What's better than punishment?

[TheBigDog]

I think that the courts need more options at their disposal for sentencing. Like Cedars was saying, when you have mandatory minimums you cannot do anything but feed the broken system. I remember stories about young men being offered by a judge the choice of joining the service of doing time. That gives a person opportunity for their future and lets them do a much needed and appreciated civic service in defending the country as a means of repaying debt for their crimes.

 

But I do not think that there is any way to prevent all crime. I disagree with Infinite that punishment is useless and only teaches people how to avoid getting caught. While that may be true with some people, it is not true with most. Most citizens when given an opportunity to get away with a serious crime, one that they would do time for, opt out of that situation, if not over moral grounds, then out of fear of jail. And despite the rate of multiple offenders, there are a great deal - in fact a majority - of ex-cons who have been scared straight by serving time.

 

I think that punishment belongs in the system. But cons need the opportunity to work their way out of punishment and have a path back toward being a productive memeber of society. The nightmares of general population need to be remedied so that those in prison who have limited time to serve see that they have a future with hope. It is a real belief in a hopeful future that will help guide the convicted to the straight and narrow path.

 

One of the biggest problems that I see today in documentaries of prison is that the prisoners essentially dictate the terms of societal expectations in prison. The group up into cliques of their own choosing. They enforce bizarre rules of behavior and conduct that are antisocial and unacceptable by outside terms. And the system allows this in an attempt to keep some sort of peace. I would try and create an atmosphere where projects are being accomplished, and teamwork is being promoted. The teams would be mixed up in different fashions so that the inmates would need to show tolerance across all sorts of racial and social boundries. They would be taught skills like giving and taking constructive criticism. Leading a group through tasks. Following a leader through tasks. Group problem solving. Conflict resolution. The idea is to give their lives a purpose. And keep them focused and busy on that purpose. And have that purpose help build the skills that will make them productive members of society. I would also look into having something similar to AA for convicts. Set people up with mentors who are further along in their cycle toward getting out. This adds to the purpose each person has each day and keeps idle time from causing trouble.

 

When convicts have earned a higher level of trust they would be in facilities that would giv ethem access to greater resources for learning job skills and studying. They could continue to mentor other inmates for two purposes. On one hand they are an axample to those inmates in the tougher environment that there is indeed hope for a better life, and they are reminded of what they have already accomplished and worked their way out of.

 

This program would not be available to everyone. Those who actually have no hope of ever getting out would not be allowed to poison those with an end in sight. There would be separate accomidations for all lifers.

 

Bill

[InfiniteNow]

But I do not think that there is any way to prevent all crime. I disagree with Infinite that punishment is useless and only teaches people how to avoid getting caught.

Just to clarify, I don't mean to imply that punishment is useless, only that is not as effective at steering behavior as are many other means. Also, I am not at the extreme end of the spectrum stating that punishment ONLY teaches you how not to get caught. It teaches you other things too, like how to plan your next crime better and do so while waiting out the current consequences. ;)

 

Really, anybody who learns from punishment are those who felt shame from it, and those folks weren't generally the problem to begin with. If they had the capacity for shame as a result of their punishment, chances are good they also have the capacity to be better and may have committed the crime due to some extraneous circumstances (like robbing a pharmacy for a sick kid or the like).

 

Overall, I like the idea of other options. Like having a mutli-tiered system (Class A, B, C, D, and R crimes)... Where class A does repaiting of buildings and park benches, B , does highway cleaning, class C builds houses for Habitat for Humanity, class D has to scrub the insides of nuclear smoke stacks, and class R gets to go to single cell units and forced to watch re-runs of soap operas... :eek:

 

 

I would try and create an atmosphere where projects are being accomplished, and teamwork is being promoted. The teams would be mixed up in different fashions so that the inmates would need to show tolerance across all sorts of racial and social boundries. They would be taught skills like giving and taking constructive criticism. Leading a group through tasks. Following a leader through tasks. Group problem solving. Conflict resolution. The idea is to give their lives a purpose. And keep them focused and busy on that purpose. And have that purpose help build the skills that will make them productive members of society.

I like your idea here, along the same lines as above, but many will just use those organizational skills and team building exercises to become better criminals. But then again, maybe this new level of criminalization will help them better fit in with our current business models and political system. :phones:

 

I am searching for a way to prevent crime, and a way to improve our prison systems. Thank you all for offering your thoughts to assist me in this exploration.

 

 

Cheers. :cup:

[Cedars]

That's a good idea Cedars, but I don't know about that Army stuff.

 

The draft Army during Vietnam had lots of folks like that. Low morale, poor training, high incidence of abuse, fragging, etc.

 

Now we have an all "volunteer" force, and those problems are much lessened.

 

I do like the idea of a "peace corps" though. Maybe instead of giving a bunch of felons guns and training them to be agressive killers we should give them all pick axes, ship them off to Burkina Faso and say "You can come back when you've built a school and a road."

 

TFS

 

But was it the cons causing the problems with low morale, poor training, abuse etc or was it the draft/war itself? As I said, my friend had to make sure he didnt screw up with misconduct or back to the big house. I think this would be much easier to ensure now, than then.

 

I would agree with areas in the armed services, that while on probation, a recruited con would be ineligable to serve, but theres a lot of those guys who could be good mechanics, and whether we like it or not, good shots. It doesnt clear their records, they are still convicted felons. But it would give them a future they may not have seen. The ones who can do it right would be exposed to a wider world. Some will fail. Who knows what would occur when they got back into the big house. Maybe their words of how they blew that last chance would make the next con who is eligable for recruiting try just a bit harder to succeed.

 

Peace corps would be the one with real limits on which cons could go. Those are people your shipping out to work more independantly than recruits. Which type of convict would you suggest for the peace corps?

[HydrogenBond]

I did not mean to change the direction of the topic, which is what is better than punishment. The point I was trying to make is that punishment or punishment alternatives do not always fit the crime. If one talks about murder everyone agrees this is an extreme violation and is dealt with about the same in all cultures. If one is caught having a beer in the middle east, in that culture this is a serious offense. It is not the same in all cultures so it is not an absolute crime like murder. The real criminals, in that hypothetical case, are those who bully, yet these are not the ones locked up with real criminals (stealing, murder, etc) even though their behavior makes them closer to hardened criminals. They may be rewarded with a promotion.

 

We need to rationalize what is ment by criminal violation before talking punishment or punishment alternatives.

[InfiniteNow]

What about programs like this?

 

Sentenced to Shakespeare

PITTSFIELD — To some, they are the bad seeds of the county. They are the teens who fought authority and got busted and have since been ordered under the watchful eye of Berkshire Juvenile Court.

But instead of ordering them to trash duty or other community service, Judge Paul E. Perachi sentenced them to Shakespeare.

<...>

Now in its fifth year, the 10- to 12-week program is assigned in the spring to adjudicated youths selected by the court as part of their sentencing, meaning the kids don't have a choice in the matter.

[TheBigDog]

What about programs like this?

 

Sentenced to Shakespeare

I love that type of thing. I would like to see how effective it is over a longer period of helping those who go through it stay on the straight and narrow path - and I am optimistic that if properly done will have a statistically demonstratable benefit. :) Great article Infinite!

 

Of note though is the fact that it is both a carrot and an stick. It is mandatory, and if they don't fulfill this obligation they are confronted with a worse one. They are choosing this as the lesser punishment by compliance.

 

Bill

[Panjandrum]

I think its imporatant to distinguish between diffrent types of crime. Stuff like property crime, vandalism and theft should be treated rather than punished. Education, exposure to culture, that kind of thing.

 

Violent crimes, like assault, should be punished. Why give them any kind of reward for that behaviour? Make them a ward of state, set them to work till theyve served thier time. No need to bother with parole, early release or rehabilitation. If they know that violence will get them a miserable couple of years, no chance of early release, itll act as a powerful deterent.

 

Finally, rapists and kiddie-fiddlers should just be put to death. Why waste time and resources on untreatable social time-bombs like that?

[InfiniteNow]

Of note though is the fact that it is both a carrot and an stick. It is mandatory, and if they don't fulfill this obligation they are confronted with a worse one. They are choosing this as the lesser punishment by compliance.

Yes, but I like that it's more "education" than "punishment." Programs like this could serve as an "anchor" for these misguided folks, a point of comparison for future actions. It also stimulates them academically, socially, and artisitically, stimulation which many "criminals" tend to lack, and a potential source of some of the trouble they get into.

[InfiniteNow]

Finally, rapists and kiddie-fiddlers should just be put to death. Why waste time and resources on untreatable social time-bombs like that?

Since your argument rests on the assumption of having a moral high ground, when you pursue this type of reaction, what makes you any different from them?

[Racoon]

I think its imporatant to distinguish between diffrent types of crime. Stuff like property crime, vandalism and theft should be treated rather than punished. Education, exposure to culture, that kind of thing.

 

Violent crimes, like assault, should be punished. Why give them any kind of reward for that behaviour? Make them a ward of state, set them to work till theyve served thier time. No need to bother with parole, early release or rehabilitation. If they know that violence will get them a miserable couple of years, no chance of early release, itll act as a powerful deterent.

 

That part makes sense.

 

Shakespeare or Biology Lessons for non-violent offenders...

Hard Time for really bad guys!

[Panjandrum]

Morality is an arbitrary social construct. I would assume that the actual crimes punished by death would change over time, which is why its important that the law makers are not controlled by the politicians, but directly elected or apointed to reflect the consensus of moral opinion of the people.

[InfiniteNow]

I heard a comment on a program the other night that keeps rising in my thoughts. The individual was making a comment about prisons, and said,

 

"If the prison system works so well, then how come so many of the SAME people keep going back after their release?"

 

 

It's a good point.

[Panjandrum]

^^ yes, agreed. I think a large part of this problem arises from treating all crimes more or less equally, varying only the length of the tarrif.

[nkt]

Yesterday there was a big news flash type thing. The Home Secretary made a big announcement about how the government is going to bring in "Violent offender control orders" so that when violent offenders are on PROBATION they aren't allowed to commit violent acts. Further, even once they get off probation, they will be put on a list of "dangerous people" in the same way as the sex offenders register (doesn't) works.

 

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,,1757457,00.html?gusrc=rss

 

^- proof I'm not making it up, though it is a joke.

 

The idea of letting people who are believed likely to re-offend out halfway through the sentence imposed is pathetic. Instead of addressing this, the government is awarding itself new emergency powers using emergency powers, to shove yet another daily soundbite through and into law.

 

Before we start working out what's better than punishment, let's try and fix the punishment system...

 

 

EDIT: From the end of that article:

The recidivism rate of the general (UK) prison population is around 66%.

 

Victor Bates, whose wife Marian was shot dead by raiders - one of whom was under supervision - in a Nottingham jeweller's in 2003, said violent criminals should remain "locked up".

 

"Do not let violent criminals out early under any circumstances," he told the BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

 

But Harry Fletcher, the assistant general secretary of the probation union Napo, said violent criminals jailed for a set period had to be released back into the community at some point, adding that 95% of those released on parole did not reoffend.

Lies, damned lies and statistics, eh? 66% is the same as 5%, and 33% is the same as 95%. Clever, that.

[InfiniteNow]

Before we start working out what's better than punishment, let's try and fix the punishment system...

If we're trying to replace the system, why bother fixing it? If I've got a junky old rusted Dodge, but am planning on buying a brand new Beamer... why should I bother spending money/time/resources fixing the Dodge I won't be using anyway?

 

Interesting points, nkt, and thanks for the thoughts. Below is a pretty good site I found today discussing multiple issues and contexts here:

 

http://www.rethinking.org.uk/facts/rethink/index.html

 

I particularly found interest in the What else can we do and Pros and Cons sections.

 

 

Cheers. :cup:

[InfiniteNow]

Wiki has a good article on punishment. It clearly states that the longer between the act and punishment, the less effective it will be. Longer can mean minutes after being too long... our system often punishes offenders months or even years after the act. Another argument in favor of an alternative system...

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punishment

 

The effectiveness of punishment in suppressing the response depends on many factors, including the intensity of the stimulus and the consistency with which the stimulus is presented when the response occurs.

 

i.e. Getting zapped the moment one commits the act.

[Panjandrum]

The problem with speeding up the time between crime and punishment is that it would lead to less extensive and thorough investigations. Even when it is obvious that someone has commited a crime, it is still important to grant the suspect the full process of the law. Not that such couldnt be streamlined, but I doubt that very great time savings are possible in a system that presumes innocence, and I doubt many people would favour adopting a system that presumes guilt. ;)