what do you feel is/should be the purpose of jail?

[eakers]

should jail be used as punishment or as more of a rehablitation thing?
is the purpose of jail now punishment or is it to keep the community safe while rehabiltating the criminal?

i think that its more punishment than anything else, humans need a deterant to stop them from doing bad things.

*kat. <-- had a huge thing typed out aobut this then hit cancel so you go the condensed version.

 

[Noriaki]

Right now jail is just a punishment thing.

I think it should be both punishment and rehabilitation. There's not much point in releasing someone if chances are good they are just going to do the same thing again.

 

[trek]

It should be strictly punishment. If people are stupid enough to commit the crimes they deserve it.

-Trek

 

[pulse8]

<< It should be strictly punishment. If people are stupid enough to commit the crimes they deserve it.

-Trek >>



But they don't learn that the crime was wrong. Negative re-enforcement only works for so long. It helps to prevent some people from committing crimes, but it doesn't help the people who commit them anyway. Eventually, they become numb to the punishment you are giving them and then you have to up the severity. It's also why I don't believe in hitting your child. While it conditions them to not do whatever it is that you hit them for, it doesn't not teach them that is was wrong and why it was wrong. They just know not to do it because they are going to get smacked.

 

[Elledan]

What jail should be depends on the person. Some people can't be helped with rehabilitation and should be kept permanently out of society. Other people can well be rehabilitated, which then should be done.

The people for who rehabilitation is not an option should be put to good use. They should not spend their rest of their days in a cozy chamber with cable-tv and a room to work out. They would make ideal subjects in various experiments and certain research areas.

But there's one thing which is certain, it's wrong to lock people up in a place which is so different from society that they'll have trouble or even find it impossible to adapt to society once they're released. The solution lies in using wise 'punishments', not brainless, senseless and futile punishments like keeping someone away from society for a few months, years or decades, after which you throw him back in, but socially in a much worser shape than ever before.

 

[lowfatbaconboy]

it should be both....but more rehablitation ala clock work orange =o

 

[pulse8]

Who's to say and how do you tell who can and who can't be rehabilitated?

Good movie. Also a prime example of what we're talking about. The main character never really learned it was wrong, he merely got sick at the thought of it and that conditioned him not to think about it.

 

[linuxboy]

jail does not serve as a deterrent from what we consider incorrect action if the individual performing the action considers it correct and praiseworthy.


Thus, for a society to only place a punishment upon a person who does not consider the jail as punishment is not an effective measure of combatting the action considered by the society to be wrong.

Some law breakers do see jail as punishment and it is an effective deterrent but they do not know of any other way of life. In these cases, some counseling and rehabilitation is avisable.

My view is that is should be both since doing only one does not produce the most benefit to the society in control of the punishment.

 

[Elledan]

<< Who's to say and how do you tell who can and who can't be rehabilitated? >>

Test periode. Depending on how well they react to the used methods, an independent committee will then decide about any further treatments.

 

[linuxboy]

<< The solution lies in using wise 'punishments >>



that's what I was trying to get at. It should be decided case by case depending on the severity of the crime and the individual.

but using only one method is still a suboptimal solution

 

[linuxboy]

<< << Who's to say and how do you tell who can and who can't be rehabilitated? >>

Test periode. Depending on how well they react to the used methods, an independent committee will then decide about any further treatments. >>




a preliminary analysis by a psychotherapist can also be used to determine further action

 

[Elledan]

<<

<< << Who's to say and how do you tell who can and who can't be rehabilitated? >>

Test periode. Depending on how well they react to the used methods, an independent committee will then decide about any further treatments. >>




a preliminary analysis by a psychotherapist can also be used to determine further action >>

Maybe that would be useful to collect some data before the test periode, but at such a stage it's still too early to make any final conclusions.

 

[linuxboy]

agreed.

 

[ChrichtonsGirl]

I think sentences need to be two-pronged. Jail/prison is for punishment. When they've served out their punishment, then they move on to rehabilitation. If they fail rehabilitation, they get more punishment.

If someone's sentenced to 25 years for 2nd degree murder, then they serve 20 years in prison as punishment. If those 20 years have been relatively uneventful, then they're moved to a rehabilitation facility - maybe a lower security prison. After 4 years, they move on to another rehabilitation facility - maybe a halfway house this time. At any time during the process, if said prisoner re-offends or violates the terms of his rehabilitation, then he goes back to prison to finish out his sentence there.

You can't deter crime if all you offer is rehabilitation any more than you can prevent further crime by punishment alone.

 

[AmbitV]

Shame is a greater moral lesson than punishment. -Aristotle

 

[Elledan]

ChrichtonsGirl, problem with your 'proposal' is that it'll lead to a 'desocialization' of the offender, i.e. s/he will never be able to function normally in society again.

 

[Elledan]

<< Shame is a greater moral lesson than punishment. -Aristotle >>

So true.

 

<< What jail should be depends on the person. Some people can't be helped with rehabilitation and should be kept permanently out of society. Other people can well be rehabilitated, which then should be done. >>



So is that person any less of a person then the next guy?
Should they be denied the rights that every other human the planet should have?
So locking them up in a cage for their life is the answer?

 

[ChrichtonsGirl]

<< ChrichtonsGirl, problem with your 'proposal' is that it'll lead to a 'desocialization' of the offender, i.e. s/he will never be able to function normally in society again. >>



Why not? I would think offering progressive rehabilitation based on performance is an excellent way to ease them back into society. We have to let most of them out sometime - would you rather someone who repeatedly violates the terms of rehabilitation doesn't get punished anymore? Or offer a model prisoner nothing but punishment? The current prison system isn't exactly a success story in most states. I can't quote specific studies, but how well do current programs prepare inmates for life after prison?

I'm not sure which part of my 'proposal' is de-socializing, but maybe I didn't express my thoughts very well. I absolutely think prisoners who will be released back into society need to be prepared for it, but part of that preparation has to be a fairly rigid system of punishment, checks and the beginnings of rehabilitation before any full rehabilitation program can begin.

I'm making a silly comparison, but when your kid hits his sister, you punish him first (send him to his room, make him stand in the corner, take his GameBoy away) then &quot;rehabilitate&quot; him by explaining why he shouldn't hit his sister and giving him coping skills so that he won't hit her again. If he turns around and hits her again, you stop your rehabilitation talk and stick him back in the corner until he's ready to listen. If he never listens and continues to hit her, then you remove him from contact with his sister until he's old enough that you no longer control where he goes (his &quot;sentence&quot; is over).

I'm not saying we treat inmates like children, but why wouldn't that kind of system work? My example of a 25-year sentence was just sort of off the top of my head, but why is the basic premise de-socializing?

 

[SmokeyTheBear]

I was watching &quot;Justice Files&quot; on Discovery the other night and it delt with this subject actually parole but that's related. Anyway, a man was up for parole, he was a sex offender, but under the law could not be sent to rehab because his victims were people he knew and under the law they could only be sent if the victims were people they did not know. When his case went before teh parole board made up of 7 people, only 3 of them had to look at the case, one of the 3 said that she didnt' even read the case because there was so much preasure to release prisoners early because of overcrowding. On this same show, there was a group that was working to release elderly prisoners who were serving a life sentece. Some of them were in their late 70's one man had both legs amputated and was still in prison! The point was that it cost more to keep these elderly offenders in because of all the health care they need.

I think that parole boards need to take a more active roll in releasing prisoners. After all, that is their job.

Something else to think about that is also related and I believe was part of this show. If someone is released after serving time for murder or rape would you want to know if they are living in your neighborhood? The problem is that once these people are released they have nowhere to go, no one wants them living in their neighborhood. So even if rehab works where do they go?

I tried to find a link on Discovery that would give a description of the show but couldn't find one. Sorry

 

[Elledan]

<< I'm not saying we treat inmates like children, but why wouldn't that kind of system work? My example of a 25-year sentence was just sort of off the top of my head, but why is the basic premise de-socializing? >>

Some people are able to change, those can be rehabilitated. Others can not change, once those are used to a certain way of life they can't stop living like that.

The ones who can not change will be selected during this test periode I talked about earlier and will permanently be removed from society.
And punishment? Isn't rehabilitation already punishment enough? For some of them it'll be a mental torture they can barely take. Mental punishment/correction is much more targeted and efficient than those cruel, obsolete physical punishments and 'correction'-methods which have been used so far.

You could even call it brain-washing, but then on a far less invasive manner. They'll be guided towards a different way of thinking.

You can completely change people by using gentle methods without crippling them mentally.

I hope that you can see now why 'your' method is inefficient and the result of old ideas which are no longer of any value.

 

[ChrichtonsGirl]

<< I hope that you can see now why 'your' method is inefficient and the result of old ideas which are no longer of any value. >>



Nope, I don't see, nor do I agree. But thank you for explaining, it certainly is interesting to read others' opinions about this.

BTW, I don't know if you meant it that way or not, putting 'your' and 'proposal' in quotations is condescending and was unecessary, given my friendly manner and willingness to listen to your comments.

 

[DaRockMan]

Jail needs to be MORE punishment. Get those prisoners off their duffs from watching cable, and have them work 12 hour days turning big rocks into little ones and tending old ladies gardens.

 

[Cyberian]

<< Test periode. Depending on how well they react to the used methods, an independent committee will then decide about any further treatments.
>>



Will these people be as astute and efficient as current parole boards?

 

[Elledan]

<<

<< I hope that you can see now why 'your' method is inefficient and the result of old ideas which are no longer of any value. >>



Nope, I don't see, nor do I agree. But thank you for explaining, it certainly is interesting to read others' opinions about this. >>

Let me give you a visualization:

Current methods are like trying to crack a nut by means of brute force, i.e. using more and more power until the nut cracks.
When using methods which target the intellect of the subject and his/her mental defenses, it's like you enter the nut using a small slit in its outside after which you manipulate the nut from inside. Obviously this methode is much more effective, has a higher successrate and is more targeted at the individual.

By just putting the subject in a totally strange environment where no longer any 'rules', which are common in the society the subject came from, count, you're desocializing him/her since s/he has to adapt to a totally new set of rules. This is part of 'cracking the nut' by brute force. A totally different environment with totally different rules and values. They (the people outside the prison) hope that this will convince the 'criminal' that his/her actions were futile and are not to be ever repeated. Unfortunately this works only for a few people. A nut isn't that easily cracked. Even torture wouldn't be sufficient for many people to change them. The nutcracker just 'slips' off the nut. Some subjects even reinforce their mental defenses during and after their time in jail. The 'nuts' become even harder to crack.



<< BTW, I don't know if you meant it that way or not, putting 'your' and 'proposal' in quotations is condescending and was unecessary, given my friendly manner and willingness to listen to your comments. >>

I'm sorry if you thought so. I assure you that it wasn't my intention to create this suggestion.