EPTImo yes it can cause mental traumas so it should be banned and replaced by an extension of the judgement or a really good beating.
30k Prisoner Hunger Strike Protesting Solitary - Page 10
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Acertos
France852 Posts
Imo yes it can cause mental traumas so it should be banned and replaced by an extension of the judgement or a really good beating. | ||
|
TheSwamp
United States1497 Posts
On July 11 2013 10:58 Rainling wrote: I thought the point of prison was to provide disincentives for crime, rehabilitate people so they can be brought back into society, and/or prevent people from committing further crimes, not subject people to inhumane conditions that worsen their mental state. Nope. They are used to make money for the people who are contracted to provide services for the government. | ||
|
sva
United States747 Posts
On July 12 2013 08:03 Plansix wrote: Ok, you are not from the US, so I am going to explain this to you. When the Supreme Court of the US says something is Illegal and against the Constitution, that is it. Its fact and law. End of story. There is no place higher to go and there is no changing the outcome. It his the highest law in the land, overriding all other laws. You don't understand what you are talking about, you did poor research, which Kwark and I are calling you on and you don't listen. Give up, your wrong. I just gave up what that guy was saying because he clearly doesn't understand the U.S. law system. I'd love to see his response on these though, because I feel like he's going to just repeat himself over and over again. | ||
|
sva
United States747 Posts
On July 12 2013 08:10 theking1 wrote: If you read the 5 core complaints the prisoners on hunger strike have you'll notice that one of the complaints is about collective punishment for individual offences. Their complaint is about getting solitary for things that the prison knows that they didn't do. Also your response to my suggestion that you're barely literate was riddled with errors. You're not even trying here. And you take the word of some inmates who were convicted for violent offences in the first place...you are living in your own dream world...You do not even know if what they are saying is true.All of the other sources point out they are violent gang members.it is preety useless to argue with you.You have your own oppinion and when use ad hominen whenever you run out of arguments..all of the other users here seem to understand my argumentation and offer other arguments to their side of the story.Even if they do not agree with me they keep the discussion civil.Then you came and ruined the discussion with your ad homines.But hey you are a mod  .When I innitially came here I though that these website due to its reputation would be a little more ad homien free.But it turns out the mods are the biggest insult users around.I am taking a break form TeamLiquid.Going to blizzard forums for a while.I am also deleting all of my Op.not that there are many but I put a little effort into them.Oh well my mistake.it will never happen again.Have fun on the blizzard forums lol..... This baby attitude of yours will be perfect there. TL is very political these days. fixed quote | ||
|
Craton
United States17233 Posts
On July 11 2013 10:48 GhostOwl wrote: They will eventually eat. Let them perform their hunger strike. There is a reason why they are in prison in the first place. Once they have commited the crimes that landed them in prison, their basic rights were taken away. They don't deserve the same rights as normal citizens. I don't think you realize just how little it takes to end up in prison or just how severe solitary is. | ||
|
dirtydurb82
United States178 Posts
| ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
In this way, all the small crimes would decrease. The psychos would still go for it, but since you can't foresee a crime, you 'just' have to make sure they can't go out and repeat it again. The example of northern country prisons is out of context: it can only work there, where people have a different mind set, the popolation is law and overall criminality is law. If you were to apply a Norway-like system to United States (but even Italy, Spain, France) people would EAT each others. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On July 12 2013 08:55 Craton wrote: I don't think you realize just how little it takes to end up in prison or just how severe solitary is. Especially given the fact that the US incarceration-rate seems to be totally out of control, with over 1% of the population (adults) sitting in prison. There are actually more people in prison in the US than their are in China (2.3 milion to 1.6 million) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/uk/06/prisons/html/nn2page1.stm For me it looks like putting people in prison is more like a job creating thing instead of putting away the bad guys. | ||
|
GolemMadness
Canada11044 Posts
And really, what's being accomplished here? Driving people insane, possibly causing their behaviour to become increasingly erratic and violent? Why is this still happening in 2013? | ||
|
EMIYA
United States433 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 12 2013 09:17 EMIYA wrote: So what's the alternative? I understand the morality issue, but isn't it a necessary evil? The denotation of prison as a rehab facility is laughable as it hasn't served that purpose for a LONG ass time. The US at least will never have the man power nor money to properly rehab these people in the near future. Read the thread. The Supreme Court has ordered them to find an alternative, or they did 3 years ago. The state is still working on that. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On July 12 2013 09:07 SoSexy wrote: A prison should be one of the scariest place on earth. A place that makes you REALLY think MANY times 'is this crime really worth the possible, atrocious confinement?' In this way, all the small crimes would decrease. The psychos would still go for it, but since you can't foresee a crime, you 'just' have to make sure they can't go out and repeat it again. The example of northern country prisons is out of context: it can only work there, where people have a different mind set, the popolation is law and overall criminality is law. If you were to apply a Norway-like system to United States (but even Italy, Spain, France) people would EAT each others. Yeah...this doesn't even work. Historical studies have shown that losing a hand did not deter theft, death penalty does not deter murder, etc. The worse prisons are, the more maladjusted prisoners become, and less likely that they'll be able to fit in with normal society once they get out of prison. There is absolutely nothing special about criminals in the United States that prevents them from being rehabilitated. | ||
|
BuddhaMonk
781 Posts
On July 12 2013 09:07 SoSexy wrote: A prison should be one of the scariest place on earth. A place that makes you REALLY think MANY times 'is this crime really worth the possible, atrocious confinement?' In this way, all the small crimes would decrease. The psychos would still go for it, but since you can't foresee a crime, you 'just' have to make sure they can't go out and repeat it again. The example of northern country prisons is out of context: it can only work there, where people have a different mind set, the popolation is law and overall criminality is law. If you were to apply a Norway-like system to United States (but even Italy, Spain, France) people would EAT each others. The evidence shows consistently, including with lots of data from across the U.S. (and also in other Western countries), that simply increasing the severity of sentences does not act as a better deterrent. A good summary of recent studies on this topic can be found here, but to summarize for you, it essentially boils down to the fact that humans (especially those who are committing crimes) are not always rational, sober or of sound mind, and thus they don't weigh the consequences of every action before it occurs. In fact it is counter-productive to reducing crime because "longer prison sentences were associated with a three percent increase in recidivism". Of course this only makes sense if your goal is public safety for all. If your goal is to "fill beds" in order to maximize shareholder profit, then the system of putting away black kids for marijuana is totally awesome. Interestingly the certainty of whether one would be caught does serve as an effective deterrent. On July 12 2013 09:17 EMIYA wrote: So what's the alternative? I understand the morality issue, but isn't it a necessary evil? The denotation of prison as a rehab facility is laughable as it hasn't served that purpose for a LONG ass time. The US at least will never have the man power nor money to properly rehab these people in the near future. Rehab costs much less than incarceration, a dollar spent on treatment in prison yields about six dollars of savings, but a dollar investment in community-based treatment yields nearly $20 in cost savings. The policies that have discarded rehab in favor of harsher sentencing and mandatory minimums inflict a costly economic toll on the nation. It is the opposite of a necessary evil. It's yet another example of corporations co-opting government in order to scam taxpayers. | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On July 12 2013 11:21 BuddhaMonk wrote: The evidence shows consistently, including with lots of data from across the U.S. (and also in other Western countries), that simply increasing the severity of sentences does not act as a better deterrent. A good summary of recent studies on this topic can be found here, but to summarize for you, it essentially boils down to the fact that humans (especially those who are committing crimes) are not always rational, sober or of sound mind, and thus they don't weigh the consequences of every action before it occurs. In fact it is counter-productive to reducing crime because "longer prison sentences were associated with a three percent increase in recidivism". Of course this only makes sense if your goal is public safety for all. If your goal is to "fill beds" in order to maximize shareholder profit, then the system of putting away black kids for marijuana is totally awesome. Interestingly the certainty of whether one would be caught does serve as an effective deterrent. Rehab costs much less than incarceration, a dollar spent on treatment in prison yields about six dollars of savings, but a dollar investment in community-based treatment yields nearly $20 in cost savings. The policies that have discarded rehab in favor of harsher sentencing and mandatory minimums inflict a costly economic toll on the nation. It is the opposite of a necessary evil. It's yet another example of corporations co-opting government in order to scam taxpayers. I agree except for your evil corporation comments. | ||
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
This is because prisons should work mostly as a rehab institution, not only punishment. If for whatever reasons it's used as punishment, I think shorter sentence times with the same or more amounts of solitary confinement (depending on behavior) would be reasonable. Also, I'd say major repeat offenders —including repeat/serious offenders while incarcerated— should just be outright killed, which could save the country lots of money.+ Show Spoiler + Note: death penalty is not expensive. What's expensive is all the trials/appeals associated with them along with the incarceration time of the inmate before they are killed. From what I understand the cost of the actual procedure is around 0% of the overall cost of the entire greater system. With a "3 strikes you're out" minimum, along with case-by-case judgement and perhaps even small "plead for life" hearings, the system would seem pretty fair and result in virtually no false sentencing (percentage of false convictions to the power of 3 or more results in a very small number), while still remaining low-impact on economic resources. It goes without saying, but obviously decriminalization/legalization and regulation of marijuana could go a long way to improving prisons as well. That said, this has been a glaring issue with the prison/government/judicial system for a long time, and I find it pretty ridiculous that things would only change after prisoners protest. I certainly don't think any sort of actions should be taken to change the system —or promise to change the system— within the time it takes for them to starve. Yes change needs to be done, but responding to threatening prisoner demands is silly, even if some of them are minor offenders or non-offenders. | ||
|
[]Phase[]
Belgium927 Posts
On July 12 2013 09:10 GolemMadness wrote: It's kind of disturbing how many people have the mindset of "They're criminals, therefore they deserve what they get." Really? People who go to prison for something like possession of marijuana deserve to be mentally tortured? And as for only getting solitary confinement because you've stabbed someone in prison or something... No. While this may be the case in some prisons, in many it isn't; given that it's solely up to the discretion of the authorities of any given prison. And really, what's being accomplished here? Driving people insane, possibly causing their behaviour to become increasingly erratic and violent? Why is this still happening in 2013? Yep, this thread has gotten pretty disgusting damn fast. It is making my eyes bleed, and honestly it's the first time I really want a thread to be closed, despite the good intentions of some posters. After this im steering clear from this thread. People should not (and will not) stop committing crimes because of fear for prison. We should try make people stop committing crimes by solving the cause, and that can be a problem with their upgrowing environment, a neurological problem, and so on. The fact that there are regions where less crime occurs isn't just coincidence. This alone should make it very clear that we do indeed have control over things such as crime - if we are willing to take the time and study it thoroughly. People don't do evil deeds just like that. I am not saying they have no control over what they do, but a 'lack of selfcontrol' is also a phenomena that can be investigated and possibly cured. As a temporary solution we have prisons -some of which work better than others might I add- but they shouldn't go so low as to resort to torture practices. Are we heading back to medieval times now? It is not about wether a criminal 'deserves' it or not. Allowing something like torture practices also says something about yourself, you know. This approach of 'ah that person did something wrong, let's just lock him up so I don't have to spend time caring, and I can move on with my life' disgusts me to no end. It is like a child covering his ears, so he can stay stupid. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
I'm against solitary confinement, but what are the alternatives? Maybe I'm missing something obvious but if an inmate is dangerous to others, what can be done? My initial thought was that they should have individual cells and be away from the rest of the people, but that's most likely very costly and some inmates would probably prefer to be there... Anyway I don't know. So what are the solutions? | ||
|
Shiori
3815 Posts
| ||
|
Nekovivie
United Kingdom2599 Posts
| ||
|
Fenris420
Sweden213 Posts
On July 13 2013 00:34 Djzapz wrote: I'm afraid to read this thread because I'm expecting to read from people who are favorable to the torture of the inmates who misbehave and such, so I'll go ahead and ask a question... I'm against solitary confinement, but what are the alternatives? Maybe I'm missing something obvious but if an inmate is dangerous to others, what can be done? My initial thought was that they should have individual cells and be away from the rest of the people, but that's most likely very costly and some inmates would probably prefer to be there... Anyway I don't know. So what are the solutions? I will post this again, because it deserves to be posted: Sam Harris says it much better than I can; We cannot morally justify revenge. It makes no sense no matter how you look at it. With this POV in mind, the solution is to create a society where prisons are not filled with people because the people are not criminals to begin with. This is outside of the scope of this thread, but I think the problem is that the thread has too narrow of a scope to begin with. It feels like in order to discus what to do when prisoners go on strike we need to hold common ground on why they are prisoners to begin with. If you ask me (dunno why, I am not an expert), the problem is that prisons only deal with the symptoms, not the causes. Look at any place on earth. The better the lives are of the people who live there, the lower the crime rate. I don't have numbers, but would guess that you can draw similar parallells with education, health and freedom. In scandinavia, we have violent criminals and psychos too, but they don't kill each other on a daily basis. For one, because they are not crammed together in a place that revels in violent gangrelated behaviour. But mostly because they really don't need to. here is an article from a swedish prison: http://juliamoved.com/2011/01/11/open-doorslead-to-choco/ This is not because swedish people are somehow gifted with non violent genes. If anything, we have had nothing but violence in our history. It is because we are lucky enough to live in a country where things are kinda nice no matter how you look at it. If not, the question them becomes; what are the reasons scandinavians are just not as criminal as some other nations? I will claim with no basis that you can take young criminals from any american city and have them live good lives in norway without an issue. It is not the people, it is something else. So if it isn't the people who decide whether they become criminals or not, why punish them when they do? People are so blinded when it comes to righteous revenge that they fail to look for any sort of solution to the problem. It is well documented that harsh sentences does not deter crime, nor that military style gulags reduces violence in prisons. We just want criminals to be punished for no reason other than that we feel good about it, like we feel good about eating cake. However, just like we know that the long term effects of eating cake makes us fat an unhealthy, we also know that the long term effects of punishing people is that unhealthy. | ||
| ||
