In Pursuit Of Justice; What’s More Important?

[Vastator]

I have affixed a poll to this thread, which I encourage all to participate in. While the poll allows for only one choice; this poll will reflect only that single choice which you find MOST important.
However for ones contribution to be useful it is also necessary to include order of succession for the other choices as well.

Example: Poster Z chooses “1”, then offers; 1, 3, 2... for a complete answer.

The purpose of the poll/thread is to gather a baseline as to what individuals prioritize when it comes to a social justice system. Not to be confused with Social activism, like the SJWs engage in.

Thanks in advance to all who choose to participate...

 

[GreenAndBlue]

This needs to be asked in better ways


Human nature protects humans from great harm

If high logic people sees unfairness in tge justice system .. that means they see HYPOCRISY. Which is pre wired into humans to get angry and to solve the problem with revenge

But only the high logic’s can make justice work and only they should be voting

 

[shockedcanadian]

I understand the poll but there are too many factors to consider which can't be included. The type of crime being first consideration, the age of the perp and victim, the circumstances behind the crime.

This is why judges are important and too often citizens only receive partial information. You would have to be at the trial to hear it all and understand the crime in more detail. There are often circumstances.

The classic example is of a single mother stealing a loaf of bread to feed her children, compared to some guy pilfering millions of dollars of retirement money from the elderly. Or two people getting into a bar fight and one guy hits his head the wrong way on the curb and accidentally dies, compared to someone stalking and murdering innocent, random victims.

I'd say restitution is probably most important, however that is defined.

 

[Penelope]

Certainty not revenge, restitution involving attempts at rehabilitation.

 

[GreenAndBlue]

But remember what is human nature

Injustice brings anger against the hypocrisy of injustice and seeking revenge to make it equal is a universal law of a human being

Which proves

Do NOT bring unequal justice because revenge will come to bring justice

 

[Vastator]

Apologies to posters for reporting, mods please disregard reports. I didn’t want to bias the poll by voting in it myself; as such I didn’t see any votes.
Again; thanks to those who choose to participate.

 

[Camp]

I have affixed a poll to this thread, which I encourage all to participate in. While the poll allows for only one choice; this poll will reflect only that single choice which you find MOST important.
However for ones contribution to be useful it is also necessary to include order of succession for the other choices as well.

Example: Poster Z chooses “1”, then offers; 1, 3, 2... for a complete answer.

The purpose of the poll/thread is to gather a baseline as to what individuals prioritize when it comes to a social justice system. Not to be confused with Social activism, like the SJWs engage in.

Thanks in advance to all who choose to participate...

You have left out and ignored what many may believe two of the most important reasons for incarcerating criminals are. Perhaps you only consider reasons that begin with the lerrer R. The reasons you left out are far more important rhan the ones listed in your poll.

 

[Vastator]

I have affixed a poll to this thread, which I encourage all to participate in. While the poll allows for only one choice; this poll will reflect only that single choice which you find MOST important.
However for ones contribution to be useful it is also necessary to include order of succession for the other choices as well.

Example: Poster Z chooses “1”, then offers; 1, 3, 2... for a complete answer.

The purpose of the poll/thread is to gather a baseline as to what individuals prioritize when it comes to a social justice system. Not to be confused with Social activism, like the SJWs engage in.

Thanks in advance to all who choose to participate...

You have left out and ignored what many may believe two of the most important reasons for incarcerating criminals are. Perhaps you only consider reasons that begin with the lerrer R. The reasons you left out are far more important rhan the ones listed in your poll.

I never mentioned incarceration, as it isn’t pertinent to the information sought by this poll. This poll is to gauge the priority of the the public, as it pertains to the choices offered in this poll. Thank you for your input.

 

[Disir]

I am also for incarceration. Removal from society. Period. Rehabilitation is always done on the cheap and there are a plethora of programs exiting prisons. If you are on a waiting list to take classes to acquire a GED in a prison then that is a problem. Restitution is a pretty word that doesn't seem to be met all that well. Revenge is not an option.

 

[Camp]

I am also for incarceration. Removal from society. Period. Rehabilitation is always done on the cheap and there are a plethora of programs exiting prisons. If you are on a waiting list to take classes to acquire a GED in a prison then that is a problem. Restitution is a pretty word that doesn't seem to be met all that well. Revenge is not an option.

The main reasons for incarceration should be public safety and public education. Get the criminals off the street and prevented from committing repeated offenses and educate potential future offenders of the punishments of committing specific offenses.

 

[Disir]

I am also for incarceration. Removal from society. Period. Rehabilitation is always done on the cheap and there are a plethora of programs exiting prisons. If you are on a waiting list to take classes to acquire a GED in a prison then that is a problem. Restitution is a pretty word that doesn't seem to be met all that well. Revenge is not an option.

The main reasons for incarceration should be public safety and public education. Get the criminals off the street and prevented from committing repeated offenses and educate potential future offenders of the punishments of committing specific offenses.

That's why people are incarcerated. Public safety.

 

[Camp]

I am also for incarceration. Removal from society. Period. Rehabilitation is always done on the cheap and there are a plethora of programs exiting prisons. If you are on a waiting list to take classes to acquire a GED in a prison then that is a problem. Restitution is a pretty word that doesn't seem to be met all that well. Revenge is not an option.

The main reasons for incarceration should be public safety and public education. Get the criminals off the street and prevented from committing repeated offenses and educate potential future offenders of the punishments of committing specific offenses.

That's why people are incarcerated. Public safety.

Yes, and the things listed in the thread poll are secondary even though related to public safety. Locking up the criminal and removing him or her from the public is the first priority.

 

[SavannahMann]

I have talked about this before. It is one of those areas where I am far more Liberal than most of my peers in this area, or most areas.

If we use Recivitism rates as a guide. Our Current Justice system is failing miserably. Now the Conservatives are right when they say that Liberals are doubling down on failure when pushing an agenda that is already demonstrably false. The same is exactly as true when discussing the Criminal Justice System. Conservatives only want tougher prisons, longer sentences, and more brutal conditions.

The problem that the Conservatives fail to appreciate is that most of these criminals are thriving in these brutal conditions. An old saying is that cream rises to the top. The same is true in Prison, the best rise to the top, and if you want a brutal and barbaric system, that brutal and barbaric system, will have the most brutal and barbaric rise to the top. The more brutal and barbaric you are, the higher you place, and the less you are harassed and brutalized by others.

But there is more to consider. Eventually people are getting out of Prison. So we have ample evidence of the results of this. They have survived years in a brutal and barbaric system, and now they are free. The learned behavior is brutality. Criminality. So all you have done with the barbaric, and brutal prisons, is create a University of Higher Learning. The course structure is prison fighting, making weapons, Rape and Sodomy, and corruption of the guards to get the contraband you want, like drugs. A Convict emerging from these Universities of Extreme Criminal Behavior have their Masters Degree in brutality. Then we, as a society, are shocked that this behavior we essentially forced upon the individual, is carried out into the streets.

Instead of looking at the results and saying that this is obviously not working. We decide that we need to go even more. Essentially saying that criminals are sub human. Well we put them in situations where the strongest sub human thrives, and are surprised that they become as sub human as possible to survive?

We do not look around to see what we are doing wrong. Instead we demand that we double down, on a failed program, creating even more severe and brutal prisons. Because nothing breeds success like a long chain of failures.

We do not look beyond our limited situation to find examples of success. When Henry Ford created the first assembly line, everyone who wanted to make cars or any other complex machine, copied him. Ford helped make factories that turned out dozens of airplanes a day during the war. It was a successful program, that worked.

Yet, what happened to those companies that did not switch to the assembly line? With a few notable exceptions, they all fell out of the market unable to compete. Sure a few luxury car companies remained, but for the most part, it was adapt or die. The same thing happened in the 1970’s, when Japanese cars started to enter the American Market. They could produce cheaper cars, good quality, reliable, and a lot of them. The British Car Companies remained with the manpower intensive assembly lines, and all essentially failed. The American companies saw this, and adapted. Once again, it was adapt or die, and the failed companies spoke volumes about the desire to double down on a failing program or technique.

We do this Darwinian process with everything in life. Except prisons and criminal justice.

As has been mentioned before, the Norwegian Prisons have a much lower Recivitism rate. I am not saying that it will eliminate repeat offenders. But if taking some prisoners, and putting them into an alternative system, we can reduce the rate at which we see repeat offenders, isn’t it worth it?

There is no one size fits all. Neither clothing, or answers to issues. As has been our experience, the truth is that one size fits none. The Brutal prisons are a cakewalk for people from high crime areas like the slums of some cities, or the economically depressed rural areas. There is no incentive to behave once they get out of Prison. It is no worse than the world they return to when they get out.

There is another consideration. Rights of the released convicts. Most people treat people who have gotten out of prison like lepers. As if at any moment they’ll go on a crime spree robbing and raping and murdering their way across three states before they end up dead in a shootout with Police. So opportunities for employment are limited, and usually menial, with minimal earning potential. In other words, they can not rejoin society easily, and the climb up the ladder of success is nearly impossible.

So why are we surprised that they return to crime? WE train them for it in prison. We insure that there are limited choices for them outside of prison making Crime far more attractive as a vocation.

Changing the way we manage and handle and educate the prisoners is one part of the equation. The next part, is changing the way we think, learning how to forgive if not forget.

 

[Vastator]

I have talked about this before. It is one of those areas where I am far more Liberal than most of my peers in this area, or most areas.

If we use Recivitism rates as a guide. Our Current Justice system is failing miserably. Now the Conservatives are right when they say that Liberals are doubling down on failure when pushing an agenda that is already demonstrably false. The same is exactly as true when discussing the Criminal Justice System. Conservatives only want tougher prisons, longer sentences, and more brutal conditions.

The problem that the Conservatives fail to appreciate is that most of these criminals are thriving in these brutal conditions. An old saying is that cream rises to the top. The same is true in Prison, the best rise to the top, and if you want a brutal and barbaric system, that brutal and barbaric system, will have the most brutal and barbaric rise to the top. The more brutal and barbaric you are, the higher you place, and the less you are harassed and brutalized by others.

But there is more to consider. Eventually people are getting out of Prison. So we have ample evidence of the results of this. They have survived years in a brutal and barbaric system, and now they are free. The learned behavior is brutality. Criminality. So all you have done with the barbaric, and brutal prisons, is create a University of Higher Learning. The course structure is prison fighting, making weapons, Rape and Sodomy, and corruption of the guards to get the contraband you want, like drugs. A Convict emerging from these Universities of Extreme Criminal Behavior have their Masters Degree in brutality. Then we, as a society, are shocked that this behavior we essentially forced upon the individual, is carried out into the streets.

Instead of looking at the results and saying that this is obviously not working. We decide that we need to go even more. Essentially saying that criminals are sub human. Well we put them in situations where the strongest sub human thrives, and are surprised that they become as sub human as possible to survive?

We do not look around to see what we are doing wrong. Instead we demand that we double down, on a failed program, creating even more severe and brutal prisons. Because nothing breeds success like a long chain of failures.

We do not look beyond our limited situation to find examples of success. When Henry Ford created the first assembly line, everyone who wanted to make cars or any other complex machine, copied him. Ford helped make factories that turned out dozens of airplanes a day during the war. It was a successful program, that worked.

Yet, what happened to those companies that did not switch to the assembly line? With a few notable exceptions, they all fell out of the market unable to compete. Sure a few luxury car companies remained, but for the most part, it was adapt or die. The same thing happened in the 1970’s, when Japanese cars started to enter the American Market. They could produce cheaper cars, good quality, reliable, and a lot of them. The British Car Companies remained with the manpower intensive assembly lines, and all essentially failed. The American companies saw this, and adapted. Once again, it was adapt or die, and the failed companies spoke volumes about the desire to double down on a failing program or technique.

We do this Darwinian process with everything in life. Except prisons and criminal justice.

As has been mentioned before, the Norwegian Prisons have a much lower Recivitism rate. I am not saying that it will eliminate repeat offenders. But if taking some prisoners, and putting them into an alternative system, we can reduce the rate at which we see repeat offenders, isn’t it worth it?

There is no one size fits all. Neither clothing, or answers to issues. As has been our experience, the truth is that one size fits none. The Brutal prisons are a cakewalk for people from high crime areas like the slums of some cities, or the economically depressed rural areas. There is no incentive to behave once they get out of Prison. It is no worse than the world they return to when they get out.

There is another consideration. Rights of the released convicts. Most people treat people who have gotten out of prison like lepers. As if at any moment they’ll go on a crime spree robbing and raping and murdering their way across three states before they end up dead in a shootout with Police. So opportunities for employment are limited, and usually menial, with minimal earning potential. In other words, they can not rejoin society easily, and the climb up the ladder of success is nearly impossible.

So why are we surprised that they return to crime? WE train them for it in prison. We insure that there are limited choices for them outside of prison making Crime far more attractive as a vocation.

Changing the way we manage and handle and educate the prisoners is one part of the equation. The next part, is changing the way we think, learning how to forgive if not forget.

If people understood the results of the Stanford experiment they’d rethink their position on our way outmoded, completely ineffective, and frankly counter productive method of dealing with criminal behavior.



The cliff notes version is that all participants being actors, were paid to play the roles of prisoners, and guards. In as short as 36 hrs; seemingly regular everyday people cast in these roles quickly devolved into various types of psychotic behavior completely uncharacteristic with their normal personas. The situation spiraled so completely out of control that the experiment had to be cancelled. And this is exactly what we do in our pursuit of justice. It flat out doesn’t work. And in fact has been demonstrated to change people and situations from bad to worse.

 

[Disir]

I am also for incarceration. Removal from society. Period. Rehabilitation is always done on the cheap and there are a plethora of programs exiting prisons. If you are on a waiting list to take classes to acquire a GED in a prison then that is a problem. Restitution is a pretty word that doesn't seem to be met all that well. Revenge is not an option.

The main reasons for incarceration should be public safety and public education. Get the criminals off the street and prevented from committing repeated offenses and educate potential future offenders of the punishments of committing specific offenses.

That's why people are incarcerated. Public safety.

Yes, and the things listed in the thread poll are secondary even though related to public safety. Locking up the criminal and removing him or her from the public is the first priority.

Yes. It appears intentional and that by removing incarceration the only other options available. Between you and I---that's some nonsense. It isn't working now. It's not going to work later.

 

[Disir]

The Stanford Experiment
Debunking the Stanford Prison Experiment. - PubMed - NCBI
https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/amp0000401

One of Psychology's Most Famous Experiments Was Deeply Flawed

 

[Vastator]

The Stanford Experiment
Debunking the Stanford Prison Experiment. - PubMed - NCBI
https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/amp0000401

One of Psychology's Most Famous Experiments Was Deeply Flawed

There are always naysayers. The fact that your primary concern is merely to insulate yourself from the problem, rather than address it is quite telling. Incarceration has been a demonstrable, catastrophic failure in resolving the problem. It serves only to avoid resolving the problem. And as you posited that incarceration should serve e as "an example to others", that fits it squarely into the revenge choice offered.
So your preferred option was available. You just didnt care for the wording. Another example of how you prefer to tailor the environment to your comfort, rather than addressing problems head on, and resolving them.
Avoidance is not a method of addressing a problem.

 

[Disir]

The Stanford Experiment
Debunking the Stanford Prison Experiment. - PubMed - NCBI
https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/amp0000401

One of Psychology's Most Famous Experiments Was Deeply Flawed

There are always naysayers. The fact that your primary concern is merely to insulate yourself from the problem, rather than address it is quite telling. Incarceration has been a demonstrable, catastrophic failure in resolving the problem. It seves only to avoid resolving the problem. And as you posited that incarceration should serve e as "an example to others", that fits it squarely into the revenge choice offered.
So your preferred option was available. You just didnt care for the wording. Another example of how you prefer to tailor the environment to your comfort, rather than addressing problems head on, and resolving them.
Avoidance is not a method of addressing a problem.

My preferred option is removal from society based on one's criminal actions. Not as a deterrent. It is very specific. You can now revise your response.

 

[Vastator]

The Stanford Experiment
Debunking the Stanford Prison Experiment. - PubMed - NCBI
https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/amp0000401

One of Psychology's Most Famous Experiments Was Deeply Flawed

There are always naysayers. The fact that your primary concern is merely to insulate yourself from the problem, rather than address it is quite telling. Incarceration has been a demonstrable, catastrophic failure in resolving the problem. It seves only to avoid resolving the problem. And as you posited that incarceration should serve e as "an example to others", that fits it squarely into the revenge choice offered.
So your preferred option was available. You just didnt care for the wording. Another example of how you prefer to tailor the environment to your comfort, rather than addressing problems head on, and resolving them.
Avoidance is not a method of addressing a problem.

My preferred option is removal from society based on one's criminal actions. Not as a deterrent. It is very specific. You can now revise your response.

No. Need. Your post confirms mine.

 

[Disir]

The Stanford Experiment
Debunking the Stanford Prison Experiment. - PubMed - NCBI
https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/amp0000401

One of Psychology's Most Famous Experiments Was Deeply Flawed

There are always naysayers. The fact that your primary concern is merely to insulate yourself from the problem, rather than address it is quite telling. Incarceration has been a demonstrable, catastrophic failure in resolving the problem. It seves only to avoid resolving the problem. And as you posited that incarceration should serve e as "an example to others", that fits it squarely into the revenge choice offered.
So your preferred option was available. You just didnt care for the wording. Another example of how you prefer to tailor the environment to your comfort, rather than addressing problems head on, and resolving them.
Avoidance is not a method of addressing a problem.

My preferred option is removal from society based on one's criminal actions. Not as a deterrent. It is very specific. You can now revise your response.

No. Need. Your post confirms mine.

No. But, I understand where you are coming from. This is all a little social justice warrior thing for you. You sit behind a screen, pontificate but have acquired no direct knowledge.

Your '