Crime and punishment

Draco_Argentum · Post by **Draco_Argentum** » Fri May 16, 2008 9:02 am

angelfromanotherpin wrote:If someone really needs to be separated from the population, I recommend banishment.

To where?

Sentencing length: The only sane setup is for sentences to be long enough that the criminal is rehabilitated and won't re offend with a confidence level of whatever %.

PL wrote:But anyway if you want to go with "OK if its 90% chance of committing said crime we lock up the lot including the 10% innocents" then fine. But if so I want to start seeing some of you arguing from that position putting your hands up to be part of the 10% innocents locked up for life on behalf of society.

Meh, its already there. There are innocents going to jail right now. You're a member of society so presumably this risk doesn't bother you a lot.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Fri May 16, 2008 9:33 am

Justice is an impossible to achieve goal. Once someone has tortured two people to death there is literally nothing that you can do to them which will be equal to the magnitude of their crime. Sure, you can indulge some sick fantasies and do horrible things to them, but the fact is that each person only has one life and the maximum fine truly is "all" of their possessions and the forfeit of their person. No matter how horrendous the penalties you inflict on someone, you have to come to terms with the fact that nothing society can do to one person can compare with the total damage that one person can do to society. It's a losing game.

But it's also a pointless game. Causing suffering now to anyone, no matter how much you believe them deserving, does nothing whatever to alleviate suffering already caused in the past. Until and unless we develop time travel we have to wrap our minds around the fact that there is in fact no amount of punishment which will in any way lessen the burden caused by crimes already committed. And thus we have to ask ourselves what precisely these punishments are for.

And the only answer that makes sense is that we punish people to send a message to people in the future that committing crime is not OK. But we know that no matter how high we set punishments, crime will still occur. Some people don't believe that they will get caught. Some people feel that they would rather kill and die than live and let live. Other people don't really think about consequences at all and act purely impulsively. And once you run into that barrier it no longer matters how high you set the reprisals because no one still committing crime is even listening any more.

Indeed, once reprisals are set high enough, people become cavalier about committing future crime. Once they've hit the wall where the penalties for the crimes they've already done become unimaginable, there is no longer any incentive for people to not commit crime of any sort.

Punishments should be real. Punishments should be defined and publicized. But punishments of today are far too harsh to actually accomplish anything. There comes a time when prison sentences no longer make society safer and start making society less safe. We passed that point a long time ago.

-Username17

shirak · Post by **shirak** » Fri May 16, 2008 10:19 am

While I generally agree with angelfromanotherpin, I'd suggest a different approach to people we can't live with: Boot Camp. Seriously, about the only place where society can use the fact that someone is OK with killing is in the army. And the brainwashing involved in serious army training will probably help with impulse control and the many other psychological problems that lead people to do murder. There'd have to be studies of course. For Science.

angelfromanotherpin · Post by **angelfromanotherpin** » Fri May 16, 2008 4:41 pm

SphereOfFeetMan, when I say caning, I mean it to include any short-term painful and possibly humiliating punishment. Pain and humiliation form strong associations in the human brain, which would probably be a good deterring force. I don't know how effective it would actually be, I'm just raising it as a possibility.

Draco_Argentum, the U.S. has plenty of options for both internal and external banishment. Maybe set up a penal island farming colony. Again, just I wanted to look at an alternative.

It is unfortunate that true rehabilitation and the desire for punishment run counter to each other. Most people commit crimes because they're poor and desperate. Nine times out of ten, the best way to keep that guy from re-offending is to give him housing and job training. But in what's known as the gesellschaft society, not enough of the population care about that person as a person to support the consequences of crime being free rent and school. Instead we isolate that person with criminals for years, ensuring both alienation and criminal contacts when they're released.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Fri May 16, 2008 5:07 pm

angelfromanotherpin wrote:caning

Where do I sign up?

Maybe set up a penal island

Good idea. Send all the rejects to some barren island in the middle of nowhere. Come back in a hundred years to see what they say. I imagine it'll be "G'day, mate."

CatharzGodfoot · Post by **CatharzGodfoot** » Fri May 16, 2008 5:09 pm

angelfromanotherpin wrote:SphereOfFeetMan, when I say caning, I mean it to include any short-term painful and possibly humiliating punishment. Pain and humiliation form strong associations in the human brain, which would probably be a good deterring force. I don't know how effective it would actually be, I'm just raising it as a possibility.

Corporal punishment can have interesting effects..

angelfromanotherpin wrote:It is unfortunate that true rehabilitation and the desire for punishment run counter to each other. Most people commit crimes because they're poor and desperate. Nine times out of ten, the best way to keep that guy from re-offending is to give him housing and job training. But in what's known as the gesellschaft society, not enough of the population care about that person as a person to support the consequences of crime being free rent and school. Instead we isolate that person with criminals for years, ensuring both alienation and criminal contacts when they're released.

Yeah, one of the great arguments for more socialization: if people don't need to make a "cry for help" to get help, you don't have to worry about rewarding them for being destructive. They can just ask for help. And if you don't punish them like the American welfare system does, so much the better.

But punishment in some form or another is very useful. It's not clear what kind or to what extent, but in psychological experiments punishment is the primary way to ensure cooperation among heterogeneous groups.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Sat May 17, 2008 2:59 am

CatharzGodfoot wrote: Corporal punishment can have interesting effects..

A few points here.

Firstly, I imagine the idea was for this to be done to adults, not children. Adults tend to have developed as much as they're going to, and it takes more to damage their minds.

The last "sexual problem" is hardly a problem, it's simply not that person's cup of tea. And if that is the criteria, then I put it to you that sex involving any number of men is a sexual problem. I look forward to the day where that is the case.

Not to mention that there seem to be more cases of sexual problems these days than there were back when it was the norm, barring the raping-sprees performed by knights and others trained to be violent and self-important.

And I love the "studies that show corporal punishment is no more effective than other forms." I don't actually support it, partly because I think it should remain the pastime of consenting adults and partly because allowing a blanket "this will work, do it." isn't a good idea, considering how different people react differently to different things. However, those studies always seem to rely on faulty data:

A child is well-behaved for the most part and there is no problem: not taken to any kind of counselling, not included in data.

A child tends to misbehave, and some other punishment is used, and is successful - perhaps they hate to disappoint, and being reprimanded works well, or perhaps taking away their (item) works: chances are, they are not reported or anything, so are not included in data.

A child tends to misbehave, and corporal punishment is used, and is successful (and not abusive): again, they are not included in the data.

A child misbehaves frequently and one method is tried unsuccessfully: if the parents have sense, they'll try a number of different things before running off for help. It is here that the data is included - where all the methods attempted have proven unsuccessful.

Now, if they have a better way of gathering data, one that takes into account the cases where various methods have proved successful, that will actually be relevant and useful.

I know I have, in general, made a pretty piss-poor argument for corporal punishment of children. If I thought it was a good idea, I'd probably make a better argument. As it is, I'm surprised I managed as much as I did. The moral of the story: faulty data leads to all kinds of BS.

CatharzGodfoot · Post by **CatharzGodfoot** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:28 am

Firstly, I didn't say that sadomasochistic kids are a bad thing. I had a lot of fun as an ickle sadomasochist. I would be creeped out to learn that my kids were getting off on me punishing them (although there's a great song about that by Lords of Acid), but I don't have a problem with sadomasochism under the right circumstances.

You're right about the issue of data analysis. It's possible that the study did not adequately control for the base rate of misbehavior prior to punishment among the two populations. I would hesitate to assume that this is the case based on a news article, but it's probably not safe to assume good methodology either. Doing that study right would probably take more money than was available.

Despite all of the study's possible flaws, however, I think it's worth considering whether a punishment will always be effective if such punishment might be viewed as an incentive by a certain subset of the population. Children are generally as psychologically resilient as adults. Adults aren't less susceptible to acting out revenge fantasies, they're just more 'mature' in how they go about it.

SphereOfFeetMan · Post by **SphereOfFeetMan** » Sat May 17, 2008 6:22 am

angelfromanotherpin wrote:SphereOfFeetMan, when I say caning, I mean it to include any short-term painful and possibly humiliating punishment. Pain and humiliation form strong associations in the human brain, which would probably be a good deterring force. I don't know how effective it would actually be, I'm just raising it as a possibility.

Ok. I agree with fines/labor/removal from society as forms of punishment. I thought you were specifically advocating caning as a form of punishment. I wondered what evidence existed that supported caning as the best form of corporal punishment.

Generally, I am unsure as to whether or not any form of corporal punishment would be best for a society. Practically speaking, there are many more problems with corporal punishment than the other punishments you listed. That is without regard to any moral problems.
__________________________

Koumei wrote:It is here that the data is included - where all the methods attempted have proven unsuccessful.

Some parents start with corporal punishment.

Hypothetical leading questions:

If two forms of punishment work equally well at correcting a child, and one is corporal and one is not, is there any moral or practical reason to choose one form over the other?

Would most parents prefer not to use corporal punishment?

If all else fails, do some parents use (and succeed with) corporal punishment? Are the parents that failed to correct their children through all other means bad parents?

Do only bad or ignorant parents use corporal punishment?

Are there different levels of challenge in correcting different children? Are different parents resorting to corporal punishment at different stages of difficulty?
_________________________

Koumei wrote:The moral of the story: faulty data leads to all kinds of BS.

Yes.

That is why different studies are made and reproduced. As far as I am aware, most conclude that corporal punishment has more adverse effects than non-corporal punishment.

If you assume that the vast majority of studies are not only faulty, but have findings directly opposite that of the truth, then you are assuming that the those trained in the scientific method are the least able to give advice.
_______________________

Personally, based upon the trends of most studies about corporal punishment of children, I believe it to be an inferior choice.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Sat May 17, 2008 11:26 am

Catharz: the article suggested sadomasochism in adults is a bad thing. I suggest that they're dicks, so I should mock anything they say. Now, for society, I can see issues of it as an incentive, or people simply getting angrier as a result and committing more crime. As I said, it's for these exact reasons that I wouldn't want it provided as a standard.

Sphere: those who start with it will either be faced with success (this data, in the above model, will not be gathered) or will likely then try other means before going to counselling, or go straight to counselling. The case where it works is the only one where the data isn't caught.

For your hypotheticals: If they were both equal, even if they both caused the exact same change of behaviour, the same (hopefully low/non-existent) levels of resentment/fear and all the rest, then I would still advocate the non-corporal form.

Now, I'm not going to discuss morals, because I wouldn't say my morals are that great. I'm just talking from the standpoint of "all things equal, if you don't need to cause unwanted pain to someone, then don't." as well as a standpoint of "I enjoy engaging in that kind of activity with other consenting adults. I would not feel comfortable with a minor being involved, even though the situation would be completely different."

I imagine most prefer not to - the polls suggest this, along with the fact that most countries have decided to outlaw it (off the top of my head, only certain parts of Africa and the Czech Republic allow it for children, as opposed to beating adults. Oh wait, and certain states of the US), and usually, things get banned because the majority want it banned.

Some do successfully use corporal punishment. I know of the odd case. I don't know if they attempted other means, but I wouldn't call them bad parents. Their children turned out petty well, barring one exception - but I'm talking about a small number of examples I know of, as opposed to substantial data.

Now, I wouldn't say only bad parents use it, but for ignorance, there is a strong leaning (as far as I can tell) towards "that's how things have always been done". Still, it's possible my refusal to use it would make me a bad parent, were I a parent, as I wouldn't be willing to try every option.

And yes, different children have different difficulty levels, clearly.

For the most part, the various "don't do it!" groups all use the same study, singular, and mostly the data is the same. They also really enjoy using personal accounts, because statistically speaking, no matter what your position, you should be able to find someone who says something supporting you.

But by the same token, most studies advocating its use seem to rely on looking at the fall of usage over the years and the rise of problems in youth, crime etc. without mentioning any other possible factors.

Generally, I won't accept "X people interviewed say ____" or other studies which are just statistics with no transparency into what's going on. Even though everybody lies, and people with a point to prove lie all the time, I have more faith in a coherent argument that shows the actual method they went through, how the information was gathered, and why the information means what they claim it to mean.

Draco_Argentum · Post by **Draco_Argentum** » Sun May 18, 2008 2:10 am

angelfromanotherpin wrote:Draco_Argentum, the U.S. has plenty of options for both internal and external banishment. Maybe set up a penal island farming colony. Again, just I wanted to look at an alternative.

Thats not a lot different from imprisonment. Especially if the prison system was overhauled to suck less ass.

Catharz already said what I wanted to about food/housing. It'd cut the crime rate among the poor nicely in addition to being a good idea. Wouldn't help with the rich arseholes who defraud people to become even richer though. Thats something where fines/jail is more helpful.

Crissa · Post by **Crissa** » Sun May 18, 2008 2:59 am

The study is seriously flawed.

Mostly because it did not also count how many ways the corporal punishment kids were punished; but slightly because 90% of kids receive it.

Better question than 'did you receive' is 'would you have used'.

With correlations that high... It's more likely we're saying 'if a child misbehaved as a child involving power plays, they're more likely to misbehave involving power plays as adults'.

Which is like a big 'no duh'.

-Crissa

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Sun May 18, 2008 5:57 am

Crissa wrote:slightly because 90% of kids receive it.

Seriously? I must be missing something here.

Crissa · Post by **Crissa** » Sun May 18, 2008 7:50 am

Koumei wrote:
Crissa wrote:slightly because 90% of kids receive it.
Seriously? I must be missing something here.

Yeah, said so in the study.

-Crissa

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Sun May 18, 2008 11:16 am

I completely forgot about that, and have reason to believe it is less than accurate. Just like the rest.

The 13 Wise Buttlords · Sun May 25, 2008 3:32 pm

Unfortunately, a significant segment of our American society is--let's face it--so sadistic and eager for punishment of the criminal underclass that I simply can't imagine them allowing any sort of meaningful reform.

I mean, seriously. We still think that male prison rape is a source of endless physical comedy and the 'real' punishment of prison. We're so conditioned to think that putting people in a position where criminals are tortured is okay that people who speak out against it are demonized that I don't know what to do.

I guess I would start by reducing television violence and income inequality and then top this out by cancelling the war on drugs. But I have a feeling that it won't do much for the rest of the underclass.

But if we really feel this way about 'criminals', then why don't we just shoot them?