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 p

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.