6 ms·

It's pretty rich that almost this entire thread is arguing about the prison not respecting Sunde's vegan wishes and his personal wealth and ideals. There are mo

It's pretty rich that almost this entire thread is arguing about the prison not respecting Sunde's vegan wishes and his personal wealth and ideals. There are more than ninety comments here and all of them hang off nearly-dead comments. The entire point of prison is to suck, otherwise it wouldn't serve its role, which is to deter crime. Louis CK has a bit about this in one of his recent specials: ...but we really need the law against murder, for one simple reason: the law against murder is the number one thing preventing murder. We'd like to think it's because "oh, I would never do that," no, it's because it really sucks getting caught murdering. A lot. [1] Debating the prison's respect for Sunde's vegan wishes misses the forest for the trees. Honestly, if that's your biggest concern from reading this article, you have really messed up priorities. How about the fact that he went to maximum at all? Anyway, just an oddly off-topic thread here, thought I'd point it out. It's even more fun because I've been detained, so reading some of the arguments makes it clear that I'm one of the only people with that experience here. Prison's not something you can just try, to see what it's like, so unless you've been there it's usually wise to assume the worst things are true rather than being optimistic about rights and common sense. If one thing is true about detention, it's that rights and common sense don't matter at all when the door's closed and nobody's looking. Also, welcome back, Peter. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQUr2RkjykU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQUr2RkjykU

p8952 12y ago
Louis C.K. wonders how different the world would be if murder was legal, or at least a misdemeanor, in his HBO special "Oh My God": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHnsajl-kB8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHnsajl-kB8
tn13 12y ago
I dont think the role of prison is to suck. The idea of justice has three components retribution, deterrence and prevention. As a society it is of paramount importance how we define these three components and the fact that we adhere to those definitions. If it has to suck, it has to be defined apriori to what extent it sucks.
- akerl_ 12y ago
  In the US, the prevailing strategy of prisons for handling all 3 aspects is to make getting caught so shitty and destructive for the person involved that people don't do things that would lead them there. You can, of course, view any number of metrics to identify how well this is "working".
  - Crito 12y ago
    Prison being shitty covers retribution and deterrence. Prevention is provided merely by having strong walls and razor wire. If somebody is locked in a cell, then they will be physically unable to rob the local liquor store. How well or poorly they are treated is irrelevant in that regard.
    - tn13 12y ago
      Why not let the cops simple shoot the man once convicted ? Isn't that retribution, deterrence and prevention all in one ? People should know a-priori the consequences of their actions. Otherwise it is very likely that there is will be manny shitty prisons and some VIP cool prisons.
ShinyCyril 12y ago
> The entire point of prison is to suck, otherwise it wouldn't serve its role, which is to deter crime. Prison serves many purposes other than punishment - one of which is rehabilitation. Making someone's life miserable for several years, purely to punish them, does nothing in the long-run - hence why re-offending rates can be so high.
- jsmeaton 12y ago
  Rehabilitation is supposed to be one of the purposes, but is that true in many places in the world anymore?
  - markvdb 12y ago
    Some serious attempts at rehabilitation in Norway: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/feb/25/norwegian-prison-inmates-treated-like-people http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/feb/25/norwegian-pri...
- jsmthrowaway 12y ago
  Two orthogonal factors undermine your observation: (1) the prison system is drifting toward private, for-profit prisons, and rehabilitating offenders incarcerated therein would be damaging to the long-term profits of the institution, and (2) believe it or not, a significant number of inmates in the American system do not want to be rehabilitated, which is directly linked to various external factors. It's easy for those outside America to put the United States Criminal Justice System in a vacuum -- it's happening all over this thread and it's honestly ridiculous -- and try to explain to Americans that strategy A doesn't work because recidivism B, and country C actually tries strategy D so America should implement strategy E, but the fact is that the American justice system reflects a lot of other problems in the United States that need to be addressed. Key among those is a significantly substandard education compared to other parts of the world, especially the oft-cited Scandinavian countries for the purposes of this discussion. It is my personal experience that rehabilitation in an incarceration setting only works in the majority if the criminal has some kind of education and desire for a better life. Those citing Norway's prisons, have you ever considered that education is better in Norway and most folks don't break bad by default? Norway has the 7th best education in the world. The United States is much further down the list. Even in minimum, the majority of the people I was in with did not especially mind being there nor look at it as a serious event. "Oh, I got arrested for check fraud again, can't wait to get out and go back to selling meth, much less risky income." To most people I talked to, it was an inconvenience and mild disruption from their life of crime. The hardest of the hard criminals want to be in prison because they can actually have power in several systems run from prison, including an entire infrastructure of gangs. To be quite honest, I think pointing at American prisons and saying "your job is to rehabilitate" is a nice, ivory tower sort of feel-good explainer for sending people to prison, but the fact is going to prison in the United States is a complete life-ender for "doing good" in almost every case. My felony just fell off my record and even in this industry, I was nearly unemployable -- my conviction wasn't even computer-related, but most people pull a report and see "felony" and discard the entire candidate. Prison is only a portion of the consequences for committing a crime. Regardless of how you might feel criminal justice should happen, right now in the United States the policy is one of deterrence. Your life is pretty great until you pick up a felony, then you'll spend the rest of your life trying to undo the damage. And, to be honest, I can understand the logic there: your government has an implicit contract with you that the liberties offered and protected by the United States are yours as long as you don't do any of these hundreds of crimes, and once you do, the contract is void. I can understand the thinking that brought us there. I also don't think the failure thereof is necessarily the fault of the system, as criminal rehabilitation absolutely cannot exist in a vacuum of policy. Life isn't SimCity. You can't tweak a "prison life quality" slider and magically fix recidivism. There are other external inputs into that equation and any discussion thereof must include the whole picture.
na85 12y ago
> How about the fact that he went to maximum at all? Agree. It seemed obvious to me, an outside observer, that he was being disproportionately sentenced. Someone, whether influenced by the RIAA/MPAA cabal or not, decided that he should be made an example.
king_jester 12y ago
Prison still sucks even if you can follow your diet. Its not like prisoners who have allergy reasons for avoiding things like dairy and honey are having a great time. The fact that he went to high security holding and didn't have access to his normal diet are entirely related as part of the oppressive nature of prison that goes beyond just removing someone from society for a period of time.
joe_the_user 12y ago
Western society once considered prisons to have multiple functions; punishment, deterrent and rehabilitation. Now it seems the punishment part has become it. Obviously, this seems to go along with the assumption that the only thing stopping committing crimes is there fear of getting caught. I think that's probably much more true for hacking a bank for a million dollars than murder (which most people aren't just itching to get away with). The rehabilitation assumption goes along with the idea that if person improves, if they are uplifted, they won't commit crimes. The punishment assumption goes with the idea that everyone is a criminal and the question is who can get away with it. And the "everyone is a criminal" assumption certainly makes with those presently at the top of society making out like bandits (aside from having made laws which make their actions legal). So, perhaps what you say is true at the moment. But it's truth involves us being diminished.
jakezorx 12y ago
But he didn't go to a maximum security prison at all, infact he was at Västervik a "säkerhetsklass 2" prison. [2] "Säkerhetsklass 1" would be a maximum security prison, class 3 is the lowest class and those don't even have walls meaning that a class 2 would essentially be a "vanilla" prison.[1] [1]:http://www.kriminalvarden.se/fangelse-frivard-och-hakte/fangelse/sakerhetsklass http://www.kriminalvarden.se/fangelse-frivard-och-hakte/fang... [2]:http://www.kriminalvarden.se/hitta-och-kontakta/verksamhet/anstalt/vastervik-norra http://www.kriminalvarden.se/hitta-och-kontakta/verksamhet/a...
- Zirro 12y ago
  Furthermore, the prisons in the nordic countries are among the few in the world which actively do practice rehabilitation rather than just "suck", as OP expressed it. I believe that is the reason the vegan diet was brought up as a big deal - he was treated OK in most other regards, especially when considering how prisons work in other parts of the world. Take a look at this documentary: http://arenan.yle.fi/tv/2428667 http://arenan.yle.fi/tv/2428667
  - jakezorx 12y ago
    Yeah I agree, I am however somewhat surprised that they didn't manage to provide him with vegan meals. I mean it shouldn't be that difficult im sure they already offer vegetarian alternatives. Very interesting show!
josu 12y ago
Murder has always been illegal, in every society, throughout history. Nevertheless murder rates vary widely from one society to another. So no, "the law against murder is the number one thing preventing murder". There is much more to it.
- mistaken 12y ago
  Yes, but stealing usually had a much harsher punishment.
  - knicholes 12y ago
    I'd argue that murder is on the extreme end of stealing.
    - eru 12y ago
      Depends on jurisdiction.
- mbell 12y ago
  > Murder has always been illegal, in every society, Only if you allow for a highly variable definition of 'murder', at which point there isn't much value in comparison.
  - iopq 12y ago
    Murder is killing someone when it's illegal. Otherwise it's not murder. Yay circular logic! Oh you were defending yourself? Then it's not murder. Oh, you're a soldier? Then it's not murder. Oh, you're a cop? Then it's not murder.
thret 12y ago
I strongly reject Louis CK's assessment. I don't believe there has ever been anyone who has reconsidered murder because of the law. If anything the law protects the murderer - without it, retaliation would be far more appealing.
- alexbecker 12y ago
  What? You really don't think there would be a single additional murder if murder were legal? > If anything the law protects the murderer - without it, retaliation would be far more appealing. ...which contradicts what you just said.
nathanvanfleet 12y ago
Kind of annoying when people who don't sound as if they comprehend or care-to-comprehend about the complexity of capital punishment have a really hard line opinion about it. Your citation of Louis CK aside. Is treating someone inhumanely for years going to make them actually behave like humans when they are released? Is it actually better for society to do it? America has some extreme examples of bad conditions.
- jsmthrowaway 12y ago
  Who is talking about capital punishment? I'm pretty sure the point of the thread was incarceration, and even then I'm not actually offering my opinion on the efficacy thereof, only pointing out that the picture is far simpler than most people who have not been there believe.
aragot 12y ago
> about the prison not respecting Sunde's vegan (...) The other half of his complaints are about boredom, which is equally non-exceptionnal in prison. And he's been there only 5 months, that's very moderate for someone who's been a fugitive.
tesq 12y ago
Prisons aren't punishment and retribution factories. I also like that you get on your soap box about being detained as if that justifies your shitty opinion. Having been through the system as well, I am amazed that you'd come to that conclusion after experiencing it first hand. How can you visit a place where rights and common sense don't matter and then turn around and justify how it operates? How long were you detained? For what crime?
- jsmthrowaway 12y ago
  I'd like you to point out to me what opinion I offered or conclusion I reached in the comment to which you are replying, and then consider if instead of an opinion that you are upset about you have instead encountered an observation regarding our shitty world. Then dial down the indignation you have for me by a couple notches. Hint: My opinion is elsewhere in the thread.
lettergram 12y ago
I'm also pretty sure Sweden's "maximum" security prison is still better than most US prisons.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- kbart 12y ago
  To stretch even further, they are even better than some dormitory rooms I've seen across the world. Check the picture at the top of this article that shows the maximum security prison's cell in Sweden: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/dec/01/why-sweden-closing-prisons http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/dec/01/why-sweden-cl... Taking it to the absurd level, A. Breivik, a Norwegian killer of 77 people (mostly children), demanding better video games "to end his torture": http://www.euronews.com/2014/02/14/far-right-terrorist-breivik-threatens-hunger-strike-for-better-video-games-end-/ http://www.euronews.com/2014/02/14/far-right-terrorist-breiv... and here's how his prison looks like: http://content.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1989083_2137372,00.html http://content.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1989083_21... I guess that only proves a point that crime prevention is not about the severity of the punishment, but the well being and education.
new299 12y ago
wouldn't serve its role, which is to deter crime I wouldn't say that is the sole role of prisons. They kind of have 3 functions: 1. To remove a troublesome individual from society. 2. To rehabilitate an individual. 3. To disincentivize crime (as you say). In our society they are often talked of as having a further role to "punish" an individual. I guess this may actually effect policy, which I guess is effectively revenge. This doesn't seem like a useful notion however. I'm not sure that prisons being nicer would really make me consider crime as a more viable option. It sounds pretty bad even if I don't consider the culinary options.
geofft 12y ago
> Debating the prison's respect for Sunde's vegan wishes misses the forest for the trees. The forest is big and scary and honestly a bit abstract. I've heard about it from childhood; I don't know where it begins and where it ends. I'm supposed to stay away from it, so I do; it serves a useful function, or so I hear. But a single tree I can see at once. I can walk up to it, look at exactly how tall it is, imagine getting trapped under it, fear just how dark its shade is.... and then I can understand just how dangerous the forest is, in a way that my parents could never convey to me from the safety of my home. You've been lost in the forest, so this isn't new to you. But for me, appreciating the enormity of a single tree is one of the few ways I can actually begin to comprehend the terror of the forest.
vacri 12y ago
No, the point of prison is to be part of the legal system. The point of the legal system is to keep society hale and hearty. If that means prisons are horrible torture pits, so be it. If that means prisons are touchy-feely slices of utopia, so be it. "Reducing crime" is important, but whether you do it through the carrot or the stick (or a third method or a combination of methods) is up for debate. So no, the 'point of prison' isn't 'to suck'. That's an overly simplistic view of the issue.

p8952 12y ago

Louis C.K. wonders how different the world would be if murder was legal, or at least a misdemeanor, in his HBO special "Oh My God": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHnsajl-kB8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHnsajl-kB8

tn13 12y ago

I dont think the role of prison is to suck. The idea of justice has three components retribution, deterrence and prevention. As a society it is of paramount importance how we define these three components and the fact that we adhere to those definitions. If it has to suck, it has to be defined apriori to what extent it sucks.

akerl_ 12y ago
In the US, the prevailing strategy of prisons for handling all 3 aspects is to make getting caught so shitty and destructive for the person involved that people don't do things that would lead them there. You can, of course, view any number of metrics to identify how well this is "working".
- Crito 12y ago
  Prison being shitty covers retribution and deterrence. Prevention is provided merely by having strong walls and razor wire. If somebody is locked in a cell, then they will be physically unable to rob the local liquor store. How well or poorly they are treated is irrelevant in that regard.
  - tn13 12y ago
    Why not let the cops simple shoot the man once convicted ? Isn't that retribution, deterrence and prevention all in one ? People should know a-priori the consequences of their actions. Otherwise it is very likely that there is will be manny shitty prisons and some VIP cool prisons.

ShinyCyril 12y ago

> The entire point of prison is to suck, otherwise it wouldn't serve its role, which is to deter crime. Prison serves many purposes other than punishment - one of which is rehabilitation. Making someone's life miserable for several years, purely to punish them, does nothing in the long-run - hence why re-offending rates can be so high.

jsmeaton 12y ago
Rehabilitation is supposed to be one of the purposes, but is that true in many places in the world anymore?
- markvdb 12y ago
  Some serious attempts at rehabilitation in Norway: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/feb/25/norwegian-prison-inmates-treated-like-people http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/feb/25/norwegian-pri...
jsmthrowaway 12y ago
Two orthogonal factors undermine your observation: (1) the prison system is drifting toward private, for-profit prisons, and rehabilitating offenders incarcerated therein would be damaging to the long-term profits of the institution, and (2) believe it or not, a significant number of inmates in the American system do not want to be rehabilitated, which is directly linked to various external factors. It's easy for those outside America to put the United States Criminal Justice System in a vacuum -- it's happening all over this thread and it's honestly ridiculous -- and try to explain to Americans that strategy A doesn't work because recidivism B, and country C actually tries strategy D so America should implement strategy E, but the fact is that the American justice system reflects a lot of other problems in the United States that need to be addressed. Key among those is a significantly substandard education compared to other parts of the world, especially the oft-cited Scandinavian countries for the purposes of this discussion. It is my personal experience that rehabilitation in an incarceration setting only works in the majority if the criminal has some kind of education and desire for a better life. Those citing Norway's prisons, have you ever considered that education is better in Norway and most folks don't break bad by default? Norway has the 7th best education in the world. The United States is much further down the list. Even in minimum, the majority of the people I was in with did not especially mind being there nor look at it as a serious event. "Oh, I got arrested for check fraud again, can't wait to get out and go back to selling meth, much less risky income." To most people I talked to, it was an inconvenience and mild disruption from their life of crime. The hardest of the hard criminals want to be in prison because they can actually have power in several systems run from prison, including an entire infrastructure of gangs. To be quite honest, I think pointing at American prisons and saying "your job is to rehabilitate" is a nice, ivory tower sort of feel-good explainer for sending people to prison, but the fact is going to prison in the United States is a complete life-ender for "doing good" in almost every case. My felony just fell off my record and even in this industry, I was nearly unemployable -- my conviction wasn't even computer-related, but most people pull a report and see "felony" and discard the entire candidate. Prison is only a portion of the consequences for committing a crime. Regardless of how you might feel criminal justice should happen, right now in the United States the policy is one of deterrence. Your life is pretty great until you pick up a felony, then you'll spend the rest of your life trying to undo the damage. And, to be honest, I can understand the logic there: your government has an implicit contract with you that the liberties offered and protected by the United States are yours as long as you don't do any of these hundreds of crimes, and once you do, the contract is void. I can understand the thinking that brought us there. I also don't think the failure thereof is necessarily the fault of the system, as criminal rehabilitation absolutely cannot exist in a vacuum of policy. Life isn't SimCity. You can't tweak a "prison life quality" slider and magically fix recidivism. There are other external inputs into that equation and any discussion thereof must include the whole picture.

na85 12y ago

> How about the fact that he went to maximum at all? Agree. It seemed obvious to me, an outside observer, that he was being disproportionately sentenced. Someone, whether influenced by the RIAA/MPAA cabal or not, decided that he should be made an example.

king_jester 12y ago

Prison still sucks even if you can follow your diet. Its not like prisoners who have allergy reasons for avoiding things like dairy and honey are having a great time. The fact that he went to high security holding and didn't have access to his normal diet are entirely related as part of the oppressive nature of prison that goes beyond just removing someone from society for a period of time.

joe_the_user 12y ago

Western society once considered prisons to have multiple functions; punishment, deterrent and rehabilitation. Now it seems the punishment part has become it. Obviously, this seems to go along with the assumption that the only thing stopping committing crimes is there fear of getting caught. I think that's probably much more true for hacking a bank for a million dollars than murder (which most people aren't just itching to get away with). The rehabilitation assumption goes along with the idea that if person improves, if they are uplifted, they won't commit crimes. The punishment assumption goes with the idea that everyone is a criminal and the question is who can get away with it. And the "everyone is a criminal" assumption certainly makes with those presently at the top of society making out like bandits (aside from having made laws which make their actions legal). So, perhaps what you say is true at the moment. But it's truth involves us being diminished.

jakezorx 12y ago

But he didn't go to a maximum security prison at all, infact he was at Västervik a "säkerhetsklass 2" prison. [2] "Säkerhetsklass 1" would be a maximum security prison, class 3 is the lowest class and those don't even have walls meaning that a class 2 would essentially be a "vanilla" prison.[1] [1]:http://www.kriminalvarden.se/fangelse-frivard-och-hakte/fangelse/sakerhetsklass http://www.kriminalvarden.se/fangelse-frivard-och-hakte/fang... [2]:http://www.kriminalvarden.se/hitta-och-kontakta/verksamhet/anstalt/vastervik-norra http://www.kriminalvarden.se/hitta-och-kontakta/verksamhet/a...

Zirro 12y ago
Furthermore, the prisons in the nordic countries are among the few in the world which actively do practice rehabilitation rather than just "suck", as OP expressed it. I believe that is the reason the vegan diet was brought up as a big deal - he was treated OK in most other regards, especially when considering how prisons work in other parts of the world. Take a look at this documentary: http://arenan.yle.fi/tv/2428667 http://arenan.yle.fi/tv/2428667
- jakezorx 12y ago
  Yeah I agree, I am however somewhat surprised that they didn't manage to provide him with vegan meals. I mean it shouldn't be that difficult im sure they already offer vegetarian alternatives. Very interesting show!

josu 12y ago

Murder has always been illegal, in every society, throughout history. Nevertheless murder rates vary widely from one society to another. So no, "the law against murder is the number one thing preventing murder". There is much more to it.

mistaken 12y ago
Yes, but stealing usually had a much harsher punishment.
- knicholes 12y ago
  I'd argue that murder is on the extreme end of stealing.
  - eru 12y ago
    Depends on jurisdiction.
mbell 12y ago
> Murder has always been illegal, in every society, Only if you allow for a highly variable definition of 'murder', at which point there isn't much value in comparison.
- iopq 12y ago
  Murder is killing someone when it's illegal. Otherwise it's not murder. Yay circular logic! Oh you were defending yourself? Then it's not murder. Oh, you're a soldier? Then it's not murder. Oh, you're a cop? Then it's not murder.

thret 12y ago

I strongly reject Louis CK's assessment. I don't believe there has ever been anyone who has reconsidered murder because of the law. If anything the law protects the murderer - without it, retaliation would be far more appealing.

alexbecker 12y ago
What? You really don't think there would be a single additional murder if murder were legal? > If anything the law protects the murderer - without it, retaliation would be far more appealing. ...which contradicts what you just said.

nathanvanfleet 12y ago

Kind of annoying when people who don't sound as if they comprehend or care-to-comprehend about the complexity of capital punishment have a really hard line opinion about it. Your citation of Louis CK aside. Is treating someone inhumanely for years going to make them actually behave like humans when they are released? Is it actually better for society to do it? America has some extreme examples of bad conditions.

jsmthrowaway 12y ago
Who is talking about capital punishment? I'm pretty sure the point of the thread was incarceration, and even then I'm not actually offering my opinion on the efficacy thereof, only pointing out that the picture is far simpler than most people who have not been there believe.

aragot 12y ago

> about the prison not respecting Sunde's vegan (...) The other half of his complaints are about boredom, which is equally non-exceptionnal in prison. And he's been there only 5 months, that's very moderate for someone who's been a fugitive.

tesq 12y ago

Prisons aren't punishment and retribution factories. I also like that you get on your soap box about being detained as if that justifies your shitty opinion. Having been through the system as well, I am amazed that you'd come to that conclusion after experiencing it first hand. How can you visit a place where rights and common sense don't matter and then turn around and justify how it operates? How long were you detained? For what crime?

jsmthrowaway 12y ago
I'd like you to point out to me what opinion I offered or conclusion I reached in the comment to which you are replying, and then consider if instead of an opinion that you are upset about you have instead encountered an observation regarding our shitty world. Then dial down the indignation you have for me by a couple notches. Hint: My opinion is elsewhere in the thread.

lettergram 12y ago

I'm also pretty sure Sweden's "maximum" security prison is still better than most US prisons.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
kbart 12y ago
To stretch even further, they are even better than some dormitory rooms I've seen across the world. Check the picture at the top of this article that shows the maximum security prison's cell in Sweden: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/dec/01/why-sweden-closing-prisons http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/dec/01/why-sweden-cl... Taking it to the absurd level, A. Breivik, a Norwegian killer of 77 people (mostly children), demanding better video games "to end his torture": http://www.euronews.com/2014/02/14/far-right-terrorist-breivik-threatens-hunger-strike-for-better-video-games-end-/ http://www.euronews.com/2014/02/14/far-right-terrorist-breiv... and here's how his prison looks like: http://content.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1989083_2137372,00.html http://content.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1989083_21... I guess that only proves a point that crime prevention is not about the severity of the punishment, but the well being and education.

new299 12y ago

wouldn't serve its role, which is to deter crime I wouldn't say that is the sole role of prisons. They kind of have 3 functions: 1. To remove a troublesome individual from society. 2. To rehabilitate an individual. 3. To disincentivize crime (as you say). In our society they are often talked of as having a further role to "punish" an individual. I guess this may actually effect policy, which I guess is effectively revenge. This doesn't seem like a useful notion however. I'm not sure that prisons being nicer would really make me consider crime as a more viable option. It sounds pretty bad even if I don't consider the culinary options.

geofft 12y ago

> Debating the prison's respect for Sunde's vegan wishes misses the forest for the trees. The forest is big and scary and honestly a bit abstract. I've heard about it from childhood; I don't know where it begins and where it ends. I'm supposed to stay away from it, so I do; it serves a useful function, or so I hear. But a single tree I can see at once. I can walk up to it, look at exactly how tall it is, imagine getting trapped under it, fear just how dark its shade is.... and then I can understand just how dangerous the forest is, in a way that my parents could never convey to me from the safety of my home. You've been lost in the forest, so this isn't new to you. But for me, appreciating the enormity of a single tree is one of the few ways I can actually begin to comprehend the terror of the forest.

vacri 12y ago

No, the point of prison is to be part of the legal system. The point of the legal system is to keep society hale and hearty. If that means prisons are horrible torture pits, so be it. If that means prisons are touchy-feely slices of utopia, so be it. "Reducing crime" is important, but whether you do it through the carrot or the stick (or a third method or a combination of methods) is up for debate. So no, the 'point of prison' isn't 'to suck'. That's an overly simplistic view of the issue.