Is it normal that i'm largely opposed to incarceration?

50% Normal
19 Comments

After careful consideration, I can only deduce that the practice of incarceration is obtuse and essentially just faulty. I simply have no idea who it was who thought it a good idea to lock someone in a cage for years at taxpayer expense because they stole something or lost their temper (or even in some notable cases, simply said something that was deemed too politically incorrect).

Prison is just a colossal waste of money, time, and effort on the part of a number of parties. Not to mention the fact that it stands in defiance of the old and rather reasonable saying "the punishment should fit the crime." Someone who physically batters someone should perhaps just be physically battered themselves, if only to be forced to empathize with their victim and therefore reach a heightened understanding of general decency and morality, something which prison presumably cannot accomplish.

I personally think we should basically do away with prison and instead opt for a system of corporal punishment, fining, labor, deportation and, if need be, capital punishment. This would be so much easier for EVERYONE.

What I find particularly disturbing is that I've heard practically nothing from anyone which is congruent with my findings. What about you? Agree or disagree?

FYI, I've never been to jail or prison myself.

Voting Results
50% Normal
Based on 28 votes (14 yes)
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 19 )
  • [Old Memory]
    10 years ago

    Original OP here.

    I submitted this and it was initially rejected, then someone else, with my cooperation, submitted it under his name and it was approved. That version was deleted, and I just thought I'd give it one more shot under my name.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    4
    4
      -
    • dom180
      10 years ago

      I was wondering where I'd seen this before.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      1
      1
  • lufa
    10 years ago

    It's idiotic that they rejected your post but shit happens.

    Anyways, I agree with you to an extent. We put people in jail because we lack creativity. It's the be all end all solution to all sorts of different human behaviours.

    I'm on board with punishing people in exactly the same manner they treated their victims. I'm sure many criminals know if they get caught for raping/torturing kids, animals or women, they'll just get a cushy cell but not have to suffer in the way their victims did. So they happily commit their crimes-its no deterrent to extremely bad behaviour. I think knowing they could suffer in the same way if caught would serve as a deterrent.

    However in some cases putting people in jail makes sense since you remove them from society, yet they might not deserve death. Plus if the evidence is weak that they harmed someone, then we could end up punishing someone innocent.

    I think however people should be killed for violently raping someone. I could never imagine doing such a thing-this it is an act of an evil mind/person. However I don't include 'date rape' because I've known of many cases where the girl willingly had sex, then turned around and called it rape.

    As for theft, they should pay off their debts, so they're taught a lesson-unless violence was involved, that could change things.

    But here's the thing about murder, right now we treat everyone as equals, but say you kill someone for raping your child, I think that person deserves to be set free and the rapist deserved to die. So killing with a good enough reason should let someone off. I'm saying all this in a rough draft sense.

    I'd add one more point, I think criminality is ultimately genetic, so we'd need to find out which humans behave in this way and maybe just weed them out of the gene pool to eventually end most crimes.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    2
    2
      -
    • SkullsNRoses
      10 years ago

      The problem is that if we were able to isolate the genes which increase the likelihood of someone committing crimes what would we do with the people identified as having these genes? Would it be moral to kill them or monitor their behaviour even if they had committed no crimes? Would we also need to take into account the environment in which they were raised and their personal levels of aggression and empathy for other people before taking measures?

      Then there's the question of how we would find out who has the genes in the first place. Would we check only convicted criminals, or would everyone be compulsively checked at a certain age? How would people be treated once others knew they had the "criminal genes", what would they think of themselves? It's an ethical minefield.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
        -
      • lufa
        10 years ago

        The low-hanging fruit in this case would be sociopaths. We know their brains are wired differently, it's already been proven scientifically. They have shallow emotions, lack the ability to empathize with others and this disorder tends to be predominant among serial killers. Of course that's a small minority of all sociopaths, most of whom will likely never hurt anyone.

        Of course ideology (political or religious) along with the socioeconomic status also play a significant role.

        I think the prudent thing would be to perhaps create parallel societies or they would have to be monitored or kept in institutions for most of their lives.

        Some people are parasites in society-think of pimps or the global sex-trafficking trade. Why should we not wipe out people who do such things to others?

        Of course there is the danger of false-positives, getting 'normal' people labelled as abnormal and the creation of surveillance societies, which to an extent they are already. However we don't have the same level of state coercion and intimidation we see in Communist, Islamic or fascist nations.

        While it is a complex, thorny issue, I don't believe it is intractable. It can be solved and I think we can achieve something closer to a more civilized society.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        1
        1
  • [Old Memory]
    10 years ago

    "Someone who physically batters someone should perhaps just be physically battered themselves, if only to be forced to empathize with their victim"

    If someone physically batters you, then empathy is the last thing you will feel for your victim. Punishing people in the same way they offended reinforces their tendencies. Many people do violent things because they were the victims of violence earlier in life.

    Think...just...think.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    1
    1
      -
    • lufa
      10 years ago

      Whether the perp feels empathy for their victim if they're battered also is besides the point in my view. Call it revenge, payback, getting their just desserts, I think those who harm others deserve to harmed in the same way.

      I'm not looking for any 'higher' purpose or anything therapeutic, it's as simple as if you hit someone then expect to be hit back and call it even.

      Those people who were victims of violence and become violent themselves should know better and even if they don't, it's not an excuse or justification to harm others-so they get what they deserve all the same. There's plenty of other people who were victims and did not become abusers themselves.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      1
      1
  • MR.mr
    8 years ago

    I agree

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • [Old Memory]
    10 years ago

    You must be a liberal

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
      -
    • [Old Memory]
      10 years ago

      I have come to hold such labels in low regard, though if anything, I believe I'm actually considerably more right-leaning overall.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
        -
      • [Old Memory]
        10 years ago

        Then why do you hate jail? This is a position that most hippy-dippy Libs have; you know, the ones who are way too the left of Pbama, the real "socialists".

        Some people belong in jail and abolishing it would be stupid. I firmly believe we need to privatize prisons. That is such a cost-effective method.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        0
        0
          -
        • [Old Memory]
          10 years ago

          I suspect you did not read the OP.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
          0
          0
            -
          • [Old Memory]
            10 years ago

            I did and I do not agree with his view at all.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
            0
            0
  • Legion
    10 years ago

    my biggest problem with prison is that it simply hardens people and makes them better criminals. They will also may feel less guilty about doing another crime. They hardly do anything, and when theyre in the yard, the criminals beat, rape and kill each other, and most of the time, the guards look the other way. I think

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • Pisslan616
    10 years ago

    In the case of violent criminals prison might have more to do with keeping the general public safe than punishment.

    I agree with some of the commenters that there should be no profit motive. This will only encourage them to lock people up for stupid shit like drug possession and other minor offences simply to increase their profits. Maybe a fine or community service are more appropriate for these types of crime.

    As for capital punishment I am strongly opposed to it. The justice system is not full proof and you will end up killing innocent people eventually. This alone is sufficient to reject it but in addition to that it doesn't work as a deterrent and contrary to popular belief is very very costly.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • Terence_the_viking
    10 years ago

    You mean this is not a knapsack? damn you false advertisers.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • davesumba
    10 years ago

    There should be no law enforcement whatsoever. They don't do shit except make the corrupt government money.
    If every single person carried a gun on them at all times, there would be zero crime, or at least a very low rate.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
      -
    • lufa
      10 years ago

      If you take away 'the law' then your society will descend into barbarism, gang-rule and endless blood feuds.

      Think of what happened after Hurricane Katrina, mass raping, looting and so on. Some people have the wisdom to be able to self-govern, others need to be governed and be herded like cattle because they're little more than animals when your society's imposed norms and controls are removed.

      I'm a pro-gun advocate and all for freedom but until humans evolve into something more advanced and mature, mass means of coercion will remain with us for some time.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      1
      1
  • thegypsysailor
    10 years ago

    It's all about the money, honey, at least in the USA. Prisons are BIG business and everybody and their uncle wants a piece of the action. Don't expect anything to change any time soon.
    For rapists, child molesters, murders, crooked politicians and bankers, I say, "shoot 'em all and let god sort it out."

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0