|
Post by chefmate on Jan 10, 2009 3:21:09 GMT
What do people really want for punishment in the prisons?
What is realistic and can be implemented without violating the eighth amendment?
Although I visit a death row inmate I'm beginning to understand why people are against that simply because to many bleeding hearts cannot see the reality that these guys have not been the little darlings the visitors think they see and know and therefore want to make conditions easier on them but that is inmates manipulating the system for their own selfish gain is it not?
I'm tired of a website where the dingalings from Europe sit and bemoan the fact the murderer was executed but forget that there were victims who suffered horribly and had no peaceful death like their killer does......I'm at the point I want to stop these foolish women dead in their tracks and cut them off from trying to destroy our punishment system for their silly ideals that hold no water.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jan 10, 2009 16:13:45 GMT
Chris, you've touched on a subject that's very dear to my heart.
I really want members to respond to this brilliant post by Cheffie because it's the main reason I discovered message boards in the first place.
Keep the debate flowing!
|
|
|
Post by chefmate on Jan 10, 2009 20:19:18 GMT
I don't consider you a dingaling from Europe by the way as I don't think you are madly in love with one of our death row inmates........
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jan 10, 2009 20:52:19 GMT
Thanks for that, Chris! I agree with you that too many people are like 'death row groupies' and I find that sad and a bit disgusting just as I do the chorus of people who seem to think that somehow a prisoner is less than human.
What do members think? I know we have many here who feel just as passionately on the subject as Chefmate and I do.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 10, 2009 21:11:13 GMT
realistic punishment doesn't exist, because of the bleeding hearts who have no concept of reality. case in point, hazel's seventeen year year old daughter has been in oregon youth authority since she was twelve for assaulting a foster mother with a baseball bat. i spent several years in the courts trying to get her back to california before we came back here. a year and a half ago, the probation officer finally agreed to let her come back here, with a host of restrictions, of course. the worthless kid lasted five days before hazel had to beat the living shyt out of her and sent her back to oregon. since then, and knowing what this girl is, the probation officer has insisted on "helping" her by constantly putting her into placements instead of keeping her locked up. three times i have had to trace phone numbers when she called her mom and send the information so she could be arrested. bottom line: she and seven other girls decided to assault three staff members, putting 42 staples in one guy's head. oregon, at long last, finally, is getting it right. she is charged, as an adult, with attempted murder of a peace officer, as well as several assaults, and she will get a minimum of fifteen years in state prison. the reality is that there is very little chance that she will ever get out. it will take her six months to catch another assault beef in there. the point is, had proper punishment been dealt out when she was 13, instead of the stupidity of "helping" her, while it is not likely, it is at least possible that she would have decided to become a huma being
|
|
|
Post by drewsmom595 on Jan 10, 2009 21:15:44 GMT
I am by no means an expert on this subject, I believe the purpose of prison should be three-fold: protection of public safety, punishment for the prisoner and rehabilitation. I know many people don't believe in rehabilitation, but I believe it is a distinct possibility for some inmates. And if more emphasis was put into rehabilitation rather than just warehousing, as well as re-entry programs for prisoners re-entering society after incarceration, than we would have better recidivism rates.
I don't believe prison should be a pleasant experience, but on the other hand I don't believe treating prisoners like animals in cages accomplishes anything in the long term either.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 10, 2009 21:47:48 GMT
I am by no means an expert on this subject, I believe the purpose of prison should be three-fold: protection of public safety, punishment for the prisoner and rehabilitation. I know many people don't believe in rehabilitation, but I believe it is a distinct possibility for some inmates. And if more emphasis was put into rehabilitation rather than just warehousing, as well as re-entry programs for prisoners re-entering society after incarceration, than we would have better recidivism rates. I don't believe prison should be a pleasant experience, but on the other hand I don't believe treating prisoners like animals in cages accomplishes anything in the long term either. the PRIMARY purpose of prison is, and always should be, protection of the public, and anything else is far back in second.
|
|
|
Post by drewsmom595 on Jan 11, 2009 3:59:35 GMT
Well, well, well, Jumbo! I'm pleased to see that you believe there's more to prison than punishment! I thought for sure you were going to jump all over me for saying the R word. You continually surprise me.
|
|
|
Post by chefmate on Jan 11, 2009 14:56:20 GMT
Actually, there are three different categories we are talking here:
juvenile hall and youth authority prisons, regular prisons and death row......all have their own set of special considerations considering the type of inmates that inhabit them.
I would think the place to start would be with the juveniles as they are the ones who progress through the system if not treated early on with various interventions.
|
|
|
Post by chefmate on Jan 11, 2009 15:00:56 GMT
If Hazel had to beat the living shyt out of the girl then something is obviously wrong with both mother and daughter for that to be occuring
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 11, 2009 15:49:57 GMT
Actually, there are three different categories we are talking here: juvenile hall and youth authority prisons, regular prisons and death row......all have their own set of special considerations considering the type of inmates that inhabit them. I would think the place to start would be with the juveniles as they are the ones who progress through the system if not treated early on with various interventions. i just got through pointing out the dismal failure of so called "interventions" all the interventions for hazel's daughter resulted in someone being almost killed
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 11, 2009 15:52:40 GMT
If Hazel had to beat the living shyt out of the girl then something is obviously wrong with both mother and daughter for that to be occuring the daughter is tras, by choice. she cut my hand taking a knife away from her and was luckier than hell that I didn't stomp her then, like she deserved
|
|
|
Post by drewsmom595 on Jan 11, 2009 23:50:40 GMT
I totally believe in early intervention and prevention programs for youth...but frankly they need to be started in elementary school...targeting at-risk kids before they get off the wrong path.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 12, 2009 13:00:47 GMT
I totally believe in early intervention and prevention programs for youth...but frankly they need to be started in elementary school...targeting at-risk kids before they get off the wrong path. there, we will agree. i think that, up to about twelve, or maybe 13, except for a murderer of course, it might be possible to turn a kid around. fourteen is too late, and 16 is ALWAYS too late. i've had far too much experience with it over the years
|
|
|
Post by swl on Jan 12, 2009 22:54:02 GMT
I think we need to totally reassess how we punish people, why we do it and what we expect from the justice system. The vast, vast majority of criminals are males aged 16-25. Criminality for many boys is simply part of the growing-up process. Finding limits and boundaries is a perfectly normal part of the male maturation process. Once we recognise that, we start to look at crime & punishment differently. Rehabilitation simply does not work, it's a liberal pipe dream. There is no definitive study that shows rehabilitative efforts affect re-offending any more than boys simply growing up. Give me 100 teenage prisoners and 100 teenage undetected criminals (most crime isn't detected) and I can virtually guarantee that no matter how long the criminals spend in prison, no matter how much effort is put into rehabilitating them, by the time both groups reach the age of 30, re-offending rates will be nearly identical. So, understanding that male criminal behaviour declines from the age of 25, I would simply incarcerate them to that point. What's the point in jailing a 16 year old thug for three years, then releasing him at 19 - slap bang in the middle of the criminality age range? Keep him in until he's 25. For 22, 23, and 24 year olds, give them an appropriate minimum sentence obviously. However, it is important that a young man being released at 25 with up to 9 years in prison behind him is able to cope with society. To this end, prison must as closely resemble outside life as possible. It must have an education element, a work element, recreation, play and socialisation. I've wittered on a bit but I've loads to say on the subject ;D Shoot me down in flames now and we can start to narrow the subject down a bit
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 14, 2009 19:38:47 GMT
I think we need to totally reassess how we punish people, why we do it and what we expect from the justice system. The vast, vast majority of criminals are males aged 16-25. Criminality for many boys is simply part of the growing-up process. Finding limits and boundaries is a perfectly normal part of the male maturation process. Once we recognise that, we start to look at crime & punishment differently. Rehabilitation simply does not work, it's a liberal pipe dream. There is no definitive study that shows rehabilitative efforts affect re-offending any more than boys simply growing up. Give me 100 teenage prisoners and 100 teenage undetected criminals (most crime isn't detected) and I can virtually guarantee that no matter how long the criminals spend in prison, no matter how much effort is put into rehabilitating them, by the time both groups reach the age of 30, re-offending rates will be nearly identical. So, understanding that male criminal behaviour declines from the age of 25, I would simply incarcerate them to that point. What's the point in jailing a 16 year old thug for three years, then releasing him at 19 - slap bang in the middle of the criminality age range? Keep him in until he's 25. For 22, 23, and 24 year olds, give them an appropriate minimum sentence obviously. However, it is important that a young man being released at 25 with up to 9 years in prison behind him is able to cope with society. To this end, prison must as closely resemble outside life as possible. It must have an education element, a work element, recreation, play and socialisation. I've wittered on a bit but I've loads to say on the subject ;D Shoot me down in flames now and we can start to narrow the subject down a bit let's start with the most glaring: prison must as closely resemble outside life as possible. that is obviously nuts. prison must most closely resemble the complete opposite of outside life. you are wanting to encourage imbeciles to commit crimes to go to prison. hell, why not, if you have everything in prison that you could have on the outside, and not have to work for it?
|
|
|
Post by swl on Jan 14, 2009 21:25:24 GMT
Yeah I get that & I agree in general, but when we are talking about youth offending we are talking about different kinds of people. Take the example of a 16 yr old banged up for 9 years. Put himin a harsh environment and he'll come out a harsh individual, completely incapable of comprehending or living in society. Odds are he'll re-offend largely through ignorance.
I'm talking about a two-tier prison system, as we have now really with Young Offender's Institutions and real prisons. Real prison can be a bitch, but YOI should be about preparing the kid for the world.
Yes I know a proportion of them will re-offend - then they get treated as adults and thrown into an adult prison. But I reckon by protecting society from young men who have gone off the rails and only releasing them when there is a proven statistical likelihood that they are unlikely to re-offend, we will save a lot of time & effort.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jan 15, 2009 12:45:13 GMT
I think we need to totally reassess how we punish people, why we do it and what we expect from the justice system. The vast, vast majority of criminals are males aged 16-25. Criminality for many boys is simply part of the growing-up process. Finding limits and boundaries is a perfectly normal part of the male maturation process. Once we recognise that, we start to look at crime & punishment differently. Rehabilitation simply does not work, it's a liberal pipe dream. There is no definitive study that shows rehabilitative efforts affect re-offending any more than boys simply growing up. Give me 100 teenage prisoners and 100 teenage undetected criminals (most crime isn't detected) and I can virtually guarantee that no matter how long the criminals spend in prison, no matter how much effort is put into rehabilitating them, by the time both groups reach the age of 30, re-offending rates will be nearly identical. So, understanding that male criminal behaviour declines from the age of 25, I would simply incarcerate them to that point. What's the point in jailing a 16 year old thug for three years, then releasing him at 19 - slap bang in the middle of the criminality age range? Keep him in until he's 25. For 22, 23, and 24 year olds, give them an appropriate minimum sentence obviously. However, it is important that a young man being released at 25 with up to 9 years in prison behind him is able to cope with society. To this end, prison must as closely resemble outside life as possible. It must have an education element, a work element, recreation, play and socialisation. I've wittered on a bit but I've loads to say on the subject ;D Shoot me down in flames now and we can start to narrow the subject down a bit Thanks for your fascinating post. I agree with a lot of what you say but there's also stuff you've said which is either dubious or just plain wrong. It's absolutely crucial to tackle youth crime first because if you don't get that part right then the problem will snowball. I'll post more later because I've got to go out now.
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 16, 2010 17:18:45 GMT
Here are some photos of a detention center in Leoben Austria (source: www.yangsquare.com/paradise-prison-judicial-center-leoben/)And here is a video of a dentention center in Arizona run by Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Note the extremely opposite points of view on how best to deal with criminals in detention.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 16, 2010 20:22:41 GMT
obviously, it's sheriff joe who does it right
|
|