5 ms·

Community service, pays back the community, hopefully break-even cost in terms of administration and enforcement to labor productivity gained, at least won't be

Community service, pays back the community, hopefully break-even cost in terms of administration and enforcement to labor productivity gained, at least won't be as bad as a prison sentence. At best can be a form of rehabilitation.

eloisius 8y ago
And when you don't do your community service because there's no consequences (because jails are already full and because you can't squeeze water from a stone), what happens?
- stickfigure 8y ago
  Why isn't caning a reasonable solution? Serious question.
  - gojomo 8y ago
    There's a strong cultural bias against corporal punishment in the US, but it should probably be studied, perhaps as an option a mature defendant can choose in lieu of another fine/imprisonment, but is never forced to take. If the practice actually deterred crime, without leaving any lasting physical or psychological damage – other than an aversion to re-offending – it deserves unemotional consideration.
    - mantale 8y ago
      Corporal punishments don't even work on children, what make you think it will work on adults?
      - dpark 8y ago
        I don’t know why people make this claim. I don’t spank my kids, but the idea that spanking doesn’t work seems utterly absurd to me. It’s the classic “positive punishment”. Is it the best way to get a kid to behave? No, not according to the research. Is it going to turn generally shitty parenting into good parenting? Obviously not. Can it be an effective discipline strategy? Yes.
        Trill-I-Am 8y ago
        https://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspx https://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspx
        dpark 8y ago
        There’s no real scientific data captured there, but my criticism is summed up well: > As in many areas of science, some researchers disagree about the validity of the studies on physical punishment. Robert Larzelere, PhD, an Oklahoma State University professor who studies parental discipline, was a member of the APA task force who issued his own minority report because he disagreed with the scientific basis of the task force recommendations. While he agrees that parents should reduce their use of physical punishment, he says most of the cited studies are correlational and don’t show a causal link between physical punishment and long-term negative effects for children. > “The studies do not discriminate well between non-abusive and overly severe types of corporal punishment,” Larzelere says. “You get worse outcomes from corporal punishment than from alternative disciplinary techniques only when it is used more severely or as the primary discipline tactic.” > In a meta-analysis of 26 studies, Larzelere and a colleague found that an approach they described as “conditional spanking” led to greater reductions in child defiance or anti-social behavior than 10 of 13 alternative discipline techniques, including reasoning, removal of privileges and time out (Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 2005). Larzelere defines conditional spanking as a disciplinary technique for 2- to 6-year-old children in which parents use two open-handed swats on the buttocks only after the child has defied milder discipline such as time out. The studies that exist largely seem unable or unwilling to distinguish between mild spanking and physical abuse. Those in the spanking-is-evil camp are fine with this and will assert that there is no difference because they’ve already decided and are happy to argue circularly. So they’ll argue that because some physical punishment has clear negative outcomes, all physical punishment must have negative outcomes despite support for that belief being minimal to nonexistent. This is akin to asserting that brief Time Out as punishment is harmful because locking a child in a closet for hours as punishment is harmful. I feel like there should be more compelling proof that spanking (not a rollup category of “physical punishment”) is harmful. There seems to be little to no evidence for this, which makes the belief pretty suspect.
      - gojomo 8y ago
        I think it should be studied. Singapore famously uses them, and has vanishingly-tiny street-crime/property-crime rates. See, for example: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/16/singapores-crime-rate-is-so-low-that-many-shops-dont-even-lock-up.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/16/singapores-crime-rate-is-so-... My hunch is that it could work because it provides a cheap, rapid symbolic "closing of the psychological loop" – offense, capture, punishment. Even though the tangible costs (in money and time) may be less, the necessary messages are sent to change the calculations of the sort of people who choose such crimes. Indeed, there may even be less collateral damage to their other lawful relationships (job, school, family), compared to jail time spent with (and learning from) other worse criminals. In the US, jail time is a theoretical punishment, but very inconsistently applied because the courts and jails are crowded. Such uncertainty lessens the deterrent effect, and leaves the victims of petty crimes feeling helpless.
    - onemoresoop 8y ago
      What do you mean, lashes for theft? How about if they were public? I hope I won't live to see that in the western world.
      - gojomo 8y ago
        You can read about how it works in Singapore at the Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caning_in_Singapore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caning_in_Singapore The description of scarring and motion difficulties for up to a month afterwards are more severe than I'd expected. The lashes are not delivered in public. There are some ways in which Singapore is "the western world", by language/culture/legal-system, though not geography. As the article notes, their practice of caning was inherited from the British. I share some of the visceral discomfort with the idea, but also know lots of things we allow because they work, or are within someone else's preferences, also cause many people visceral discomfort: organ (or fecal!) transplants; non-majority sexual practices; legalization of drugs or prostitution (some western world jurisdictions). Disgust is often a hint, but not reliably dispositive, about what should be allowable. We also allow solitary confinement and the death penalty, despite evidence these have weak deterrent effects, sometimes causing grave psychological damage or the death of innocents. What if we studied the matter, and found evidence that corporal punishment of adults better deterred crime, with less follow-own damage, than these traditional practices. We should probably then ban those familiar barbarisms, but still consider as possible the far milder action – lashes – that seems like a barbarism from unfamiliarity and gut reactions.
- baroffoos 8y ago
  You also have to pay someone to constantly supervise them which is just as expensive as just paying someone to do the job.
onetimemanytime 8y ago
Community service, pays back the community, Probably just a gimmick. Court costs and overhead time checking the crooks doing mandatory good deeds might be more. But then we have to punish them somewhow
- onemoresoop 8y ago
  I'm not sure if this has been tried before, but how about a time consuming (multiple choice) test for deterring crimes where an offender, in order to cut prison time, has to study hard and be mentally in involved with like 1000 questions for a few hours. Fail the test? You're given a week to study and take the test again. The type of test that is so annoying that once you pass you don't want to take it again.
  - HeyLaughingBoy 8y ago
    So, you're saying that to avoid jail, all the offender has to do is sit in a room for a few hours every week?

eloisius 8y ago

And when you don't do your community service because there's no consequences (because jails are already full and because you can't squeeze water from a stone), what happens?

stickfigure 8y ago
Why isn't caning a reasonable solution? Serious question.
- gojomo 8y ago
  There's a strong cultural bias against corporal punishment in the US, but it should probably be studied, perhaps as an option a mature defendant can choose in lieu of another fine/imprisonment, but is never forced to take. If the practice actually deterred crime, without leaving any lasting physical or psychological damage – other than an aversion to re-offending – it deserves unemotional consideration.
  - mantale 8y ago
    Corporal punishments don't even work on children, what make you think it will work on adults?
    - dpark 8y ago
      I don’t know why people make this claim. I don’t spank my kids, but the idea that spanking doesn’t work seems utterly absurd to me. It’s the classic “positive punishment”. Is it the best way to get a kid to behave? No, not according to the research. Is it going to turn generally shitty parenting into good parenting? Obviously not. Can it be an effective discipline strategy? Yes.
      - Trill-I-Am 8y ago
        https://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspx https://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspx
        dpark 8y ago
        There’s no real scientific data captured there, but my criticism is summed up well: > As in many areas of science, some researchers disagree about the validity of the studies on physical punishment. Robert Larzelere, PhD, an Oklahoma State University professor who studies parental discipline, was a member of the APA task force who issued his own minority report because he disagreed with the scientific basis of the task force recommendations. While he agrees that parents should reduce their use of physical punishment, he says most of the cited studies are correlational and don’t show a causal link between physical punishment and long-term negative effects for children. > “The studies do not discriminate well between non-abusive and overly severe types of corporal punishment,” Larzelere says. “You get worse outcomes from corporal punishment than from alternative disciplinary techniques only when it is used more severely or as the primary discipline tactic.” > In a meta-analysis of 26 studies, Larzelere and a colleague found that an approach they described as “conditional spanking” led to greater reductions in child defiance or anti-social behavior than 10 of 13 alternative discipline techniques, including reasoning, removal of privileges and time out (Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 2005). Larzelere defines conditional spanking as a disciplinary technique for 2- to 6-year-old children in which parents use two open-handed swats on the buttocks only after the child has defied milder discipline such as time out. The studies that exist largely seem unable or unwilling to distinguish between mild spanking and physical abuse. Those in the spanking-is-evil camp are fine with this and will assert that there is no difference because they’ve already decided and are happy to argue circularly. So they’ll argue that because some physical punishment has clear negative outcomes, all physical punishment must have negative outcomes despite support for that belief being minimal to nonexistent. This is akin to asserting that brief Time Out as punishment is harmful because locking a child in a closet for hours as punishment is harmful. I feel like there should be more compelling proof that spanking (not a rollup category of “physical punishment”) is harmful. There seems to be little to no evidence for this, which makes the belief pretty suspect.
    - gojomo 8y ago
      I think it should be studied. Singapore famously uses them, and has vanishingly-tiny street-crime/property-crime rates. See, for example: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/16/singapores-crime-rate-is-so-low-that-many-shops-dont-even-lock-up.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/16/singapores-crime-rate-is-so-... My hunch is that it could work because it provides a cheap, rapid symbolic "closing of the psychological loop" – offense, capture, punishment. Even though the tangible costs (in money and time) may be less, the necessary messages are sent to change the calculations of the sort of people who choose such crimes. Indeed, there may even be less collateral damage to their other lawful relationships (job, school, family), compared to jail time spent with (and learning from) other worse criminals. In the US, jail time is a theoretical punishment, but very inconsistently applied because the courts and jails are crowded. Such uncertainty lessens the deterrent effect, and leaves the victims of petty crimes feeling helpless.
  - onemoresoop 8y ago
    What do you mean, lashes for theft? How about if they were public? I hope I won't live to see that in the western world.
    - gojomo 8y ago
      You can read about how it works in Singapore at the Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caning_in_Singapore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caning_in_Singapore The description of scarring and motion difficulties for up to a month afterwards are more severe than I'd expected. The lashes are not delivered in public. There are some ways in which Singapore is "the western world", by language/culture/legal-system, though not geography. As the article notes, their practice of caning was inherited from the British. I share some of the visceral discomfort with the idea, but also know lots of things we allow because they work, or are within someone else's preferences, also cause many people visceral discomfort: organ (or fecal!) transplants; non-majority sexual practices; legalization of drugs or prostitution (some western world jurisdictions). Disgust is often a hint, but not reliably dispositive, about what should be allowable. We also allow solitary confinement and the death penalty, despite evidence these have weak deterrent effects, sometimes causing grave psychological damage or the death of innocents. What if we studied the matter, and found evidence that corporal punishment of adults better deterred crime, with less follow-own damage, than these traditional practices. We should probably then ban those familiar barbarisms, but still consider as possible the far milder action – lashes – that seems like a barbarism from unfamiliarity and gut reactions.
baroffoos 8y ago
You also have to pay someone to constantly supervise them which is just as expensive as just paying someone to do the job.

onetimemanytime 8y ago

Community service, pays back the community, Probably just a gimmick. Court costs and overhead time checking the crooks doing mandatory good deeds might be more. But then we have to punish them somewhow

onemoresoop 8y ago
I'm not sure if this has been tried before, but how about a time consuming (multiple choice) test for deterring crimes where an offender, in order to cut prison time, has to study hard and be mentally in involved with like 1000 questions for a few hours. Fail the test? You're given a week to study and take the test again. The type of test that is so annoying that once you pass you don't want to take it again.
- HeyLaughingBoy 8y ago
  So, you're saying that to avoid jail, all the offender has to do is sit in a room for a few hours every week?