Do you have any evidence to support either of those claims? Why would it lead to more police in peaceful neighborhoods? Why the need for drones?Originally Posted by RJKarl
Do you have any evidence to support either of those claims? Why would it lead to more police in peaceful neighborhoods? Why the need for drones?
The answers for your last two questions are obvious. If you have more people on house arrest and who are monitored, you need more people to do it. Drones are used for security and would certainly be used to keep ties on criminals.
society doesn't even want people labeled sex offenders literally anywhere in their neighborhoods but they'll be OK with murderers?
But the murderers will have ankle coverage and will promise not to leave their homes.
RJ is the human embodiment of liberalism. We'll just have more drones!
Y’all must be for some significant UBI and ban-the-box measures if you think all these murderers are going to be buying homes in peaceful neighborhoods.
And I’m sorry, but “the logistics are hard” isn’t a good excuse for committing more violence than is absolutely necessary to keep society safe.
We already use this system for some murderers so I’m not sure why it’s suddenly so controversial.
they won't be - that's the problem. same with sex offenders.
Wait, there actually are people who say that murderers and rapists shouldn't be in prison?
Several here...
It must be difficult to be so blinded by your hatred as to be so ignorant of what I have said.
I don't want more drones. I want violent criminals to be in prison like nearly every same person would.
Let's let hit men roam the streets with anklets. Let's let serial child molestors be free. Let them live next to MHB's kids.
Last edited by RJKarl; 01-16-2019 at 04:36 PM.
The only reason to build a new prison IMO is to replace an existing one which has deteriorated to a level that is unsafe to hold prisoners inside. I meant this to mean modernization of prisons, remodeling and renovation so that it’s a much more humane existence for prisoners. You should not be forced into literal cesspools because you were convicted of a crime, no matter how heinous.
You realize that we give the large majority of violent criminals the option to return to the community, sometimes for several years, before sending them to prison. Right?
And then we let the large majority of violent criminals back into the community without taking any meaningful steps to make them less predisposed to violence (and in fact likely having increased their predisposition towards violence). Right?
I’m basically just advocating for a system that cuts out the middle part where we essentially condition people to be violent and is only concerned with public safety, not antiquated notions of moral vengeance.
What percentage of criminal recidivism is caused by the prison system or factors that have nothing to do with the actual prison itself. It’s almost too complicated to get solid data but if you have some that be great. If the purpose of prison is to rehabilitate a person and prevent them from committing a crime again it’s a horrible system, or if the purpose of the prison system is to remove that person from society because they are destined to commit a crime then it’s a ok system but call it what it is, a removal system not a rehabilitate system.
I feel pretty confident in saying that, at least in my lifetime, there will never be a prison system in the United States in which the sentence of rapists and murderers will depend on some heretofore undefined metric of public safety.
Last edited by Jamison2Carter; 01-16-2019 at 05:11 PM.
If that’s the purpose of the system it’s a horrible system. It’s both over and under inclusive, unnecessary in most cases, and inhumane in all cases in its current form.
I would feel pretty confident in that statement as well.
The “what about murderers and rapists” has only ever been a theoretical conversation brought up by people trying to undermine the abolitionist framework for evaluating our prison system.
If you paid attention to what I have posted, I have repeatedly said we need new styles of prisons and methodologies for those incarcerated. I've said we don't need to keep an overwhelming majority of non-violent criminals in prison. I've stated we should move towards Portugal's drug policies.
There are some people who need to be in prison and some need not to have any bail.
The object should be to get done the things that are agreed upon and work on those we don't. This isn't something that can be done overnight or with one law.
I would love to see DAs and cops be liable for framing innocent people. My opinion is they should be considered guilty of kidnapping those who were framed and other serious repercussions.
Prisons were started to be rehabilitative, but as conservative influence in government has grown over the past 50-60 years, criminal justice has been moved severely in the direction of retribution at all costs. That’s the only way someone can justify mandatory drug possession sentences of double-digit years.
You know what else is inhumane? Murdering someone.
Obviously. If you think society should respond to inhumane actions with inhumanity then make that argument. Ultimately I disagree with that stance, but it’s actually the only argument for maintaining a prison system that seems remotely compelling.
That’s not the discussion we are having though.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote