Do you agree with Corporal Punishment?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by TechTrek (91 posts) -
Do you agree with the idea of inflicting physical pain or causing injury in order to deter criminals from repeating their offenses? For example, in Saudi Arabia, which is governed by Sharia Law, thieves are punished by having one of their hands amputated. In Malaysia, rapists are punished by receiving very violent lashings, which can actually strip flesh bare. As barbaric as these punishments may seem, it should be considered that these countries have some of the lowest crime rates in the world. Here, in the U.S., we don't resort to corporal punishment, we simply imprison our criminals. However, as a result, we have a very high crime rate. So, what you do you guys think? EDIT: Just to be clear, I don't agree with extreme forms of corporal punishment which entails amputations or disfigurement. However, punishments such as beatings or lashings don't seem to bad. Parents use such punishments on their kids, so why can't the government use them on criminals.
#2 Posted by heysharpshooter (6348 posts) -

Do you agree with the idea of inflicting physical pain or causing injury in order to deter criminals from repeating their offenses? For example, in Saudi Arabia, which is governed by Sharia Law, thieves are punished by having one of their hands amputated. In Malaysia, rapists are punished by receiving very violent lashings, which can actually strip flesh bare. As barbaric as these punishments may seem, it should be considered that these countries have some of the lowest crime rates in the world. Here, in the U.S., we don't resort to corporal punishment, we simply imprison our criminals. However, as a result, we have a very high crime rate. So, what you do you guys think? TechTrek

many of those countries have low "crime rates" because the vast majority of crimes go unreported/no one cares/ things that would be illegal in the US are legal there... those "crime rates" are a bunch of BS...

The Constitution protects us from "curel and unusual punishment", so thats it... Corporal Punishment is illegal in the US...

#3 Posted by lightleggy (15870 posts) -
Do you agree with the idea of inflicting physical pain or causing injury in order to deter criminals from repeating their offenses? For example, in Saudi Arabia, which is governed by Sharia Law, thieves are punished by having one of their hands amputated. In Malaysia, rapists are punished by receiving very violent lashings, which can actually strip flesh bare. As barbaric as these punishments may seem, it should be considered that these countries have some of the lowest crime rates in the world. Here, in the U.S., we don't resort to corporal punishment, we simply imprison our criminals. However, as a result, we have a very high crime rate. So, what you do you guys think? TechTrek
yeah but im sure that those guys who get imprisoned get their share of corporal punishment from other inmates if you get what I mean
#4 Posted by UCF_Knight (6863 posts) -
Cruel and unusual punishment is against our Constitution. Personally though, no, I would not support ideas such as cutting off a hand of someone that committed of thievery.
#5 Posted by Former_Slacker (2618 posts) -

[QUOTE="TechTrek"]Do you agree with the idea of inflicting physical pain or causing injury in order to deter criminals from repeating their offenses? For example, in Saudi Arabia, which is governed by Sharia Law, thieves are punished by having one of their hands amputated. In Malaysia, rapists are punished by receiving very violent lashings, which can actually strip flesh bare. As barbaric as these punishments may seem, it should be considered that these countries have some of the lowest crime rates in the world. Here, in the U.S., we don't resort to corporal punishment, we simply imprison our criminals. However, as a result, we have a very high crime rate. So, what you do you guys think? heysharpshooter

many of those countries have low "crime rates" because the vast majority of crimes go unreported/no one cares/ things that would be illegal in the US are legal there... those "crime rates" are a bunch of BS...

The Constitution protects us from "curel and unusual punishment", so thats it... Corporal Punishment is illegal in the US...

This is pretty much it.

#6 Posted by ShadowDeathX (10547 posts) -
"The Constitution protects us from "curel and unusual punishment", so thats it... Corporal Punishment is illegal in the US..." This^
#7 Posted by brendanhunt1 (2333 posts) -
"you can measure the civilization of a society by the way it treats its prisoners"
#8 Posted by ferrari2001 (16736 posts) -
"you can measure the civilization of a society by the way it treats its prisoners"brendanhunt1
Exactly. I'm proud that I live in a country that could be considered civilized in that regard.
#9 Posted by Nick3306 (2560 posts) -
[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"]"The Constitution protects us from "curel and unusual punishment", so thats it... Corporal Punishment is illegal in the US..." This^

But who is to say whats cruel and unusual? There is no set of defining rules for it.
#10 Posted by BranKetra (47788 posts) -

Depends. Some people are totally against violence in any shape or form. Personally, I think that's taking away one of the most basic traits of human beings. Like it or not.

As far as Corporal Punishment goes, I think it has to do with the fear of being permanently branded as a criminal. A scar on the body can be a lot worse than simply being labeled a felon. To be honest, you could be right saying that the lack of personal punishment beyond confinement and embellishing one's social status is a factor in the U.S.' high crime rate. At the same time, states have diffferent policies towards crimes, so it's probably more complicated than you're making it out to be.

#11 Posted by mrgiggles24 (44 posts) -

All I can say is that I'm a criminal justice student, kind of a useless major, but I have learned some things. I know that some people committ misdemeanors in the winter to be put in jail for 6 months until the weather is nicer. In jail they get three hots and a bed. Also when a person is sent to prison, they learn how to become a better criminal. They get to talk to other incarcerated people and learn new tricks on how not to get caught. I myself don't have any ideas on how to fix it, but I know that our prison system in the US does have some problems.

#12 Posted by heysharpshooter (6348 posts) -

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"]"The Constitution protects us from "curel and unusual punishment", so thats it... Corporal Punishment is illegal in the US..." This^Nick3306
But who is to say whats cruel and unusual? There is no set of defining rules for it.

Yes there is...

Cruel: punishment that would cause great, brutal suffering done by an indivdual with malicious intent. Good luck finding someone to treat torture as "another day in the office"

Unusual: anything that goes way over-board, out from left field... like that Simpons episode where Bart and Homer and tethered together... thats unusual...

The Constitution is quite clear, and the Supreme Court has sent precedent... there is no grey area...

#13 Posted by luisen123 (6537 posts) -
"you can measure the civilization of a society by the way it treats its prisoners"brendanhunt1
You can also measure the civilization by the way it treats its poor citizens. Also, I do agree with corporal punishment, criminals are scum and deserve no better, but that's my opinion.
#14 Posted by heysharpshooter (6348 posts) -

[QUOTE="brendanhunt1"]"you can measure the civilization of a society by the way it treats its prisoners"luisen123
You can also measure the civilization by the way it treats its poor citizens. Also, I do agree with corporal punishment, criminals are scum and deserve no better, but that's my opinion.

Who is a criminal? Are you a criminal when you J-walk... you commited a crime, violated a law... should they run you over with a car as punishment?

Thats the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard...

#15 Posted by Nick3306 (2560 posts) -

[QUOTE="luisen123"][QUOTE="brendanhunt1"]"you can measure the civilization of a society by the way it treats its prisoners"heysharpshooter

You can also measure the civilization by the way it treats its poor citizens. Also, I do agree with corporal punishment, criminals are scum and deserve no better, but that's my opinion.

Who is a criminal? Are you a criminal when you J-walk... you commited a crime, violated a law... should they run you over with a car as punishment?

Thats the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard...

To be honest that was a terrible comparison, no one considers J-walkers criminals. Just because he supports corporal punishment doesnt me he supports it for all crimes.
#16 Posted by luisen123 (6537 posts) -

Who is a criminal? Are you a criminal when you J-walk... you commited a crime, violated a law... should they run you over with a car as punishment?

Thats the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard...heysharpshooter

My, my, first off, I don't see why you would J-walk, it's against the law after all, is it not? Laws are there for a reason, to preserve order and to protect you, when you go against them you refuse that and deserve what you'll get. Also, criminals are scum.

#17 Posted by heysharpshooter (6348 posts) -

[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]

[QUOTE="luisen123"] You can also measure the civilization by the way it treats its poor citizens. Also, I do agree with corporal punishment, criminals are scum and deserve no better, but that's my opinion.Nick3306

Who is a criminal? Are you a criminal when you J-walk... you commited a crime, violated a law... should they run you over with a car as punishment?

Thats the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard...

To be honest that was a terrible comparison, no one considers J-walkers criminals. Just because he supports corporal punishment doesnt me he supports it for all crimes.

once you start something, you set off a chain reaction... first its for major criminals only, then for lesser crimes... before long, its every crime...

only people living in a free country ever want their freedoms taken... so strange...

#18 Posted by UCF_Knight (6863 posts) -
Are you a criminal when you J-walk... you commited a crime, violated a law... should they run you over with a car as punishment?heysharpshooter
Oh that would suck. :P My university wouldn't have any physically-well students left.
#19 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23411 posts) -
The tc seems so familar to me, but I can't pinpoint to who it is...
#20 Posted by BranKetra (47788 posts) -

[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]Who is a criminal? Are you a criminal when you J-walk... you commited a crime, violated a law... should they run you over with a car as punishment?

Thats the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard...luisen123

My, my, first off, I don't see why you would J-walk, it's against the law after all, is it not? Laws are there for a reason, to preserve order and to protect you, when you go against them you refuse that and deserve what you'll get. Also, criminals are scum.

That's pretty generalized, don't you think? I jay-walk sometimes because there's too much traffic at intersections and I don't have time to wait. Laws may be in place for the order and stability of people, but that doesn't mean they are flawless.
#21 Posted by luisen123 (6537 posts) -
That's pretty generalized, don't you think? I jay-walk sometimes because there's too much traffic at intersections and I don't have time to wait. Laws may be in place for the order and stability of people, but that doesn't mean they are flawless.BranKetra
It's still against the law, I can proudly say I've never done it, I don't see the point, that's what corners are for and that's why there are stop lights.
#22 Posted by heysharpshooter (6348 posts) -

[QUOTE="BranKetra"] That's pretty generalized, don't you think? I jay-walk sometimes because there's too much traffic at intersections and I don't have time to wait. Laws may be in place for the order and stability of people, but that doesn't mean they are flawless.luisen123
It's still against the law, I can proudly say I've never done it, I don't see the point, that's what corners are for and that's why there are stop lights.

you can honestly say you have never commited a crime, ever?

Cause me, I have... makes me scum I suppose...

#23 Posted by luisen123 (6537 posts) -
Cause me, I have... makes me scum I suppose...heysharpshooter
Yes, from the crimes available to the average citizen, never have J-walked, littered, gone above the allowed speed, drived without the proper papers, etc. etc. It's not hard, at all, seriously.
#24 Posted by BranKetra (47788 posts) -
[QUOTE="BranKetra"] That's pretty generalized, don't you think? I jay-walk sometimes because there's too much traffic at intersections and I don't have time to wait. Laws may be in place for the order and stability of people, but that doesn't mean they are flawless.luisen123
It's still against the law, I can proudly say I've never done it, I don't see the point, that's what corners are for and that's why there are stop lights.

Then you didn't understand my post. I jaywalk because the traffic is too dense. I could run through the traffic at the stop light, but that would be worse. If you think the world is as clear cut as any particular law states it to be, you've got a lot to learn.
#25 Posted by StealthMonkey4 (7041 posts) -

Yes, by the way are you BRHD's alt?

#26 Posted by Alter_Echo (10722 posts) -

No. The way our injustice system is setup, having a criminal history is punishment enough. Getting a loan? Background check. Getting a job? Background check. Guess what type of person fails both of those.....

I find it hilarious how you can break the law here in the US, serve your punishment, pay restitution and then be discriminated against for the rest of your life based on a charge that may be ****ing years and years old even with nothing before or since.

Get caught with drugs, serve jail time, pay fines, court costs, probation oh and also forget the notion of ever getting a respectable job EVER in the future because a life of forced poverty due to it is completely fair.

This is coming from someone who got one of those "We regret to inform you" letters from a prospective employer when i have ONE criminal charge my entire life which was over a decade ago and has absolutely NOTHING to do with the type of job i was applying for.

I mean ****. If i was scraping by and did not already have a decent job what would i do now? Rob a bank? Knock over a liqour store? How many people have broken the law AGAIN out of necessity after being disallowed a normal life by the system?

rant rant rant. Don't even remember what i was talking about but spent too much time on it to delete.

#27 Posted by luisen123 (6537 posts) -
[QUOTE="BranKetra"] Then you didn't understand my post. I jaywalk because the traffic is too dense. I could run through the traffic at the stop light, but that would be worse. If you think the world is as clear cut as any particular law states it to be, you've got a lot to learn.

I don't know, I never understand your posts, it seems you're too goddamn deep for me. All I'm saying is, there's not a valid reason to go against the law and if you do, there should be punishment to make sure you don't do it again.
#28 Posted by luisen123 (6537 posts) -

No. The way our injustice system is setup, having a criminal history is punishment enough. Getting a loan? Background check. Getting a job? Background check. Guess what type of person fails both of those.....

I find it hilarious how you can break the law here in the US, serve your punishment, pay restitution and then be discriminated against for the rest of your life based on a charge that may be ****ing years and years old even with nothing before or since.

Get caught with drugs, serve jail time, pay fines, court costs, probation oh and also forget the notion of ever getting a respectable job EVER in the future because a life of forced poverty due to it is completely fair.

This is coming from someone who got one of those "We regret to inform you" letters from a prospective employer when i have ONE criminal charge my entire life which was over a decade ago and has absolutely NOTHING to do with the type of job i was applying for.

I mean ****. If i was scraping by and did not already have a decent job what would i do now? Rob a bank? Knock over a liqour store? How many people have broken the law AGAIN out of necessity after being disallowed a normal life by the system?

rant rant rant. Don't even remember what i was talking about but spent too much time on it to delete.

Alter_Echo
You shouldn't have broken the law in the first place.
#29 Posted by Former_Slacker (2618 posts) -

[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]Who is a criminal? Are you a criminal when you J-walk... you commited a crime, violated a law... should they run you over with a car as punishment?

Thats the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard...luisen123

My, my, first off, I don't see why you would J-walk, it's against the law after all, is it not? Laws are there for a reason, to preserve order and to protect you, when you go against them you refuse that and deserve what you'll get. Also, criminals are scum.

There is no black and white, all laws are relative. Is a murder the same as someone who stole a bag of chips? Also who's to say the they're guilty in the first place?

#30 Posted by luisen123 (6537 posts) -
There is no black and white, all laws are relative. Is a murder the same as someone who stole a bag of chips? Also who's to say the they're guilty in the first place?Former_Slacker
That's why I'd say you'll get what you deserve.
#31 Posted by Alter_Echo (10722 posts) -

[QUOTE="Alter_Echo"]

No. The way our injustice system is setup, having a criminal history is punishment enough. Getting a loan? Background check. Getting a job? Background check. Guess what type of person fails both of those.....

I find it hilarious how you can break the law here in the US, serve your punishment, pay restitution and then be discriminated against for the rest of your life based on a charge that may be ****ing years and years old even with nothing before or since.

Get caught with drugs, serve jail time, pay fines, court costs, probation oh and also forget the notion of ever getting a respectable job EVER in the future because a life of forced poverty due to it is completely fair.

This is coming from someone who got one of those "We regret to inform you" letters from a prospective employer when i have ONE criminal charge my entire life which was over a decade ago and has absolutely NOTHING to do with the type of job i was applying for.

I mean ****. If i was scraping by and did not already have a decent job what would i do now? Rob a bank? Knock over a liqour store? How many people have broken the law AGAIN out of necessity after being disallowed a normal life by the system?

rant rant rant. Don't even remember what i was talking about but spent too much time on it to delete.

luisen123

You shouldn't have broken the law in the first place.

If you think something like that is justified i really don't know what else to say to you about it. Either what the person did was bad enough to serve life in prison or it wasn't and they are set free and ALLOWED to at least TRY to have a prosperous life outside.

It's like releasing someone from jail after 10 years and then not sealing his record pending a probationary period. Why bother releasing them at all? They wont be able to get a job worth a **** which leads to no money which leads to them more than likely doing the same **** they did the first time which puts them back in prison.

Why would you want to eject people out into society and then GIVE them reasons to break the law again? There needs to be better legislation at least. Why a petty charge like mine stays on there just as long as murder or rape is mind boggling.

#32 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

Violence is fun and makes you feel stronger, so yes.;)

#33 Posted by BuryMe (22017 posts) -

No. Not only because it's incredibly cruel, but also becaue there's no actual evidence that it actually works.

#34 Posted by BranKetra (47788 posts) -

[QUOTE="BranKetra"] Then you didn't understand my post. I jaywalk because the traffic is too dense. I could run through the traffic at the stop light, but that would be worse. If you think the world is as clear cut as any particular law states it to be, you've got a lot to learn.luisen123
I don't know, I never understand your posts, it seems you're too goddamn deep for me. All I'm saying is, there's not a valid reason to go against the law and if you do, there should be punishment to make sure you don't do it again.

That's too bad. It's not that complicated. If there is a law that clearly needs to be revised, I will consider it as such. That doesn't mean I'm going to steal from someone else just because they have something that I require. What it means is, if any particular law is clearly hindering me from doing something as simple as walking across a street when I see no other alternative, I'm going. Whatever happens after that is on my hands.

To say that laws are absolute is a little strange, if you ask me. Look at civilizations throughout the history of mankind. In Rome, refusing to acknowledge the emperor as divine and worship him was against the law. In the United States' history, it used to be against the law for women to vote or join the army or for anyone other than white people to be full citizens of the United States. Do you really think that the law was fair and just then?

I admit that law helps give people order, but the lines distinguishing an upstanding citizen from a criminal aren't as simple as you make them out be. There's such a thing called "civil disobedience."

#35 Posted by luisen123 (6537 posts) -

If you think something like that is justified i really don't know what else to say to you about it. Either what the person did was bad enough to serve life in prison or it wasn't and they are set free and ALLOWED to at least TRY to have a prosperous life outside.

It's like releasing someone from jail after 10 years and then not sealing his record pending a probationary period. Why bother releasing them at all? They wont be able to get a job worth a **** which leads to no money which leads to them more than likely doing the same **** they did the first time which puts them back in prison.

Why would you want to eject people out into society and then GIVE them reasons to break the law again? There needs to be better legislation at least. Why a petty charge like mine stays on there just as long as murder or rape is mind boggling.Alter_Echo

But really, you shouldn't have broken the law in the first place. Sure let's make things easier for criminals, right?

#36 Posted by BuryMe (22017 posts) -

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"]"The Constitution protects us from "curel and unusual punishment", so thats it... Corporal Punishment is illegal in the US..." This^Nick3306
But who is to say whats cruel and unusual? There is no set of defining rules for it.

The supreme court decides what is cruel and unusual.

And if receiveing beatings or lashings isn't "curel" or unusual, then nothing is.

#37 Posted by gameguy6700 (12197 posts) -
[QUOTE="Alter_Echo"]

[QUOTE="luisen123"][QUOTE="Alter_Echo"]

No. The way our injustice system is setup, having a criminal history is punishment enough. Getting a loan? Background check. Getting a job? Background check. Guess what type of person fails both of those.....

I find it hilarious how you can break the law here in the US, serve your punishment, pay restitution and then be discriminated against for the rest of your life based on a charge that may be ****ing years and years old even with nothing before or since.

Get caught with drugs, serve jail time, pay fines, court costs, probation oh and also forget the notion of ever getting a respectable job EVER in the future because a life of forced poverty due to it is completely fair.

This is coming from someone who got one of those "We regret to inform you" letters from a prospective employer when i have ONE criminal charge my entire life which was over a decade ago and has absolutely NOTHING to do with the type of job i was applying for.

I mean ****. If i was scraping by and did not already have a decent job what would i do now? Rob a bank? Knock over a liqour store? How many people have broken the law AGAIN out of necessity after being disallowed a normal life by the system?

rant rant rant. Don't even remember what i was talking about but spent too much time on it to delete.

You shouldn't have broken the law in the first place.

If you think something like that is justified i really don't know what else to say to you about it. Either what the person did was bad enough to serve life in prison or it wasn't and they are set free and ALLOWED to at least TRY to have a prosperous life outside.

It's like releasing someone from jail after 10 years and then not sealing his record pending a probationary period. Why bother releasing them at all? They wont be able to get a job worth a **** which leads to no money which leads to them more than likely doing the same **** they did the first time which puts them back in prison.

Why would you want to eject people out into society and then GIVE them reasons to break the law again? There needs to be better legislation at least. Why a petty charge like mine stays on there just as long as murder or rape is mind boggling.

I gotta agree with Alter_Echo here. The way ex-cons are treated in America ensures many of them will wind up back in prison again. Think about: If you reform a drug dealer into a respectable person but then deny him any livelihood other than dead-end, degrading minimum wage work, do you think he's going to opt to live in poverty his whole life or do you think that he'll decide to go back to selling drugs? And keep in mind that thanks to how our prisons are run, said ex-drug dealer is likely to have actually REFINED his criminal skills while in prison, in addition to making a ton of new contacts. It gets even worse with sex offenders. Not only do they run into the same issues as any other ex-con, but they also get actively harrassed by society. And thanks to rules like "you can't live within 200 meters of a bus stop, playground, park, school, church, library, chuckie cheese, etc." there's virtually nowhere they can legally live, meaning they usually wind up homeless. Unfortunately for society, homeless people tend to be extraordinarily difficult to keep track of (especially if they remove that ankle tracker) which is why you hear about so many sex offenders "falling through the system". It has nothing to do with incompetent probation officers, a lack of funding, or laws not be strict enough, and everything to do with people being forced to live off the grid. The root of most problems with crime rates in Amercia are, ironically, Americans' extremely vindicitive attitudes towards criminals.
#38 Posted by BranKetra (47788 posts) -
[QUOTE="gameguy6700"] I gotta agree with Alter_Echo here. The way ex-cons are treated in America ensures many of them will wind up back in prison again. Think about: If you reform a drug dealer into a respectable person but then deny him any livelihood other than dead-end, degrading minimum wage work, do you think he's going to opt to live in poverty his whole life or do you think that he'll decide to go back to selling drugs? And keep in mind that thanks to how our prisons are run, said ex-drug dealer is likely to have actually REFINED his criminal skills while in prison, in addition to making a ton of new contacts. It gets even worse with sex offenders. Not only do they run into the same issues as any other ex-con, but they also get actively harrassed by society. And thanks to rules like "you can't live within 200 meters of a bus stop, playground, park, school, church, library, chuckie cheese, etc." there's virtually nowhere they can legally live, meaning they usually wind up homeless. Unfortunately for society, homeless people tend to be extraordinarily difficult to keep track of (especially if they remove that ankle tracker) which is why you hear about so many sex offenders "falling through the system". It has nothing to do with incompetent probation officers, a lack of funding, or laws not be strict enough, and everything to do with people being forced to live off the grid. The root of most problems with crime rates in Amercia are, ironically, Americans' extremely vindicitive attitudes towards criminals.

So the problem isn't the system itself so much as the people running it?
#39 Posted by BuryMe (22017 posts) -

[QUOTE="BranKetra"] That's pretty generalized, don't you think? I jay-walk sometimes because there's too much traffic at intersections and I don't have time to wait. Laws may be in place for the order and stability of people, but that doesn't mean they are flawless.luisen123
It's still against the law, I can proudly say I've never done it, I don't see the point, that's what corners are for and that's why there are stop lights.

When there are no cars around, and the corner is a fair distance away, why would I walk out of my way to cross the street, and then back again, when I'm already right infront of where I want to go?

#40 Posted by TechTrek (91 posts) -

No. The way our injustice system is setup, having a criminal history is punishment enough. Getting a loan? Background check. Getting a job? Background check. Guess what type of person fails both of those.....

I find it hilarious how you can break the law here in the US, serve your punishment, pay restitution and then be discriminated against for the rest of your life based on a charge that may be ****ing years and years old even with nothing before or since.

Get caught with drugs, serve jail time, pay fines, court costs, probation oh and also forget the notion of ever getting a respectable job EVER in the future because a life of forced poverty due to it is completely fair.

This is coming from someone who got one of those "We regret to inform you" letters from a prospective employer when i have ONE criminal charge my entire life which was over a decade ago and has absolutely NOTHING to do with the type of job i was applying for.

I mean ****. If i was scraping by and did not already have a decent job what would i do now? Rob a bank? Knock over a liqour store? How many people have broken the law AGAIN out of necessity after being disallowed a normal life by the system?

rant rant rant. Don't even remember what i was talking about but spent too much time on it to delete.

Alter_Echo
If you don't mind me asking, what crime were you convicted of?
#41 Posted by BuryMe (22017 posts) -

[QUOTE="Alter_Echo"]If you think something like that is justified i really don't know what else to say to you about it. Either what the person did was bad enough to serve life in prison or it wasn't and they are set free and ALLOWED to at least TRY to have a prosperous life outside.

It's like releasing someone from jail after 10 years and then not sealing his record pending a probationary period. Why bother releasing them at all? They wont be able to get a job worth a **** which leads to no money which leads to them more than likely doing the same **** they did the first time which puts them back in prison.

Why would you want to eject people out into society and then GIVE them reasons to break the law again? There needs to be better legislation at least. Why a petty charge like mine stays on there just as long as murder or rape is mind boggling.luisen123

But really, you shouldn't have broken the law in the first place. Sure let's make things easier for criminals, right?

No, he's saying that ex-cons, people who have already served their punishments and paid their debts to society, should be able to live normal lives.

#42 Posted by 67gt500 (4620 posts) -
A truly civilised society abhors corporal and capital punishment...
#43 Posted by gameguy6700 (12197 posts) -
[QUOTE="gameguy6700"] I gotta agree with Alter_Echo here. The way ex-cons are treated in America ensures many of them will wind up back in prison again. Think about: If you reform a drug dealer into a respectable person but then deny him any livelihood other than dead-end, degrading minimum wage work, do you think he's going to opt to live in poverty his whole life or do you think that he'll decide to go back to selling drugs? And keep in mind that thanks to how our prisons are run, said ex-drug dealer is likely to have actually REFINED his criminal skills while in prison, in addition to making a ton of new contacts. It gets even worse with sex offenders. Not only do they run into the same issues as any other ex-con, but they also get actively harrassed by society. And thanks to rules like "you can't live within 200 meters of a bus stop, playground, park, school, church, library, chuckie cheese, etc." there's virtually nowhere they can legally live, meaning they usually wind up homeless. Unfortunately for society, homeless people tend to be extraordinarily difficult to keep track of (especially if they remove that ankle tracker) which is why you hear about so many sex offenders "falling through the system". It has nothing to do with incompetent probation officers, a lack of funding, or laws not be strict enough, and everything to do with people being forced to live off the grid. The root of most problems with crime rates in Amercia are, ironically, Americans' extremely vindicitive attitudes towards criminals.BranKetra
So the problem isn't the system itself so much as the people running it?

No, it's the people who made it.
#44 Posted by RubiksCubeReven (246 posts) -

It's already torture enough to go through all the court cases, plus prison isn't that awesome.

#45 Posted by BranKetra (47788 posts) -

[QUOTE="BranKetra"][QUOTE="gameguy6700"] I gotta agree with Alter_Echo here. The way ex-cons are treated in America ensures many of them will wind up back in prison again. Think about: If you reform a drug dealer into a respectable person but then deny him any livelihood other than dead-end, degrading minimum wage work, do you think he's going to opt to live in poverty his whole life or do you think that he'll decide to go back to selling drugs? And keep in mind that thanks to how our prisons are run, said ex-drug dealer is likely to have actually REFINED his criminal skills while in prison, in addition to making a ton of new contacts. It gets even worse with sex offenders. Not only do they run into the same issues as any other ex-con, but they also get actively harrassed by society. And thanks to rules like "you can't live within 200 meters of a bus stop, playground, park, school, church, library, chuckie cheese, etc." there's virtually nowhere they can legally live, meaning they usually wind up homeless. Unfortunately for society, homeless people tend to be extraordinarily difficult to keep track of (especially if they remove that ankle tracker) which is why you hear about so many sex offenders "falling through the system". It has nothing to do with incompetent probation officers, a lack of funding, or laws not be strict enough, and everything to do with people being forced to live off the grid. The root of most problems with crime rates in Amercia are, ironically, Americans' extremely vindicitive attitudes towards criminals.gameguy6700
So the problem isn't the system itself so much as the people running it?

No, it's the people who made it.

Those people are probably long gone. That leaves whoever still approves and maintains this system. Apparently, that's a lot of people.

I can understand the basis of the system from a laymen's point of view: Hiring a crook is bad for business because there's a chance he'll repeat his crimes with the business who hired him as the victim. Not to mention the fact that it might frighten people away from applying for a job there. It's possible that some of these convicted people want to change their ways and become better people. In 1st world societies, there are some crimes that are intolerable and the most lenience a culprit can hope to get is life in prison.For better or worse, some people believe that a crime is a crime regardless of its context and should be punished to full extent the law mandates. Hopefully, not everyone is so naive or heartless. Then again, I remember reading a thread about how a woman in labor being rushed to the hospital got a ticket for speeding and the majority of responses were in favor of her punishment. In the end, people will risk their social stability for the sanctity of their lives.

#46 Posted by lpjazzman220 (2248 posts) -

[QUOTE="Nick3306"][QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"]"The Constitution protects us from "curel and unusual punishment", so thats it... Corporal Punishment is illegal in the US..." This^heysharpshooter

But who is to say whats cruel and unusual? There is no set of defining rules for it.

Yes there is...

Cruel: punishment that would cause great, brutal suffering done by an indivdual with malicious intent. Good luck finding someone to treat torture as "another day in the office"

Unusual: anything that goes way over-board, out from left field... like that Simpons episode where Bart and Homer and tethered together... thats unusual...

The Constitution is quite clear, and the Supreme Court has sent precedent... there is no grey area...

so if someone commits an offense that caused great, brutal suffering with malicious intent...we should throw them in prison...give them 3 squares a day...let them get an education off of our tax dollars...give them a computer to use...let them have sex with their wives/gf's?? i think not...i personally believe if the death penalty in america actually happened in under...say...50 years...then crime would be much less...also...1 bullets worth of lead costs a h*** of a lot less than 50 years worth of supporting someone...

#47 Posted by lpjazzman220 (2248 posts) -

A truly civilised society abhors corporal and capital punishment...67gt500

a truely civilized society wouldnt need a system of punishment...everyone would be civilized and therefore would refrain from crime as it is...the uncivilized thing to do...

#48 Posted by Hemmaroids (3148 posts) -
I believe in Capital punishment.