Prisons for Exclusion, not Punishment or Rehabilitation

[actuallyenlightened]

People seem to talk only about punishment vs rehabilitation but never about the aspect of preventing offenders from being able to commit crimes - which seems like the whole point of the justice system.

Many people go to prison for committing crimes which involve the blatant disregard of others, then come out only to reoffend. I feel that the wellbeing of their next victim should outweigh their right to freedom, and thus it would be just to keep them locked away indefinitely. In this case, I'm advocating for life in prison not out of the desire to punish but to protect society from dangerous people.

People often bring up the 'underlying societal issues' as a way to shift blame away from criminals to justify shorter sentences. My argument however, is not concerned with blame but is rather about risk reduction and enhancing safety. Once underlying societal issues get solved, then my solution would still hold, except that less people will end up incarcerated.  

I am also not against rehabilitation - but only support this option if there is a <10% chance of a former inmate reoffending.

Life imprisonment for offences most costly to society:
- Murders
- Rapists
- Career criminals (say 50%+ of their income is generated through crime)

Exponentially increasing sentences for repeat offenders:
ie shoplifting:
1) slap on the wrist.
2) 1 year (jailtime)
3) 2 years
4) 4 years
5) 8 years, etc.
with a different curve for other types of crime with varying severity (white collar, violent, etc).

These strict sentences would also act as a strong deterrent against the types of people who commit crimes only if they think they can get away with it.

Edited April 2 by actuallyenlightened

[Danioover9000]

@actuallyenlightened

4 hours ago, actuallyenlightened said:

People seem to talk only about punishment vs rehabilitation but never about the aspect of preventing offenders from being able to commit crimes - which seems like the whole point of the justice system.

Many people go to prison for committing crimes which involve the blatant disregard of others, then come out only to reoffend. I feel that the wellbeing of their next victim should outweigh their right to freedom, and thus it would be just to keep them locked away indefinitely. In this case, I'm advocating for life in prison not out of the desire to punish but to protect society from dangerous people.

People often bring up the 'underlying societal issues' as a way to shift blame away from criminals to justify shorter sentences. My argument however, is not concerned with blame but is rather about risk reduction and enhancing safety. Once underlying societal issues get solved, then my solution would still hold, except that less people will end up incarcerated.  

I am also not against rehabilitation - but only support this option if there is a <10% chance of a former inmate reoffending.

Life imprisonment for offences most costly to society:
- Murders
- Rapists
- Career criminals (say 50%+ of their income is generated through crime)

Exponentially increasing sentences for repeat offenders:
ie shoplifting:
1) slap on the wrist.
2) 1 year (jailtime)
3) 2 years
4) 4 years
5) 8 years, etc.
with a different curve for other types of crime with varying severity (white collar, violent, etc).

These strict sentences would also act as a strong deterrent against the types of people who commit crimes only if they think they can get away with it.

   Will you still be for this type of imprisonment when the government taxes you more for the funding and maintenance? 

[actuallyenlightened]

7 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

@actuallyenlightened

   Will you still be for this type of imprisonment when the government taxes you more for the funding and maintenance? 

Yes - I would pay for a safer society.

There are also indirect costs to crime that everyone pays. For example, grocery stores need to charge extra to offset lost merchandise (or paying a security guard) due to theft. Victims of crime may become unproductive, paying less taxes and requiring more government services. So in terms of societal wealth, paying to keep people in prisons may not be as expensive as it appears on face value.

In the long term, the costs should go down with less people committing crimes.
- Offenders oftentimes go into a life of crime after being influenced by existing criminals in their social circle. People in prison are effectively excluded from socializing with outsiders. 
- Stricter sentences become normal and expected for people growing up in such a system. Committing crimes would become unimaginable for these people, or at the very least seen as taboo.

Finally, deterrence is powerful when it comes to economically motivated crime. If the penalty far exceeds the benefit to oneself (theft or fraud or selling drugs, for example) many people would likely choose to live an honest life.

[Emerald]

I was thinking about this the other day that the thing that makes a social system more or less corrupt is how unfocused or focused it is toward its ACTUAL function.

For example... the function of the military is defense. And to the degree that it deviates from its purpose of defense (towards extra concepts like offense) is the degree to which it slips towards corruption.

And the function of an economic system is to disseminate value across society. And to the degree that it deviates from that purpose (towards extra concepts like deserving and undeserving) is the degree to which it slips towards corruption.

And the function of the criminal justice system is to protect society from detrimental actions. And to the degree that it deviates from that purpose (by adding in extra concepts like punishment) is the degree to which it slips towards corruption.

[Razard86]

Until you have your freedom taken from you, you will not understand how callous your suggestion is. 

I suggest go voluntarily submit yourself to a psych ward and see how comfortable you are with being locked up. 

[actuallyenlightened]

2 hours ago, Emerald said:

how unfocused or focused it is toward its ACTUAL function.

Yes, and in terms of the justice system the purpose is public safety. Basically everything else is a cost.

1 hour ago, Razard86 said:

Until you have your freedom taken from you, you will not understand how callous your suggestion is. 

I suggest go voluntarily submit yourself to a psych ward and see how comfortable you are with being locked up. 

I'm sure it's rough. But do you really want to respect a dangerous criminal's right to freedom? I don't.