3 ms·

It wasn't just 'in the movies' - it was for real. Did it work? So long as the troubled kids got through '2 years' - then I would argue that it worked. 'Back i

It wasn't just 'in the movies' - it was for real. Did it work? So long as the troubled kids got through '2 years' - then I would argue that it worked. 'Back in the day' - the Army was a job for people who were somewhat patriotic, but it was also a job - at least for privates, it was pretty straightforward. As long as you 'did your work' - it would keep someone focused on doing something, and I suggest they would be 'much better off' than having spent the time in jail. 'Back in the day' - almost everyone was patriotic to some extent. 'Slacker' might have been someone who didn't wear a hat in public (!) or later, had 'long hair' (!). These kinds of people aren't hardened criminals or bad people, just people off the path, that need some bit of motivation - even if it's a little coerced. And even 'back in the day' when military standards were not so hardcore - I there was still enough 'value' work being done, enough of a cause for them to 'mostly believe in'. I think it would be a great program for some kids, even to this day. Prison is the worst thing for not-quite-real criminals. It creates a really negative atmosphere, hardens them, depresses them - it's like the absolute worse possibly 'peer pressure' situation imaginable. The worst role models possible. This guy is not a bad kid. He's more of a 'catcher in the rye' type - just needs to find his path. When you are pushed a little bit on a path for a couple years, that includes a very rudimentary amount of 'getting up' 'doing something constructive' 'learning something' 'applying yourself' ... then I think you have enough momentum (and hopefully a few dollars in the bank) to possibly do something afterwards.

dalke 10y ago
It looks like you've gone from "often really changes people" to "get through two years by having the goal of getting out." The latter is the same goal for those in jail. The question I have is, how do you know that conscripted service, which is what you propose, is more effective than prison. By that I mean a sane prison, like what Norway has, with the goal of rehabilitation, and not the inhumane US prisons designed to punish. And is it more effective than other alternatives? Yes, movies often portray military service as transformative, but movies want to tell a good story, and military service is one of many ways to structure a bildungsroman. (Movies also tend to portray the good side of the military.) I don't understand your "back in the day" comments. Almost everyone now is patriotic to some extent too. Remember, back in the day, many Americans did not consider communists, socialist, unionizers, peace activists, or people of Japanese ancestry to be patriotic Americans. These are people who would have been put in jail or internment camps. Question for you: were Eugene Debs, Charles Schenck and Elizabeth Baer "patriotic" back in the day? What of the 100+ communist party leaders jailed under the Smith Act? The problem I have with saying "some kids" is that nearly anything will work for "some kids". Certainly the military works for some people. Jail works for some people. College works for some people. Getting a job works for some people. Religion works for some people. Counseling works for some people. Taking up a sport works for some people. Moving to another town works for some people. Simply waiting a few years can also work. The hard part is knowing which methods are appropriate for which people. And training someone for military service is not cheap. How much money should we spend for a "catcher in the rye" type, and are there cheaper alternatives? Forced military service as a alternative to jail is not going to happen again. The military well remembers what damage even a single disgruntled draftee can do in the modern highly-technical military. Take a look at all the sabotage done during Vietnam when a large fraction of the military were against the war. (Eg, sailing of the USS Ranger was delayed for months after its main reduction gear was sabotaged.) Also, the modern "hardcore" standards are only possible because everyone is a volunteer.
- jomamaxx 10y ago
  "The question I have is, how do you know that conscripted service, which is what you propose, is more effective than prison." It's not quite 'conscripted' - it's a choice. I was in the Army. And I have distant family members in prison. My friend - it's clear you don't have exposure to either. Nobody would compare serving in the Army to 'prison' unless that person really, really didn't want it - in which they could chose prison. Prison is a terrible, terrible place for most people. It's where people learn how to be criminals. And I didn't go from 'having something to believe in' to 'getting through two years of service'. They are not quite mutually exclusive. "Forced military service as a alternative to jail is not going to happen again. The military well remembers what damage even a single disgruntled draftee can do in the modern highly-technical military." This is not an issue, and neither is 'sabotage'. Also 'getting a job' and 'getting religion' are not comparable to prison or the military. In both prison and the military - you have a fairly guided life. You have a lot of set rules. You are required to follow a lot of rituals. Having a choice to go into the service for a couple of years instead of some kind of aggressive sentencing would be a great option, in 2016 for many kids, left to the judges and military's consent.
  - dalke 10y ago
    "My friend", my wife served 8 years in the military and did two tours in Iraq and my grandfather served as a quartermaster. You are obviously extrapolating from no data when you say I have no exposure to the Army. I certainly have more experience with the Army than you have with the prison system. But you, "friend", keep talking about the experience in a modern volunteer army. What is your experience in a conscripted army? What is your experience in an army containing people whose choice is "jail or military"? From your history, your grandparents recently passed away, which means you no older than 50. The US became an all volunteer army in 1973, so if you, a non-American, served as a Combat Engineer in the US military then you at best heard things second-hand. You are right, it isn't conscription, but the difference is mighty small. If you are conscripted, you go into the military or you can choose to go jail. If you are in front of a judge, you go to prison or you can choose to join the military. The difference is almost only the time you might serve in jail. (Conscientious objectors have another option.) The US military flat out says they don't people who are forced to choose between the military or jail. Why do you think the military is so strongly against what you think would be so useful? (Hint: https://www.army.mil/article/106813/ https://www.army.mil/article/106813/ ) Do you believe in equal justice under the law? If so, what of those who cannot join the military, perhaps because they don't have a high school degree, or are too short, or handicapped, or don't meet some other military requirement? Or those who are pacifists or another type of C.O.? According to you, they'll become criminals as they have no other option than prison. Sucks to be them! Regarding the treatment in jails, I again point to my earlier statement, "By that I mean a sane prison, like what Norway has, with the goal of rehabilitation, and not the inhumane US prisons designed to punish." Do you think Norwegian jails are a place where people learn to be criminals? Ahh, but looking at your comment history I see you think the Norwegian penal system is morally corrupt, not punitive enough, and you think execution can be a form of justice. It seems you would rather have a penal system which breeds criminals than one which does its best to rehabilitate, though knowing there will be some failures. I notice you didn't answer my question about what you meant by "back in the day" and patriotism. Since you are not an American, which country and patriotism are you referring to?

dalke 10y ago

It looks like you've gone from "often really changes people" to "get through two years by having the goal of getting out." The latter is the same goal for those in jail. The question I have is, how do you know that conscripted service, which is what you propose, is more effective than prison. By that I mean a sane prison, like what Norway has, with the goal of rehabilitation, and not the inhumane US prisons designed to punish. And is it more effective than other alternatives? Yes, movies often portray military service as transformative, but movies want to tell a good story, and military service is one of many ways to structure a bildungsroman. (Movies also tend to portray the good side of the military.) I don't understand your "back in the day" comments. Almost everyone now is patriotic to some extent too. Remember, back in the day, many Americans did not consider communists, socialist, unionizers, peace activists, or people of Japanese ancestry to be patriotic Americans. These are people who would have been put in jail or internment camps. Question for you: were Eugene Debs, Charles Schenck and Elizabeth Baer "patriotic" back in the day? What of the 100+ communist party leaders jailed under the Smith Act? The problem I have with saying "some kids" is that nearly anything will work for "some kids". Certainly the military works for some people. Jail works for some people. College works for some people. Getting a job works for some people. Religion works for some people. Counseling works for some people. Taking up a sport works for some people. Moving to another town works for some people. Simply waiting a few years can also work. The hard part is knowing which methods are appropriate for which people. And training someone for military service is not cheap. How much money should we spend for a "catcher in the rye" type, and are there cheaper alternatives? Forced military service as a alternative to jail is not going to happen again. The military well remembers what damage even a single disgruntled draftee can do in the modern highly-technical military. Take a look at all the sabotage done during Vietnam when a large fraction of the military were against the war. (Eg, sailing of the USS Ranger was delayed for months after its main reduction gear was sabotaged.) Also, the modern "hardcore" standards are only possible because everyone is a volunteer.

jomamaxx 10y ago
"The question I have is, how do you know that conscripted service, which is what you propose, is more effective than prison." It's not quite 'conscripted' - it's a choice. I was in the Army. And I have distant family members in prison. My friend - it's clear you don't have exposure to either. Nobody would compare serving in the Army to 'prison' unless that person really, really didn't want it - in which they could chose prison. Prison is a terrible, terrible place for most people. It's where people learn how to be criminals. And I didn't go from 'having something to believe in' to 'getting through two years of service'. They are not quite mutually exclusive. "Forced military service as a alternative to jail is not going to happen again. The military well remembers what damage even a single disgruntled draftee can do in the modern highly-technical military." This is not an issue, and neither is 'sabotage'. Also 'getting a job' and 'getting religion' are not comparable to prison or the military. In both prison and the military - you have a fairly guided life. You have a lot of set rules. You are required to follow a lot of rituals. Having a choice to go into the service for a couple of years instead of some kind of aggressive sentencing would be a great option, in 2016 for many kids, left to the judges and military's consent.
- dalke 10y ago
  "My friend", my wife served 8 years in the military and did two tours in Iraq and my grandfather served as a quartermaster. You are obviously extrapolating from no data when you say I have no exposure to the Army. I certainly have more experience with the Army than you have with the prison system. But you, "friend", keep talking about the experience in a modern volunteer army. What is your experience in a conscripted army? What is your experience in an army containing people whose choice is "jail or military"? From your history, your grandparents recently passed away, which means you no older than 50. The US became an all volunteer army in 1973, so if you, a non-American, served as a Combat Engineer in the US military then you at best heard things second-hand. You are right, it isn't conscription, but the difference is mighty small. If you are conscripted, you go into the military or you can choose to go jail. If you are in front of a judge, you go to prison or you can choose to join the military. The difference is almost only the time you might serve in jail. (Conscientious objectors have another option.) The US military flat out says they don't people who are forced to choose between the military or jail. Why do you think the military is so strongly against what you think would be so useful? (Hint: https://www.army.mil/article/106813/ https://www.army.mil/article/106813/ ) Do you believe in equal justice under the law? If so, what of those who cannot join the military, perhaps because they don't have a high school degree, or are too short, or handicapped, or don't meet some other military requirement? Or those who are pacifists or another type of C.O.? According to you, they'll become criminals as they have no other option than prison. Sucks to be them! Regarding the treatment in jails, I again point to my earlier statement, "By that I mean a sane prison, like what Norway has, with the goal of rehabilitation, and not the inhumane US prisons designed to punish." Do you think Norwegian jails are a place where people learn to be criminals? Ahh, but looking at your comment history I see you think the Norwegian penal system is morally corrupt, not punitive enough, and you think execution can be a form of justice. It seems you would rather have a penal system which breeds criminals than one which does its best to rehabilitate, though knowing there will be some failures. I notice you didn't answer my question about what you meant by "back in the day" and patriotism. Since you are not an American, which country and patriotism are you referring to?