Incarceration: Rehabiliate and Protect? Or Punish?

Lestat · #1 08-09-2007, 02:06 AM

It goes without saying that people should bear the consequences of their actions. Cold call enough raises from a tight player with Q4s, and you deserve to be punished and lose your money. Get caught cheating on a test and you deserve to fail. Get caught pilfering company supplies and you deserve to lose your job. Etc., etc.

But I'm wondering if it should ever be the role of a civilized society to punish. Aren't rehabilitation and protection from the public the only roles society should be concerned about when it comes to incarcerating a fellow human being? Or should punishment also be a factor? And if so, how do we go about defining the varying degrees of the offense? Stealing a $1000 chip off someone playing in a $400-$800 game is wrong. But is it as wrong (or harmful), as stealing $1000 from an elderly lady who lives on welfare and food stamps? Should the punishments be the same?

What got me thinking about this is a recent news story about a man who, as part of a 12-step program for AA, tried to atone for a gang rape he took part in back in college. He is now middle age, I believe. The woman he raped, instead of accepting his apology, turned him in and he is now serving a 10 year prison sentence, which he will be eligible for parole in only months. This is not good enough for the woman who wants him imprisoned longer.

Don't get me wrong. I feel for the woman and she has every right to be angry, revengeful, or whatever else she wants to be. But this is a man, who now has a family and is otherwise successful and a productive member of society (and if he isn't, please don't harp on that. Let's assume he is). What's important is that he has presumably never committed another rape.

So assuming society does not need protection from this individual, and assuming he does not need rehabilitation, does he really need to be incarcerated? Certainly not if society's main concern is in the rehabilitation of crimminals, or in the protection of innocent citizens. Is it right for civilized society to be in the business of doling out punishments?

Borodog · #2 08-09-2007, 02:10 AM

Incarceration is a bad idea.

Lestat · #3 08-09-2007, 02:11 AM

quickly, while I can still edit. Is incarceration an improper term, for how I mean it? I mean jail sentences.

Borodog · #4 08-09-2007, 02:12 AM

No, that's right. It's a terrible idea.

Lestat · #5 08-09-2007, 02:13 AM

I'm confused, because I'm sure you don't mean putting people in jail is a bad idea. ??

Borodog · #6 08-09-2007, 02:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm confused, because I'm sure you don't mean putting people in jail is a bad idea. ??

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, putting people in jail is a bad idea. If necessary, I'll elaborate tomorrow. Off to bed.

borisp · #7 08-09-2007, 05:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Incarceration is a bad idea.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is trivially true, if you replace "bad" with "suboptimal."

Which means that the requirements for supporting this idea are heavily biased towards suggesting reasonable alternative deterrents to crime.

In other words, when you elaborate, you must provide alternatives. Otherwise, you are just whining. I personally am very interested in listening to viable alternatives.

Borodog · #8 08-09-2007, 02:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Incarceration is a bad idea.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is trivially true, if you replace "bad" with "suboptimal."

Which means that the requirements for supporting this idea are heavily biased towards suggesting reasonable alternative deterrents to crime.

In other words, when you elaborate, you must provide alternatives. Otherwise, you are just whining. I personally am very interested in listening to viable alternatives.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't be a bitch. Of course there are better alternatives. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

borisp · #9 08-09-2007, 07:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Incarceration is a bad idea.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is trivially true, if you replace "bad" with "suboptimal."

Which means that the requirements for supporting this idea are heavily biased towards suggesting reasonable alternative deterrents to crime.

In other words, when you elaborate, you must provide alternatives. Otherwise, you are just whining. I personally am very interested in listening to viable alternatives.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't be a bitch. Of course there are better alternatives. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
I am serious when I ask: What are they?

I would argue that presently we don't know enough human psychology to effectively rehabilitate. So one plan is to research psychology in a productive manner, but that is really hard to do, because you can't experiment in a meaningful fashion without being cruel. So if your suggestion is "rehabilitate," then I warn you that I am pretty skeptical going in.

I can ignore the notion of punishment, since that is all in people's heads. I prefer to view incarceration as a suboptimal but effective deterrent to crime. Is there a better method? Serious question.

rubberloon · #10 08-13-2007, 09:43 PM

A friend and devout moslem, Sultan Achmed Khan, who made the pilgrimage to Meeca claimed nobody stole from pilgrims in Mecca, because the authorities cut off thieves' hands - that is punishment works. Although this is hearsay, Sultan was truthful to a fault.