tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post378340867899685156..comments2024-03-27T19:03:47.301-07:00Comments on Winging It: The Purpose of the Penal SystemStanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04523232247971115247noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-29834606511508436942010-06-25T22:31:49.539-07:002010-06-25T22:31:49.539-07:00I believe that prison is supposed to be primarily ...I believe that prison is supposed to be primarily for punishment. I'm not concerned with rehabilitation until the sentenced is served and the convict is about to be released. If by that time he hasn't repented and sworn off his life of crime simply by having lost his freedom and possibly working hard while at it, then that con is looking forward to more time inside. <br /><br /><br />Dan T makes a mistake by considering his time as <i>"the loss of a productive citizen who is now in prison instead of working and paying taxes and otherwise contributing to society."</i> If he was any of those things, he wouldn't be in prison. <br /><br />I know Dan likes to think that it's worth it to society to reform cons, to give them the opportunity to learn a trade that they never took before they committed the crime for which they got busted. But I don't like the idea of giving these people a <i>second</i> education on society's dime. If such education results in a more acceptable recidivism rate, then that second education should be garnished from future wages, just as any other law-abiding citizen pays for retraining in hard times, or just for his paying for higher education. <br /><br />Dan thinks this will not work, or rather, he believes that since there are no stats to support this idea that it will not work or shouldn't be implemented. It's silly. If the con is willing to study and learn, paying money for it later is the easy part. <br /><br />But worse, to rehabilitate a convict is to add to his debt to society and somehow, the reformers think we should pay this cost. <br /><br />But I don't think of cost in that manner. I'll pay more to do the right thing than to do the easier thing. The right thing here is to make the convict pay for his crimes. His crime is the debt for which he owes us. A second education is a reward for his criminal act. It is injustice toward the law abiding society, a legitimate social injustice in fact, to reward a criminal with a free education. It's worth it to me to pay to put him back in jail if he gets out and sins again rather than to give him a prize for doing it the first time. In the meantime, law-abiding people are struggling with the same temptations, resisting and paying this bum's way. Only a lib would see that as a good thing.Marshal Arthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-3969965445384930212010-06-25T07:42:40.340-07:002010-06-25T07:42:40.340-07:00The entire premise of liberalism is built on the p...The entire premise of liberalism is built on the premise that man is fundamenatlly good; the welfare system, economic policy, gun laws, apeasment of those who want us dead, and yes, the judical system. The really weird thing is that the meaning of good doesn't stay the same because there is no basis for it. It seems that in this age, in order to know what "good" means on any given day you have to ask a devout democrat.Danny Wrighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15006024707303951009noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-5552483833103774712010-06-24T07:00:48.411-07:002010-06-24T07:00:48.411-07:00Hey! We agree!Hey! We agree!Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-82932349716336532912010-06-24T06:56:47.604-07:002010-06-24T06:56:47.604-07:00Well, while I set up three purposes (reform, prote...Well, while I set up three purposes (reform, protection, and punishment), my premise is that most people end up with just two. The "reform" crowd typically sees no need to punish criminals (an outdated notion) and favor rehabilitation both for the criminal's sake and for the protection of society. The "punishment" types typically see the penal system as a method of "balancing the books", so to speak. "You cost us with your crime; it's gonna cost you." Reform, to this group, is typically simply part of protecting society (much as you explained), not as the primary purpose of the penal system. It <i>looks</i> as if you are saying you fall in that second category.Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04523232247971115247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-87785238461644803812010-06-24T05:53:03.290-07:002010-06-24T05:53:03.290-07:00I reckon I vote for both/and.
If there were a 30 ...I reckon I vote for both/and.<br /><br />If there were a 30 day procedure whereby a rapist or murderer could be wholly reformed, justice would not be served by then releasing them and I would not favor releasing them at that point.<br /><br />On the other hand, for practical, societal reasons, we'd do very well to strive for reform. If a fella has committed a robbery, he's cost society in many ways - the loss of the stolen goods, the feeling of security that has been taken away from that neighborhood, the loss of a productive citizen who is now in prison instead of working and paying taxes and otherwise contributing to society.<br /><br />But we're not going to imprison a burglar for life. SO, when he gets out, I WANT that felon to be reformed, to have a chance to get a job and become a productive citizen. I WANT to see recidivism go down.<br /><br />For "selfish" societal reasons aside for wanting any good for the burglar, I want to see reform. And then, of course, as a Christian, I'd also have compassion for the felon and want to see him reformed for his sake, as well.<br /><br />So, I vote very much for both/and reform and punishment.Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.com