Which one should we focus on more in our criminal justice system? Basically, which one would serve as a satisfactory/fitting punishment for prisoners?

He shoots, he scores.

It's a matter of treating people a certain way, not where they're from. If you treat your criminals nicely and show them that they are your equal, they are much more likely to be receptive and change their behavior. That is true in America, Norway, England, China, Antarctica, anywhere. That's a matter of the human brain. We are all humans no matter where we live.

But, we could just keep on doing the exact same thing, over and over, that doesn't work as well and doesn't really prevent anything, because if people really wanted to commit a crime, they would just do it, whether they would go to jail or not. Good idea. We've been doing this, so why change? Brilliant mentality.

Send all the ghetto gangsters to Norwegian prisons so that the Norwegian prisoners can treat them nice. Send the entire population of San Quentin to Norway, and let the Norwegians be nice to them. Let's test this theory out.




50 bucks says Norway's prisons become overrun with violence, drug smuggling and gay orgies.

The crime is going to happen so long as humans are human. AMG INEQUALITY! Jealousy, envy, greed, sloth. IF someone has something you want bad enough to kill for, then what's going to stop you? Why might you be willing to kill? The way you grew up maybe? Your response brings up the nature vs nurture argument which could be argued either way and won't really lead to much as neither of us are certified psychologists (not that it would mean either of us are right, even if we were). Also, treat a criminal like an equal and they'll think they can get away with it again and again and again. They aren't our equals. They committed crimes, and depending on the severity of it punishments are handed out (be they fair or not).

Granted the society in Norway is different, as a whole, and that, in part, allows for the success of their progressive and wildly liberal justice system. However, what none of you seem to be understanding is that the point of pointing out Norway's system was to show that rehabilitation can work, and does work. There are very profound and far-reaching implications in that American prisoners might not do so well in a Norwegian center for rehabilitation, even though those said prisoners committed identical, or at least similar, crimes to those Norwegian criminals who found success in the same system. Our society is largely to blame for this, but our prison system is only perpetuating and inflating the problem.

We need sociological reform, sure. We need to change before this sort of rehabilitation could be wholly successful in the United States, definitely. But, that doesn't mean that there aren't steps that we could be taking or should be taking. America is f**king broken, and if a country like Norway doesn't make that painfully clear to the lot of you... you aren't f**king listening.

How about you go to Norway, then?

America has a problem with repeat offenders of drunk driving. El Salvador has no repeat drunk driving offenders- the first time you are caught drunk driving, you are put to death by firing squad. It works for them, so why shouldn't we do it too? Just because it works doesn't mean its the right, or that it's right for us.

You have to understand there are consequences to having a prison system like Norway. Norway has some of the highest taxes in the world. I don't think that America will be too excited about higher taxes because you want to make sure the guy who just killed a cop has a nice furniture in his hotel suite.

That and even if some how Americans became more willing to accept higher taxes, no politician is going to say "I'm going to raise taxes to help rehabilitate criminals" in their platform. The same applies to the poverty rate. The poverty limit is some # (I forget the exact amount), when living right above the poverty limit is still pretty shit poor. The # needs to be adjusted, but no politician wants to have poverty shoot up while they were in office.

With assholes like you, why would I ever want to leave?




Their high taxes are largely due to a myriad of social programs, most of which are not directed, nor intended, for criminals. Secondly, their criminals probably build and sell nicer furniture than they sit on. Lastly, as I had said before, obviously it is an issue of larger social change. I thought I made that quite clear. Having said that: straw man f**king argument.

Maybe, at this point, we just need a thread on socialism, cause, this is becoming increasingly divergent.




Well, politicians suck, not much unlike America itself. Not to mention, if I were to make a formal proposal, it would eliminate over half of our prison population - that's a lot of extra money, don't you think? Enough to actually do something, at least. In either case, that's neither here nor f**king anywhere else.

Go straw man yourself. Why should we try to be Norway? We aren't Norway and we don't want to be Norway.

You want change? Get off your ass and stop whining on the internet.





Start your own multi million dollar business and buy your politicians like the rest of us.

Amen to Capitalism.

That sounds like no fun whatsoever. God, I need socialism.

We'll miss you dearly when you do leave for socialism.

Oh, oh, do I get a going away party? Do I?! Do I?!

And that's where we run into the Chinese System. Their first offenders serve short jail sentences, which focuses on rehabilitation that emphasizes social consciousness and sincere repentance. Repeat offenders get put to death. The American government has looked into this and considered implementation because there are fewer people in their prisons, and obviously far fewer repeat offenders.
Buuuuuuut of course, that's far too cruel. However, if their system is worthy of consideration, even though society operates differently in China, then other countries' more humane, but also effective methods should be considered too without being written off because, just for example, "America =/= Norway."


If politicians are so concerned with the poverty rate, perhaps they should start putting a little more money towards reducing it, rather than pouring it into unjust wars.


Why not try to be like Norway? Who doesn't want to be more like Norway? Obviously people aren't satisfied with the ways things are here, so we shouldn't be so quick to write off other countries' non-violent practices.

ITT: kids worship Europe and take the US for granted



What are you talking about? Of course you can write it off. You're using the logic that since Norway + Five Star Hotel prison system = good prisoners, then America + Five Star Hotel prison system = good prisoners. The problem with that logic is that America != Norway, and that's EXACTLY why you can write it off as a system that will not work if implemented now.



Oh great, so instead of spending money on one unjust thing, you'll spend it on another unjust thing.

You wanna reduce spending? Stop the war, don't even think about implementing bullshit universal healthcare, stop the inefficient bullshit programs and overall, shrink the government.

The government needs to stop taking half of our f**king income.

PRO-TIP: The poverty line is different from country to country. If the government wants to reduce the poverty rate, they can lower the poverty line like every other country. When you can own 2 TV sets and still be considered in poverty, the poverty line is too high.

Not to mention, it's not the government's responsibility to put food on your plate, beggar.



Are you saying we should get rid of all minorities and make a nearly 100% white state? You racist pig.

Did I SAY it should be implemented now? No. I've read the whole debate, that argument is going to lead us in circles. I'm merely suggesting that if one DIFFERENT country's system can be considered, so can another's.


That was a) just a side note. And b) referring to one thing, and one thing alone. I hardly meant to discuss the realignment of our socio-economic system in one sentence.


I didn't even suggest that in the least. Is jumping to absurd conclusions really the best sort of argument you've got?

It WAS considered, and it was decided that it would blow chunks out of a polar bear's asscrack if it was implemented here.

Move on.



If you can jump to shitty conclusions, I will too.

At least mine aren't completely arbitrary.

Showoff.

You guys keep saying it won't work here, but you haven't explained why it won't work here other than, "We are not Norway." So...?

And, if that argument is so sound, then why are we trying to make Iraq into a democratic state? Why do we think that sort of thing is an OK change, when, clearly, Iraq /= America, but we think that taking a look at our prison and healthcare systems is entirely too dramatic, because America /= Norway, Iceland, Sweden, France, England, Belgium, Ireland, Spain, Germany....

http://www.createblog.com/forums/index.php...t&p=2848742

Read:



Your recipe for success doesn't work if you're substituting the wrong ingredients in. There are plenty of reasons why America's prisons being different from Norway would mean that their system would not work here. Like I was alluding to with paperplane, you don't have racial diversity in the prisons in Norway, so there are no race wars there. You don't have an enormous population in Norway. You don't have the same income tax as in Norway. You're not going to be able to scale up huge programs like that to America-size without things becoming incredibly inefficient.

Why this is so hard to understand, I do not know.



I don't think democracy works for everyone. Likewise, Norway's prison system will not work for everyone.

So there goes that argument. Nice try.

Perfect. That is, I mean I agree.

You're agreeing with a straw man argument.

No one was ever suggesting that implementation of a Norwegian system would meet with the same exact success in America. What we were trying to point out is that rehabilitation can work. Further, we were saying that we should be examining those societies in which they do work in order to better understand why they work. And, lastly, we all recognized that the success of rehabilitation (financially, practically, etc. etc.) would be part of larger social change.

I've tried to make that clear a few times now. Kyro decided he would ignore it.

And I've been saying, what's your point? We're talking about OUR justice system. Your discussion is going off on a tangent.

Going hardline and annihilating all criminals CAN WORK too. Should we examine those societies too in order to better understand why they work? And should we recognized that the success of annihilation (financially, practically, etc. etc.) would be part of larger social change?

Just because we can doesn't mean we should.