Opinion/debate (harsher penalties for financial crimes)

[Formless]

What do you mean by the "purpose of punishment"?

I mean, why do we do it? What is our justification for it? Punishment is unusual ethically because normally we are trying to avoid causing harm, but punishments by nature cause harm. Therefor, there needs to be a purpose for doing it that is justifiable. Deterrence, restitution, and rehab are all justifiable purposes of punishment. Punishment for punishment's sake (i.e. revenge) is not.

What happens when there is no chance for restitution, rehabilitation and deterrence is not all that effective (past a point)? Such as the case of some murderers?

You could say that we imprison such people to prevent further harm from the rest of society. But what were to happen if this person became a cripple in jail and no real threat to society, do we set this individual free because there is no obvious purpose other than revenge?

I wish I had a decent answer to that, but to be honest, I don't. If I had to try, though... In that situation, further punishment seems to me like a pointless endeavor because they are no longer threatening, and arguably have already gotten a slice of karmic retribution due to their injury. Why waste the time, effort and resources on such a person?

Fortunately, I think there are very few people who we can't in some way deter, gain restitution from, or failing that rehabilitate. Even murderers-- restitution might not be possible in the strictest sense (you can't bring people back from the dead, sadly), but since most murders are crimes of passion rather than a result of true psychopathy you can at least reasonably hope to rehabilitate them.

Of course, for many reasons deterrence and rehab aren't all that possible with white collar crime, so all we can hope for would be restitution, as others have said.

[bobalot]

What happens when there is no chance for restitution, rehabilitation and deterrence is not all that effective (past a point)? Such as the case of some murderers?

You could say that we imprison such people to prevent further harm from the rest of society. But what were to happen if this person became a cripple in jail and no real threat to society, do we set this individual free because there is no obvious purpose other than revenge?

I wish I had a decent answer to that, but to be honest, I don't. If I had to try, though... In that situation, further punishment seems to me like a pointless endeavor because they are no longer threatening, and arguably have already gotten a slice of karmic retribution due to their injury. Why waste the time, effort and resources on such a person?

Fortunately, I think there are very few people who we can't in some way deter, gain restitution from, or failing that rehabilitate. Even murderers-- restitution might not be possible in the strictest sense (you can't bring people back from the dead, sadly), but since most murders are crimes of passion rather than a result of true psychopathy you can at least reasonably hope to rehabilitate them.

I agree that it is iffy question. Weather we as a society care to admit it, I think revenge is a part of the sentencing. The public would never tolerate the release of a unrepentant crippled murderer or paedophile even if he/she were no threat to society. To be honest, until you asked I took it for granted revenge was a factor, without really thinking about it. Now I'm wondering if it should be.

Of course, for many reasons deterrence and rehab aren't all that possible with white collar crime, so all we can hope for would be restitution, as others have said.

I disagree. Long jail terms in harsh prisons would prove a much more effective deterrent than the current slap on the wrist white collar criminals get. Despite what people say, no one has shown that white collar criminals suffer any sort of punishment that is comparable to their blue collar counterparts.

The best argument was the "humiliation", which blue collar criminals also suffer anyway.

[Stark]

The logic behind the idea that jail terms would have no effect on white collar crime is stupid. It's possible that these people would be even MORE deterred by actual jail time (as opposed to fines or country clubs).

[The Yosemite Bear]

The logic behind the idea that jail terms would have no effect on white collar crime is stupid. It's possible that these people would be even MORE deterred by actual jail time (as opposed to fines or country clubs).

Especially if they don't have the golf courses, and they can be raped....