What is the point of prison?

[Deleted member 49]

If I could tap them on the shoulder and say: "I'm not going to stop you, but you will get caught and you will go to jail," I guarantee 99% of offenders would walk away.

I very much doubt that....what percent of burglaries are to feed a drug habit do you think ?

 

[Pale Rider]

I very much doubt that....what percent of burglaries are to feed a drug habit do you think ?

Quite a few, but the punter is not so out of his head as to be unable to understand a simple risk/reward equation.

That's why he's formed the intention to burgle - access to goods and therefore cash with no comeback.

 

[Pale Rider]

I completely agree PR, but turning this round, how can we help people not to offend, for whatever reason, before they do?

The 'help' is instilling the fear of detection and meaningful punishment.

 

[Archie_tect]

Now we know that is nigh on impossible without significant improvements to policing... 'help' [sic] is creating the environment where there is no 'need' to offend in the first place... what would that require?

 

[theclaud]

Not at the games I go to , the idiots still boo (some ar$eholes can't even keep quiet during the 2 minute silence) and the rest generally do nothing.
What am I going to lose by the way?

White supremacists, I mean. They've always already lost, on account of the nation they want to 'bring back' being a fantasy that never existed. But they've lost the argument, and they're losing the crowd as well.

 

[Pale Rider]

Now we know that is nigh on impossible without significant improvements to policing... 'help' [sic] is creating the environment where there is no 'need' to offend in the first place... what would that require?

You've answered your own question - significant improvements to policing, and rebalance the criminal court system away from the offender.

That's a very lofty aim, but probably not as lofty as eradicating the deeply ingrained societal ills which cause the weak willed to offend.

 

[Milkfloat]

You've answered your own question - significant improvements to policing, and rebalance the criminal court system away from the offender.

That's a very lofty aim, but probably not as lofty as eradicating the deeply ingrained societal ills which cause the weak willed to offend.

The assumes the US system of 'lock em up' works, which was all know is a bit of a disaster. Whilst I am not adverse to locking up the real menaces to society surely the models mentioned previously in the thread (Norway etc) work better? Sure it takes money and time to get there, but in the long run I believe it is cheaper and better for society to prevent offending using a carrot approach rather than locking people up at great expense.

 

[Archie_tect]

Improvements to policing and rebalancing the penal system is the answer to the question I did not ask- we both understand that is addressing the effect.

Eradicating the deeply ingrained societal ills is precisely the causal question I'm asking.

 

[BoldonLad]

Improvements to policing and rebalancing the penal system is the answer to the question I did not ask- we both understand that is addressing the effect.

Eradicating the deeply ingrained societal ills is precisely the causal question I'm asking.

Depending on what exactly you mean by this, are we certain they CAN be eradicated, even with unlimited funding?

 

[mudsticks]

Improvements to policing and rebalancing the penal system is the answer to the question I did not ask- we both understand that is addressing the effect.

Eradicating the deeply ingrained societal ills is precisely the causal question I'm asking.

Which brings us back round to investing in housing, city and town planning, health and social services, education, and meaningful job creation , plus a few other things besides.

Having the effect of creating a society in in which offending just isn't the the 'best' or even only option available to so many.

Sure we need good policing, and even some locking up after the fact.

But living in a less threatening, and pleasanter more positive society in the first place, so less of this shoot happens is better for everyone..

The US shows us that a high prison population, even capital punishment, isn't effective in creating this peaceful society .

Who loses out on increased 'wellbeing' in society .??

Those for whom keeping a fair section of the population poor and under resourced is ultimately a money spinner..

 

[mudsticks]

Depending on what exactly you mean by this, are we certain they CAN be eradicated, even with unlimited funding?

Not eradicated..
That would be unrealistic.

Greatly reduced would be a more reasonable aim wouldn't it. ??

 

[BoldonLad]

Not eradicated..
That would be unrealistic.

Greatly reduced would be a more reasonable aim wouldn't it. ??

OK, I will buy "greatly reduced", but, what about the "Depending on what exactly you mean by this," where this means "deeply ingrained societal ills"?

Has any Country or Society ever achieved "eradicated", or even "greatly reduced"?

If the "societal ills" cannot be eradicated, but, only "greatly reduced", then, presumably, we always have some offenders (even if fewer)?, what do we do with them?

 

[mudsticks]

OK, I will buy "greatly reduced", but, what about the "Depending on what exactly you mean by this," where this means "deeply ingrained societal ills"?

Has any Country or Society ever achieved "eradicated", or even "greatly reduced"?

If the "societal ills" cannot be eradicated, but, only "greatly reduced", then, presumably, we always have some offenders (even if fewer)?, what do we do with them?

With really persistent offenders ..??

Well clearly the very best option would be to send them down to me for a jolly good talking to.

No one would want to have to go through that twice, would they??

 

[BoldonLad]

With really persistent offenders ..??

Well clearly the very best option would be to send them down to me for a jolly good talking to.

No one would want to have to go through that twice, would they??

A mildly amusing way of saying, you don't know, thought not

You still haven't explained exactly what you mean by "societal ills", not has @Archie_tect of course

 

[mudsticks]

I never said there should be no prisons.
Or no prison sentences, for the most persistent or dangerous offenders.

Just that in many ( but obv not all) cases prevention is possible, and certainly preferable through preemptive action.

Either through better provision early on in life, or later through alternative consequences, such as detailed upthread by our friend Rusty..

You do sometimes seem to have an 'all or nothing' attitude to many of these ideas.

Which is a bit tiresome when trying to have a sensible thoughtful, discussion.

I'd expect these kind of 'binary' black or white responses from some of our regular contributors, but not so much from yourself.

Given your life experiences to date.

Oh well ..