sense, we, as a society, have failed them before they even thought about burglary.
We have a responsibility to try to right those failings. That's where rehabilitation rather than vengeance comes in.

Yes but I didn't exactly have a good start in life but I didn't go and rob people a decent human being should know right from wrong
But do agree with you and David that it has to be about rehabilitation but just giving offenders suspended sentences or community service won't do that they should be locked up and trained to be proper members of society

 

[ghoti]

And there it is.....the "Prison Experience".
Should we rank it then along side the Gap Year experience? The VSOS experience?
No. It should be punitive.

So you want them to suffer. Glad we cleared that up.

 

[viv1969]

A lot of burglars (and blue collar criminals in general) are very vulnerable people themselves. Whether they know it or not. And in a very real sense, we, as a society, have failed them before they even thought about burglary.
We have a responsibility to try to right those failings. That's where rehabilitation rather than vengeance comes in.

Oh please. They have only failed themselves.
Everyone has the opportunity to make the best of their life. It might be tough, but it's true.
Everyone who commits a crime choses to do so.

 

[LCPete]

The trouble what do you do if you can't ? - crrent the position is pretend that you have and let them go to reoffend which doesnt serve anyones best interests

Yes you have a point and I don't know the answer to that

 

[viv1969]

So you want them to suffer. Glad we cleared that up.

I want them to know that when they comit a crime, then prison life isn't going to be a barrel of laughs, and maybe they might not wish to repeat the experience.

You seem to wish to give them an easy learning experience and an apology that their life isn't all it might have been.

 

[Pookeyhead]

Are we not all free to do what is allowed when it is allowed?

I have no desire to do what is not allowed by law... but within the law, I can, and do exactly what I want, when I want to, yes.

Being disenfranchised, as you put it, or desperate is absolutely no excuse.
Thousands, if not millions, face hardship on a daily basis, but they do not CHOOSE to go out and commit crimes against another person / persons to get what they want.

Because they're well adjusted, well brought up people, with no learning difficulties, or mental health issues. As others have said, society fails some people.. not the other way around.

I don't care about the systems in other countries. I don't live in them.
Using them as an example is a weak argument at best.

No it's not. If they don't work there, what makes you think they'll work here? Why ignore an already existing case study?

Neither does yours. It is merely a pettycoated attempt to do so.

Well, in fairness, it may well discover the reasons for extreme violence and psychopathic behaviour, and hence a cure.

This paragraph is just laughable and makes your next one even more so.
I'm not talking about your TV habits, nor mine, and the badly hidden insult would be pathetic if it came from someone else.

There was no intended insult, just an attempt to explain how utterly trivial TV is. I don't think it's laughable to list some of the things that make being free such a wonderful thing, and to make you think about losing them as a punishment.

yes, I agree, and many of your posts are amongst them.

(shrug)

 

[ghoti]

I want them to know that when they comit a crime, then prison life isn't going to be a barrel of laughs, and maybe they might not wish to repeat the experience.

You seem to wish to give them an easy learning experience and an apology that their life isn't all it might have been.

So you want them to suffer? You can say it. It's your opinion, don't be afraid of it.

 

[neil_g]

who'd have thought this topic would've ended up in an argument..

 

[ghoti]

You seem to wish to give them an easy learning experience and an apology that their life isn't all it might have been.

No. I want a justice system focused on rehabilitation, not retribution.
I don't see the point in depriving people of all comforts when they've already lost their liberty. Prison, as it stands, is not "a barrel of laughs" as you put it.
I would much rather we had the Norwegian system. Trust, compassion, support, rehabilitation; all while keeping the individual away from wider society for an appropriate period of time.

 

[viv1969]

So you want them to suffer? You can say it. It's your opinion, don't be afraid of it.

You're the one choosing to say it. Not I.
I'd prefer you didn't speak on my behalf, but I understand why you do, since you struggle to do otherwise.
I'm secure in my opinions, and if my wish was to see real suffering instead of the loss of all liberties, then I would say so.

 

[viv1969]

I would much rather we had the Norwegian system. Trust, compassion, support, rehabilitation; all while keeping the individual away from wider society for an appropriate period of time.

Then might I suggest an application for Norwegian residency?

 

[ghoti]

You're the one choosing to say it. Not I.
I'd prefer you didn't speak on my behalf, but I understand why you do, since you struggle to do otherwise.
I'm secure in my opinions, and if my wish was to see real suffering instead of the loss of all liberties, then I would say so.

Loss of all liberties isn't suffering? Deprived of company and distraction? Not suffering?

 

[ghoti]

You're the one choosing to say it. Not I.
I'd prefer you didn't speak on my behalf, but I understand why you do, since you struggle to do otherwise.
I'm secure in my opinions, and if my wish was to see real suffering instead of the loss of all liberties, then I would say so.

Loss of all liberties isn't suffering? Deprived of company and distraction? Not suffering?

 

[viv1969]

Loss of all liberties isn't suffering? Deprived of company and distraction? Not suffering?

No. It's a consequence. One which they are aware will occur if convicted of a crime.

 

[big soft moose]

No. I want a justice system focused on rehabilitation, not retribution.
.

So what do you propose when rehabilitation doesn't work ?

which is the basic problem

if someones driver to offend was psychological , rehabilitation might work - if the offender genuinely wants to change , if they don't then it definitely won't, while even if they dio it may not be succesful

if the driver to offend was economic - as in "they've got it, I haven't lets take it" the rehab alone is very unlikely to work because an ex con has even less prospect of gaining employment than he had before he commited the offence regardl;ess of what skills he might have picked up in prison

 

[ghoti]

So what do you propose when rehabilitation doesn't work ?

Well, like I've said already, I have no problem with the concept of prison per se. Remove someone who is a danger to people and property from society at large, and I've no problem with people spending their entire lives in prison in extreme cases where the goal is to segregate them from people or property that they may harm (although why some people think they must also be made to suffer inside, I do not know).
So where rehabilitation fails (inasmuch as we can be sure it has failed) - being held in custody indefinitely is an option for me. But there is a scale of options depending on the level of danger represented by the individual. There's a place for supervision in the community, also monitoring, for example.

 

[ghoti]

No. It's a consequence. One which they are aware will occur if convicted of a crime.

Of course it's a consequence, yes. That doesn't stop it being suffering. The consequence you propose is suffering inflicted upon an individual by the state.