5 ms·

I'm more and more convinced that this is a cultural problem in the US. The idea of "serving out justice" seems to override any compassion for people. People al

by rtpg 11y ago

I'm more and more convinced that this is a cultural problem in the US. The idea of "serving out justice" seems to override any compassion for people. People always talk about throwing bankers in jail for the crisis, but why would you wish all this suffering on anyone? Denying freedom for someone for years. Especially considering the multitude of studies showing that extended incarceration _does not work as a deterrent_. We should be ashamed, a country with this sort of penal system cannot declare itself to be a bastion of civil rights.

billforsternz 11y ago
Agreed. Even the most liberal thinkers routinely call for people they don't approve of to be thrown in jail. I think it's important to challenge this type of thinking. Reserve jail for those times when there is no other way to protect innocents from violent offenders.
- robotresearcher 11y ago
  > Even the most liberal thinkers routinely call for people they don't approve of to be thrown in jail. Evidence or argument to support this? It seems false by definition.
  - fineman 11y ago
    Argument. :) Tautologically, you're right. Liberal is people who wouldn't do this, therefore... But, of people who would self-identify as liberal how many are in fact closet authoritarians? Lots!
  - billforsternz 11y ago
    I'm thinking of bloggers I subscribe to who are often characterised as Social Justice Warriors - people who are extremely liberal. Very often these people will call for Bush, Cheney et al. to be jailed for war crimes. They tend to want people perceived as financial beneficiaries of the "neo-liberal" orthodoxy (bankers etc.) to be jailed as white collar criminals too.
    - eru 11y ago
      > [...] people who are extremely liberal. In the American definition of the word.
      - billforsternz 11y ago
        Yes, always a source of confusion.
  - rtpg 11y ago
    The "why haven't any bankers been thrown in jail" trope has been repeated fairly often on both sides of the aisle. Now here, "Most liberal" might be just talking about people still within mainstream thinking. Though many talk about not throwing people in jail for things like Marijuana, few talk about reducing sentences for non-drug related crimes (and pretty much no discussion on reducing it for violent crimes as well).
    - jacquesm 11y ago
      It all hinges on whether or not you look at the justice system as an agent for revenge or one of correction and rehabilitation.
      - rtpg 11y ago
        Very true. It's one of those topics where people don't even start with the same axioms and definitions, so the discussion goes nowhere. Personally, I was on the other side of the fence, until the constant evidence of the extreme suffering a large segment of the population goes through in prison convinced me that we're accomplishing immense amounts of harm this way.
fineman 11y ago
The bankers are the ones I think it would work for. They understand risk analysis and it's all slow, reasoned, crime. Not like crimes of passion.
- _delirium 11y ago
  Is locking people in cages really necessary to stop bank misbehavior though? I would prefer first trying things like: 1) closer oversight; 2) fines restructured as a percentage of wealth so that they actually deter even very wealthy people; 3) kicking people out of the sector (e.g. bans from working in finance). Cages seem like a really blunt and rather barbaric instrument to use for improving society.
  - rjsw 11y ago
    Some punishments are designed to send a message [1], maybe bankers would change their behaviour too. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Byng https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Byng
    - nitrogen 11y ago
      Making an example out of someone to send a message to others is completely unjust for the person who is made an example.
      - fineman 11y ago
        Did they intend the crime? And their only defense is "The other guy was doing it too"? Oh well. As long as we prosecute as many people in their position as possible it doesn't seem to be a problem if we miss some. It's only selective when we choose who to ignore. Something like Aaron Schwartz where it wasn't a crime until someone who made the DA look like an idiot does it... Then it's clearly crossed the line.
  - eru 11y ago
    > 2) fines restructured as a percentage of wealth so that they actually deter even very wealthy people Or even just the possibility of piercing the veil of incorporation, ie let the employees take some risk on the downside, too.
stef25 11y ago
One has to find a balance between compassion and justice. Some people obviously deserve more of one that the other, I guess this is what judges are for but they don't always do it right. Locking someone up for a long time seems unusually cruel unless their crime involved punishing someone in a similar fashion over a similar amount of time. An eye for an eye seems to be more appropriate but impossible and immoral in its implementation. Making some of those bankers live in poverty to me seems like a good punishment. Make them realise what it feels like to "lose it all", something they did basically inflict on thousands of people. Very hard to implement though.

by rtpg 11y ago

billforsternz 11y ago

Agreed. Even the most liberal thinkers routinely call for people they don't approve of to be thrown in jail. I think it's important to challenge this type of thinking. Reserve jail for those times when there is no other way to protect innocents from violent offenders.

robotresearcher 11y ago
> Even the most liberal thinkers routinely call for people they don't approve of to be thrown in jail. Evidence or argument to support this? It seems false by definition.
- fineman 11y ago
  Argument. :) Tautologically, you're right. Liberal is people who wouldn't do this, therefore... But, of people who would self-identify as liberal how many are in fact closet authoritarians? Lots!
- billforsternz 11y ago
  I'm thinking of bloggers I subscribe to who are often characterised as Social Justice Warriors - people who are extremely liberal. Very often these people will call for Bush, Cheney et al. to be jailed for war crimes. They tend to want people perceived as financial beneficiaries of the "neo-liberal" orthodoxy (bankers etc.) to be jailed as white collar criminals too.
  - eru 11y ago
    > [...] people who are extremely liberal. In the American definition of the word.
    - billforsternz 11y ago
      Yes, always a source of confusion.
- rtpg 11y ago
  The "why haven't any bankers been thrown in jail" trope has been repeated fairly often on both sides of the aisle. Now here, "Most liberal" might be just talking about people still within mainstream thinking. Though many talk about not throwing people in jail for things like Marijuana, few talk about reducing sentences for non-drug related crimes (and pretty much no discussion on reducing it for violent crimes as well).
  - jacquesm 11y ago
    It all hinges on whether or not you look at the justice system as an agent for revenge or one of correction and rehabilitation.
    - rtpg 11y ago
      Very true. It's one of those topics where people don't even start with the same axioms and definitions, so the discussion goes nowhere. Personally, I was on the other side of the fence, until the constant evidence of the extreme suffering a large segment of the population goes through in prison convinced me that we're accomplishing immense amounts of harm this way.

fineman 11y ago

The bankers are the ones I think it would work for. They understand risk analysis and it's all slow, reasoned, crime. Not like crimes of passion.

_delirium 11y ago
Is locking people in cages really necessary to stop bank misbehavior though? I would prefer first trying things like: 1) closer oversight; 2) fines restructured as a percentage of wealth so that they actually deter even very wealthy people; 3) kicking people out of the sector (e.g. bans from working in finance). Cages seem like a really blunt and rather barbaric instrument to use for improving society.
- rjsw 11y ago
  Some punishments are designed to send a message [1], maybe bankers would change their behaviour too. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Byng https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Byng
  - nitrogen 11y ago
    Making an example out of someone to send a message to others is completely unjust for the person who is made an example.
    - fineman 11y ago
      Did they intend the crime? And their only defense is "The other guy was doing it too"? Oh well. As long as we prosecute as many people in their position as possible it doesn't seem to be a problem if we miss some. It's only selective when we choose who to ignore. Something like Aaron Schwartz where it wasn't a crime until someone who made the DA look like an idiot does it... Then it's clearly crossed the line.
- eru 11y ago
  > 2) fines restructured as a percentage of wealth so that they actually deter even very wealthy people Or even just the possibility of piercing the veil of incorporation, ie let the employees take some risk on the downside, too.

stef25 11y ago

One has to find a balance between compassion and justice. Some people obviously deserve more of one that the other, I guess this is what judges are for but they don't always do it right. Locking someone up for a long time seems unusually cruel unless their crime involved punishing someone in a similar fashion over a similar amount of time. An eye for an eye seems to be more appropriate but impossible and immoral in its implementation. Making some of those bankers live in poverty to me seems like a good punishment. Make them realise what it feels like to "lose it all", something they did basically inflict on thousands of people. Very hard to implement though.