++> Inspired by Dennis Menard comments to Day Brown
++> on "ETHICS"
Read through your many "paragraph-to-question"s on the
sprawling subject of punishment notions ("ethics" would
confuse the issue). Would it be hard for you to accept
that most people just want problems to go away (motives less
noble). That is why we employ institutions supposedly trained
and skilled in such areas. Naturally, things seem ner' so
simple...!
DMe> Does "justice" always reduce to "punishment"? Question.
What we call justice on the surface is largely overridden just
beneath it, by a "greater" desire to be rid of problems that
might effect us. This "doublespeak" (even doublethink) allows
a society to veil itself in high-minded public concerns, while
getting on with the actual business of a more perceived safe-
comfortable everyday life. There be always the reason and the
REASONS.
DMe> Whether or not you want to eliminate state involvement with
DMe> justice, if you put a high value on "public opinion" vs "the
DMe> facts" or a judiciary concerned more with conviction rates than
DMe> "the truth," you are going to get some state involvement.
DMe> Aren't you? Question.
A population disturbed ENOUGH with crime will find a way to
address it that is emotionally satisfying. Whether it be at
state, local collective (vigilante) or personal levels. Public
opinion will eventually win out so it is up to the state to rid
the environment of crime that disturbs people in a "QUIET"
effective way. Public opinion, unless temporarily diverted by
rhetoric, just wants the problems to "go way". If they don't
go away, those perceived to be the source grow to become a
population wide acceptable target.
DMe> Are not their prisons stuffed to the gills? Seems to me like the
DMe> states started locking them up longer for less serious assaults
DMe> and the drug dealing that releases the passions that cause them.
DMe> The public may have been thinking of justice in longer prison for
DMe> social predators, but it has reduced the murder rate.
At the state level some semblance of justice is attempted. If it
was up to the man on the street, we would go back to Western justice--
a quick trial for murder with a hangin in the back yard. If you
cannot hang them, the next best is to MAKE THEM DISAPPEAR (as is
presently growing popular).
DMe> Granted. In your view, do you feel it (ie, stuffing the prison
DMe> system) has SOLVED the problems which frequently in murders
DMe> (ie, drug-dealing)? Rephrasing: Has it addressed the causes, or the
DMe> symptoms, OF the problems)? Will inmates be released -- only to find
DMe> themselves confronted by those same causes (ie, influences) which
DMe> saw them to prison in the first place? Do you not think these
DMe> issues deserve some consideration? These are questions.
If the symptoms can be made to vanish, most are satisfied.
If the public had their way, releasing inmates would be more
rare. Like feeding the thousands that die every night from
starvation, the public is only interested in the causes of crime
if handled quietly and cheap. The world hunger plague is handled
"most quiet" ....not even mentioned in the news media (hardly)!
DB> I am not arguing that execution reduced the murder rate among the
DB> general public in any detectable fashion. I say that it reduced
DB> the rate of *murder among the prison population*, which has had a
DB> salutatory effect on the death rate for guards.
Its a matter of practicality, execution would be the least costly
if the appeals process was not so expensively dragged out...
DMe> Understood. In your view, do you feel there are any alternative
DMe> methods of achieving the same result short of execution? Is it
DMe> your understanding that guards are immune from criminal acts or
DMe> responsibility just because they ARE guards? See note, near end
DMe> of post. More questions.
In history's years of penal experience, not much seems to have
been more effective than jailing or execution with the latter most
effective. Other methods would only be considered if they were
cheap and proven effective. No one trusts any other methods-
(would appreciate a list of them ???). From what I read, most
inmates follow criminal patterns and are pretty immune to "other
methods". Like with dugs, 90% return to the habit after very
expensive rehab! I think we have to live with a +/- 5%
criminality factor (regardless of what is done).
DB> The black may well face more severe sentences. But in as much as
DB> they cause greater damage to their community, I think that this is
DB> appropriate. The white criminal preys on a richer community that
DB> can more easily afford it without fraying the social fabric.
DMe> In effect, then, what you are saying is that, one of the benefits
DMe> of being more affluent is that the richer criminal will suffer a
DMe> lesser penalty for a given crime for which the poorer criminal will
DMe> suffer a greater penalty?
You know it is *not* that simple!!!! but, Yes, I believe that is
historically true from the earliest records...the rich a bit more
equal under the law than the poor. Our society accepts that as
natural. Rven when guilt heavy, Money attracts the best legal defence.
DMe> Do I understand you correctly? What if the money dedicated to the
DMe> maintenance of incarceration were redirected towards prevention
DMe> (ie, reducing economic inequities and disparate opportunities
DMe> between cultures, say?)
It is not possible to manage such an effort, even if funded.
America tried it with some best efforts and only succeeded in
producing more criminals and dilemmas. There comes a time when
one must realize that either the resources are expended at the
wrong end of the problem or the problem cannot be solved by
resources thrown at it .....or, most likely, we are not smart
enough or willing enough to pull it off. There are SO many things
in this world that WOULD-BE-NICE, IF! .....if profitable in terms
of the prime human motivator .....the GREED instinct buried in
our genes like sex!
DMe> Can the U.S. conceive of itself WITHOUT capital punishment?
NO!
DMe> Does it want to?
NO!
DB> Cost to who? the accused? or the victim? My justice measurement
DB> is the only number I can count: the number of victims. If policy
DB> decreases that number, then it's as much justice as I can expect.
DB> Calculated in that number of *victims* are those who falsely are
DB> convicted by the state.
DMe> Do you allege to know, then, how many innocent victims have been
DMe> convicted by the State? Are claims of the executed innocent
DMe> followed-up? What of an ex-inmate, falsely accused, having served
DMe> all his time ... what time can he expect now from those who jailed
DMe> him when they couldn't spare him the time to verify his innocence
DMe> before that costly prison term? Questions.
DB> If I have to kill one of them to prevent a hundred guards and
DB> non-violent prisoners from being killed, who is to say that it
DB> is not worth it?
yes! the reality of practical truth is
appreciated even when not "good sounding"!
DMe> Perhaps the innocent person who remains a victim because of
DMe> judicial technicalities that make the review (and correction)
DMe> of, frequently, very overt errors and miscarriages of justice
DMe> within the system ... impossible? :(
I believe there are overwhelmingly far more errors made that
set the guilty free..... Questions
DMe> I notice that the U.S.A. is mentioned a surprising number of
DMe> times in those bulletins published by Amnesty International
DMe> (ie, at least, it surprised me)
The USA has the unique problem of having a minority generated
crime problem and too many lawyers to defend them ......and
all this within a growing Romanish media game atmosphere-
....to say nothing of a mixed in complex drug problem!
.......a good recipe to bake this cake is
hard to come by...........yes?
_
/"0o\_ ... Dave
.....guess I come from the wrong side of the tracks!
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------
* Origin: America's favorite whine - it's your fault! (1:261/1000)
|