|
Post by whiplash on Mar 3, 2006 16:57:09 GMT -5
One detail that is often misreported. Avery was not put in prison for a crime he did not commit, necessarily. The DNA evidence did not prove that he did not commit the crime. The DNA evidence suggested that someone else may have had the opportunity of commiting the crime.
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Mar 7, 2006 15:27:55 GMT -5
What would your ideas be for prison reform though?
|
|
|
Post by Avogadro on Mar 8, 2006 18:16:15 GMT -5
Three words for pirson reform. Work Work Work
smash rocks, make license plates anything to pay your debt back to society.
Not to mention that working will give the prisoner a sense of purpose and full fillness, further more forging his caracter so that avenues may become available for him/her upon release into the general society.
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Apr 2, 2006 11:27:16 GMT -5
Of course there is one problem with that, what if your a lifer and you refuse to work, what punishment is there they could put on you that is worse than the already existant one of never ever getting release, the serious criminals could just refuse to work, it's not like you can beat them to make them work or put them in solitary, most of the sickest serial killers are already in solitary. So how do you punish someone who is a lifer? You can't add time to and indefinite sentence, there simply is no incentive for people like this to work. And short of torture or physical and mental deprivation, which is illegal, there's no way you can give these people an incentive to work.
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on Apr 10, 2006 4:26:32 GMT -5
Of course there is one problem with that, what if your a lifer and you refuse to work, what punishment is there they could put on you that is worse than the already existant one of never ever getting release, the serious criminals could just refuse to work, it's not like you can beat them to make them work or put them in solitary, most of the sickest serial killers are already in solitary. So how do you punish someone who is a lifer? You can't add time to and indefinite sentence, there simply is no incentive for people like this to work. And short of torture or physical and mental deprivation, which is illegal, there's no way you can give these people an incentive to work. What? The point isn't forcing lifers to work. The point is forcing (or even just allowing) people to work for rehabilitation purposes, for when they get out.
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on Apr 10, 2006 4:29:21 GMT -5
In Wisconsin we just had a case where a man was released from prison after serving 18 years for rape because new DNA evidence exonerated him. Six months after his release investigators found a burned corpse in a trash barrel on his property. The corpse was that of a young women who had been missing for about a month. This guy has been arrested and charged with murder. My point in this is that people who are unjustly or accidentally convicted are not likely to be model citizens who have led a life of innocence. The police know who the scumbags are and those are the first ones they investigate. This guy was known to be a scumbag and the police investigated him for the rape. His reputation and the evidence collected led to him being convicted of the rape. Yes, it was a mistake; but for 18 years society was protected from him. What?! I can't even make sense of this post. Are you suggesting that we hold people in prison when they are proven innocent of the crime they were convicted for, since, hell, they probably did SOMETHING wrong? Do you have some statistics to back up the idea that tried-and-acquitted people are more likely to be criminals, or is your post complete horsenuts?
|
|
|
Post by Avogadro on Apr 10, 2006 14:59:06 GMT -5
Naw can't take away the smokes and toilet paper, ya'd get sued It's work or stay in your cell 24/7. I could be wrong but I know if I was in jail for 12 years, I'd want to keep 1-Busy 2-Active so that when I get out I might have a chance at finding a job I believe with prison work they also make a little bit of money which could be used for distance education etc. My point was simply, don't let the prisoners be a drain on society. Make them earn their keep both for the good of the taxpayer and for their own good. I bet after working outside for 8 strong hours they would sleep better at night and be less mischievous as well. As is now, jail is a place to learn how to become a better criminal period.
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Apr 10, 2006 15:30:36 GMT -5
If they do not wish to work, they are not allowed the previlledges that the other inmates are allowed. There are ways to award those that wish the help and ways to punish those that don't wish to participate in any form of rehab. First thing you have to realize is that prison is barren, an inhospitable land. The guards and warren are your "god" or at least should be. If you don't go with the format laid out for you, simple previledges can be stripped, eg. no TV, no Books, no Cigarettes, no Candy. These simple things seem just that simple to you and me but in the prison enviroment they are gold. Take away his toilet paper until it is paid for. If he want to clean his butt after a dump tell him to wipe it with his hand and then wash his hands in the sink. If you wish to be an animal, we can treat you like one. One top of that, if you see no need for rehab of any sort after commiting a horrible crime, then you are obviously not ready to be readdmitted to society. Well I was talking about lifers with no hope of parole. Also you can't deprive people of external activities, I'd imagine that's also illegal. I agree with Avogadro work is a viable method, it makes you feel better when handled properly, can give you goals and motivation and has incentives and I'd imagine leads to less "mischief", but for some you'd need other means to get them to be productive, and for a lifer(with no parole) I don't see how that would be possible. In English prisons I know all inmates are given jobs as a matter of course with the best or cushiest jobs going to the most well behaved, not sure how it happens in the US but I believe it's the same if Shawshank Redemption is any guide . But I'd imagine you mean hard labour, mostly external prison labour, grunt work.
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on Apr 10, 2006 20:01:57 GMT -5
Actually Avo, the drain on society is the revolving door effect that happens when you allow the prisoners to just bide their time in jail and come out the same person that went in. The idea is, to be separated from society for a certain time period in order to readjust your thinking and the way you do things. You don't normally learn this through labour camps. You stated you would want to be busy and learn new things so that you are job ready when released. You, however, (I beleive) do not have a criminal intellect and therefore of course those would be your objectives. Not so for the career criminal. And until they except rehab as a choice and relearn their thinking, they will continue to be in and out of prison. If you get a chance, watch the movie called the Shawshank Redemption. (Not sure that is how it is spelt) and keep an eye on the old librarian. This is what happens to alot of lifers when they get out. There was no rehab at this prison. After a while it becomes the norm and once released they commit more crimes just to get back in. They become "Homesick". This is not what we want is it? Dusty, I guess you have the idea that there is this large segment of people who decide "Well, I think I'm going to keep committing crimes until I get caught." and do it, and that the role of prison is to try to change these people. I disagree with both halves. I think that criminals have an assload of reasons for committing crimes but "because I'm a career criminal lol" isn't one of them. There's no such thing as a "criminal intellect." I've committed lots of drug crimes, if you count them up (which I don't, but YMMV), and there have been loads of times when I would have been more than happy to steal or kill. If the circumstances had been different, I might well have. Frankly, if you can't say the same thing, I think you've either led a pretty damn sheltered life, or you're lying to yourself. I don't think I'm different in this regard from most criminals, except that in my cases the circumstances were not different. Meaning: I grew up in a pretty good neighborhood, I'm blessed with a sharp mind, so I have lots of money available to me and I don't have gangs out for my head or am part of one out for someone else's, and a million other little things. I object to the idea that almost ANY criminals are just bad people who are cursed with the "criminal intellect~." I think that most criminals, as I or you, are victims of circumstance, and by changing their life we can change their future through rehabilitation; and for most people I think hard work is a good first step. The problem with your bit is that you keep slamming on that these guys need to "relearn their thinking." I totally disagree, and even if I didn't, it's practically impossible; you are who you are. They need to change their life, not relearn their thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Avogadro on Apr 21, 2006 10:10:56 GMT -5
I wonder what to do with the sick ones involved with touching children? Yeah yeah I know everyones first reaction is KILL KILL KILL them. Point is we cannot. Point is there is a very high rate of re-offending even with counseling. Has anyone seen the new movie with Kevin Bacon? The Woodsman? www.thewoodsmanfilm.com/What do we do with such people? He obviously was sick in the head? He was lucky not to re-offend. It's like they should serve their time then be sent to live in Florida with all the old retired geezers so that they would not be tempted. My mind has long ago been made up over capital punishment, abortion, euthanasia. On this issue I don't know what the answer is. There is a guy in my home town who went nuts being tempted by children. He locked himself in a barn got drunk and cut of his own genitalia. Guess what? He is still tempted. I'm sure as brain imaging technologies continue to involve we shall someday "isolate" an area defective in these people and hopefully treat them in order to both keep society safe and offer them a chance at a normal life. Any thoughts on what to do till then?
|
|
|
Post by tonia on Aug 30, 2006 11:13:12 GMT -5
Sidhe:
There are going to be exceptions to any law a society passes. It is a society's responsibility to do what is good for the whole not the exceptions. The United States already has a problem with prison overcrowding. If we were to do away with the death penalty completely as you suggest, this problem would be even worse. Sorry I don't desire to see my tax dollars go to support criminals all their natural lives while they sit in prison and have a free ride. They had no compassion for their victims, so why should I have compassion for them? IMO, their right for compassion ended when they decided to commit their crime.
I do believe the death penalty should be available in murder cases. We do have a nice long appeals process for someone to prove their innocence. Evidence is not the same as it used to be, and with technology getting better so will the accuracy of evidence. Sidhe, why should we keep alive serial killers such as Charles Manson or Jeffrey Dahmer when their actions have already proven that they are so sick in the head and they can't be rehabilitated?
Under the current laws in most states, child molestors have to serve a number of years in prison for their crime, then they are released back into society with little or no rehabilitation. More often than not, they commit the same crime again. IMO, the only real way to stop a child from being molested is to either execute the perp or lock them in prison for the rest of their natural life without any possibility of parole. Until the United States decides to adopt one of these choices in every state, children wil continue to be molested. Do I have any compassion for these people at all? No I don't. There is absolutely no excuse in the world you can give to violate a child in this way even if you are a victim yourself. If you are a victim, why are you not smart enough to seek help for yourself instead of making someone else a victim?
As far as making someone to work to rehabilitate them:
If they are in the free world and choose crime instead of working, how would working have a positive effect on them in prison? Working might help with their support costs as long as the prison or government gets all the money they make. When the United States starts adopting this policy how long do you think it will last before inmates start saying their rights are being violated? My guess is not very long.
|
|