5 ms·

We already have loads of regulations on where people who have paid their debts to society can be. I think you're right about this. Straight-up pandering.

mikeash 10y ago
People on parole are still paying their debts to society.
- Retric 10y ago
  Increasing someone's burden after sentencing is incredibly sketchy behavior and detrimental to the rule of law. Parole is not a punishment it's monitoring for legal behavior.
  - mikeash 10y ago
    These people could be locked up in a cage instead. Putting them on parole at all is decreasing their burden compared to their original sentence, and adding a restriction to that is still way better than what they were sentenced to.
    - Retric 10y ago
      This is retroactive to people already on parole. Some of these people where caught urinating in public or other non issues. There are also very sick people, but remember your applying this to a huge range of innocent people not just the kind of demons you see on TV. PS: I have seen estimates as low as 50:50 for actually committing every crime they where convicted of.
      - mikeash 10y ago
        The issue where people can be convicted for these crimes for public urination and similar is extremely important, but also completely separate. People like that shouldn't be on parole in the first place. Considering that they're probably being jailed, complaining about a Pokemon Go restriction because some of the targeted people may have committed a minor crime doesn't make any sense to me. It's like saying that we shouldn't restrict prisoners' phone calls, because that's unfair to the wrongly convicted. It's technically true, but being wrongly convicted in the first place is far more important.
        Retric 10y ago
        Parole is actually a safety valve in such cases, you might serve a few days in prison and then have X months / years of monitoring. Prison is a rather separate situation, but they still let most prisoners read for example.
        pavel_lishin 10y ago
        > People like that shouldn't be on parole in the first place. But they are, so we have to consider them when writing new laws that will impact them. I agree that them being jailed/on parole at all is the greater injustice here, but that doesn't mean we can just wave this off.
        Retric 10y ago
        Just to add, the innocent people in prison is an important factor. For example it's a bad idea to simply execute people on death row right now. We have already released 20 people on death row we realized where innocent, how many more are wrongfully convicted?
        mikeash 10y ago
        That's because execution is irreversible. Are there any examples of taking innocence into account when it comes to reversible punishments?
        Retric 10y ago
        > execution is irreversible So is prison. Lock someone up for 20 years and they never get that time back. Parole is actually used as reversible punishment in the other direction. Stay clean and your free to go, do even minor things and your instantly in prison. First offence leniency has a similar rational.
        mikeash 10y ago
        I tend to agree with you, but that's not how the system works. Whether or not prison is actually reversible, it's treated as though it were, by releasing and possibly compensating innocents.
    - chefandy 10y ago
      I have a dear friend who is a 'sex offender' because she and a boy her age were arrested for having sex in a stall in their college dorm bathroom, which was legally a 'public place.' Is there any point that she deserved to be locked up in a cage for that?
      - __derek__ 10y ago
        Situations like that were the first thing that I thought about when reading this news. The New Yorker had an excellent piece on juvenile sex offenders and the horror that that status inflicts on their lives.[1] [1] http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/03/14/when-kids-are-accused-of-sex-crimes http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/03/14/when-kids-are-a...
  - __derek__ 10y ago
    Not to mention that it's counter-productive, assuming that the correctional system's goal is to successfully integrate offenders into society, which some people dispute.

mikeash 10y ago

People on parole are still paying their debts to society.

Retric 10y ago
Increasing someone's burden after sentencing is incredibly sketchy behavior and detrimental to the rule of law. Parole is not a punishment it's monitoring for legal behavior.
- mikeash 10y ago
  These people could be locked up in a cage instead. Putting them on parole at all is decreasing their burden compared to their original sentence, and adding a restriction to that is still way better than what they were sentenced to.
  - Retric 10y ago
    This is retroactive to people already on parole. Some of these people where caught urinating in public or other non issues. There are also very sick people, but remember your applying this to a huge range of innocent people not just the kind of demons you see on TV. PS: I have seen estimates as low as 50:50 for actually committing every crime they where convicted of.
    - mikeash 10y ago
      The issue where people can be convicted for these crimes for public urination and similar is extremely important, but also completely separate. People like that shouldn't be on parole in the first place. Considering that they're probably being jailed, complaining about a Pokemon Go restriction because some of the targeted people may have committed a minor crime doesn't make any sense to me. It's like saying that we shouldn't restrict prisoners' phone calls, because that's unfair to the wrongly convicted. It's technically true, but being wrongly convicted in the first place is far more important.
      - Retric 10y ago
        Parole is actually a safety valve in such cases, you might serve a few days in prison and then have X months / years of monitoring. Prison is a rather separate situation, but they still let most prisoners read for example.
      - pavel_lishin 10y ago
        > People like that shouldn't be on parole in the first place. But they are, so we have to consider them when writing new laws that will impact them. I agree that them being jailed/on parole at all is the greater injustice here, but that doesn't mean we can just wave this off.
      - Retric 10y ago
        Just to add, the innocent people in prison is an important factor. For example it's a bad idea to simply execute people on death row right now. We have already released 20 people on death row we realized where innocent, how many more are wrongfully convicted?
        mikeash 10y ago
        That's because execution is irreversible. Are there any examples of taking innocence into account when it comes to reversible punishments?
        Retric 10y ago
        > execution is irreversible So is prison. Lock someone up for 20 years and they never get that time back. Parole is actually used as reversible punishment in the other direction. Stay clean and your free to go, do even minor things and your instantly in prison. First offence leniency has a similar rational.
        mikeash 10y ago
        I tend to agree with you, but that's not how the system works. Whether or not prison is actually reversible, it's treated as though it were, by releasing and possibly compensating innocents.
  - chefandy 10y ago
    I have a dear friend who is a 'sex offender' because she and a boy her age were arrested for having sex in a stall in their college dorm bathroom, which was legally a 'public place.' Is there any point that she deserved to be locked up in a cage for that?
    - __derek__ 10y ago
      Situations like that were the first thing that I thought about when reading this news. The New Yorker had an excellent piece on juvenile sex offenders and the horror that that status inflicts on their lives.[1] [1] http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/03/14/when-kids-are-accused-of-sex-crimes http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/03/14/when-kids-are-a...
- __derek__ 10y ago
  Not to mention that it's counter-productive, assuming that the correctional system's goal is to successfully integrate offenders into society, which some people dispute.