Rehabilitation or Retribution, Our criminal justice system. Options

[MissHygienic]

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

[*Steven*]

If we can only focus on one? Retribution.

[ersatz]

I personally feel better mentally about rehabilitation. Punishment always strikes me in an odd place; I've had strange experiences myself with "punishment", and it just irks me that certain people have the authority to say what another "deserves" for their perceived wrongdoing. In any case, more often than not, there is some sort of experience(s) that the criminal had early on in life that somehow affected his/her decision to commit the crime, so when I put that into perspective, I think that rehabilitation is the only "fair" thing to do. Whenever something traumatic happens to someone, we're always so nice until they do something "bad" because of it. Punishment is really not always the best deterrent. It works well with children only because they have not yet developed their own set of morals. Criminals obviously have a greatly differing moral code than most, so their code needs to be analyzed and the "bad" thing needs to be changed.

[fameONE]

I personally feel better mentally about rehabilitation. Punishment always strikes me in an odd place; I've had strange experiences myself with "punishment", and it just irks me that certain people have the authority to say what another "deserves" for their perceived wrongdoing. In any case, more often than not, there is some sort of experience(s) that the criminal had early on in life that somehow affected his/her decision to commit the crime, so when I put that into perspective, I think that rehabilitation is the only "fair" thing to do. Whenever something traumatic happens to someone, we're always so nice until they do something "bad" because of it. Punishment is really not always the best deterrent. It works well with children only because they have not yet developed their own set of morals. Criminals obviously have a greatly differing moral code than most, so their code needs to be analyzed and the "bad" thing needs to be changed.

I've read your ramble, now you shall read mine. Don't worry, though, I'll be more to the point.

The justice system needs tweaking, however, if the justice system worked as it should, then those who commit heinous and vile crimes should be punished accordingly. Kill 'em. f**k it.

Moral code? I really hope you aren't referring to America's moral code, because that went out the window when Natives got raped, murdered, and forced to move elsewhere.

[ersatz]

No...I was referring to the individual's. That's what I said.

[Kontroll]

I personally feel better mentally about rehabilitation. Punishment always strikes me in an odd place; I've had strange experiences myself with "punishment", and it just irks me that certain people have the authority to say what another "deserves" for their perceived wrongdoing. In any case, more often than not, there is some sort of experience(s) that the criminal had early on in life that somehow affected his/her decision to commit the crime, so when I put that into perspective, I think that rehabilitation is the only "fair" thing to do. Whenever something traumatic happens to someone, we're always so nice until they do something "bad" because of it. Punishment is really not always the best deterrent. It works well with children only because they have not yet developed their own set of morals. Criminals obviously have a greatly differing moral code than most, so their code needs to be analyzed and the "bad" thing needs to be changed.

Sorry Charlie, I'm going to have to look the other way on this one. Americans spend too much money keeping inmates locked away for "rehabilitation" instead of "retribution." Over six billion dollars is spent "rehabilitating" criminals.

In 1995, the most recent year we can use for comparative purposes, the overall incarceration rate for the United States was 600 per 100,000 population, including local jails (but not juvenile institutions). Around the world, the only country with a higher rate was Russia, at 690 per 100,000.

"The number of people in prison, in jail, on parole, and on probation in the U.S. increased threefold between 1980 and 2000, to more than 6 million, and the number of people in prison increased from 319,598 to almost 2 million in the same period. This buildup has targeted the poor, and especially Blacks. In 1999, though Blacks were only 13 percent of the U.S. population, they were half of all prison inmates. In 2000, one out of three young Black men was either locked up, on probation, or on parole. The military-industrial complex of the 1950s, with its Cold War communist bogeyman, has been replaced by a prison-industrial complex, with young Black "predators" serving as its justification."

"From 1984 to 1994, Califomia built 21 prisons, and only one state university...the prison system realized a 209% increase in funding, compared to a 15% increase in state university funding."

They deserve a punishment suitable for their crime. Sitting in a jail cell is punishment, but not punishment enough. You have to give people a reason to fear doing crime. A slap on the wrist is not deterrant enough.

[NoSex]

The justice system needs tweaking, however, if the justice system worked as it should, then those who commit heinous and vile crimes should be punished accordingly. Kill 'em. f**k it.

Why? What's the point? Isn't that contrary? We spend our time telling our children not to hurt others and that two wrongs don't make a right... where's the f**king sense in that?

Further, haven't you considered the reality of America's social climate? We live in a society that is alienating, isolating, and oppressive towards the poor, the marginalized, the eccentric, and the "strange." Our society breeds crime and enforces repeat offenses. Our society is a poison and the state of our prisons is a mirror.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xJ0B2xDzSgg&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=xJ0B2xDzSgg&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=xJ0B2xDzSgg&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=xJ0B2xDzSgg&feature=related

(There is a good f**king reason that Norway has fewer homicides, in its entire country, each year (about fifty), than the single city of Gary, Indiana.)

Sorry Charlie, I'm going to have to look the other way on this one. Americans spend too much money keeping inmates locked away for "rehabilitation" instead of "retribution." Over six billion dollars is spent "rehabilitating" criminals.

There is a much better solution to financial issues surrounding our prison system. Fifty-seven percent of our prisons are full of non-violent drug offenders and we spend (without considering upkeep, prison expenses, or judicial procedures) twelve billion dollars a year waging the "war" on drugs. Legalize drugs, end the Drug War, and you've suddenly saved thirty or so billion dollars a year, as well as reduced crime, reunited families, added to the workforce and the consumer population, and affirmed freedom.

Rehabilitation discourages repeat offenses (it's kind of hard being alive in the grave for years and years, being treated like shit and scum, and them suddenly being thrown out into society again) and could help reduce crime and free up our prisons. It also increases the mental health of our society as a whole - it allows people to regain and maintain respect, live a free life, and contribute to the world.

Look the other way all you want - that's the f**king problem with our society. We refuse to take responsibility for the ills and the poisons we create. Throw them away and put them behind walls, out of sight out of mind. What we need are people to stare the problem down and tackle it head on. f**k your cowardly shit.

They deserve a punishment suitable for their crime. Sitting in a jail cell is punishment, but not punishment enough. You have to give people a reason to fear doing crime. A slap on the wrist is not deterrant enough.

Criminals don't think they're going to get caught in the first place, jackass. It doesn't matter what the f**k you do. People don't commit crimes expecting to get caught - thus the severity of their punishment is wholly irrelevant.

Not to mention, you have to consider phenomena such as the exponentially increasing crime rate in Texas in comparison to the shrinking rates in the Midwest. Texas has the largest death row population in the United States. States in the Midwest tend to have the lowest. A bit contrary to your hypothesis, huh jackass?

[Kontroll]

Why? What's the point? Isn't that contrary? We spend our time telling our children not to hurt others and that two wrongs don't make a right... where's the f**king sense in that?

Further, haven't you considered the reality of America's social climate? We live in a society that is alienating, isolating, and oppressive towards the poor, the marginalized, the eccentric, and the "strange." Our society breeds crime and enforces repeat offenses. Our society is a poison and the state of our prisons is a mirror.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xJ0B2xDzSgg&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=xJ0B2xDzSgg&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=xJ0B2xDzSgg&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=xJ0B2xDzSgg&feature=related

(There is a good f**king reason that Norway has fewer homicides in the entire country each year (about fifty) than the single city of Gary, Indiana.)
There is a much better solution to financial issues surrounding our prison system. Fifty-seven percent of our prisons are full of non-violent drug offenders and we spend (without considering upkeep, prison expenses, or judicial procedures) twelve billion dollars a year waging the "war" on drugs. Legalize drugs, end the Drug War, and you've suddenly saved thirty or so billion dollars a year, as well as reduced crime, reunited families, added to the workforce and the consumer population, and affirmed freedom.

Rehabilitation discourages repeat offenses (it's kind of hard being alive in the grave for years and years, being treated like shit and scum, and them suddenly being thrown out into society without warning) and could help reduce crime and free up our prisons. It also increases the mental health of our society as a whole - it allows people to regain and maintain respect, live a free life, and contribute to the world.

Look the other way all you want - that's the f**king problem with our society. We refuse to take responsibility for the ills and the poisons we create. Throw them away and put them behind walls, out of sight out of mind. What we need are people to stare the problem down and tackle it head on. f**k your cowardly shit.
Criminals don't think they're going to caught in the first place, jackass. It doesn't matter what the f**k you do. People don't commit crimes expecting the get caught - thus the severity of their punishment is wholly irrelevant.

Not to mention, you have to consider phenomena such as the exponentially increasing crime rate in Texas in comparison to the shrinking rates in the Midwest. Texas has the largest death row population in the United States. States in the Midwest tend to have the lowest. A bit contrary to your hypothesis, huh jackass?

A bit, I guess. I'll have to rework my hypothesis. Thanks.

[jesusisthebestth...]

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

Edit: Oops, and if someone can fix the misspelling in my topic title, I'd appreciate it, thanks.

REHABILITATION: Jailtime is supposed to be about rehabilitation. What is the point of jailing someone for committing a crime without rehabilitating them? How are they supposed to survive when they get out? How is the victim's family supposed to feel when this criminal finishes his/her sentence or is paroled? Jail is nothing without rehabilitation. I can't say for sure because my family has never been the victim of any crime (knock on wood), but I would prefer to know that someone has been reformed after they've served a jail sentence because retribution is temporary but rehabilitation lasts a lifetime.

[Kontroll]

REHABILITATION: Jailtime is supposed to be about rehabilitation. What is the point of jailing someone for committing a crime without rehabilitating them? How are they supposed to survive when they get out? How is the victim's family supposed to feel when this criminal finishes his/her sentence or is paroled? Jail is nothing without rehabilitation. I can't say for sure because my family has never been the victim of any crime (knock on wood), but I would prefer to know that someone has been reformed after they've served a jail sentence because retribution is temporary but rehabilitation lasts a lifetime.

Well, if that is the case, why not just get rid of the jail time all together. Jail does not equal rehabilitation. If it were all about rehabilitation we could do it without putting criminals behind bars.

[jesusisthebestth...]

Well, if that is the case, why not just get rid of the jail time all together. Jail does not equal rehabilitation. If it were all about rehabilitation we could do it without putting criminals behind bars.

I honestly believe that if we can rehabilitate criminals without putting them in jails, then we should. Jail is a waste of tax dollars: rehabilitate or kill criminals - one or the other. But don't make me pay tax dollars to house a serial killer or repeat sex offender, and when he/she comes out of jail he/she still kills or wants to rape women. That's a clear waste of my money when there are several other ways in which my money could be spent. Theoretically, the point of jail is to make criminals reflect on their misdoings and want to correct that behavior so they do not return to jail because it's a nasty place that takes away your freedoms- jails not do that therefore they [the jails] have no purpose. But that's just what I think.

[Kontroll]

I honestly believe that if we can rehabilitate criminals without putting them in jails, then we should. Jail is a waste of tax dollars: rehabilitate or kill criminals - one or the other. But don't make me pay tax dollars to house a serial killer or repeat sex offender, and when he/she comes out of jail he/she still kills or wants to rape women. That's a clear waste of my money when there are several other ways in which my money could be spent. Theoretically, the point of jail is to make criminals reflect on their misdoings and want to correct that behavior so they do not return to jail because it's a nasty place that takes away your freedoms- jails not do that therefore they [the jails] have no purpose. But that's just what I think.

I think theoretically you're right. But the thing is that jail consists of criminals. Four brick walls and a ten year sentance doesn't chance the fact that you're still a criminal. You came into this doing wrong, and you're put into an environment that is probably 100% more violent than the one that you came from. Like I always say... You can take the boy outta the hood, but you can't take the hood outta the boy.

[Comptine]

REHABILITATION: Jailtime is supposed to be about rehabilitation. What is the point of jailing someone for committing a crime without rehabilitating them? How are they supposed to survive when they get out? How is the victim's family supposed to feel when this criminal finishes his/her sentence or is paroled? Jail is nothing without rehabilitation. I can't say for sure because my family has never been the victim of any crime (knock on wood), but I would prefer to know that someone has been reformed after they've served a jail sentence because retribution is temporary but rehabilitation lasts a lifetime.

The only successful rehabilitation stories have been people who underwent very expensive and extensive help.

Some place West of the Mississippi had a new program where each parole had two officers check up on them constantly. Work, shelter, and counseling was set up for them. There was a significant drop in repeat offenders. There was also a significant drop in budget.

I've had personal experience with a child molester. He hasn't been caught and he still owns an afterschool program for children. People like him never change, no matter how much jail time he receives.

Retribution is the way to go, within reason. Having a therapist sit a criminal on a couch and share feelings isn't going to change anything. Having them do productive things in jail won't change anything.

[NoSex]

Retribution is the way to go, within reason. Having a therapist sit a criminal on a couch and share feelings isn't going to change anything. Having them do productive things in jail won't change anything.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xJ0B2xDzSgg&feature=related

Norway. f**king Norway, you dumb c**t!

[Comptine]

^Are we in Norway? No.

So refrain from calling me such an obscene insult and debate like an intelligent person.

[NoSex]

^Are we in Norway? No.

The f**k does that have to do with anything? You said treating them like human beings wouldn't change anything - but it does. I proved you wrong and you're going to rebut with "but we're not in Norway?" Are you out of your f**king mind?

Retribution is compounding and confounding the problems our society faces. It doesn't prevent crime, it hurts people, it demeans people, and it makes us all look like moronic barbarians - and, in the end, what isn't making a change is our current system of non-rehabilitation. I was pointing to Norway as a more progressive and more productive alternative. There is a reason Norway doesn't suffer nearly as much crime as we do, and I promise it has, at least in part, to do with the enormously different ways we treat social misfits. We could take a few hints, don't you think?

So refrain from calling me such an obscene insult and debate like an intelligent person.

You want to know what's more insulting than me calling you ugly names? You f**king suggesting that we should swallow the poison and f**king like it! You crazy bitch! Norway, Norway, Norway!

Oh, also, it's more insulting that you didn't follow the rules and couldn't even bring yourself to read a single page of posts. The debate threads take a bit more investment than the lounge.

[Comptine]

I did read it. I was stating my opinion. Just because I didn't go, "OMG! HE'S TOTALLY RIGHT! I SHOULD AGREE WITH HIM!" doesn't mean I didn't f**king pay attention. I answered in the frame of America and my own opinions.

I said: retribution within reason. I don't think we should give the death penalty to drug offenders. For murders and other serious crimes, only retribution can work. And I'm not saying hang and quarter them. Whether retribution or rehabilitation, it always happens after the matter; after the crime was committed.

You think the justice system is the only reason why Norway and America has different crime rates? How about our difference in gun laws? Or how about we have a huge rich-poor gap?

I'm sorry for not writing an essay.

I think you're insane bastard who can't maintain a civil demeanor on an online debate for even one post.

[Spirited Away]

Why? What's the point? Isn't that contrary? We spend our time telling our children not to hurt others and that two wrongs don't make a right... where's the f**king sense in that?

We also teach them crime and punishment, consequences of wrongdoing. In the case of rehabilitation, there is no consequence there is no suitable punishment for the crime. How is that justice?

Suitable in the sense that punishment corresponds to the level of the crime.

That said, how do we rehabilitate someone who doesn't want to change? Further, why would tax payers be comfortable with their money benefiting serial killers and rapists...etc.

As for Norway, this isn't my argument, but it has been brought up and I am curious as to how you would refute it. Is the low crime rate in Norway attributed to its humane system or has it always been like that? Where we live has a lot to do with what crimes or the level of crimes that are committed.

Also, http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/00/02/f...ev_en/main.html. It seems Norwegian prisons have their own problems.

[B-NOX]

what a long text

[fameONE]

This topic is rather broad. Its a little difficult to choose one of the two as a general solution for every crime. Anyone with enough common sense can agree.

Rehabilitation does nothing for people like this...
Click here, bitches

He knew what he did, and was perfectly fine with it. Killing his wife was a damn relief for him. So how would he be rehabilitated?

[ersatz]

As for Norway, this isn't my argument, but it has been brought up and I am curious as to how you would refute it. Is the low crime rate in Norway attributed to its humane system or has it always been like that? Where we live has a lot to do with what crimes or the level of crimes that are committed.

Well, generally, those who commit the most crimes are those that are poor. Norway treats its poor citizens (not that there are many) quite well, alleviating some of the rage that those citizens may have simply about being poor. Frustration builds up if things aren't going too well financially, which turns to frustration about family because of the finances, and so on and so on, and eventually, all that pent up rage goes into crime. So, no, it's not solely because of the excellent prison system, and of course everything has its flaws, but maybe if our country took a look at some of these countries' (Norway, Iceland, Sweden) systems of government, we could take a hint and come out with better, happier citizens.

[fameONE]

Well, generally, those who commit the most crimes are those that are poor. Norway treats its poor citizens (not that there are many) quite well, alleviating some of the rage that those citizens may have simply about being poor. Frustration builds up if things aren't going too well financially, which turns to frustration about family because of the finances, and so on and so on, and eventually, all that pent up rage goes into crime. So, no, it's not solely because of the excellent prison system, and of course everything has its flaws, but maybe if our country took a look at some of these countries' (Norway, Iceland, Sweden) systems of government, we could take a hint and come out with better, happier citizens.

You have no idea. Rage is a stretch. Desperation is probably the more appropriate word.

Are you Norwegian or an American? You can't expect the government to restructure their welfare plan around a country that operates differently with the drop of a dime.

[kryogenix]

Norway? More like NorGAY.

[ersatz]

You have no idea. Rage is a stretch. Desperation is probably the more appropriate word.

Are you Norwegian or an American? You can't expect the government to restructure their welfare plan around a country that operates differently with the drop of a dime.

I wish I was Norwegian. I didn't have a choice in where I lived.

I also don't believe I said that the entire system of American government should change, right now, this instant. But, it should change either way. Sitting here doing the same stuff when, obviously, by looking at the many other ways we could be solving specific problems that can be and are being observed as better, is kind of stupid.

[*Steven*]

I wish I was Norwegian. I didn't have a choice in where I lived.

I also don't believe I said that the entire system of American government should change, right now, this instant. But, it should change either way. Sitting here doing the same stuff when, obviously, by looking at the many other ways we could be solving specific problems that can be and are being observed as better, is kind of stupid.

It's so easy to say America should change like this or like that, over time, now, whenever, etc. The fact is, America =/= Norway. Norway has a way different climate, way different demographic, and way different upbringings. They're way less culturally diverse and aren't in the world's spotlight. They're not nearly as big as us and not always under criticism. They're not a super power either. There are so many systems that work in different settings for different people.

[fameONE]

It's so easy to say America should change like this or like that, over time, now, whenever, etc. The fact is, America =/= Norway. Norway has a way different climate, way different demographic, and way different upbringings. They're way less culturally diverse and aren't in the world's spotlight. They're not nearly as big as us and not always under criticism. They're not a super power either. There are so many systems that work in different settings for different people.

He shoots, he scores.

[ersatz]

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.

[kryogenix]

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.

[*Steven*]

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.

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).

[NoSex]

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.

[Comptine]

How about you go to Norway, then?

[kryogenix]

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.

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.

[*Steven*]

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.

[NoSex]

How about you go to Norway, then?

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

[kryogenix]

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.

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.

[fameONE]

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

Amen to Capitalism.

[NoSex]

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

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

[Comptine]

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

[NoSex]

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

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

[*paperplane*]

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.

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."

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.

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.

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

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.

[kryogenix]

ITT: kids worship Europe and take the US for granted

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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

[*paperplane*]

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.

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.

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. Jumping to unfounded conclusions at everything I say is an awfully tacky way to debate. (Which is not to say that you cannot debate. I know you can, and I wouldn't be that presumptuous.)

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

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.

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

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

[kryogenix]

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.

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.

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

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

[*paperplane*]

At least mine aren't completely arbitrary.

[kryogenix]

I have Down's Syndrome!

Showoff.

[ersatz]

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....

[kryogenix]

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...?

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

Read:

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.

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.

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....

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.

[Spirited Away]

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.

[NoSex]

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.

[kryogenix]

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.

[NoSex]

Just because we can doesn't mean we should.

Actually, it does. If we have any interest whatsoever in the progression and advancement of mankind and, specifically, our society, we should consider and look at all possibilities and consider them within reason. In the case of capital punishment, it's interesting, really, that such practice is most popular in the underdeveloped and third-world countries. Starting to get the point? It's called pragmatism and social reformation. If we have any concern for maintaining and or increasing the standard-of-living, we should very seriously consider those social structures that present with higher standards than our own.

Pragmatism.

If you don't value those things, you probably won't be creating a very stable or successful society. It's not whether it's wrong or right (I'm an amoralist), it's whether or not it's practical/pragmatic.

[Reidar]

Norway's penal system, or lack thereof, is atrocious. Only recently, it wasn't even illegal for convicted perpetrators to dismiss attending their prison dates at all, and while that's been rectified, it hasn't actually been fully implemented yet. And there's one of the most prominent members of their Supreme Court, Tor Erling Staff, who, in the '80s, had "a murder case in Drammen where the Eidsivating court took into account when deciding on a sentence that the murderer was from another cultural tradition." Staff now wants at least a two-year sentence reduction on the basis that the murder committed was legitimized on the grounds of the killer defending his or her "honor". And there are plenty of gems like this:

Oslo’s police department is having a hard time coping with a rising crime rate. Only one in five reported cases is currently being resolved, police seem as frustrated as crime victims, and commentators worry that citizens are having to rely on private security firms to ensure their safety.

Repeated calls are made for more visible police patrols on the streets of Oslo, but resources don’t allow it at present.

The numbers, reported in newspaper Aftenposten, speak for themselves: No country has fewer police per capita than Norway, as many as 70 percent of so-called petty crimes are never followed up, and while the police force has increased 150 percent since 1960, the crime rate has increased 700 percent.

With so few crimes being investigated and solved, observers worry that Norwegians are losing confidence in whether the police will even come when called. Seven of 10 Norwegians have no faith that they’ll get any help if someone breaks into their home, notes Aftenposten.

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article1661877.ece

In 2006, Norway had 86.3 crimes reported for every 1,000 people, according to Statistics Norway. The United States? 39.8 per 1,000.

It's a non sequitur to use Norway's rehabilitative philosophy as grounds for pointing out how such a system can work when the surrounding circumstances don't even equate to that being a factor in the quantitative statistics, especially after it's already been acknowledged that facets like homogeneity come into play. Consequently, it would also be a misnomer to cite their system as a cause for the homicidal rate at all. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Is it low because of their justice system, or is their justice system lenient because of the crime rate? You would have to specifically pinpoint a component that comprises the order of what afflicts what, and when that variable came into play. No, if you want a pertinent example, use the United States itself. In 2006, Vermont Judge Edward Cashman sentenced a man who sexually abused a six-year old girl over a four year period to 60 days in jail.

Rehabilitation was the original intent for the scum, but after harsh protesting, the sentence was upped to only three years.

Rehab methods should be used in conjunction with what would be a typical sentence, but when it's utilized as a method in lieu of proper punishment is where the line is drawn. Need I even bring up John Couey, who had a history of repeated sexual offenses on young girls before finally murdering Jessica Lunsford in 2005? So outrageous was the build-up to that that an entire law was formulated in response to the incident. Whenever I read about cases like that, every single cliché vigilante movie I've seen comes bubbling to my cognitive surface. "You're a loose cannon, Callahan! Don't go outside the system, Callahan! A regular time bomb, Callahan! Callahan!"

No wonder they make for such good protagonists.

[kryogenix]

Actually, it does. If we have any interest whatsoever in the progression and advancement of mankind and, specifically, our society, we should consider and look at all possibilities and consider them within reason. In the case of capital punishment, it's interesting, really, that such practice is most popular in the underdeveloped and third-world countries. Starting to get the point? It's called pragmatism and social reformation. If we have any concern for maintaining and or increasing the standard-of-living, we should very seriously consider those social structures that present with higher standards than our own.

Pragmatism.

If you don't value those things, you probably won't be creating a very stable or successful society. It's not whether it's wrong or right (I'm an amoralist), it's whether or not it's practical/pragmatic.

Well then, what SHOULD we do? What's the point of bringing up Norway when we know it won't work here? Why are you talking about massive change and practicality in the same sentence? Why even talk about justice when you don't care about right and wrong? I've got a modest proposal for you, let's chop up the criminals and feed them to the poor! Pragmatism at work!

Trying something that isn't fair and doesn't work isn't pragmatism. It's called stupidity.