Prison Rape, Huh, What Is It Good For (Absolutely Nothing)

2

Posts

  • ButtcleftButtcleft Registered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    I agree with everything everybody has said so far, and just to add another complication orbiting this topic: pedophilia doesn't mean you've committed a crime. There are people who have realized that they have such inclinations and are attempting to resist them, and the mainstream derision of pedophiles doesn't really distinguish between offending and nonoffending, making it harder to seek and comply with treatment.

    http://time.com/3486493/preventing-child-sex-abuse-stephen-collins/

    Urgh, top comment of that article complaining about some weird pedo agenda being just like the gay agenda and oh my christ.

    But yes, creating situations where someone feels ashamed, incapable of reaching for help and destined to be sent to the hell holes that are American prisons doesn't actually help at risk people not commit crime. I mean, that situation is pretty much the text book feelings for suicide and other extreme acts.

    Is curing pedophiles even an ideal? I don't see much difference between that and homosexuality, other than pedophiles having the shitty luck of having their targets of attraction being considered incapable of giving consent for a number of very valid reasons.

    Pedophilia is a mental disorder not a sexual preference. There's not a lot of data on treating it since you'd be hard struck to find volunteers and nobody would fund it so we don't have any real idea how to treatit

    I would bet that the number of people who actually abuse children is just a small fraction of the overall population of people with those feelings and thoughts.

    But, in America at least, you'll be hard pressed to have any significant research or, god forbid, actual therapeutic help for these people.

    Germany was doing something interesting about it, but I cant find a link to the story, and I'm pretty sure the searches I just did to find it put me on a watchlist.

    that's it, I'm shutting this entire forum down, everyone thank buttcleft
    Peccavi
  • Grunt's GhostsGrunt's Ghosts Registered User regular
    As someone who has gone to prison, I can tell you that it isn't for "rehabilitation". My conviction was drug related and I had to do mandatory Narcotics Anonymous classes. These classes were run by a prison counselor who taught that we were "addicts and criminals and would always be addicts and criminals." This upset me because its reinforcing the idea that all we have is crime. That's all we would ever be, thieves and dealers and addicts and could never rise above it. Plenty of people have turn their lives around, but you wouldn't know that hearing this guy. Its a wonder why people who have been arrested talk like they can never leave the crime life. Its part of the reason why our prisons are so full right now, we demoralize prisoners until they can't see themselves as anything but criminals, so they go right back into society and commit more crimes because that's all they know.

    ButtcleftThe EnderSiskaBarrakkethRMS OceanicBedlamEndaroForarTL DRDisruptedCapitalistminirhyderLovely
  • ButtcleftButtcleft Registered User regular
    As someone who has gone to prison, I can tell you that it isn't for "rehabilitation". My conviction was drug related and I had to do mandatory Narcotics Anonymous classes. These classes were run by a prison counselor who taught that we were "addicts and criminals and would always be addicts and criminals." This upset me because its reinforcing the idea that all we have is crime. That's all we would ever be, thieves and dealers and addicts and could never rise above it. Plenty of people have turn their lives around, but you wouldn't know that hearing this guy. Its a wonder why people who have been arrested talk like they can never leave the crime life. Its part of the reason why our prisons are so full right now, we demoralize prisoners until they can't see themselves as anything but criminals, so they go right back into society and commit more crimes because that's all they know.

    Exactly everything he just said.

    People don't turn their lives around because of prison, the very few who manage it do so in spite of prison.

    that's it, I'm shutting this entire forum down, everyone thank buttcleft
    Phoenix-DshrykeTL DR
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    Dunder wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Jail as 'hell' only works if you never release anyone from jail.

    If shoplifting has a sentence of 100 years then okay.

    But since it doesn't, by making prison 'hell', all you're doing is ensuring that people that come out are psychologically damaged and will have a serious chip on their shoulder regarding the way they've been treated. The worse it is, the more likely people released from prison will seek retribution against society at large.

    That's not rehabilitation.

    That's an eye for eye making the world blind.

    Not really though. Most criminals are convinced they wont get caught or that the rules won't apply to them. In which case jail-as-a-deterrent doesn't work. There are many real life examples of this behavior, most prominently the death penalty's effect on murders (i.e. none).

    Has there been any good research on whether increasing the consistency of punishment works in deterring criminals?

    I'm actually a fan of the broken windows theory. It tends to work out horribly in practice, but as far as I can tell this seems to be because the people implementing it generally can't resist the urge to increase the severity of punishments as well, rather than decreasing them to maintain the same total punishment for a repeat offender.

    Broken windows works out horribly in practice because it's gooseshit.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
    King RiptorSo It GoesRegina Fong
  • King RiptorKing Riptor Registered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    Dunder wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Jail as 'hell' only works if you never release anyone from jail.

    If shoplifting has a sentence of 100 years then okay.

    But since it doesn't, by making prison 'hell', all you're doing is ensuring that people that come out are psychologically damaged and will have a serious chip on their shoulder regarding the way they've been treated. The worse it is, the more likely people released from prison will seek retribution against society at large.

    That's not rehabilitation.

    That's an eye for eye making the world blind.

    Not really though. Most criminals are convinced they wont get caught or that the rules won't apply to them. In which case jail-as-a-deterrent doesn't work. There are many real life examples of this behavior, most prominently the death penalty's effect on murders (i.e. none).

    Has there been any good research on whether increasing the consistency of punishment works in deterring criminals?

    I'm actually a fan of the broken windows theory. It tends to work out horribly in practice, but as far as I can tell this seems to be because the people implementing it generally can't resist the urge to increase the severity of punishments as well, rather than decreasing them to maintain the same total punishment for a repeat offender.

    Broken windows works out horribly in practice because it's gooseshit.

    Yeah focusing on minor crimes is literally so police look effective and elected officials can point to a stat those minor crimes fall under and say " I lowered that!"

    I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
    So It Goes
  • jothkijothki Registered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    Dunder wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Jail as 'hell' only works if you never release anyone from jail.

    If shoplifting has a sentence of 100 years then okay.

    But since it doesn't, by making prison 'hell', all you're doing is ensuring that people that come out are psychologically damaged and will have a serious chip on their shoulder regarding the way they've been treated. The worse it is, the more likely people released from prison will seek retribution against society at large.

    That's not rehabilitation.

    That's an eye for eye making the world blind.

    Not really though. Most criminals are convinced they wont get caught or that the rules won't apply to them. In which case jail-as-a-deterrent doesn't work. There are many real life examples of this behavior, most prominently the death penalty's effect on murders (i.e. none).

    Has there been any good research on whether increasing the consistency of punishment works in deterring criminals?

    I'm actually a fan of the broken windows theory. It tends to work out horribly in practice, but as far as I can tell this seems to be because the people implementing it generally can't resist the urge to increase the severity of punishments as well, rather than decreasing them to maintain the same total punishment for a repeat offender.

    Broken windows works out horribly in practice because it's gooseshit.

    Don't confuse principles being gooseshit with police being gooseshit. The idea is that the police should be a fixture of the community rather than an outside force that intercedes at its own whim to deal out punishment and death. Simply increasing the whimrate doesn't mean that that principle is being followed. The police need to actually fix the windows, whether this involves catching criminals, scolding litterers, or offering to escort drunk people safely to their destinations. A police officer's presence should always provide a net gain to everyone nearby.

    AtomikaAndy Joe
  • VeeveeVeevee WisconsinRegistered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    jothki wrote: »
    Dunder wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Jail as 'hell' only works if you never release anyone from jail.

    If shoplifting has a sentence of 100 years then okay.

    But since it doesn't, by making prison 'hell', all you're doing is ensuring that people that come out are psychologically damaged and will have a serious chip on their shoulder regarding the way they've been treated. The worse it is, the more likely people released from prison will seek retribution against society at large.

    That's not rehabilitation.

    That's an eye for eye making the world blind.

    Not really though. Most criminals are convinced they wont get caught or that the rules won't apply to them. In which case jail-as-a-deterrent doesn't work. There are many real life examples of this behavior, most prominently the death penalty's effect on murders (i.e. none).

    Has there been any good research on whether increasing the consistency of punishment works in deterring criminals?

    I'm actually a fan of the broken windows theory. It tends to work out horribly in practice, but as far as I can tell this seems to be because the people implementing it generally can't resist the urge to increase the severity of punishments as well, rather than decreasing them to maintain the same total punishment for a repeat offender.

    Broken windows works out horribly in practice because it's gooseshit.

    Don't confuse principles being gooseshit with police being gooseshit. The idea is that the police should be a fixture of the community rather than an outside force that intercedes at its own whim to deal out punishment and death. Simply increasing the whimrate doesn't mean that that principle is being followed. The police need to actually fix the windows, whether this involves catching criminals, scolding litterers, or offering to escort drunk people safely to their destinations. A police officer's presence should always provide a net gain to everyone nearby.

    That isn't Broken Windows, that's Community Policing.

    FeralSo It GoesCaedwyrRegina FongTofystedeth
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    Buttcleft wrote: »
    jothki wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    I agree with everything everybody has said so far, and just to add another complication orbiting this topic: pedophilia doesn't mean you've committed a crime. There are people who have realized that they have such inclinations and are attempting to resist them, and the mainstream derision of pedophiles doesn't really distinguish between offending and nonoffending, making it harder to seek and comply with treatment.

    http://time.com/3486493/preventing-child-sex-abuse-stephen-collins/

    Urgh, top comment of that article complaining about some weird pedo agenda being just like the gay agenda and oh my christ.

    But yes, creating situations where someone feels ashamed, incapable of reaching for help and destined to be sent to the hell holes that are American prisons doesn't actually help at risk people not commit crime. I mean, that situation is pretty much the text book feelings for suicide and other extreme acts.

    Is curing pedophiles even an ideal? I don't see much difference between that and homosexuality, other than pedophiles having the shitty luck of having their targets of attraction being considered incapable of giving consent for a number of very valid reasons.

    Pedophilia is a mental disorder not a sexual preference. There's not a lot of data on treating it since you'd be hard struck to find volunteers and nobody would fund it so we don't have any real idea how to treatit

    I would bet that the number of people who actually abuse children is just a small fraction of the overall population of people with those feelings and thoughts.

    But, in America at least, you'll be hard pressed to have any significant research or, god forbid, actual therapeutic help for these people.

    Germany was doing something interesting about it, but I cant find a link to the story, and I'm pretty sure the searches I just did to find it put me on a watchlist.

    It's mentioned in the Time article I linked above.
    In Germany, where therapy is confidential (and where recording conversations without peoples’ knowledge or consent is illegal), thousands have reached out to the Prevention Project Dunkelfeld, which specifically targets men and adolescent boys—both ones who have acted on their impulses and ones who haven’t—attracted to children.

    This is another good article on nonoffending pedophiles:

    https://medium.com/matter/youre-16-youre-a-pedophile-you-dont-want-to-hurt-anyone-what-do-you-do-now-e11ce4b88bdb

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
    redx
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    Veevee wrote: »
    jothki wrote: »
    jothki wrote: »
    Dunder wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Jail as 'hell' only works if you never release anyone from jail.

    If shoplifting has a sentence of 100 years then okay.

    But since it doesn't, by making prison 'hell', all you're doing is ensuring that people that come out are psychologically damaged and will have a serious chip on their shoulder regarding the way they've been treated. The worse it is, the more likely people released from prison will seek retribution against society at large.

    That's not rehabilitation.

    That's an eye for eye making the world blind.

    Not really though. Most criminals are convinced they wont get caught or that the rules won't apply to them. In which case jail-as-a-deterrent doesn't work. There are many real life examples of this behavior, most prominently the death penalty's effect on murders (i.e. none).

    Has there been any good research on whether increasing the consistency of punishment works in deterring criminals?

    I'm actually a fan of the broken windows theory. It tends to work out horribly in practice, but as far as I can tell this seems to be because the people implementing it generally can't resist the urge to increase the severity of punishments as well, rather than decreasing them to maintain the same total punishment for a repeat offender.

    Broken windows works out horribly in practice because it's gooseshit.

    Don't confuse principles being gooseshit with police being gooseshit. The idea is that the police should be a fixture of the community rather than an outside force that intercedes at its own whim to deal out punishment and death. Simply increasing the whimrate doesn't mean that that principle is being followed. The police need to actually fix the windows, whether this involves catching criminals, scolding litterers, or offering to escort drunk people safely to their destinations. A police officer's presence should always provide a net gain to everyone nearby.

    That isn't Broken Windows, that's Community Policing.

    Let's be clear here. Broken windows is specifically the sociological theory that uncorrected minor crimes lead to more serious crimes. People are more likely to commit burglary when vandalism goes unpunished and unrepaired.

    As a theory, broken windows is not airtight. There is plenty of room for academic debate. But it's not gooseshit either. There's solid evidence behind it, but there are other valid ways of interpreting that evidence.

    What is clearly gooseshit is the misapplication of the theory to justify overly punitive and often racist policing.

    If it weren't for that misapplication, this would be an interesting discussion topic for social sciences nerds rather than a political issue.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
    The EnderSiskaSo It GoesCaedwyrGrunt's GhostsjmcdonaldShadowfireGnome-InterruptusPolaritieForarKetarMartini_PhilosopherNija
  • programjunkieprogramjunkie Registered User regular
    Honestly, you don't even need to agree that raping child molesters is wrong to believe we should prevent prison rape. All you need is a lack of a morally unconscionable naivety that suggests that only guilty people go to prison, or that criminals willing to rape people are somehow going to perform that action according to a rigorous and correct moral framework (which apparently they developed right after getting to prison?), and not based on factors like size, race, age, gang affiliation, appearance, etc. Ditto for practical arguments about rehabilitation or medical expenses.

    SummaryJudgmentKristmas Kthulhu
  • Captain MarcusCaptain Marcus now arrives the hour of actionRegistered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    Let's be clear here. Broken windows is specifically the sociological theory that uncorrected minor crimes lead to more serious crimes. People are more likely to commit burglary when vandalism goes unpunished and unrepaired.

    As a theory, broken windows is not airtight. There is plenty of room for academic debate. But it's not gooseshit either. There's solid evidence behind it, but there are other valid ways of interpreting that evidence.

    What is clearly gooseshit is the misapplication of the theory to justify overly punitive and often racist policing.

    If it weren't for that misapplication, this would be an interesting discussion topic for social sciences nerds rather than a political issue.

    The guy that's still alive out of the original pair that developed the theory came right out and said that it's misapplied.

    FeralHappylilElf
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    It's worth noting that NYC's overally crime rate did decline after Guliani implemented the Broken Windows police policy.

    Correlation doesn't equal causation and all that, but it's certainly a data point to look at.

    With Love and Courage
  • redxredx I(x)=2(x)+1 whole numbersRegistered User regular
    The Ender wrote: »
    It's worth noting that NYC's overally crime rate did decline after Guliani implemented the Broken Windows police policy.

    Correlation doesn't equal causation and all that, but it's certainly a data point to look at.

    Didn't basically the whole nation's crime rate decline, while a massive degree of gentrification occurred in NYC during that period of time?

    This machine kills threads.
    FeralAngelHedgieprogramjunkieArdolKamarSo It GoesjmcdonaldRegina FongFuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudminirhyderCalica
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    redx wrote: »
    The Ender wrote: »
    It's worth noting that NYC's overally crime rate did decline after Guliani implemented the Broken Windows police policy.

    Correlation doesn't equal causation and all that, but it's certainly a data point to look at.

    Didn't basically the whole nation's crime rate decline, while a massive degree of gentrification occurred in NYC during that period of time?

    Not only that, the reduction began under Dinkins as well.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • ButtcleftButtcleft Registered User regular
    The Ender wrote: »
    It's worth noting that NYC's overally crime rate did decline after Guliani implemented the Broken Windows police policy.

    Correlation doesn't equal causation and all that, but it's certainly a data point to look at.

    It correlates with falling lead levels in the environment due to the eradication of lead paint and leaded gasoline more than it does with bad policies that don't work.

    that's it, I'm shutting this entire forum down, everyone thank buttcleft
    Regina Fongsilence1186Calica
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    Buttcleft wrote: »
    The Ender wrote: »
    It's worth noting that NYC's overally crime rate did decline after Guliani implemented the Broken Windows police policy.

    Correlation doesn't equal causation and all that, but it's certainly a data point to look at.

    It correlates with falling lead levels in the environment due to the eradication of lead paint and leaded gasoline more than it does with bad policies that don't work.

    I agree; it's just something to consider without outright dismissal.

    ...But actually this was the wrong thread for that post. >.<


    Hey, did you guys know that juveniles are about 5 times more likely to get raped while in prison if put into an adult facility instead of a juvenile one? Something else to bear in mind whenever people start insisting that a young offender be tried and sentenced as an adult.

    With Love and Courage
    Atomika
  • Regina FongRegina Fong Allons-y, Alonso Registered User regular
    The Ender wrote: »
    Buttcleft wrote: »
    The Ender wrote: »
    It's worth noting that NYC's overally crime rate did decline after Guliani implemented the Broken Windows police policy.

    Correlation doesn't equal causation and all that, but it's certainly a data point to look at.

    It correlates with falling lead levels in the environment due to the eradication of lead paint and leaded gasoline more than it does with bad policies that don't work.

    I agree; it's just something to consider without outright dismissal.

    ...But actually this was the wrong thread for that post. >.<


    Hey, did you guys know that juveniles are about 5 times more likely to get raped while in prison if put into an adult facility instead of a juvenile one? Something else to bear in mind whenever people start insisting that a young offender be tried and sentenced as an adult.

    Wait, you're telling me that terrible things happen to 13 year olds that we send to adult prisons?

    I am shocked. Shocked, I tell you. And offended.

    Feral
  • Regina FongRegina Fong Allons-y, Alonso Registered User regular
    *insert mouthbreathing comment about how "some of those 13 year olds are really big and scary (re: black) and look like adults*

  • Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    And guilty! Don't forget that.

    FeralAtomika
  • PLAPLA The process.Registered User regular
    Even in a system that supports rape-sentences, prison-rape as commonly understood is anarchy. Prisoners are not supposed to execute punishments at their own whims. There is a schedule.

  • zakkielzakkiel Registered User regular
    The Ender wrote: »
    Buttcleft wrote: »
    The Ender wrote: »
    It's worth noting that NYC's overally crime rate did decline after Guliani implemented the Broken Windows police policy.

    Correlation doesn't equal causation and all that, but it's certainly a data point to look at.

    It correlates with falling lead levels in the environment due to the eradication of lead paint and leaded gasoline more than it does with bad policies that don't work.

    I agree; it's just something to consider without outright dismissal.

    ...But actually this was the wrong thread for that post. >.<


    Hey, did you guys know that juveniles are about 5 times more likely to get raped while in prison if put into an adult facility instead of a juvenile one? Something else to bear in mind whenever people start insisting that a young offender be tried and sentenced as an adult.

    This is somewhat misleading. Despite the popular image of prison gangs raping men, the vast majority of male juveniles raped in prison are raped by female COs. It's a good argument for gender-segregating prison guards.

    Account not recoverable. So long.
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    zakkiel wrote: »
    The Ender wrote: »
    Buttcleft wrote: »
    The Ender wrote: »
    It's worth noting that NYC's overally crime rate did decline after Guliani implemented the Broken Windows police policy.

    Correlation doesn't equal causation and all that, but it's certainly a data point to look at.

    It correlates with falling lead levels in the environment due to the eradication of lead paint and leaded gasoline more than it does with bad policies that don't work.

    I agree; it's just something to consider without outright dismissal.

    ...But actually this was the wrong thread for that post. >.<


    Hey, did you guys know that juveniles are about 5 times more likely to get raped while in prison if put into an adult facility instead of a juvenile one? Something else to bear in mind whenever people start insisting that a young offender be tried and sentenced as an adult.

    This is somewhat misleading. Despite the popular image of prison gangs raping men, the vast majority of male juveniles raped in prison are raped by female COs. It's a good argument for gender-segregating prison guards.

    ...How is that related to the issue of juvenile offenders being at greater risk in an adult prison? I didn't offer any gender qualifiers, and in any case, the Slate article's source suggests only that juvenile offenders sent to juvenile prison face likely female attackers.

    Nowhere do I see a recommendation from an expert that suggests gender segregating guards will fix rape issues in jails. I assume that's your own supposition?

    With Love and Courage
  • zakkielzakkiel Registered User regular
    The Ender wrote: »
    zakkiel wrote: »
    The Ender wrote: »
    Buttcleft wrote: »
    The Ender wrote: »
    It's worth noting that NYC's overally crime rate did decline after Guliani implemented the Broken Windows police policy.

    Correlation doesn't equal causation and all that, but it's certainly a data point to look at.

    It correlates with falling lead levels in the environment due to the eradication of lead paint and leaded gasoline more than it does with bad policies that don't work.

    I agree; it's just something to consider without outright dismissal.

    ...But actually this was the wrong thread for that post. >.<


    Hey, did you guys know that juveniles are about 5 times more likely to get raped while in prison if put into an adult facility instead of a juvenile one? Something else to bear in mind whenever people start insisting that a young offender be tried and sentenced as an adult.

    This is somewhat misleading. Despite the popular image of prison gangs raping men, the vast majority of male juveniles raped in prison are raped by female COs. It's a good argument for gender-segregating prison guards.

    ...How is that related to the issue of juvenile offenders being at greater risk in an adult prison? I didn't offer any gender qualifiers, and in any case, the Slate article's source suggests only that juvenile offenders sent to juvenile prison face likely female attackers.

    Nowhere do I see a recommendation from an expert that suggests gender segregating guards will fix rape issues in jails. I assume that's your own supposition?

    OK, that's why I said "misleading" and not "wrong," since the popular inference is that juveniles are being raped by other inmates in adult prisons. I did not see that this was specific to complaints in juvenile settings, so if it's true that adult facilities significantly increase the likelihood of being raped, it may well be other inmates. However, it looks like that claim is disputed. In any case, it is a pretty good argument for gender-segregating staff in juvenile centers. Should we also for adult prisons? Yes, I think we should.

    Account not recoverable. So long.
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    In the adult prison population, the consensus among experts is that about 18~ percent of prison rapes are conducted by guards, the rest by inmates. The relevant research was largely conducted by Cindy Struckman-Johnson in the late 90s.


    This is the research source tied to the juvenile prison rape issue you brought up; it's certainly worthy of consideration, but it is one source and, frankly, the numbers are so extraordinary that they are also worthy of skepticsm & further scrutiny. We need more established data, in my opinion, before we can start citing rates as high as 90~ percent female-on-male rape as fact (especially given that this flies in the face of what's a more or less even gender split 'out in the wild' as it were).

    With Love and Courage
  • PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    burbo wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Jail as 'hell' only works if you never release anyone from jail.

    If shoplifting has a sentence of 100 years then okay.

    But since it doesn't, by making prison 'hell', all you're doing is ensuring that people that come out are psychologically damaged and will have a serious chip on their shoulder regarding the way they've been treated. The worse it is, the more likely people released from prison will seek retribution against society at large.

    That's not rehabilitation.

    That's an eye for eye making the world blind.

    I've always thought that one of the most dehumanizing things we do to our convicts is to take away their voting rights. I mean, supposedly after you go through prison you are supposed to have done your time and paid your dues, ready to be a member of society again. Yet for some reason, you still can't participate in this act that is supposed to be a fundamental right as a citizen of our republic? What the fuck for, except just to say "fuck you criminals"? Has the threat of losing the right to vote ever dissuaded someone from committing a criminal act? Are we worried all the felons are going to get together to form a large voting block and push through the "Murder is Totally Cool Now Guys Amendment"? I just don't get it.

    Honestly I don't think there's a valid justification for not letting them vote, even while incarcerated (I don't consider "it's hard" valid when discussing rights or morality).

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
    programjunkieshrykeKristmas KthulhuMegaMekGnome-InterruptusAndy JoeCalica
  • ShivahnShivahn Unaware of her barrel shifter privilege Eastern coastal temptressRegistered User regular
    Pretty much the only crimes which I could entertain stripping voting power as a legitimate punishment would fit under the category of "harm to the democrating functioning of the state." Voter fraud, any illegal use of cash to influence stuff, etc.

    Even then I'm not sure and it'd be mostly symbolic.

    We let bigots vote, they've fucked me over more than any bloc of murderers or traitors could.

    FeralAlbino BunnyTofystedethAtomika
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Pretty much the only crimes which I could entertain stripping voting power as a legitimate punishment would fit under the category of "harm to the democrating functioning of the state." Voter fraud, any illegal use of cash to influence stuff, etc.

    Even then I'm not sure and it'd be mostly symbolic.

    We let bigots vote, they've fucked me over more than any bloc of murderers or traitors could.

    I'd argue those who would kill or torture the citizens of a democracy have necessarily forfeited voting power, if only because that's pretty much how voting suppression works in the worst parts of the world.

  • ShivahnShivahn Unaware of her barrel shifter privilege Eastern coastal temptressRegistered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Pretty much the only crimes which I could entertain stripping voting power as a legitimate punishment would fit under the category of "harm to the democrating functioning of the state." Voter fraud, any illegal use of cash to influence stuff, etc.

    Even then I'm not sure and it'd be mostly symbolic.

    We let bigots vote, they've fucked me over more than any bloc of murderers or traitors could.

    I'd argue those who would kill or torture the citizens of a democracy have necessarily forfeited voting power, if only because that's pretty much how voting suppression works in the worst parts of the world.

    It's not really here, though. Our democracy is warped by things within the system anyway though so it's kinda.. whatever. Our murders are rarely political in nature.

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus premium Registered User regular
    Polaritie wrote: »
    burbo wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Jail as 'hell' only works if you never release anyone from jail.

    If shoplifting has a sentence of 100 years then okay.

    But since it doesn't, by making prison 'hell', all you're doing is ensuring that people that come out are psychologically damaged and will have a serious chip on their shoulder regarding the way they've been treated. The worse it is, the more likely people released from prison will seek retribution against society at large.

    That's not rehabilitation.

    That's an eye for eye making the world blind.

    I've always thought that one of the most dehumanizing things we do to our convicts is to take away their voting rights. I mean, supposedly after you go through prison you are supposed to have done your time and paid your dues, ready to be a member of society again. Yet for some reason, you still can't participate in this act that is supposed to be a fundamental right as a citizen of our republic? What the fuck for, except just to say "fuck you criminals"? Has the threat of losing the right to vote ever dissuaded someone from committing a criminal act? Are we worried all the felons are going to get together to form a large voting block and push through the "Murder is Totally Cool Now Guys Amendment"? I just don't get it.

    Honestly I don't think there's a valid justification for not letting them vote, even while incarcerated (I don't consider "it's hard" valid when discussing rights or morality).

    I can think of a reason: Politics are bad enough to discuss face-to-face with relatives.

    Prison isn't known for differences of opinion being discussed civilly. Political differences are already a cause for some violence in prison: imagine how much worse it'll be if they're allowed to vote? Not to mention the threat of violence if you don't vote a certain way - in other words, voter intimidation.

    dt3GeqU.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
  • ButtcleftButtcleft Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Polaritie wrote: »
    burbo wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Jail as 'hell' only works if you never release anyone from jail.

    If shoplifting has a sentence of 100 years then okay.

    But since it doesn't, by making prison 'hell', all you're doing is ensuring that people that come out are psychologically damaged and will have a serious chip on their shoulder regarding the way they've been treated. The worse it is, the more likely people released from prison will seek retribution against society at large.

    That's not rehabilitation.

    That's an eye for eye making the world blind.

    I've always thought that one of the most dehumanizing things we do to our convicts is to take away their voting rights. I mean, supposedly after you go through prison you are supposed to have done your time and paid your dues, ready to be a member of society again. Yet for some reason, you still can't participate in this act that is supposed to be a fundamental right as a citizen of our republic? What the fuck for, except just to say "fuck you criminals"? Has the threat of losing the right to vote ever dissuaded someone from committing a criminal act? Are we worried all the felons are going to get together to form a large voting block and push through the "Murder is Totally Cool Now Guys Amendment"? I just don't get it.

    Honestly I don't think there's a valid justification for not letting them vote, even while incarcerated (I don't consider "it's hard" valid when discussing rights or morality).

    I can think of a reason: Politics are bad enough to discuss face-to-face with relatives.

    Prison isn't known for differences of opinion being discussed civilly. Political differences are already a cause for some violence in prison: imagine how much worse it'll be if they're allowed to vote? Not to mention the threat of violence if you don't vote a certain way - in other words, voter intimidation.

    so.. Beat the shit out of dogs until they go wild eyed and vicious, then refuse to feed them because they might attack each other over it

    that's it, I'm shutting this entire forum down, everyone thank buttcleft
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus premium Registered User regular
    Please show me where in my post I said anything about the current climate inside prisons to be a good thing, or that once convicted of a crime, one should not have the ability to vote upon release from prison.

    The ability to vote while incarcerated is not something I'm necessarily opposed to, but I was able to provide a reason why perhaps it wouldn't be a good idea.

    dt3GeqU.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Polaritie wrote: »
    burbo wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Jail as 'hell' only works if you never release anyone from jail.

    If shoplifting has a sentence of 100 years then okay.

    But since it doesn't, by making prison 'hell', all you're doing is ensuring that people that come out are psychologically damaged and will have a serious chip on their shoulder regarding the way they've been treated. The worse it is, the more likely people released from prison will seek retribution against society at large.

    That's not rehabilitation.

    That's an eye for eye making the world blind.

    I've always thought that one of the most dehumanizing things we do to our convicts is to take away their voting rights. I mean, supposedly after you go through prison you are supposed to have done your time and paid your dues, ready to be a member of society again. Yet for some reason, you still can't participate in this act that is supposed to be a fundamental right as a citizen of our republic? What the fuck for, except just to say "fuck you criminals"? Has the threat of losing the right to vote ever dissuaded someone from committing a criminal act? Are we worried all the felons are going to get together to form a large voting block and push through the "Murder is Totally Cool Now Guys Amendment"? I just don't get it.

    Honestly I don't think there's a valid justification for not letting them vote, even while incarcerated (I don't consider "it's hard" valid when discussing rights or morality).

    I can think of a reason: Politics are bad enough to discuss face-to-face with relatives.

    Prison isn't known for differences of opinion being discussed civilly. Political differences are already a cause for some violence in prison: imagine how much worse it'll be if they're allowed to vote? Not to mention the threat of violence if you don't vote a certain way - in other words, voter intimidation.

    Except it's a secret ballot.

    So this argument makes no sense.

    programjunkieMulletude
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    edited August 2015
    I would be ecstatic if our correctional system evolved to a point where secret ballots were a possibility.

    We can't even decide, as a nation, whether correspondence between a prisoner and his fucking lawyer should be private, not to mention legal and illegal mail censorship.

    If we gave in-custody prisoners voting rights, I have no doubt that ballots would go missing, get altered, or replaced outright by prison staff. And who knows how many elections would pass before solid evidence of it were uncovered.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
    PLAWraith260mcdermottLovely
  • VeeveeVeevee WisconsinRegistered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    I would be ecstatic if our correctional system evolved to a point where secret ballots were a possibility.

    We can't even decide, as a nation, whether correspondence between a prisoner and his fucking lawyer should be private, not to mention legal and illegal mail censorship.

    If we gave in-custody prisoners voting rights, I have no doubt that ballots would go missing, get altered, or replaced outright by prison staff. And who knows how many elections would pass before solid evidence of it were uncovered.

    I mean, who's word you going to trust? A prison's worth of inmates, or the king and his men warden and the guards?

  • PLAPLA The process.Registered User regular
    You'd need some sort of independent branch to go into prisons and collect votes.

    Feral
  • King RiptorKing Riptor Registered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    I would be ecstatic if our correctional system evolved to a point where secret ballots were a possibility.

    We can't even decide, as a nation, whether correspondence between a prisoner and his fucking lawyer should be private, not to mention legal and illegal mail censorship.

    If we gave in-custody prisoners voting rights, I have no doubt that ballots would go missing, get altered, or replaced outright by prison staff. And who knows how many elections would pass before solid evidence of it were uncovered.

    America on the whole is really good at finding vote tampering despite what the GOP would have you think.

    It's a little silly to think the Prison staff would be allowed anywhere near the actual polling . It would have to be private security and use volunteers like any other polling station

    I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
    shryke
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    America on the whole is really good at finding vote tampering despite what the GOP would have you think.

    It's a little silly to think the prison staff would be allowed anywhere near the actual polling. It would have to be private security and use volunteers like any other polling station

    It would have to be private security from a company that is not itself a correctional contractor, otherwise you're just choosing a different fox to guard the henhouse.

    I'm cynical about this because prisons and correctional contractors have given me every reason to be cynical. We've already talked about rape (sometimes of minors) being treated like a feature rather than a bug; I mentioned censorship and surveillance. We've had multiple instances in recent years of medical contractors in prison reusing needles, in some cases giving prisoners hepatitis. We've had multiple instances in recent years of people getting thrown in jail or prison and serving time long past their sentences because the bureaucracy basically forgot about them.

    If there is a way to fuck up a process, prison contractors will find it. If there is a way to abuse prisoners for profit, prison contractors will do it.

    I want to start with reinstating voting rights for ex-convicts, and cleaning up (or abolishing) the private prison industry. After that we can work on providing ballots to people currently in custody.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
    Gnome-InterruptusminirhyderArdol
  • Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    I don't know. I'm generally on board with preventing people in prison from being able to vote. I'm okay with restoring that right post-incarceration, though.

  • ButtcleftButtcleft Registered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    I would be ecstatic if our correctional system evolved to a point where secret ballots were a possibility.

    We can't even decide, as a nation, whether correspondence between a prisoner and his fucking lawyer should be private, not to mention legal and illegal mail censorship.

    If we gave in-custody prisoners voting rights, I have no doubt that ballots would go missing, get altered, or replaced outright by prison staff. And who knows how many elections would pass before solid evidence of it were uncovered.

    America on the whole is really good at finding vote tampering despite what the GOP would have you think.

    It's a little silly to think the Prison staff would be allowed anywhere near the actual polling . It would have to be private security and use volunteers like any other polling station

    I think in the past 20 years the amount of actual, illicit vote tampering can be counted on one hand.

    the vast majority of "fraud" are people moving and failing to realize they need to update their address cause they entered a new district, and even this gets caught.

    that's it, I'm shutting this entire forum down, everyone thank buttcleft
  • Mr KhanMr Khan Not Everyone WAHHHRegistered User regular
    edited August 2015
    I imagine the guards would actually be in favor of abolishing private prisons, since they would likely do better as public employees. The wealthy wouldn't stand for it, of course.

    The guards would take issue with our efforts to reduce prison populations.

    Edit: A lot of these debates could probably be helped if they were framed as an improvement for both sides. Guards and police, for instance, would both have safer, less stressful jobs if the reforms discussed on this board were implemented.

    Mr Khan on
Sign In or Register to comment.