Termyn8or
Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
|
Buddy of mine gets out of the joint and tells me how much he has learned. Well I duuno bout you, but seems to me there are certain things that you generally don't want to learn in jail, the first of which is how to stay out of jail.
Now I know there are a couple of people with their fingers poised over the keyboard, itching at another chance to tear me up, and I don't mind really. I didn't come here to talk about the weather.
Incarceration has proven to be inneffective, and it's overuse has resulted in some strange bedfellows as well as the exchange of quite a few negative things. Ever sit in a den of thieves ? Well a prison is sort of a den of thieves on steroids. With nothing much else to do, they exchange thievery and fraud techniques like Women exchange recipes at a block party. Actually Men exchange recipes as well, but alot of ours involve hot sauce :-)
Anyway, incarceration might be appropriate for drunk drivers and a few other offenses. Misdemeanors are generally commited by people who have no thought that they would ever wind up behind bars. But then there is my ex-buddy CP, who simply does not care if he is locked up or not.
It would be nice if the punishment fit the crime. The first thing would be to identify crimes. The government isn't worth a shit doing that of course.
Forget drugs. Selling, buying or using, who cares. However if you commit a crime while high it is considered an intentional act. Intoxication never was a valid defense anyway, so let's go with that. They catch you driving drunk but not too fast or anything, but you shouldn't be driving. You didn't hurt anyone, so to keep it that way go back to the days when they would mail you your car keys. Hit someone though and it is vehicular assault and battery. Kill someone it is homicide.
Realize that might mean the death penalty for drunk driving. I think that would make people stop and think about that "one more for the road". Amd then for example, if you are cleaning or playing with a gun and it goes off and hurts or kills someone, it is considered a willful act. Even though I drink, I would support these things. One must keep enough wits about himself to avoid hurting others.
The supreme court has ruled, andI agree that getting intoxicated is willful misconduct, and therefore is not legally recognized as a disease, at least in the sense that it provide a viable defense for a defendent. While an individual court can, and some do, make an exception, if someone like the victim's family were to really push the issue they could go to a higher court and have the decision overturned.
I don't know how many judges y'all have known, or at least hung around with on occasion, but I know this. One of the biggest fears almost that a judge has is to be overturned by a superior court. It is not a phobia but it is considered very undesirable.
At any rate, to fix the system (I do not want to parallel the other thread, this is all about crime, not international issues), first there must be a better standard for proving guilt. This emormous advantage given to prosecutors mocks the intent of the framers of this government. The state of Texas knowingly executed an innocent Man after fighting all the way to the supreme court for the right to do it. Travesties like this must be stopped dead in their tracks.
But what about after that ? What about if we are sure that everyone convicted of a crime truly is guilty. Each case is reviewed and scrutinized. Plea bargains are out of the picture. Think of the changes that would ensue under these conditions.
So for the purpose of argument, we make sure the guilty are really guilty, and then inflict a punishment. A severe punishment.
I know and have known quite a few people who have been in the joint. Many of them have told me I would do very well there. Don't know quite how to take that, but they told me a few things about how things are on the inside. While people do what they are going to do, and all this was interesting, these accounts left me with the impression that there is very little if any rehabilitation going on there.
I personally know some people who smuggled drugs into prison for YEARS and never got caught. Imagine how many more are. I'm told that if you have a source of money you can get damnear anything on the inside that you can on the outside. While there are notable exceptions, people adapt.
I think it fairly resolved that the system does not work. Thus instead of creating this community, and subsequent organizations by actual criminals once released, I say make the punishment fit the crime.
I have some examples of my thinking on this, and that will probably be the fun part.
Let's start with Wife beaters. They are taken out in the street and beaten to damnear a pulp. Paramedics are standing by, and one of their functions is to see that the perp is not beaten to death. Oh no, he is not allowed to die. He is going to lay there in a hospital and learn what pain is by personal experience.
Theifs. Well I would save the cutting of f of fingers for subsequent offenses, but when someone embezzles, violates trust, especially public trust, take EVERYTHING. I mean everything but the clothes on their back. All property, houses, cars and all of the contents. No jail time, fuck no we ain't giving you a free place to live. You are on your own with nothing.
Rapists. In my futuristic book I described a pretty good punishment. Many people speak of castration, penile amputation. Some are fans of Deliverance or I Spit On Your Grave, but logically, the rapist did not kill the victim. If he did this would be the last of his worries.
A rapist, convicted dead to rights ? Well let the punishment fit the crime. In the book the rapist is tied down and fucked in the ass by as machine, and the dildo is huge. It is designed to hurt, even do some injury, but again stops short of killing. Think he'll do it again ? Let's face it, today you lock a guy up for rape, all he'll do is start raping guys. It's in his psyche, and they only way to change that is through negative reinforcement so harsh that it gets through and trumps his abnormal desire. If it doesn't work, the second offense is the death penalty.
Incarceration still has it's place. Minor thieves might be incarcerated, and worked. The proceeds of this work are paid directly to the victim and the perp is not freed until the debt is paid. Major thieves who have their property confiscated, ALL of it, it is used to pay compensation first.
You want people to say "Damn, I ain't doin' that again". And that is the only thing that will work.
It is said that most criminals operate under the premise that they will not get caught. I believe that is probably true. Now without totally wrecking the country there really is no way to change those odds, because alot of people do get away with alot. So to them it is a gamble. But as any gambler should know, you are going to lose.
I don't think we can effect a change in the odds of getting caught, but we can raise the stakes. And locking people up for 440 years plus a day is not a viable solution.
Say you got a rich guy, but he steals. He would usually do so by violating trust which was mistakenly vested in him. He is not likely to have busted into a garage and stole a bicycle.
Well rich folk depend on society, the government, the order in the country to protect their property, their business interests and in some cases their intelectual property. They use society to become wealthy, and indeed there is no other way to do that.
So they trust society to keep them and their valuables safe. But then they violate the trust that was placed on them. Wouldn't you think that it would be poetically just if society returned the favor ? They already have the means in place, because no matter how rich you are, you really own nothing. If they decided Bill Gates was a bad guy, he would be living on the streets in a month.
The power is vested in the government by the concept of liens, titles and deeds. They can take anything you have because when you get a house, you do not get a deed, you get a title deed. What that means is that you are holder in due course or something like that, but the fact is, if you really owned it you would not have to pay property taxes on it.
In the case of a car, the only way to really own a car in this country is to have the MSO. That must be surrendered to the state to get the certificate of title and subsequently, license plates. Up until maybe ten years ago there was one state that would issue plates on an MSO, it was down south, but I don't think they do it anymore.
So as they misuse these powers now, they should stop and really use them for the public good. Take everything, but get the victims paid back first. Law enforcement is not supposed to be a for profit enterprise.
I have to be off to work soon, but I get there when I get there. Right now I am wondering about something. In the old days they would put people in stocks. It's pretty obvious that they couldn't keep them there very long, but it was surely humiliating and possibly, effective. When I get home I think I'll see what I can find on this. What kinds of crimes did they punish with this device ?
We need different methods. Any ideas ?
T
|
Crime & Punishment - 
Profile
.
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread