5 ms·

You point to a whole multitude of severe issues that need to be fixed, such as reintegration after served time and leniency towards those making an honest effor

You point to a whole multitude of severe issues that need to be fixed, such as reintegration after served time and leniency towards those making an honest effort to lead good lives. But removing punishment for things we agree as a society are crimes - such as dealing heroin - won't improve any of those and will just normalize crime.

nkrisc 10y ago
The problem highlighted is that the punishment doesn't end once you leave jail and have done your time. Society continues to punish. You might think they deserve it - and maybe they do - but that won't solve the underlying problem. All the severe issues that need to be fixed are exactly why saying, "just don't go to jail" isn't remotely helpful or reasonable. Not everyone is perfect and some will make very poor decisions that land them in jail. What we as a society should avoid is then making that the start of another cycle of criminality.
- aisofteng 10y ago
  Right, but suggesting to simply not send people to jail for crime because there are further repercussions to doing so doesn't in any way reasonably suggest to simply stop sending people to jail for crime. It suggests to fix the unfair repercussions.
  - nkrisc 10y ago
    Another consideration is perhaps not all crimes that currently carry jail time as a penalty should. Is jailing someone for carrying a small amount of marijuana really in the best interest of society once the true costs are realized? Not all crimes have to be punished with imprisonment; in fact, not all crimes are.
russnewcomer 10y ago
I read your post and the article, but don't recognize either my argument or the argument the parent article is making. Nowhere does the article say to abolish punishment for crimes, and I'm certainly not calling for the abolishment of punishment for crimes. Rather, look at Mark's example. By not saying, "forget this, I'm going back to selling drugs", he is making what is perhaps an unreasonable decision from many viewpoints. Crime is already normalized in many communities, because of internal and external factors, and those communities are suffering for it. The article is pointing out that deficiencies in parenting due to incarceration are a significant contributor to the continuation of crime. I'm additionally pointing out that when you said a reasonable human being won't commit crime, that does not seem to be to be the case. There are plenty of reasons why a reasonable human being will come to the conclusion that it is reasonable to commit crimes, especially when those making a solid effort not to commit crime can be arbitrarily punished for someone else's mistake.

nkrisc 10y ago

The problem highlighted is that the punishment doesn't end once you leave jail and have done your time. Society continues to punish. You might think they deserve it - and maybe they do - but that won't solve the underlying problem. All the severe issues that need to be fixed are exactly why saying, "just don't go to jail" isn't remotely helpful or reasonable. Not everyone is perfect and some will make very poor decisions that land them in jail. What we as a society should avoid is then making that the start of another cycle of criminality.

aisofteng 10y ago
Right, but suggesting to simply not send people to jail for crime because there are further repercussions to doing so doesn't in any way reasonably suggest to simply stop sending people to jail for crime. It suggests to fix the unfair repercussions.
- nkrisc 10y ago
  Another consideration is perhaps not all crimes that currently carry jail time as a penalty should. Is jailing someone for carrying a small amount of marijuana really in the best interest of society once the true costs are realized? Not all crimes have to be punished with imprisonment; in fact, not all crimes are.

russnewcomer 10y ago

I read your post and the article, but don't recognize either my argument or the argument the parent article is making. Nowhere does the article say to abolish punishment for crimes, and I'm certainly not calling for the abolishment of punishment for crimes. Rather, look at Mark's example. By not saying, "forget this, I'm going back to selling drugs", he is making what is perhaps an unreasonable decision from many viewpoints. Crime is already normalized in many communities, because of internal and external factors, and those communities are suffering for it. The article is pointing out that deficiencies in parenting due to incarceration are a significant contributor to the continuation of crime. I'm additionally pointing out that when you said a reasonable human being won't commit crime, that does not seem to be to be the case. There are plenty of reasons why a reasonable human being will come to the conclusion that it is reasonable to commit crimes, especially when those making a solid effort not to commit crime can be arbitrarily punished for someone else's mistake.