This thread is triggered by the use of the word "monster" in relation to the impending release of Karla Homolka.
I want to focus on retributive punishment within society, and its abject failure in controlling criminality. I contend that the current system adds to the level of criminality, and that the harder and longer the retributive element is applied, the more prone to criminality society becomes.
It seems to me to be both obvious and axiomatic that any criminal act is a failure of society and of the criminal's peers. It's a failure of society to the extent that society has defined the act to be criminal in the first place and then failed to provide the resources necessary to keep the individual from committing the act. It's the failure of the criminal's peers in that they have not sufficiently educated, supported and nurtured the person to the point where he avoided criminality. Whatever penalty society demands in recompense for the crime should be paid by the peers, not the individual. Either society at large or the peers, in turn, have the responsibility of correcting the individual - correcting, not punishing. The punishment, if punishment is a necessary concept, belongs to society as a whole, or the peers, for failing the individual in the first place.
There is absolutely no advantage to society at all in retributive incarceration. There may be an advantage in correction, perhaps, but the current concept of "corrections officer" has more to do with sadism and abuse than with correction. Until there is a working process of correction which brings recidivism down to the level of failure within the population at large, incarceration should be unconstitutional, qualifying as a strange and unusual punishment. The only acceptable punishment, not strange and not unusual, should be corrective, not retributive, it should work and it should be a more effective option than any that involves no loss of liberty before it can be employed.
I put forward, in support of this argument, the successful re-introduction into society of Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, who at the age of ten killed a two-year-old boy they had abducted from a shopping mall. They both had a history of dreadful neglect and exposure to the sickest of horror videos. They were very properly placed into a secure child unit and brought up by social workers with the sole intention that they be reclaimed, rather than abandoned into a punitive prison system. They were released without exposure to prison, and it is generally acknowledged that they pose no more danger to society at large than the average adult. To the best of my knowledge - and I can't see how the system would have corrected them otherwise - they have not been subject to any form of retributive treatment.
Would we prefer to have them reclaimed, or would we prefer that they be left in their original state and simply punished, eventually being released in so damaged a state (both from their initial experiences and subsequently from their imprisonment) that they continue to be a danger to the public?
Retribution
Retribution
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
There's a difference between mentally unstable criminals, sociopaths, and criminals that got involved in crime through poor decisions and circumstances.
By far the greater part of people incarcerated are normal people who have been involved in abnormal situations....poverty and drugs namely.
The consequence of jail time is usually enough to make these people decide that the punishment is too severe to commit further crime. It worked like a charm for me, for example. Jail can be a 'wake-up call" for intelligent people who make mistakes.
As for the genetically-predisposed-to-crime, the mentally unstable, and the double YY's...
Let's chemically erase their former personalities and memories and allow them to start a new life as a different person. We have that capablility now.
By far the greater part of people incarcerated are normal people who have been involved in abnormal situations....poverty and drugs namely.
The consequence of jail time is usually enough to make these people decide that the punishment is too severe to commit further crime. It worked like a charm for me, for example. Jail can be a 'wake-up call" for intelligent people who make mistakes.
As for the genetically-predisposed-to-crime, the mentally unstable, and the double YY's...
Let's chemically erase their former personalities and memories and allow them to start a new life as a different person. We have that capablility now.
All the world's a stage and the men and women merely players...Shakespeare
Retribution
Jives wrote: The consequence of jail time is usually enough to make these people decide that the punishment is too severe to commit further crime. Thank you Jives, if the remaining posts to the thread retain your tone it'll be worth reading.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/reentry/recidivism.htm suggests you're wrong about "usually".
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/reentry/recidivism.htm suggests you're wrong about "usually".
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
Jives wrote: As for the genetically-predisposed-to-crime, the mentally unstable, and the double YY's...
Let's chemically erase their former personalities and memories and allow them to start a new life as a different person. We have that capablility now.If you can manage that without reducing either the intelligence or the creativity of the person concerned then I'd vote for that. It involves the effective killing of an individual, but there's a compensating creation of a new individual at the same moment. I don't believe it can be done, but if you can do it then it's a rational way out of the problem for that class of criminal.
Bear in mind that another society - the dreaded undemocratic Chinese, for example - might define crime in their jurisdiction in a way that would upset you (antisocial rejection of the Party line for example, or whistle-blowing on Avian Flu cases), and then employ your technique. How would you argue against their doing that, if you've already implemented the process yourself as a solution?
Let's chemically erase their former personalities and memories and allow them to start a new life as a different person. We have that capablility now.If you can manage that without reducing either the intelligence or the creativity of the person concerned then I'd vote for that. It involves the effective killing of an individual, but there's a compensating creation of a new individual at the same moment. I don't believe it can be done, but if you can do it then it's a rational way out of the problem for that class of criminal.
Bear in mind that another society - the dreaded undemocratic Chinese, for example - might define crime in their jurisdiction in a way that would upset you (antisocial rejection of the Party line for example, or whistle-blowing on Avian Flu cases), and then employ your technique. How would you argue against their doing that, if you've already implemented the process yourself as a solution?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
The rearrest rate for property offenders, drug offenders, and public-order offenders increased significantly from 1983 to 1994. During that time, the rearrest rate increased:
- from 68.1% to 73.8% for property offenders
- from 50.4% to 66.7% for drug offenders
- from 54.6% to 62.2% for public-order offenders
Well...that makes sense. The problem that they had before still exists. I take it back, give the poor skills to get a job and give the drug offenders treatment. But isn't that exactly what they do in prison? Attend classes and work at a job?
Spot, doesn't this data tend to give lie to your theory that "rehabilitation is the best course for people, not incarceration." It seems that despite the rehab attempts, criminals continue to commit crimes.
Well...in that case, I take back everything I said. Lock 'em all up and throw away the key.
- from 68.1% to 73.8% for property offenders
- from 50.4% to 66.7% for drug offenders
- from 54.6% to 62.2% for public-order offenders
Well...that makes sense. The problem that they had before still exists. I take it back, give the poor skills to get a job and give the drug offenders treatment. But isn't that exactly what they do in prison? Attend classes and work at a job?
Spot, doesn't this data tend to give lie to your theory that "rehabilitation is the best course for people, not incarceration." It seems that despite the rehab attempts, criminals continue to commit crimes.
Well...in that case, I take back everything I said. Lock 'em all up and throw away the key.
All the world's a stage and the men and women merely players...Shakespeare
Retribution
Jives wrote: Spot, doesn't this data tend to give lie to your theory that "rehabilitation is the best course for people, not incarceration." It seems that despite the rehab attempts, criminals continue to commit crimes.What gives you any confidence that the system described makes any serious, tested, efficacious attempt toward rehabilitation, instead of merely incarcerating for the duration? I think the figures argue that there's no serious effort made at all. I think there are pilot rehabilitation projects which show far better rates of recovery, which just aren't adopted generally.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
spot wrote: If you can manage that without reducing either the intelligence or the creativity of the person concerned then I'd vote for that. It involves the effective killing of an individual, but there's a compensating creation of a new individual at the same moment. I don't believe it can be done, but if you can do it then it's a rational way out of the problem for that class of criminal.
Actually, I was being sarcastic. That is not really a viable solution to my mind, so what does that leave us? The present system. Honestly, Spot, what is really left to us? We obviously can't let criminals, especially violent ones roam throughout our society. The death penalty for every offense is too extreme for our liking, (although, the South Koreans, who cane people for graffitti have virtually none of it in their cities) so all that's left is incarceration.
Have you looked up the rates for recidivism in child-molesters? They get tons of counseling and psychiatric help, yet it seems to make no difference. Their brains are just wired wrong and it can't be changed, short of torture, brainwashing, and reprogramming. As a society, we don't want to use methods like that.
Bear in mind that another society - the dreaded undemocratic Chinese, for example - might employ your technique. How would you argue against their doing that, if you've already implemented the process yourself as a solution?
That's the problem with totalitarianism, they take things that are meant for good and use them for evil, since the entire concept of a total-government controlling every aspect of a human being's life is evil, in itself.
Actually, I was being sarcastic. That is not really a viable solution to my mind, so what does that leave us? The present system. Honestly, Spot, what is really left to us? We obviously can't let criminals, especially violent ones roam throughout our society. The death penalty for every offense is too extreme for our liking, (although, the South Koreans, who cane people for graffitti have virtually none of it in their cities) so all that's left is incarceration.
Have you looked up the rates for recidivism in child-molesters? They get tons of counseling and psychiatric help, yet it seems to make no difference. Their brains are just wired wrong and it can't be changed, short of torture, brainwashing, and reprogramming. As a society, we don't want to use methods like that.
Bear in mind that another society - the dreaded undemocratic Chinese, for example - might employ your technique. How would you argue against their doing that, if you've already implemented the process yourself as a solution?
That's the problem with totalitarianism, they take things that are meant for good and use them for evil, since the entire concept of a total-government controlling every aspect of a human being's life is evil, in itself.
All the world's a stage and the men and women merely players...Shakespeare
Retribution
spot wrote: What gives you any confidence that the system described makes any serious, tested, efficacious attempt toward rehabilitation, instead of merely incarcerating for the duration?
The fact that I've seen those programs up close and I personally know many of the teachers, psychologists, and professionals that dedicate their lives to helping criminals.
Believe me, they try and try hard. They also get the support they need from the state.
The fact that I've seen those programs up close and I personally know many of the teachers, psychologists, and professionals that dedicate their lives to helping criminals.
Believe me, they try and try hard. They also get the support they need from the state.
All the world's a stage and the men and women merely players...Shakespeare
Retribution
Jives wrote: Actually, I was being sarcastic. That is not really a viable solution to my mind, so what does that leave us? The present system. Honestly, Spot, what is really left to us? We obviously can't let criminals, especially violent ones roam throughout our society. The death penalty for every offense is too extreme for our liking, (although, the South Koreans, who cane people for graffitti have virtually none of it in their cities) so all that's left is incarceration.Strangely, I wasn't being sarcastic at all in my response. It's by no means apparent why you should reject such an approach, so long as you trust the people who decide which criminals fall into the category you treat that way. That's why I asked who you'd trust, of course.
All that's left isn't *punitive* incarceration. It might involve incarceration, but it has to be effective at rehabilitation. Are you suggesting that no schemes exist which are better at reclaiming criminals than what's operated at the moment?
Jives wrote: Have you looked up the rates for recidivism in child-molesters? They get tons of counseling and psychiatric help, yet it seems to make no difference. Their brains are just wired wrong and it can't be changed, short of torture, brainwashing, and reprogramming. As a society, we don't want to use methods like that.The first report I came across shows what I expected, I could look for additional ones if you want me to.
Although the long-term recidivism rates for the child molesters were substantial, the recidivism rates for the nonsexual criminals were even higher, 61% versus 83.2%, respectively, for any reconviction. That nonsexual criminals have higher recidivism rates than child molesters runs contrary to the common assumption that child molesters are a particularly high risk group of offenders.Jives wrote: That's the problem with totalitarianism, they take things that are meant for good and use them for evil, since the entire concept of a total-government controlling every aspect of a human being's life is evil, in itself.It may be a problem with other forms of government too. It's not in the interests of shareholders, for a company which operates a correctional facility, to reduce recidivism rates unless they get paid on the basis of the rate they achieve. With no such bonus system, the more people they can suck back into their profit centers the more dividend they pay out.
All that's left isn't *punitive* incarceration. It might involve incarceration, but it has to be effective at rehabilitation. Are you suggesting that no schemes exist which are better at reclaiming criminals than what's operated at the moment?
Jives wrote: Have you looked up the rates for recidivism in child-molesters? They get tons of counseling and psychiatric help, yet it seems to make no difference. Their brains are just wired wrong and it can't be changed, short of torture, brainwashing, and reprogramming. As a society, we don't want to use methods like that.The first report I came across shows what I expected, I could look for additional ones if you want me to.
Although the long-term recidivism rates for the child molesters were substantial, the recidivism rates for the nonsexual criminals were even higher, 61% versus 83.2%, respectively, for any reconviction. That nonsexual criminals have higher recidivism rates than child molesters runs contrary to the common assumption that child molesters are a particularly high risk group of offenders.Jives wrote: That's the problem with totalitarianism, they take things that are meant for good and use them for evil, since the entire concept of a total-government controlling every aspect of a human being's life is evil, in itself.It may be a problem with other forms of government too. It's not in the interests of shareholders, for a company which operates a correctional facility, to reduce recidivism rates unless they get paid on the basis of the rate they achieve. With no such bonus system, the more people they can suck back into their profit centers the more dividend they pay out.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
Jives wrote: The fact that I've seen those programs up close and I personally know many of the teachers, psychologists, and professionals that dedicate their lives to helping criminals.
Believe me, they try and try hard. They also get the support they need from the state. ;)You don't feel, then, that they are damnably ineffective?
Believe me, they try and try hard. They also get the support they need from the state. ;)You don't feel, then, that they are damnably ineffective?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
Spot hunny Karla grew up a charmed life....
She was deemed the girl next door. Media has never indicated otherwise. Even her parents lead us to believe so.... but...karla aided in killing her younger sister, guess what, her parents still believe she is pure.
Who was was the wrong influence in her life I dunno maybe Paul Bernardo, I dunno, but it isn't always a society influence thing.
She was deemed the girl next door. Media has never indicated otherwise. Even her parents lead us to believe so.... but...karla aided in killing her younger sister, guess what, her parents still believe she is pure.
Who was was the wrong influence in her life I dunno maybe Paul Bernardo, I dunno, but it isn't always a society influence thing.
�You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough.�
• Mae West
• Mae West
Retribution
Far Rider wrote: I know I'm harsh today, but I'm tired of all the energy and time and money wasted people who make the common man work so much harder and pay more taxes, and have to practically board up our houses to protect our property and lives.All that is fine, Far Rider, so long as you can maintain reasonably that the individual is responsible for his acts and that he hasn't been criminalized as a result of his nurturing or of society's behaviour toward him.
I think I mentioned once, a while ago, to a response of utter silence, that one in eight of the total prison population of the world is a black American. Now, assuming there's no inherent flaw in being a black American that makes him more prone toward criminality, does that not suggest to you that his nurturing or society's behaviour toward him has had an effect tending toward criminalizing him? That the thing to change isn't the individual, it's his surroundings? That until you get his surroundings straight, it is perverse to apply the punitive measures that you recommend? Don't you have a moral duty to level the playing field before playing the game?
I would maintain that one can measure the health of any society by comparing their respective proportions of criminality. One can see how hard each society is trying to improve the lot of its citizens by the rate of reduction of their recidivism rates and consequent fall in prison population. Your recipe for social cohesion, for perceived justice, seems to work against the flow. It does demonstrate a great sense of true grit, though. It's a "Walk tall, walk straight and look the world right in the eye" formula for a society which has no interest in equity.
I think I mentioned once, a while ago, to a response of utter silence, that one in eight of the total prison population of the world is a black American. Now, assuming there's no inherent flaw in being a black American that makes him more prone toward criminality, does that not suggest to you that his nurturing or society's behaviour toward him has had an effect tending toward criminalizing him? That the thing to change isn't the individual, it's his surroundings? That until you get his surroundings straight, it is perverse to apply the punitive measures that you recommend? Don't you have a moral duty to level the playing field before playing the game?
I would maintain that one can measure the health of any society by comparing their respective proportions of criminality. One can see how hard each society is trying to improve the lot of its citizens by the rate of reduction of their recidivism rates and consequent fall in prison population. Your recipe for social cohesion, for perceived justice, seems to work against the flow. It does demonstrate a great sense of true grit, though. It's a "Walk tall, walk straight and look the world right in the eye" formula for a society which has no interest in equity.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
minks wrote: Who was was the wrong influence in her life I dunno maybe Paul Bernardo, I dunno, but it isn't always a society influence thing.You dunno, minks? You don't feel that being the beaten-up abused object of the affections of a multiple murderer might put you in an invidious position, vis a vis the law, at some point?
We have a woman who was in that position here, Maxine Carr, sentenced to some years for aiding and abetting (by providing an alibi) a multiple child murderer. And, I might add, persecuted thereafter by the police on all charges they could scrape up (and they went out looking with a fine tooth comb), the Prosecution service, and of course the gutter press. The press, in her case too, found a lousy photo of her and ran it so big, so hard and so often that she became a demonic byword to the world at large.
We have a woman who was in that position here, Maxine Carr, sentenced to some years for aiding and abetting (by providing an alibi) a multiple child murderer. And, I might add, persecuted thereafter by the police on all charges they could scrape up (and they went out looking with a fine tooth comb), the Prosecution service, and of course the gutter press. The press, in her case too, found a lousy photo of her and ran it so big, so hard and so often that she became a demonic byword to the world at large.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
I think you'd agree that what you describe is something the army does to people, not something that people do when they get into the army. I can look at your description and say that it shows there's no inherent flaw in being a black American. My alternative, that his nurturing or society's behaviour toward him has had an effect tending toward criminalizing him, still stands. The army provides an environment that gets people straight. The streets don't.
Prison emphatically doesn't. If it did, then the numbers wouldn't stack up the way they do. The numbers are an abomination. The numbers say that society has failed, not that the individuals who are locked up have failed. If it were the individuals, there would be no more jailed black Americans proportionately than there are white Americans. If it were the individuals regardless of race, there would be no more jailed Americans proportionately than are jailed in other countries. In both areas, the USA has a multiple-times excess, not just a few percent. What's failed is your system, not your citizens. I'm trying to address possible solutions to that failure in this thread. I'm trying to post not just my opinions but also my reasons for holding them. I'm not sure I've seen many reasons yet in what you've written.
Prison emphatically doesn't. If it did, then the numbers wouldn't stack up the way they do. The numbers are an abomination. The numbers say that society has failed, not that the individuals who are locked up have failed. If it were the individuals, there would be no more jailed black Americans proportionately than there are white Americans. If it were the individuals regardless of race, there would be no more jailed Americans proportionately than are jailed in other countries. In both areas, the USA has a multiple-times excess, not just a few percent. What's failed is your system, not your citizens. I'm trying to address possible solutions to that failure in this thread. I'm trying to post not just my opinions but also my reasons for holding them. I'm not sure I've seen many reasons yet in what you've written.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
There is a lot of good that could come out of this conversation.
My first thought after paragraph one of the OP was "society has paid" we lost a human being or someone lost their money or their car or whatever the crime was. Society is punished for it's criminals every day... hence the desire to remove them. But when the rest of the OP sinks in the value of discussion becomes evident.
Why do people commit crimes? Question number one.
I don't believe they are just "Evil" with a big E. That's a convenient excuse. I think they commit crime because they lack a sense of personal power and they are driven to try and take power in whatever way they chose. (We all know rape isn't about sex. Don't we? Let me assure you of that.)
Instilling a sense of self worth and balanced personal power is the key to rehabilitation. If it were easy we would have solved it by now.
But let's see if it can be agreed as to why crimes are committed before discussing an appropriate response. Perhaps a poll is required?
My first thought after paragraph one of the OP was "society has paid" we lost a human being or someone lost their money or their car or whatever the crime was. Society is punished for it's criminals every day... hence the desire to remove them. But when the rest of the OP sinks in the value of discussion becomes evident.
Why do people commit crimes? Question number one.
I don't believe they are just "Evil" with a big E. That's a convenient excuse. I think they commit crime because they lack a sense of personal power and they are driven to try and take power in whatever way they chose. (We all know rape isn't about sex. Don't we? Let me assure you of that.)
Instilling a sense of self worth and balanced personal power is the key to rehabilitation. If it were easy we would have solved it by now.
But let's see if it can be agreed as to why crimes are committed before discussing an appropriate response. Perhaps a poll is required?
Retribution
I note the parallel thread, which I'm not molesting, raises the question of why so many people participate in this level of demonizing or dehumanizing. I drop the following extract from George Orwell's "1984" in here, for reflection.
In its second minute the Hate rose to a frenzy. People were leaping up and down in their places and shouting at the tops of their voices in an effort to drown the maddening bleating voice that came from the screen. The little sandy-haired woman had turned bright pink, and her mouth was opening and shutting like that of a landed fish. Even O'Brien's heavy face was flushed. He was sitting very straight in his chair, his powerful chest swelling and quivering as though he were standing up to the assault of a wave. The dark-haired girl behind Winston had begun crying out 'Swine! Swine! Swine!' and suddenly she picked up a heavy Newspeak dictionary and flung it at the screen. It struck Goldstein's nose and bounced off; the voice continued inexorably.
In a lucid moment Winston found that he was shouting with the others and kicking his heel violently against the rung of his chair. The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but, on the contrary, that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge-hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.
In its second minute the Hate rose to a frenzy. People were leaping up and down in their places and shouting at the tops of their voices in an effort to drown the maddening bleating voice that came from the screen. The little sandy-haired woman had turned bright pink, and her mouth was opening and shutting like that of a landed fish. Even O'Brien's heavy face was flushed. He was sitting very straight in his chair, his powerful chest swelling and quivering as though he were standing up to the assault of a wave. The dark-haired girl behind Winston had begun crying out 'Swine! Swine! Swine!' and suddenly she picked up a heavy Newspeak dictionary and flung it at the screen. It struck Goldstein's nose and bounced off; the voice continued inexorably.
In a lucid moment Winston found that he was shouting with the others and kicking his heel violently against the rung of his chair. The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but, on the contrary, that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge-hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
Spot, I have heard all this so many times and I suppose some of the arguments have some weight, however a large number of crimes are aquisitive purely and simply for money. The money may be for drugs of whatever, I suspect it is rarely to feed the kids. Now the persons carrying out these crimes may well be socially unaware and may well live in deprived areas so what!
Shall we move evryone to this utopia where everyone has two parents a lovely cottage in the country and enough to eat. As has been said a lot of criminals make pefrectly rational (to Them ) decisions, I want something, can't be arsed to work for it, I'll steal it.
I know that some crime is a result of outside circumstances but by the same token that I can recognise that surely you can see that the reverse is true. Like most average size towns we have a well known criminal family in my area, onme of the boys has just been jailed and asked for 113 yes 113 offences to be taken into consideration. His recors wad published by the local press, he has had the benefit of every single type of counselling available including drug rehab treatment, what are the police to do ? just let this go on? At least he is now off the streets for a couple of years and whilst I understand you may say this will not help let me assure that nothing will help. he has made a choice to be a carreer criminla.
Shall we move evryone to this utopia where everyone has two parents a lovely cottage in the country and enough to eat. As has been said a lot of criminals make pefrectly rational (to Them ) decisions, I want something, can't be arsed to work for it, I'll steal it.
I know that some crime is a result of outside circumstances but by the same token that I can recognise that surely you can see that the reverse is true. Like most average size towns we have a well known criminal family in my area, onme of the boys has just been jailed and asked for 113 yes 113 offences to be taken into consideration. His recors wad published by the local press, he has had the benefit of every single type of counselling available including drug rehab treatment, what are the police to do ? just let this go on? At least he is now off the streets for a couple of years and whilst I understand you may say this will not help let me assure that nothing will help. he has made a choice to be a carreer criminla.
"I have done my duty. I thank God for it!"
Retribution
By all means then, Bothwell, keep him in prison and rehabilitate him. Don't let him out until his likelihood of reoffending is as low as the average member of society. I haven't hinted at any other course anywhere in this thread.
What I've argued is that the efforts toward rehabilitation are generally minimal, in prisons. Where they are not minimal, they are generally ineffective. Where they are effective, they should be adopted in a more widespread manner. The only way to make that a priority is to recognise that the function of prisons is to rehabilitate, not to punish or deter.
The specific case I made earlier, that the playing field needs to be levelled, is a statistical one that seems to have gone over people's heads. I assume as a given fact that no race has more or less of a tendency toward any criminal behaviour. If I observe a preponderance of one race in a nation's jails, it *cannot* be from an increased individual tendency toward criminality. It is a product of upbringing and environment, both of which can be addressed. I argue that they should be addressed as a national priority.
I don't in the least mind if the total jail population increases from its current base level. I'm not looking for utopian impossibilities. I'm sure you've misread something, but do please point out what's troubling you in what I write. If jail time is used creatively, and prison terms and performance targets are set on long term recidivism rates, any increase in population would be bound to be temporary and we'd all have a safer environment to live in. Look at the thread title. That's where the problems stem from.
What I've argued is that the efforts toward rehabilitation are generally minimal, in prisons. Where they are not minimal, they are generally ineffective. Where they are effective, they should be adopted in a more widespread manner. The only way to make that a priority is to recognise that the function of prisons is to rehabilitate, not to punish or deter.
The specific case I made earlier, that the playing field needs to be levelled, is a statistical one that seems to have gone over people's heads. I assume as a given fact that no race has more or less of a tendency toward any criminal behaviour. If I observe a preponderance of one race in a nation's jails, it *cannot* be from an increased individual tendency toward criminality. It is a product of upbringing and environment, both of which can be addressed. I argue that they should be addressed as a national priority.
I don't in the least mind if the total jail population increases from its current base level. I'm not looking for utopian impossibilities. I'm sure you've misread something, but do please point out what's troubling you in what I write. If jail time is used creatively, and prison terms and performance targets are set on long term recidivism rates, any increase in population would be bound to be temporary and we'd all have a safer environment to live in. Look at the thread title. That's where the problems stem from.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
Far Rider wrote: I'd like to raise another point here. Why is it that some of the same race and background, environment, etc. commit no crimes at all and some do?
If you can figure that out then you have a program to start working from.Two things spring to mind. You use the word "same" which has no possible meaning in the context you describe, and you seem, here as elsewhere, to have no understanding at all of normal statistical distributions.
If you can figure that out then you have a program to start working from.Two things spring to mind. You use the word "same" which has no possible meaning in the context you describe, and you seem, here as elsewhere, to have no understanding at all of normal statistical distributions.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
Far Rider wrote: Oh darn spot. let me rephrase it then... pardon my american education system... oh well maybe it's just me, but then it's easier to blame the system, isn't it.
My point is if you can figure out why people in similar backgrounds and circumstances have different outcomes then you could have a place to start your reformations.You don't feel that a demonstrable systemic injustice should be tackled head-on even before a practical theory of personal, individually distinctive causes leading to criminal behaviour has been shown to be valid and predictable? I'm not sure why you think the two areas are linked at all. I can already show the systemic injustice, and it affects a significant proportion of your fellow-citizens. Cure that and perhaps you can start to see the roots of the individual trees in the forest of criminality.
My point is if you can figure out why people in similar backgrounds and circumstances have different outcomes then you could have a place to start your reformations.You don't feel that a demonstrable systemic injustice should be tackled head-on even before a practical theory of personal, individually distinctive causes leading to criminal behaviour has been shown to be valid and predictable? I'm not sure why you think the two areas are linked at all. I can already show the systemic injustice, and it affects a significant proportion of your fellow-citizens. Cure that and perhaps you can start to see the roots of the individual trees in the forest of criminality.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
Far Rider wrote: Did you ever think that maybe its just that fewer of the other races commit crimes? Or maybe the other races are better at getting aquitted of their crimes?Damn right they are. That's a fair summary of that part of the problem we've been chewing over.
You seem to have trouble accepting that injustices can target specific groups in society. The problems that come from a police system which systemically behaves that way have been a weeping sore in the side of Bristish justice for as long as I have been alive. I see no reason why yours should be viewed in a less harsh light. Let me extend the theme of "Retribution" to "Retribution and Expedient Justice" for a while, since you raised the question.
Let me give you a few examples of the downtrodden Irish, with the absolute guarantee with hindsight that all of those in this post who were found guilty were totally innocent of the crimes of which they were accused. No weasel words about "not guilty" not meaning "innocent", these were people set up by a knowing police force to take the gutter-press pressure off the judicial system to secure prosecutions and convictions.
Before being cleared of pub bombings in 1991, the defendants who became known as the Birmingham Six spent 16 years in prison. There is no doubt that in the three days between the suspects being remanded and their second appearance in court, all six were beaten. As Lord Denning put it in a subsequent judgment, "their faces were black and blue". Nobody was ever held to account for this. Once the confessions were put to the court, all six were found guilty of 21 murders, sentenced to life since the death penalty had been abolished, and the police had done what had been asked of them. Case closed.
Lord Denning's pronouncement on the Birmingham Six put the character of the British judiciary in a nutshell. Blocking their attempt to get a court hearing of their case against the police who extracted "confessions" from them, Denning stated: "If the six men win, it will mean that the police were guilty of perjury, and that they were guilty of violence and threats, that the confessions were involuntary and were improperly admitted in evidence, and that the convictions were erroneous. That would mean the Home Secretary would either have to recommend they be pardoned or he would have to remit the case to the Court of Appeal. This is such an appalling vista that every sensible person in the land would say: 'It cannot be right that these actions should go any further.' "
Despite his views, the Six eventually had their convictions overturned. When he was finally told that the Birmingham Six were innocent, Lord Denning replied that it was better for innocent people to languish in prison than for the British legal system to be ridiculed. And this is the Judge I most admire of the last fifty years, bear in mind. He was a great man in many ways, but he was uniformly blind to the abuses of the police.
A subsequent case of an IRA bombing in Guildford followed a practically identical track of cover-up and beaten confessions which were considered sufficient evidence for conviction. So did the fitted-up case of the Maguire family. It was the media-fanned public thirst for vengeance following the Guildford and Birmingham pub bombings that led to innocent people being incarcerated. What these acts of injustice needed in order to be possible at all were a gutter press, a screaming vigilante mood among the public, a weak and ineffective police force that bent under pressure, and a court system convinced of the probity of the law in all its manifestations. You need at least one of those to be cleaned up before you have an honest justice system that works impartially.
Lord Denning went to the grave thinking the system he had worked in had been worth the abuses. He said that if the death penalty had been in force when the Guildford Four were convicted, "they'd have probably hanged the right men", and that if the Birmingham Six had been hanged, "we shouldn't have all these campaigns to get them released". He blamed the victims, which is about the lowest thing you can do when it was your own that made the mess in the first place: "The Irish people, with the Birmingham Six case, and the Guildford Four, have had a campaign against British justice, it is part of an IRA campaign.", he ended up with. Anyone's fault but the system's. Once you start down that road, it's so hard to admit your error and put it right.
You seem to have trouble accepting that injustices can target specific groups in society. The problems that come from a police system which systemically behaves that way have been a weeping sore in the side of Bristish justice for as long as I have been alive. I see no reason why yours should be viewed in a less harsh light. Let me extend the theme of "Retribution" to "Retribution and Expedient Justice" for a while, since you raised the question.
Let me give you a few examples of the downtrodden Irish, with the absolute guarantee with hindsight that all of those in this post who were found guilty were totally innocent of the crimes of which they were accused. No weasel words about "not guilty" not meaning "innocent", these were people set up by a knowing police force to take the gutter-press pressure off the judicial system to secure prosecutions and convictions.
Before being cleared of pub bombings in 1991, the defendants who became known as the Birmingham Six spent 16 years in prison. There is no doubt that in the three days between the suspects being remanded and their second appearance in court, all six were beaten. As Lord Denning put it in a subsequent judgment, "their faces were black and blue". Nobody was ever held to account for this. Once the confessions were put to the court, all six were found guilty of 21 murders, sentenced to life since the death penalty had been abolished, and the police had done what had been asked of them. Case closed.
Lord Denning's pronouncement on the Birmingham Six put the character of the British judiciary in a nutshell. Blocking their attempt to get a court hearing of their case against the police who extracted "confessions" from them, Denning stated: "If the six men win, it will mean that the police were guilty of perjury, and that they were guilty of violence and threats, that the confessions were involuntary and were improperly admitted in evidence, and that the convictions were erroneous. That would mean the Home Secretary would either have to recommend they be pardoned or he would have to remit the case to the Court of Appeal. This is such an appalling vista that every sensible person in the land would say: 'It cannot be right that these actions should go any further.' "
Despite his views, the Six eventually had their convictions overturned. When he was finally told that the Birmingham Six were innocent, Lord Denning replied that it was better for innocent people to languish in prison than for the British legal system to be ridiculed. And this is the Judge I most admire of the last fifty years, bear in mind. He was a great man in many ways, but he was uniformly blind to the abuses of the police.
A subsequent case of an IRA bombing in Guildford followed a practically identical track of cover-up and beaten confessions which were considered sufficient evidence for conviction. So did the fitted-up case of the Maguire family. It was the media-fanned public thirst for vengeance following the Guildford and Birmingham pub bombings that led to innocent people being incarcerated. What these acts of injustice needed in order to be possible at all were a gutter press, a screaming vigilante mood among the public, a weak and ineffective police force that bent under pressure, and a court system convinced of the probity of the law in all its manifestations. You need at least one of those to be cleaned up before you have an honest justice system that works impartially.
Lord Denning went to the grave thinking the system he had worked in had been worth the abuses. He said that if the death penalty had been in force when the Guildford Four were convicted, "they'd have probably hanged the right men", and that if the Birmingham Six had been hanged, "we shouldn't have all these campaigns to get them released". He blamed the victims, which is about the lowest thing you can do when it was your own that made the mess in the first place: "The Irish people, with the Birmingham Six case, and the Guildford Four, have had a campaign against British justice, it is part of an IRA campaign.", he ended up with. Anyone's fault but the system's. Once you start down that road, it's so hard to admit your error and put it right.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
Far Rider wrote: When I have time to read this over and over I'll try to answer you.That's good. I'm wondering whether it will wake the Captain up, at the moment.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
Far Rider wrote: Gosh Spot, can you make them words smaller for guys like me?
My statement was that you cannot level the playing field. Its impossible because all of us have a diffirent idea of what that field should look like. And that personal responsibility is paramount. If you screw up its on your head. That may sound barbaric to some, but that is called justice to me.
If I happen to be black in Birmingham Alabama, or Roseville California and never commit a crime, what did I do right??? I didnt give in to doing wrong. Many people dont give in and live in all the same areas. Im interested in why some do and some don't.
I'll tell you what spot, I'll go look your stats over again, try to scrutinize them some more, see if Im missing something. And in all fairness I'm sure I am, but my points were to move to individual responsibility for ones actions, regardless of race or socioecomomic position.You're quite right, where some do stay clear of crime and some don't there's an interesting story to uncover. I don't know what the underlying reasons are either. I agree that if anyone untangles it into a set of testably correct notions it will be a very important moment.
Those who have a sense of individual responsibility deserve respect. Those who haven't deserve treatment. If you feel that retribution is appropriate, then we differ. If you feel that deterence works, I think the figures show otherwise. If either of us comes up with a URL to a good rehabilitation program, then perhaps we'd agree it should be implemented more widely. I don't care at all whether it involves jail time or not, so long as it's effective. I started out saying that jail time at the moment isn't reducing the tendency toward criminal behaviour, I still think that's a fair description. If it doesn't work, why do it? If you can get it to work, do it more often.
My statement was that you cannot level the playing field. Its impossible because all of us have a diffirent idea of what that field should look like. And that personal responsibility is paramount. If you screw up its on your head. That may sound barbaric to some, but that is called justice to me.
If I happen to be black in Birmingham Alabama, or Roseville California and never commit a crime, what did I do right??? I didnt give in to doing wrong. Many people dont give in and live in all the same areas. Im interested in why some do and some don't.
I'll tell you what spot, I'll go look your stats over again, try to scrutinize them some more, see if Im missing something. And in all fairness I'm sure I am, but my points were to move to individual responsibility for ones actions, regardless of race or socioecomomic position.You're quite right, where some do stay clear of crime and some don't there's an interesting story to uncover. I don't know what the underlying reasons are either. I agree that if anyone untangles it into a set of testably correct notions it will be a very important moment.
Those who have a sense of individual responsibility deserve respect. Those who haven't deserve treatment. If you feel that retribution is appropriate, then we differ. If you feel that deterence works, I think the figures show otherwise. If either of us comes up with a URL to a good rehabilitation program, then perhaps we'd agree it should be implemented more widely. I don't care at all whether it involves jail time or not, so long as it's effective. I started out saying that jail time at the moment isn't reducing the tendency toward criminal behaviour, I still think that's a fair description. If it doesn't work, why do it? If you can get it to work, do it more often.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
I believe the key is loss of personal power. An empowered individual does not tend to break laws. Why wait until after the fact, even? Why don't schools have classes for developing self esteem? In elementary school. Obviously the world is not full of capable parents so let us not ask for the impossible. Let's make it part of the school system. Corrective learning and behaviour classes designed and maybe even taught by psychologists?
It should be a class compulsory to pass before graduating to secondary school and to the age where crimes begin to be commited. People scoffed at Homolka being given self actualization therapy in prison. This laughter is what blocks progress. This is the 21st century. It is not a joke to seek psychotherapy. Everyone can benefit from it. It should be an educational right.
It should be a class compulsory to pass before graduating to secondary school and to the age where crimes begin to be commited. People scoffed at Homolka being given self actualization therapy in prison. This laughter is what blocks progress. This is the 21st century. It is not a joke to seek psychotherapy. Everyone can benefit from it. It should be an educational right.
Retribution
no offense need be taken, Far Rider. You prove my point. The continuing fear of psychiatry is what I've already mentioned. It is obvious that our current societies (all over the world) are filled with self loathing and troubled people. How can we then condemn them when the tools they need cost, on average, $100/ clinical hr. (45min)?
BTW, speaking of fear of doctors, who's condemning the physicians that deal out pills like candy with hasty misdiagnosis resulting in deaths and debilitating illnesses in previously healthy people? This happens far more often than the psychokiller. I trust psychotherapists a hell of a lot more with my child than I trust physicians.
BTW, speaking of fear of doctors, who's condemning the physicians that deal out pills like candy with hasty misdiagnosis resulting in deaths and debilitating illnesses in previously healthy people? This happens far more often than the psychokiller. I trust psychotherapists a hell of a lot more with my child than I trust physicians.
-
capt_buzzard
- Posts: 5557
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 12:00 pm
Retribution
spot wrote: That's good. I'm wondering whether it will wake the Captain up, at the moment.Oh I've being reading with interest here. I have not gone away you know:)
Retribution
Far Rider wrote: I dont fear phsychologists or pshychiatrists, I think they are stupid. I think they know far less about the human pshychi than the average person.That is, if I may say so, an astonishing couple of sentences. I can see the potential for saying they are misguided, perhaps, or that their paradigm for mental processes leads to error, but stupid? less informed than the average person? That exposes so much more about your assumptions than about their abilities, Far Rider.
Far Rider wrote: I still blame lack of good parenting, I might add rejection of religion as well.
When was the last time you went to church?You don't see that as grossly personal and insulting? Questions like that belong in the seventeenth century, with the Salem persecutions. "God requireth not an uniformity of Religion to be inacted and inforced in any civill state…true civility and Christianity may both flourish in a state or Kingdome, notwithstanding the permission of divers and contrary consciences, either of Jew or Gentile" - a quote, I believe, from the Founder of Rhode Island, fleeing persecution from religious conformity.
Does your world-view seriously only include Christianity? What does going to church, or not going to church, have to do with accepting or rejecting religion? Just how provincial and narrow-minded is it possible to get?
Far Rider wrote: I still blame lack of good parenting, I might add rejection of religion as well.
When was the last time you went to church?You don't see that as grossly personal and insulting? Questions like that belong in the seventeenth century, with the Salem persecutions. "God requireth not an uniformity of Religion to be inacted and inforced in any civill state…true civility and Christianity may both flourish in a state or Kingdome, notwithstanding the permission of divers and contrary consciences, either of Jew or Gentile" - a quote, I believe, from the Founder of Rhode Island, fleeing persecution from religious conformity.
Does your world-view seriously only include Christianity? What does going to church, or not going to church, have to do with accepting or rejecting religion? Just how provincial and narrow-minded is it possible to get?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
capt_buzzard
- Posts: 5557
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 12:00 pm
Retribution
spot wrote: Damn right they are. That's a fair summary of that part of the problem we've been chewing over.
You seem to have trouble accepting that injustices can target specific groups in society. The problems that come from a police system which systemically behaves that way have been a weeping sore in the side of Bristish justice for as long as I have been alive. I see no reason why yours should be viewed in a less harsh light. Let me extend the theme of "Retribution" to "Retribution and Expedient Justice" for a while, since you raised the question.
Let me give you a few examples of the downtrodden Irish, with the absolute guarantee with hindsight that all of those in this post who were found guilty were totally innocent of the crimes of which they were accused. No weasel words about "not guilty" not meaning "innocent", these were people set up by a knowing police force to take the gutter-press pressure off the judicial system to secure prosecutions and convictions.
Before being cleared of pub bombings in 1991, the defendants who became known as the Birmingham Six spent 16 years in prison. There is no doubt that in the three days between the suspects being remanded and their second appearance in court, all six were beaten. As Lord Denning put it in a subsequent judgment, "their faces were black and blue". Nobody was ever held to account for this. Once the confessions were put to the court, all six were found guilty of 21 murders, sentenced to life since the death penalty had been abolished, and the police had done what had been asked of them. Case closed.
Lord Denning's pronouncement on the Birmingham Six put the character of the British judiciary in a nutshell. Blocking their attempt to get a court hearing of their case against the police who extracted "confessions" from them, Denning stated: "If the six men win, it will mean that the police were guilty of perjury, and that they were guilty of violence and threats, that the confessions were involuntary and were improperly admitted in evidence, and that the convictions were erroneous. That would mean the Home Secretary would either have to recommend they be pardoned or he would have to remit the case to the Court of Appeal. This is such an appalling vista that every sensible person in the land would say: 'It cannot be right that these actions should go any further.' "
Despite his views, the Six eventually had their convictions overturned. When he was finally told that the Birmingham Six were innocent, Lord Denning replied that it was better for innocent people to languish in prison than for the British legal system to be ridiculed. And this is the Judge I most admire of the last fifty years, bear in mind. He was a great man in many ways, but he was uniformly blind to the abuses of the police.
A subsequent case of an IRA bombing in Guildford followed a practically identical track of cover-up and beaten confessions which were considered sufficient evidence for conviction. So did the fitted-up case of the Maguire family. It was the media-fanned public thirst for vengeance following the Guildford and Birmingham pub bombings that led to innocent people being incarcerated. What these acts of injustice needed in order to be possible at all were a gutter press, a screaming vigilante mood among the public, a weak and ineffective police force that bent under pressure, and a court system convinced of the probity of the law in all its manifestations. You need at least one of those to be cleaned up before you have an honest justice system that works impartially.
Lord Denning went to the grave thinking the system he had worked in had been worth the abuses. He said that if the death penalty had been in force when the Guildford Four were convicted, "they'd have probably hanged the right men", and that if the Birmingham Six had been hanged, "we shouldn't have all these campaigns to get them released". He blamed the victims, which is about the lowest thing you can do when it was your own that made the mess in the first place: "The Irish people, with the Birmingham Six case, and the Guildford Four, have had a campaign against British justice, it is part of an IRA campaign.", he ended up with. Anyone's fault but the system's. Once you start down that road, it's so hard to admit your error and put it right.I'm just waiting for the British govenment to release the files on the murderers of Irish people of Dublin & Monaghan. They,the British have always expected the Irish government to cough up on certain members of illegal organizations in Southern Ireland. But when we have asked the same of them, its silence.www.dublinmonaghanbombings.org/
You seem to have trouble accepting that injustices can target specific groups in society. The problems that come from a police system which systemically behaves that way have been a weeping sore in the side of Bristish justice for as long as I have been alive. I see no reason why yours should be viewed in a less harsh light. Let me extend the theme of "Retribution" to "Retribution and Expedient Justice" for a while, since you raised the question.
Let me give you a few examples of the downtrodden Irish, with the absolute guarantee with hindsight that all of those in this post who were found guilty were totally innocent of the crimes of which they were accused. No weasel words about "not guilty" not meaning "innocent", these were people set up by a knowing police force to take the gutter-press pressure off the judicial system to secure prosecutions and convictions.
Before being cleared of pub bombings in 1991, the defendants who became known as the Birmingham Six spent 16 years in prison. There is no doubt that in the three days between the suspects being remanded and their second appearance in court, all six were beaten. As Lord Denning put it in a subsequent judgment, "their faces were black and blue". Nobody was ever held to account for this. Once the confessions were put to the court, all six were found guilty of 21 murders, sentenced to life since the death penalty had been abolished, and the police had done what had been asked of them. Case closed.
Lord Denning's pronouncement on the Birmingham Six put the character of the British judiciary in a nutshell. Blocking their attempt to get a court hearing of their case against the police who extracted "confessions" from them, Denning stated: "If the six men win, it will mean that the police were guilty of perjury, and that they were guilty of violence and threats, that the confessions were involuntary and were improperly admitted in evidence, and that the convictions were erroneous. That would mean the Home Secretary would either have to recommend they be pardoned or he would have to remit the case to the Court of Appeal. This is such an appalling vista that every sensible person in the land would say: 'It cannot be right that these actions should go any further.' "
Despite his views, the Six eventually had their convictions overturned. When he was finally told that the Birmingham Six were innocent, Lord Denning replied that it was better for innocent people to languish in prison than for the British legal system to be ridiculed. And this is the Judge I most admire of the last fifty years, bear in mind. He was a great man in many ways, but he was uniformly blind to the abuses of the police.
A subsequent case of an IRA bombing in Guildford followed a practically identical track of cover-up and beaten confessions which were considered sufficient evidence for conviction. So did the fitted-up case of the Maguire family. It was the media-fanned public thirst for vengeance following the Guildford and Birmingham pub bombings that led to innocent people being incarcerated. What these acts of injustice needed in order to be possible at all were a gutter press, a screaming vigilante mood among the public, a weak and ineffective police force that bent under pressure, and a court system convinced of the probity of the law in all its manifestations. You need at least one of those to be cleaned up before you have an honest justice system that works impartially.
Lord Denning went to the grave thinking the system he had worked in had been worth the abuses. He said that if the death penalty had been in force when the Guildford Four were convicted, "they'd have probably hanged the right men", and that if the Birmingham Six had been hanged, "we shouldn't have all these campaigns to get them released". He blamed the victims, which is about the lowest thing you can do when it was your own that made the mess in the first place: "The Irish people, with the Birmingham Six case, and the Guildford Four, have had a campaign against British justice, it is part of an IRA campaign.", he ended up with. Anyone's fault but the system's. Once you start down that road, it's so hard to admit your error and put it right.I'm just waiting for the British govenment to release the files on the murderers of Irish people of Dublin & Monaghan. They,the British have always expected the Irish government to cough up on certain members of illegal organizations in Southern Ireland. But when we have asked the same of them, its silence.www.dublinmonaghanbombings.org/
Retribution
Far Rider wrote: I have spent a considerable amount of my lifetime fighting, Im tired of it.It seems to be an American trait, if you'll pardon the observation.
As for "I'll not jump on your threads or bring up points just cause I know you'll not like it", I'm quite sure you realize that I'd be delighted every time you did. I think, perhaps, that you mean something else.
"As far as that question being as barbaric as you mentioned above, thats just crazy" would indeed have been crazy, had I said it. I most certainly did not mention "barbaric". The only use of the word in this thread, to date, has been yours, twice.
I'm sure we'll exchange many polite posts in future.
As for "I'll not jump on your threads or bring up points just cause I know you'll not like it", I'm quite sure you realize that I'd be delighted every time you did. I think, perhaps, that you mean something else.
"As far as that question being as barbaric as you mentioned above, thats just crazy" would indeed have been crazy, had I said it. I most certainly did not mention "barbaric". The only use of the word in this thread, to date, has been yours, twice.
I'm sure we'll exchange many polite posts in future.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
There is nothing more gracious than an American gentleman shaking hands. It's a pleasure to speak with you, Far Rider. I don't think we have any outstanding problems.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Retribution
That all being said and done,
wheee.
I was looking into the case of Kelly Ellard, another female killer from Victoria, BC. She was 15 at the time and the leader of the gang that swarmed and killed Reena Virk. Sociological studies examining the trend of youth violence and bullying (this is where it starts, folks) shows that these bully societies are established in mirror fashion to the authority structures that these kids see around them. Feeling powerless in the adult world they construct their own societies ruled by the strong, the beautiful and the wealthy who get to lead the pack and set the rules.
The "punishment" for Reena Virk breaking the rules of the group was death. So do we confirm this by killing the criminal? They are learning this behaviour from us. Ellard truly thought that Virk deserved to die. Not because Ellard was born Evil. Because that is the conclusion she and the other kids of the school reached based on observation.
Sheesh. What a dumb bunch of psychologists came to that conclusion? (sarcasm)
wheee.
I was looking into the case of Kelly Ellard, another female killer from Victoria, BC. She was 15 at the time and the leader of the gang that swarmed and killed Reena Virk. Sociological studies examining the trend of youth violence and bullying (this is where it starts, folks) shows that these bully societies are established in mirror fashion to the authority structures that these kids see around them. Feeling powerless in the adult world they construct their own societies ruled by the strong, the beautiful and the wealthy who get to lead the pack and set the rules.
The "punishment" for Reena Virk breaking the rules of the group was death. So do we confirm this by killing the criminal? They are learning this behaviour from us. Ellard truly thought that Virk deserved to die. Not because Ellard was born Evil. Because that is the conclusion she and the other kids of the school reached based on observation.
Sheesh. What a dumb bunch of psychologists came to that conclusion? (sarcasm)
-
capt_buzzard
- Posts: 5557
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 12:00 pm
Retribution
Far Rider wrote: Well no offense Koan but you can keep those pshycologists as far from my children as possible. No Dr Spock for me. My experience is that they shift the blame and never teach a child/adult to take responsibility for their own actions. The world is now filled with their absurd ideas.
No thank you.Agree with you on this one Far Rider
No thank you.Agree with you on this one Far Rider
Retribution
serial killers notes from a death row convict
The death penalty doesn't appear to communicate even the barest trace of deterrence to the consciousness of serial murders. Government sanctioned executions actually seem to make them feel their impulse to kill is perfectly normal and acceptable.
from a study the link of which I will have to resource.
I received the following piece of feedback on the site from someone calling himself “Griffâ€:
"Mr. Murray, your article is both unfairly inaccurate and hopelessly sophomoric. Your wobbly-liberal notion of the functioning of the prisons bears no resemblance to the reality in the state of Arizona system in which I recently served as a Correctional Officer. You are further not accurately portraying the federal system or the military.
Moving on, since when does the system, whatever that is, have a "duty" to rehabilitate? The terms rehabilitation and corrections are widely recognized as nothing but euphemisms believed in by no one with any sense. The value of the prisons is that they keep bad people locked away from the good people. Let them out and, surprise, they are still bad people. Those who want to change do so. Most never will. My primary job as a correctional officer was to keep their hands from around your throat and the throats of your and my loved ones. There are plenty of things that need doing. Wasting time bleeding your heart over bad apples doesn't make the cut."
Apart from the vituperation in the first paragraph (some of which I found especially odd as I had not even mentioned the US military), I thought this a useful contribution to the debate, because it succinctly sets out the dominant theory of American conservatives towards rehabilitation: that “nothing works.â€
this is the beginning. I thought it best by quoting back the passionate arguments for the 'kill them all' mentality to show it is nothing new and that greater minds than mine have fought the same battle. Are fighting.
If it ain't broke don't fix it. Newsflash. It's broke. It ain't working. The current system has failed and it is time to analyse why. Killing more people has not got the statistical support to back it as a solution and keeping them in jail forever does not have the financial support. Let's deal with it folks. At least I am trying.
The death penalty doesn't appear to communicate even the barest trace of deterrence to the consciousness of serial murders. Government sanctioned executions actually seem to make them feel their impulse to kill is perfectly normal and acceptable.
from a study the link of which I will have to resource.
I received the following piece of feedback on the site from someone calling himself “Griffâ€:
"Mr. Murray, your article is both unfairly inaccurate and hopelessly sophomoric. Your wobbly-liberal notion of the functioning of the prisons bears no resemblance to the reality in the state of Arizona system in which I recently served as a Correctional Officer. You are further not accurately portraying the federal system or the military.
Moving on, since when does the system, whatever that is, have a "duty" to rehabilitate? The terms rehabilitation and corrections are widely recognized as nothing but euphemisms believed in by no one with any sense. The value of the prisons is that they keep bad people locked away from the good people. Let them out and, surprise, they are still bad people. Those who want to change do so. Most never will. My primary job as a correctional officer was to keep their hands from around your throat and the throats of your and my loved ones. There are plenty of things that need doing. Wasting time bleeding your heart over bad apples doesn't make the cut."
Apart from the vituperation in the first paragraph (some of which I found especially odd as I had not even mentioned the US military), I thought this a useful contribution to the debate, because it succinctly sets out the dominant theory of American conservatives towards rehabilitation: that “nothing works.â€
this is the beginning. I thought it best by quoting back the passionate arguments for the 'kill them all' mentality to show it is nothing new and that greater minds than mine have fought the same battle. Are fighting.
If it ain't broke don't fix it. Newsflash. It's broke. It ain't working. The current system has failed and it is time to analyse why. Killing more people has not got the statistical support to back it as a solution and keeping them in jail forever does not have the financial support. Let's deal with it folks. At least I am trying.
Retribution
Brief History of US Prison Psychology Studies:
“Nothing works†was the soundbite summary of a 1974 essay by flamboyant New York sociologist Robert Martinson that appeared in the conservative periodical The Public Interest.
...
The idea that rehabilitation was unlikely to succeed potentially spelled the end for this practice , much to the delight of civil libertarians. Prisons had proven useless. Martinson himself wrote, “The long history of ‘prison reform’ is over. On the whole the prisons have played out their allotted role. They cannot be reformed and must be gradually torn down.â€
...
Conservatives in general, however, were even more motivated by the findings than the liberals. The early seventies were a time during which crime had exploded, with the murder rate doubling in the ten years from 1963 to 1973. This was the beginning of an era in which being ‘soft on crime’ was one of the worst insults a conservative could throw at an opponent.
...
The trouble was that the studies Martinson and his colleagues had examined had been hampered by primitive methodology. As more sophisticated, computer-based analysis began to become available, it became apparent that some programs had been effective.
Martinson himself realized this. In an article for Hofstra Law Review in 1979, he wrote that “startling results are found again and again in our study, for treatment programs as diverse as individual psychotherapy, group counseling, intensive supervision and …individual ... aid, advice, counseling.†As a result of these conclusions, he withdrew the contention that “nothing worksâ€.
It was too late to make a difference, however. A year later, Martinson threw himself out of a Manhattan apartment window while his teenaged son watched. In his absence, the prevailing attitude towards rehabilitation grew more and more disdainful.
Are you still with me?
“Nothing works†was the soundbite summary of a 1974 essay by flamboyant New York sociologist Robert Martinson that appeared in the conservative periodical The Public Interest.
...
The idea that rehabilitation was unlikely to succeed potentially spelled the end for this practice , much to the delight of civil libertarians. Prisons had proven useless. Martinson himself wrote, “The long history of ‘prison reform’ is over. On the whole the prisons have played out their allotted role. They cannot be reformed and must be gradually torn down.â€
...
Conservatives in general, however, were even more motivated by the findings than the liberals. The early seventies were a time during which crime had exploded, with the murder rate doubling in the ten years from 1963 to 1973. This was the beginning of an era in which being ‘soft on crime’ was one of the worst insults a conservative could throw at an opponent.
...
The trouble was that the studies Martinson and his colleagues had examined had been hampered by primitive methodology. As more sophisticated, computer-based analysis began to become available, it became apparent that some programs had been effective.
Martinson himself realized this. In an article for Hofstra Law Review in 1979, he wrote that “startling results are found again and again in our study, for treatment programs as diverse as individual psychotherapy, group counseling, intensive supervision and …individual ... aid, advice, counseling.†As a result of these conclusions, he withdrew the contention that “nothing worksâ€.
It was too late to make a difference, however. A year later, Martinson threw himself out of a Manhattan apartment window while his teenaged son watched. In his absence, the prevailing attitude towards rehabilitation grew more and more disdainful.
Are you still with me?
Retribution
A United States District Judge wrote of this era, “Public and political opinion were shaped by sentiments castigating the rehabilitative model. A perceived large crime wave and fear of criminals enhanced this revulsion towards any form of leniency. This shift occurred simultaneously with a change in modern prison conditions and new laws limiting the role prisoner rehabilitation could play in sentencing decisionsâ€.
This is still the prevailing attitude amongst conservatives in the United States.
But remember the founder of this sentiment? He realized his mistake. It just didn't get publicized as well.
This is still the prevailing attitude amongst conservatives in the United States.
But remember the founder of this sentiment? He realized his mistake. It just didn't get publicized as well.
Retribution
http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/Rehab.pdf that is the source of the article I am reading. Be brave. Check it out.