On justice and deterrent

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2004-12-13 01:50pm

Tom_Aurum wrote:They shouldn't. At least, not in tent city, it's a punishment in and of itself. Sheriff Joe is a fascist jackass who has been shown to be one by many, many organizations. About the only people who haven't brought him to task on his jackassed policies have been the people of Arizona. Not to mention, totally unrelated, that Arizona is a "right to get fucked over..." er.. "right to work" state.

Do you even know what that means? It means that you arent forced to join the union when you get a job in a unionized industry.

Unions can still strike, they can still negotiate for contracts. I dont see the issue with a right to work state. Unless you are arguing that I should be forced against my will to join an organization that imposes stupid regulations on how many carts I can push in the parking lot, that can file suit on my behalf, against my will, and can negotiate for increases in wages that get workers laid off and raise product prices, thus decreasing slaes leading to hour cuts which causes the reverse of what the union intended by demanding wage increases

Could a mod split this? It could get ugly.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-12-13 02:41pm

The one area in which I think the death penalty is a deterrent is where a crime has already been committed, and the criminal is faced with the choice of getting caught or trying to murder his way free (killing witnesses on the scene, cops, jurors, judges, etc.). The idea is, someone about to get arrested is less likely to open fire on the cops if he's not already looking at the death penalty.

Frankly, I'd be in favor of limiting the death penalty to felony murder, murdering anyone involved in the criminal justice system, and truly irredimable cases like child murder, torture murder, and psychosexual murder.

Falkenhayn · Post by **Falkenhayn** » 2004-12-13 03:08pm

Suppose that we could make arrest, conviction and punishment of the guilty a 100% certainty?

Plekhanov · Post by **Plekhanov** » 2004-12-13 03:38pm

Alyrium Denryle wrote:ANd if we dont make the jail uncomfortable enough, it will not serve its primary function, which is punishment of misdemeanors.

Has it not occurred to you that being imprisoned involves a significant loss of liberty and that that alone is a punishment and that that is the primary function of prisons? All this “make them suffer” crap you so enjoy wanking about is in no way an essential part of the criminal justice system.

Have a look at the prisons in the Scandinavian countries and you'll see humane prisons that seek to rehabilitate those sentenced to lose their liberty for the crimes they committed against society. Any idea what the reoffending rate is for the those subject to your beloved tent city? Because I'd be amazed if it was lower than all those “cushy” prisons the Scandinavians run.

Tom_Aurum · Post by **Tom_Aurum** » 2004-12-13 03:40pm

Alyrium Denryle wrote:
Tom_Aurum wrote:They shouldn't. At least, not in tent city, it's a punishment in and of itself. Sheriff Joe is a fascist jackass who has been shown to be one by many, many organizations. About the only people who haven't brought him to task on his jackassed policies have been the people of Arizona. Not to mention, totally unrelated, that Arizona is a "right to get fucked over..." er.. "right to work" state.
Do you even know what that means? It means that you arent forced to join the union when you get a job in a unionized industry.

Unions can still strike, they can still negotiate for contracts. I dont see the issue with a right to work state.

I'm sorry, I guess it isn't a rant at the stupidity of Arizona thread, so I'll stop after this. But, among other things, the minimum wage there is set extremely low ($2.13!) for those who work off of tips. In most other states that is ILLEGAL. Oh, and even attempting to unionize causes industries to penalize you right off the bat.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2004-12-13 03:50pm

Tom_Aurum wrote:
Alyrium Denryle wrote:
Tom_Aurum wrote:They shouldn't. At least, not in tent city, it's a punishment in and of itself. Sheriff Joe is a fascist jackass who has been shown to be one by many, many organizations. About the only people who haven't brought him to task on his jackassed policies have been the people of Arizona. Not to mention, totally unrelated, that Arizona is a "right to get fucked over..." er.. "right to work" state.
Do you even know what that means? It means that you arent forced to join the union when you get a job in a unionized industry.

Unions can still strike, they can still negotiate for contracts. I dont see the issue with a right to work state.
I'm sorry, I guess it isn't a rant at the stupidity of Arizona thread, so I'll stop after this. But, among other things, the minimum wage there is set extremely low ($2.13!) for those who work off of tips. In most other states that is ILLEGAL. Oh, and even attempting to unionize causes industries to penalize you right off the bat.

problem is, you will also loose employment for people that need it most if you raise that Min wage. Because in order to make the same profit, a business would have to cut down man hours, or their workforce.. either that or raidse prices which will decrease business... yeah you get the picture. It IS a nasty problem, and a viscious viscious cycle.

Well of course they will attempt to stop you from unionizing... it isnt in their best interests. But the main point of a right to work state is that you cannot be FORCED to join a union when you get a job in a particular industry.

Tom_Aurum · Post by **Tom_Aurum** » 2004-12-13 03:56pm

As I said, it's not my rant against the stupidity of Arizona thread, back on topic. I could go on for hours about this, but not now.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-12-13 07:51pm

His Divine Shadow wrote:I think one method of punishment is one we've ignored too long, public shaming.

I hate people who think that's wrong for SO many reasons. I saw a segment on the news, once, with this kid who was convicted of three counts of vehicular manslaughter, while driving under the influence, in an uninsured car. Part of his sentence was that he had to walk around wearing a placard that said he was an "Irresponsible Driver." He was talking about how mean the judge was, because it was so embarrassing to be walking around like that and he knew that other people were ashamed of him. WHAT THE FUCK! He KILLED THREE PEOPLE. How is walking around with a placard POSSIBLY more socially damaging than killing three people?

Tom_Aurum · Post by **Tom_Aurum** » 2004-12-14 11:44am

Apparently such methods are deemed as "unsensitive." Whatever. I think that's a painfully appropriate method of punishment for the guilty. What ever happened to the pillory?

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-12-14 03:17pm

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:Here's an interesting related question:

Do extremely harsh punishments short of death have a deterrent effect? For example, that county in Arizona (IIRC) where that sheriff makes his prisoners live in tents, eat bread and water, and work on chain gangs--does it have lower crime rates than other counties in Arizona? Or perhaps lower rates of convicts re-offending?

He reportedly has had almost no effect, up or down, on the crime rate or repeat-offense rate. However, if you're like me, you'd love to have him running your jails anyway since he's not hurting anyone and he gives the innocent a good laugh at the expense of the guilty.

It seems to me that if prison was a miserable, horrific experience, even idiots would want to not go back there; and thus if they had been caught once, demonstrating their inability to escape, they would not want to reoffend for fear of going back to such a place.

Unfortunately, for too many of them prison becomes a way of life. They really can't deal with life on the outside, so to speak, and so they have little choice but to attempt to return.