4 ms·

> There are situations in which it is right to send people to prison without them posing an active and dangerous threat Do these situations exist only when we

> There are situations in which it is right to send people to prison without them posing an active and dangerous threat Do these situations exist only when we consider punishment a valid reason for imprisonment? Don't get me wrong; Bernie Madoff being free and enjoying life wouldn't sit right with me, but you have to wonder if locking people away as retribution really benefits tax-paying, law-abiding citizens.

coldtea 12y ago
>but you have to wonder if locking people away as retribution really benefits tax-paying, law-abiding citizens Well, we should also consider if it's benefiting or humane to the people we lock away. It's not like "tax-paying, law-abiding citizens" are more human than those that end up in jail.
- blowski 12y ago
  As I understood it from my very limited studies, there are five reasons for incarcerating somebody: retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, incapacitation, and restorative justice. If somebody is judged by their peers to have broken the laws approved by their peers, then they receive the punishment deemed suitable by their peers. As I say, my knowledge of this comes from a brief college-level history about 20 years ago, so may be outdated, naive or just completely wrong. But I think in the case of Bernie Madoff, incarcerating him was justified to deter similar financial frauds in the future. I suspect (and judging by some of the comments on this page, it might have worked) locking up Andrus Nomm is an attempt to discourage programmers from working for firms like MegaUpload.
- andrewksl 12y ago
  Without a doubt, unless we're making the argument that punishment benefits the punished somehow. I should probably have made mention of rehabilitation to contrast.
pluma 12y ago
You also have to consider the cost to society locking someone away incurs. You not only remove an able-bodied worker and offload his costs of living to society, you also have to factor in the overhead of maintaining and staffing the necessary facilities. But sadly putting people behind bars is considered a solution in itself in the US, rather than a means to an end.

coldtea 12y ago

>but you have to wonder if locking people away as retribution really benefits tax-paying, law-abiding citizens Well, we should also consider if it's benefiting or humane to the people we lock away. It's not like "tax-paying, law-abiding citizens" are more human than those that end up in jail.

blowski 12y ago
As I understood it from my very limited studies, there are five reasons for incarcerating somebody: retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, incapacitation, and restorative justice. If somebody is judged by their peers to have broken the laws approved by their peers, then they receive the punishment deemed suitable by their peers. As I say, my knowledge of this comes from a brief college-level history about 20 years ago, so may be outdated, naive or just completely wrong. But I think in the case of Bernie Madoff, incarcerating him was justified to deter similar financial frauds in the future. I suspect (and judging by some of the comments on this page, it might have worked) locking up Andrus Nomm is an attempt to discourage programmers from working for firms like MegaUpload.
andrewksl 12y ago
Without a doubt, unless we're making the argument that punishment benefits the punished somehow. I should probably have made mention of rehabilitation to contrast.

pluma 12y ago

You also have to consider the cost to society locking someone away incurs. You not only remove an able-bodied worker and offload his costs of living to society, you also have to factor in the overhead of maintaining and staffing the necessary facilities. But sadly putting people behind bars is considered a solution in itself in the US, rather than a means to an end.