Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

Prison can serve three purposes:

• Rehabilitation. The criminal goes to prison in order to teach him or her a thing or two and to ensure that the crime does not happen again.
• Isolation. The criminal is a menace to society and is too dangerous to release, at least for a long time. Rehabilitation might not even be possible.
• Punishment. The bad guys did something wrong, so now they're getting a spanking they will never forget.

I seem to recall that a few years ago, somebody said that punishment is actually the main reason for prison. I forget who said this and why. (It probably wasn't anybody famous... the most likely candidate seems to be my political science professor. Although I'm sure famous people have expressed that opinion.) The only thing I remember is that the purpose was to bring the criminal to "justice", but that argument by itself sounds a little abstract to me.

So I'd say I have to disagree with that... sure, some people need to be brought to justice -- I wouldn't exactly feel sorry for Osama bin Laden, no matter what happened to him -- but I don't think many criminals are worthy of punishment for the sake of punishment. I'm happy with rehabilitation or isolation. I think if there's no chance you'll commit the crime again, there's no problem. Of course, there's no way to 100% guarantee that. And when that crime is something very ugly, like it turns out somebody committed murder some 30 years ago but has turned out to be a very nice guy since then, well, a lot of people wouldn't be comfortable with that. I think I would, though, if I could be certain that it wouldn't happen again. What do you think? And what do you think the primary purpose of prison is or should be?

- Kef

_________________
404 sig not found

I believe in rehabilitation when possible, especially for nonviolent offenders. For the violent, isolation / containment is a very important function. I don't consider punishment all that necessary; confinement is punishment enough, and certain aspects of prison life are so horrific that further suffering is honestly not needed. We all know how prevalent prison rape is. For some reason prison rape is considered amusing out here in the world, but there's really nothing funny about it. (Caution: that link is not for the squeamish. However, more people need to be aware of the facts in this issue.)

Mike

_________________
Logical fallacies ahoy! I'd also like to say: graaaaagh!

I think you forgot one though; you set an example to discourage others from doing the same mistake.
Also, I don't think punishment is a reason, either. Punishing wrong-doers is more of a tool or an instinct to get at the other purposes. "If you do that again you'll get punished, so don't do that again (rehabilitation). If anybody else does that, they'll get punished too (example). If punishment doesn't work, you'll get locked up/disabled/killed (isolation)."

I think the term you're looking for is "deterrent." Unfortunately, the deterrent factor of prison is actually very low. Prison doesn't really become a real factor until the person experiences it for themselves. There are some programs like "Scared Straight" that try to gives teens the prison experience for themselves to shock them into not going there themselves. There are some results, but it doesn't work in every case.

I do believe that the punitive aspect is an important factor, though, and do not discount the necessity of a criminal justice system intent on forcing criminals to face negative consequences for their actions.

And I do think there should be separation between nonviolent offenders and dangerous criminals.

_________________

I would disagree a bit. I agree that the deterrent factor is lower than it would be if people knew what prison is like, but still, it is what keeps me from doing stuff like murdering people. It doesnt deter everyone, but it works on the vast majority of the population.

I think our justice system is a joke. My girlfriend knows a guy who smashed a mailbox with a baseball bat 7 years ago. He's still in jail, and wont get out for 3 more years. Everyone who hears this says "Well, it is federal property and blah blah". The fact remains, whether or not it's a federal offense, he still just broken a small lifeless metal box.

On the other hand, the average time served for rapists in recent years is just over 5 years.

I do believe that we have an obligation to correct the offender, but letting rapists out in less time that a mailbox smasher is just unjustifiable.

BTW: The mailbox had nothing in it.

_________________

My thought on that: instead of lightening up on federal offenses, let's make the penalties for rape more stringent. And more consistent. First offense: 10 years. Second offense: life, no parole. Third: castration.

(yeah, I know "Life, no parole" should preclude the third offense. But it could be invoked in cases of multiple offenses, like serial rape, or in cases where an offender somehow gets out or escapes).

_________________

Umm, that would be ruled unconstitutional in a heartbeat.

Besides, most rapists and child predators don't last too long anyways. They are lucky to last 6 months in prison.

_________________

How's that? I don't think people get killed in prison very often. (Not counting the times the state does it, of course.)

_________________
404 sig not found

Prisoners have they're own justice system. It's run by the type of crime you commit an extremely violent crime like murder, the inmates will keep they're distance. If it's something like rape or child abuse, you are going to have a rough time because you are viewed a scum. Inmates don't like people who harm those viewed as innocent(Women and children). If you harm them, they will harm you.

_________________

Yeah, but as far as I know, they usually don't end up getting killed...

_________________
404 sig not found

No, they usually get raped(irony), beaten or both.

_________________

But what can they do about it? They can't just say, "I've had enough of this place! I quit!" They're still stuck in prison. There's no way they "can't last too long" unless they get killed.

- Kef

_________________
404 sig not found

I'm wondering, though, whether it might be allowed under circumstances where the prisoner chose to accept the procedure. For example, in exchange for less jail time. I could see why it might be considered unconstitutional if it's not - it would be considered "cruel and unusual" punishment. The "cruel" part could be debated if the procedure were strictly surgical, and was conducted while the prisoner were under sedation. The "unusual" part would really be the only decent counter-argument, mainly because it is not commonly practiced today. Nevertheless, I think it could be easily argued that it is not unusual, on account that it fits the crime.

_________________

But imagine having to trade off 20 years for getting castrated? Many people wouldnt be able to make the choice.

Also, buyers remorse probably sucks after castration...

_________________

Just do what the goat farmers do. Tie a ribbon around, and wait three days till *plop*.

_________________