Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in prison

[cheesehead]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1383018.stm

In 2000, executions are known to have been carried out in the following countries:

Afghanistan, Bahamas, Belarus, Burundi, China, Democratic Republic of Congo, Cuba, Egypt, Guatemala, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Malaysia, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Somalia, Taiwan, Thailand, US, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Yemen.

In addition, death sentences were imposed in:
Algeria, Armenia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Burma, Botswana, Cameroon, Congo Brazzaville, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Libya, Malawi, Mali, Mongolia, Morocco, Oman, Palestinian Authority, Rwanda, Samoa, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Yugoslavia, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

We are the 3 or 4 most active country in capital punishment:
China: 1,000
Saudi Arabia: 123
United States: 85
Iran: 75

We are an isolated ethnocentric country, way out of line with other industrialized, civilized countries. It's pathetic.

 

[Rothrandir]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

false inprisonment does happen, but it's on the decline.
with advances in technology, more people who didn't do the crime aren't paying the time.
as it is currently, i have good faith that if somone is convicted for a crime, then it's likely they did it.

as far as the death penalty, and the more harsh of punishments, i would in no way endorse them unless the proof was overwhelming and self evident.
if a man is convicted of killing his wife, but it was a tough decision and there wasn't overwhelming proof, then of course i wouldn't want to have him suffer an aweful fate, just in case he wasn't the culpret.
if someone goes into a mcdonalds and starts blowing peoples heads in, then darn right i want him to die.
i believe that punishment should fit the crime to a certain extent. if there is 100% proof somone did it then by golly make them pay. if we're not 100% sure, then it's best to hold off.

that being said, my main problem with the judicial system is not the conviction of those who don't deserve it, because i feel that our sciences and methods have progressed to the point where we can in most cases determine with a good degree of certainty who did what.
my problem lies with when the "bad guys" get away with things.
whether that's a robber breaking into a house and seriously injuring himself in the process...and then sueing the owner, or whether it's somone who obviously commited a horrible crime then got off on a technicality, or whether it's somone who just did something illegal and got away with it for whatever reason, it ticks me off.
the newspapers are filled with ridiculous stories of how somone did something and got away with it, or how somone was doing nothing wrong and got shafted by somone who was.

 

[jayflash]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

I agree with you, Rothrandr, when it's known for certain that someone committed a crime, they should pay and not get off on a MINOR technicality. That, however, is a slippery slope because we want to maintain justice and not allow the, occasional, bad DA or cop to, themselves, get away with abuse of power.

Another thought: if prisons were segregated properly, the most violent criminals who cannot be rehabilitated would be kept in the most Spartan quarters. Lack of any entertainment whatsoever, minimum, very plain, food and little or no human contact would be hell-on-earth. Life in prison under these conditions would be worse than death and retribution achieved. Quickly killing the guilty may send them to a forgiving God and, therefore, they would suffer less by dying than spending many years in a sensory deprived environment.

 

[raggie33]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

there was a guy who murduered his roomates about 70 miles from here.and they showed him in court just smileing with no remorse.he will live in prison and proably eat better then me.

 

[Bravo25]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

[ QUOTE ]
jayflash said:
One may justify the death penalty, but for me alone, I feel it's wrong to, even possibly, execute an innocent person. I believe that retribution is the main reason some favor death. Many who favor death claim to be Christians and also oppose a woman's right to terminate a small clump of cells before they become viable. Just for me alone - I feel those attitudes are wrong and hypocritical.

[/ QUOTE ]

Retribution is revenge. The death penalty is just that, a penalty, a price, a deterent. And those clump of cells, if left to no outside interference will produce a viable, living human being.

 

[Kirk]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

Rothrandir,
You brought up the 3 strikes law. When most people say they are against it, they bring up the fact that one poor "felon" got caught stealing video tapes and he shouldn't have to spend 25 years to life in prison for stealing tapes, even though it is his "Third Strike". Well I say, TOO BAD! This was his third time CAUGHT! How many crimes did he commit and NOT get caught? I may be slow, but if I get punished or suffer the consequences of my actions 2 times, I eventually get the idea that doing what hurt me is probably not good.
Kirk

 

[tsg68]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

[ QUOTE ]
cheesehead said:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1383018.stm

In 2000, executions are known to have been carried out in the following countries:

Afghanistan, Bahamas, Belarus, Burundi, China, Democratic Republic of Congo, Cuba, Egypt, Guatemala, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Malaysia, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Somalia, Taiwan, Thailand, US, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Yemen.

In addition, death sentences were imposed in:
Algeria, Armenia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Burma, Botswana, Cameroon, Congo Brazzaville, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Libya, Malawi, Mali, Mongolia, Morocco, Oman, Palestinian Authority, Rwanda, Samoa, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Yugoslavia, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

We are the 3 or 4 most active country in capital punishment:
China: 1,000
Saudi Arabia: 123
United States: 85
Iran: 75

We are an isolated ethnocentric country, way out of line with other industrialized, civilized countries. It's pathetic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cheesehead, have you investigated the substandard prison conditions, rates of overcrowding, organized crime and incidents of extreme prisoner on prisoner and guard on prisoner violence in these other supposed industrialized, civilized countries? You may find that more pathetic. Just because we rank high in capital punishment rates doesn't mean we rank the same on all the issues. Human Rights Watch has some interesting statistics on prison conditions in Europe and Asia. Perhaps if we offered the same conditions and treatments to our prisoners, we wouldn't need the death penalty and incarceration would be enough?

Roth, I agree with what you are saying in cases proscecuted where guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt, I see nothing wrong with capital punishment.

I personally wish there were more instances where judges assigned publicly demeaning sentences on convicted criminals, notice how they all want their heads covered in the media? Ridiculing criminal behavior would suit well. Introducing the "toughguys" of the criminal world to the true tough individuals of society may help too, let them see how insignificant they really are. Calling a criminal "clever" or "smart" is an oxymoron, if they were either, they would not engage in these acts the first place. In my opinion any a$$ can be a criminal, but it takes real strength to resist the lure of an "easy" meal. Let's bring back the "stocks".

When I was a teen, my buddy who worked in a record store that was notoriously getting ripped off posted his own very effective sign that read "Shop lifters will be publicly humiliated!" and it really worked, incidents of shoplifting dropped off there tremendously. Not even a criminal wants to be portrayed as a fool.

TSG /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[jayflash]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

The death penalty has been proven NOT to be a deterrent and is more costly than life without parole. If there is newer info refuting that, please point out the latest, accepted, findings.

If imprisonment was properly executed, more penalty, and therefore deterrent, would be extracted by NOT executing the guilty.

Women, regularly, spontaneously abort, and many never knew they were pregnant. Others miscarry later. Bravo, there is no guarantee that unviable cells will grow into a healthy baby or not harm the mother. I agree with your quote - restricting a woman's liberty and freedom of choice will not make us safe; it only gives men power over them. BTW, I favor adoption, counseling, and good birth control to abortion. I feel that men have no say in that matter.

 

[tsg68]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

Jayflash, how did they arrive at the conclusion that the death penalty is not a deterent? Did they submit a questionaire to those individuals considering pre-meditated homicide? I mean are potential murderers a quantifiable? If they used in-system criminals as the study group I'd say the results were tainted.

TSG /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[gadgetboy]

Well, some prisoners in an Az facility just took two tower guards hostage, so I guess for now the vicious criminals in prison are deciding for themselves...

 

[jayflash]

Yes, tsg68, criminals were questioned and revealed that they, either, didn't believe they'd be caught or didn't care if they were.

Potential criminals are obviously deterred by imprisonment, alone. States without the death penalty often have less violent crime.

 

[gadgetboy]

I don't like the death penalty, but I'm not convinced by the argument that says the dp is more expensive than a life sentence or that it actually raises violent crime. Not because I don't believe the studies, but because of what's NOT IN the studies. If these criminals thought they wouldn't be caught or didn't care, then how is imprisonment a better deterrent under those same criteria? They never thought they'd see ANY sentence, death or otherwise right?
As far as the crime rates being higher in D.P. states, isn't it possible that the rates were already higher (or rising) and the penalty was enacted as an attempt to quell the problem? Not to mention, the whole 'it doesn't work' argument seems to forget about the punishment aspect of the sentence to me.
Here's a question for our imaginary ethics professor: How is it that someone that kills a family, for example, COULD be killed in defense, but somehow doesn't deserve to die AFTERWARDS just because he's no longer in the act of killing them. I'd still whack him, I just don't like it.

 

[tsg68]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

[ QUOTE ]
jayflash said:
Yes, tsg68, criminals were questioned and revealed that they, either, didn't believe they'd be caught or didn't care if they were.

Potential criminals are obviously deterred by imprisonment, alone. States without the death penalty often have less violent crime.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm, maybe that's why they don't need the death penalty, less violent crime in those states. I mean is it a cause or effect? Is the excecuted criminal taken into account as a statistic lowering future crime. What about reccurrance rates. Are these studies obtained by examining long term effects of states that consistently enforce the death penalty or are they just examining states that have an option of utilizing the death penalty but don't consistently follow through? lots more questions than answers here, IMHO and I think the studies may be purposely short sighted, short term and unreliable. I still don't see how you can gauge an non-quantifiable statistic like deterent of intent. And questioning benefactors of the system is like asking an alcholic if locking the liquor cabinet will stop them from wanting to drink.

TSG /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[jayflash]

The ethics prof would state that killing an attacker by defending oneself may save you and prevent further killing.

Some, uncontrollably violent, criminals deserve to be kept, permanently, from society. Others have been convicted by circumstantial evidence alone and also had alibis. It's the lives of those wrongly convicted that take precedence over society's gluttony for death.

 

[gadgetboy]

I understand the prevention aspect, but I think there's more there. Our society accepts killing under certain circumstances, but not others. I don't see a gluttony for death. I see an open society of approaching 300 million people, and amongst all of those people some will be murderous. It's just mathematics. Just because they're locked away permanently from society doesn't mean they are not still a danger. One could argue that executing them 'prevents' things like the episode going on in AZ that I posted above.

 

[Negeltu]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

Perhaps it's a mechanism embedded in the human animal to keep our population down. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[tsg68]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

[ QUOTE ]
jayflash said:
The ethics prof would state that killing an attacker by defending oneself may save you and prevent further killing.

Some, uncontrollably violent, criminals deserve to be kept, permanently, from society. Others have been convicted by circumstantial evidence alone and also had alibis. It's the lives of those wrongly convicted that take precedence over society's gluttony for death.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jayflash, I would not characterize society as having a "gluttony for death" or the families of victims of murder as having a thirst for vengeance either. The death penalty offers the families of victims a finality, a guarrantee that this individual is no longer free to voice his opinions, to influence a wrongful culture or to impose his will on another victim, ever, without appeal, without opinion and he is removed as a burden to society forever.

Do you really think "warehousing" our worst violent criminals is a decent thing, I don't. What pupose does it serve, to further stress an already heavily taxed system of understaffed prisons, stretching the thin resources such as overworked and mentally strained correctional workers who could not possibly enjoy or even effectively do their jobs? Have you ever spoken to a correctional officer about what transpires in prison? The head games and intimidation inmates attempt to impose on them, the power struggles, the physical danger? I can't ask them to take charge of some of these extremely violent animals inside, I would rather unburden them a bit by excecuting the worst, then they can focus on the ones who may have a chance at rehabilitation. You invest in that which is worth saving.

One statistic I understand here is that there is a 0% reccurance of violent crime in violent criminals who are subjected to capital punishment.

TSG

 

[Greta]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

I'm sure someone here has it at the tip of their finger... how again is it more expensive to execute than to keep on death row for 50 years?

 

[Rothrandir]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

i'm sure it's expensive both ways, and i'm all for reducing costs in any way reasonable.

i've seen no evidence to proove one is cheaper than the other, but i'm sure that both are insanely more expensive than they need to be and should be.

 

[raggie33]

Re: Idea: How to deal with vicious criminals in pr

i was wondering same sasha.