|
As a society, we should be sensitive enough to realize what we do to people when we incarcerate them. Yea, perhaps we should just kill them instead. No, don't take that seriously. But what good does it do to house a murderer or a rapist for the rest of their lives? If they should never be allowed to be in public again and there is no change for the better that allows for a parole, why keep them on the public dollar? Why allow their influence upon other, not so dangerous convicts? If we had the means I would say put them at the bottom of the ocean or in orbit but why spend the money? In the old days they were shot or hanged or worse. I say if they won't play nice - get rid of them. If people knew they could lose their lives it would deter some from destructive behaviour. Even in prison the behaviour would change because of the threat of a parole refusal. Ultimately we will have to do something. Any other non-lethal suggestions? I can't stop thinking about this... If we could somehow PREVENT someone from developing a sadistic, over-aggressive personality we could deter alot of the crimminal behaviour. I guess the blame could fall on us because through our inaction and complacency we have allowed this personality type to occur. I wonder at what point our species would go from natural to unnatural and stagnated? By selectively breeding a 'harmless gene' into our species would we lose the capacity for art and creativity? Our greatest asset, To Me, is our ability to create art, music and literature. Would we sacrifice our 'humanity' to constrain our violent tendancies? I don't believe what I'm reading. This can't be for real! Throngs of people are incarcerated in the USA because of the goofy and failed "war on drugs," and the increase in mandatory sentencing and "get-tough-on-crime" revenge depravity of the Reagan years. If you haven't had a family member arrested, like I have, you have no idea how hugely depraved the system is. Kids go to prison for things that cops didn't even bust us for in the sixties and seventies. While there, they learn to survive in a gang-dominated, violence-driven society, where it is safer to fight until the guards stop it and send you to the hole than to risk looking like a coward. When you get out, you've spent years learning social interaction by violence. It is utterly, utterly ... And, many are they who have mental illness, have committed some crime, and the USA provides no place to put them but in prison, where they are victims of whomever cares to take advantage of them. Suicides are high. It is positively medieval. And it's obviously not working or there would be a lessen and not an increase in the prison population. Up until recently I had not understood why. Why endure the cost of locking them up when locking them up didn't work. I was missing a very important bit. It's not meant to work as now imprisoning is big business. With guaranteed lowest paid, full time workers whenever it is a guaranteed money earner. Masbury, Pop, pop, pop and hugs. — Comment removed by moderator — Dulios - thanks! Skwirlinator, The thought of crime not existing with a zero-tolerance attitude is interesting. I have to admit. It goes against my better judgement and is probably not accepted by most but it is very interesting. The idea of women being put behind bars for petty crimes and normally short sentences being extended needs to be looked into. Is that because the 'Long-arm-of -the-law' wants to look longer, thereby ignore more serious crimes/criminals? These women would be better off at a reform center that deals with the problems that led them into the violent world of crime in the first place.... Finally, having a woman not in control of her senses to be put behind bars and fend for herself is no less barbaric than it was feeding humans to the lions....shocking! I have a major dilemma between equality of the sexes and fair play for females in prisons. I have not resolved my dilemma so I'll not write more. Can anyone see my dilemma and help me? When I made my comment above I was refferring to all people. I don't believe women should get special treatment or extreme treatment. When I think of prisoners I don't differentiate between the sexes. To me a criminal is a criminal. Someone that refuses to obey the laws of their society. A woman that is a murderer is the same as a man that is a murderer in my eyes. The treatment of both should be the same. I agree with all that but I still have a dilemma. It doesn't seem quite right to treat the 'gentle' sex exactly the same as rough house males. My gut feels as against my intellect suggests that this might be one area where exactly the same treatment of both sexes might be wrong. So a murderer that is a woman should get better treatment than a man? I think they all should be treated as murderers. A woman can be as sadistic as any man can, maybe even more. I say treat them all the same regardless of which sex they are. Of coarse it all depends upon the type of crime they commit. Look I don't have the answer. It's a heart rule the head thing. I know in Ireland that the prison regime for females is much more tolerant and 'girly' than for the males and it works. There was a new female prison built some years ago and it seems to work well. Certainly it is with young males that the majority of suicides have occurred. While my comments referred to prisons generally, I am sure that testosterone-driven male inmates require a different regimen than that which would be advantageous to females. The core issue, I think, is whether we want punishment or we want prevention of recidivism. The former makes people into wrecks and causes what we have now - overwhelming recidivism. The latter can help many become productive members of society. Revenge sells in politics, but "get-tough-on-crime" has led us into disaster. Nearly every state is short on prison facilities, nearly every facility is overcrowded, the vast majority of our inmates return again and again, conditioned only to life in prison. Tragic! These... Some of them ARE bad Dogs! I repeat, Some of them. Incisive and decisive, as ever Masbury. Well said. Thanks, rh! Skwirl, question is, "How many of them are what they are because of what life in prison did to them?" |
View the Top Clips from March 30, 2008
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
|
|
|
