5 ms·

Are prisoners forced to work? What happens if they physically refuse? End up having to serve more time?

by packet_nerd 8y ago

inetknght 8y ago
Well if you "volunteer" to work you can get less time. So yes, if you physically refuse then you serve more time.
- liaukovv 8y ago
  "Not giving something"(term reduction in this case) and "taking something away" are very-very different things. You would have to be incredibly entitled to confuse them.
  - subway 8y ago
    You would have to be incredibly naive to believe this statement stands on its own, without evaluating implementation details and expectations of the parties involved.
  - danShumway 8y ago
    The problem is that many "taking something away" cases in prison can be rephrased as "not giving something." Am I taking away your visitation rights, or am I just not giving them to you? Am I taking away your food, or am I just not giving you food? Expectation and norms play a role in this. Suppose a judge gives a prisoner a higher sentence under the expectation that they'll work it off. They assume the prisoner will work 7 days a week, so they give a prisoner 6 years instead of 3. Now suppose another judge gives a prisoner the correct sentence (3 years), but then says, "for every day of your original sentence that you don't work, you will spend one additional day in prison." You're arguing that there's a fundamental difference between these two scenarios, but what is it? It's certainly not a difference for the prisoners -- they have the exact same incentive structure, and their outcomes and choices are exactly the same. It's not any different for the people benefiting from their labor; the work that they produce will look exactly the same. It doesn't even reveal any compelling differences in the judges' motivations -- both judges might reach their decision for the exact same same reasons. So where is the difference?

5 ms·

Are prisoners forced to work? What happens if they physically refuse? End up having to serve more time?

by packet_nerd 8y ago

Are prisoners forced to work? What happens if they physically refuse? End up having to serve more time?

inetknght 8y ago
Well if you "volunteer" to work you can get less time. So yes, if you physically refuse then you serve more time.
- liaukovv 8y ago
  "Not giving something"(term reduction in this case) and "taking something away" are very-very different things. You would have to be incredibly entitled to confuse them.
  - subway 8y ago
    You would have to be incredibly naive to believe this statement stands on its own, without evaluating implementation details and expectations of the parties involved.
  - danShumway 8y ago
    The problem is that many "taking something away" cases in prison can be rephrased as "not giving something." Am I taking away your visitation rights, or am I just not giving them to you? Am I taking away your food, or am I just not giving you food? Expectation and norms play a role in this. Suppose a judge gives a prisoner a higher sentence under the expectation that they'll work it off. They assume the prisoner will work 7 days a week, so they give a prisoner 6 years instead of 3. Now suppose another judge gives a prisoner the correct sentence (3 years), but then says, "for every day of your original sentence that you don't work, you will spend one additional day in prison." You're arguing that there's a fundamental difference between these two scenarios, but what is it? It's certainly not a difference for the prisoners -- they have the exact same incentive structure, and their outcomes and choices are exactly the same. It's not any different for the people benefiting from their labor; the work that they produce will look exactly the same. It doesn't even reveal any compelling differences in the judges' motivations -- both judges might reach their decision for the exact same same reasons. So where is the difference?