Specificaly this form:
There is no way to equally judge another human being or bring back what the violation has caused equally. The attempt will lead to mistakes and cruelty. More insidious is the notion someone can bring justice. I bring this up because the smart men and women I know (asked 40) all agreed this is why they still believe in the religion they believe in. Some cited fear of death as number 2 but all said they believe there has to be justice from higher power ultimatey. And that this is the only solace they have in this world. They believe someone who took so much life, like a Dahmer, would have to be judged by something eternal. I said someone in war may take 100's of lives but this is judged justice because they did it under orders or for a "just" cause.
Justice does seem to be hard wired instinctual.Most social mammals show different degrees of abhorrents to inequality.Especially primates.
But essentially isn't the pursuit of real justice not possible? Calling it necessary means this will make those who deem the power to wield it, to better humanity, unjust from the beginning? Isn't justice another way of claiming superiority? Doesn't a despot in the world use it to claim there power? If we agree justice is not a noble pursuit and clearly impossible (like following the word of god), what laws or punishments should be changed or updated? How would you feel if a mass murder or child molester was treated with a kind hand, rather than the visceral feeling of gutting them like a pig and dancing in the entrails as they slowing die. I am the first to admit this sounds more like justice at a primal level. But should we be smarter than that?
Did you even read those source links? What you are talking about has no relation to what I was saying. These programs are not abstinence programs. They are intervention and mediation programs used in disputes in crime-ridden neighborhoods.
I didn't see the sources but recoignized the reference and agree with the source. I didn't notice they were links until now. I wasn't even speaking to those comments it was this one you wrote:
"The other tries to influence behavior by introducing school-based curricula like antidrug and safe-sex campaigns."
And as I said it's a pet peeve sorry I didn't mean any disrespect just one of those issues I can't stop but get on a soap box for no reason.
Ahhhh... I see. No worries.
"IN THE PUBLIC-HEALTH field, there have long been two schools of thought on derailing violence. One focuses on environmental factors, specifically trying to limit gun purchases and making guns safer. The other tries to influence behavior by introducing school-based curricula like antidrug and safe-sex campaigns.
To add to that I think it all starts with the parents. I know this opens up an entirely new can of worms, that's not my intention, but before we address schools and guns we need to address mom and dad imho.
Nope I think its the same can of worms. this needs to be a holistic approach. I will say that the more repeated violent criminals tend to be predominately from those with bad upbringings or bad events in children however not always at the service does it look like that.
Perhaps it is the same can of worms. The HOW behind that WHAT is what would be an interesting/next discussion point but you're right, it is all interconnected.
I agree but i think the first step is a systematic look at the laws we are sending people to jail for.
SO true. I know of a guy who was in jail for an expired fishing license...are you JOKING? Some judges are a bit ridiculous if you ask me. All it does is crowd our jails and make the system that much more bogged down.
Think about how much money is spent incarcerating people for relatively innocuous marijuana "crimes." Even where it doesn't result in incarceration, it wastes lots of expensive court time.
The individuals who need treatment actually become clear when you remove systematically those who have been punished to harshly for a crime. How do you determine the punishment was to harsh? First you look at how variant the outcome of similar cases. so if one guy went to jail for 5 years for buying a bag of weed over an ounce, compared to another jurisdiction giving them a fine and community service. If the variances are obvious like that then the law should be looked at more closely. then look at the offense itself. I know of a rapist who went to jail for 7 years and a man who stole 10k from his clients as the accountant in a period of 4 years. the accountant got 12 yrs. Yes they went to different jails which is at least better but a rapist untreated get out with good behavior 2-3 years, the accountant 5 yrs minimum sentence. judges more than not have no choice the amoutn of time they give due to mandatory sentencing laws like 3 strikes. this way a politicain can say I am not easy on crime.
So, to take a concrete example, a famous country singer owes millions of dollars in evaded taxes. A tax court reduces his liability by half. Joe Schmoe also has a huge tax liability due to being caught in an evasion. Joe should get treatment?
nope it says the law itself is unfair that is all.
There are many people who have had a poor upbringing who never went on to live a life of crime.The recidivism rate for convicts released from America's prison systems is very high. Now the question is- Is it the convict's fault or the system's fault that they became a repeat offender? You cannot force rehabilitation onto a prisoner; they have to have a desire to change. Rehabilitation is offered in our state's prison systems; the ability to complete your high school education and beyond is also available. Early parole consideration is an incentive for completing these courses but some still lack the interest.
I cannot see the future but I do know it would be absolutely irresponsible to allow some of our incarcerated to return back into society. Some individuals are psychopathic and a danger to society and others are sexual predators who would almost certainly repeat their offenses if given the opportunity. Some do not stop this behavior even after being locked up and the system is forced to isolate them from the imprisoned population.
It has to be realized that a certain percentage of offenders have no inclination to change their ways. Some people are just evil. We have unfortunately learned these lessons the hard way when a parole board releases someone who goes out into society and rapes and kills again.