Criminal Punishment - Your Thoughts

[methodistgirl]

I talk to you guys on AOL. Gees! If it wern't for AOL I wouldn't be
able to talk to you guys. Internet Explorer just sit there and said,
"Work offline?" Aol kept dialing until I got an answer and now I can
get Magle international music unless I go back to the library and talk
to you once in a while. I would still be captian of something.
Krummhorn, I heard of something going on like that in texas
with some cult.
judy tooley

[intet_at_tabe]

Hello Intet,

Its not only in the South that they've had chain-gangs but also in the North. The use of chain-gangs in the South brought back "institutional" memory about chain-gangs used by slave owners. So of course there are many politicians who are squeamish about reinstituting chain-gangs for fear of being labeled as racist. I believe Sheriff Joe Arpaio is of Mexican descent so its not so easy for ACLU to label him as racist.

Cheers,

CD

Dear Corno Dolce

Why do I get the feeling, you seem to think I talk of racism (haven´t even thought about it), and you think I am against the ideas of Sheriff Joe Arpaio? Well my friend. You´re wrong.

To tell you the truth, I see many good ideas put to practice to Mr. Arpaio´s opinions on how to run a prison and how to treat prisoners. For the society outside also better, at a very low cost for the taxpayers, if your numbers in Dollars in a year are correct, then it´s great.

My point however is still the same though, if it works for the benefit of the society outside the prison, and it keeps the prisoners in line at all times, reminding them each day of the crimes they have performed, then why has his system not been implemented throughout the entire State?

Would you call this kind of prison for rehabilitation through correction or simply punishment? I don´t see much punishment here. Just think of it towards Rikers Island or the former San Quintin. The prisoners from the film are outside in the fresh air every day, excercising, they can talk together, make plans, lots of fresh air and they can look as far as the eye can reach to the horizon. They even have their lunch brought to them like in a club for gentlemen.

Respectfully,

[Muza]

To answer your question, Intet (that is if it works, why not implement more of it) is what I and Krummhorn were saying all along - bacause we have IDIOTS in here, liberals who are burrying the society deeper and deeper into the ground just so that they can feel better! Because its unacceptable by human standards, because putting human beings in chaingangs is mean and embarrasing, because even criminals have feelings! Its absurd!

Just as a little example, do you think there is some economical benefit coming from Arpaio's prison? It certainly makes sense to me that it does, because first of all it costs less to run that kind of prison, and second of all - they are actually doing something productive which the county would probably have to delegate money to take care of otherwise. Remember that woman in the youtube clip - a member of some prison reform? She is arguing that its not so, and yet all she can say is "This is just Arpaio's perception, many will disagree". She really doesnt have anything of a substance to say - she cant say why its not true, why Arpaio is wrong, why she is right - no facts, no statistics, no reasons, not even attempted arguments. All that she knows is just to argue and oppose, for the sake of opposition. Just like the rest of liberals. Have no idea what they are arguing, have no idea of problems involved, just arguing...to promote open mind and understanding.

Thats why I am very happy and thankful to Joe Arpaio - he is a smart and a brave man. And Im happy that he is doing what he is doing, because I think its a little step towards getting society back on track. I hope that more of these little steps will be made (and I think that more people will follow Arpaio's example), and we will get closer to a better prison system.

[Corno Dolce]

Dear Intet,

Please perish the thought that I think you're speaking of racism - nothing could be further from the truth. I included what I said about Sheriff Arpaio because there are any number of "visitors" on this forum who might be unaware of Sheriff Arpaio's background and wish to make political hay against Sheriff Arpaio and about a very effective program run by the good Sheriff from Arizona.

Its not just the whole of Arizona but all of the other States should implement the program. The reasons are many but mainly political.

Cheers,

CD

[Muza]

Would you call this kind of prison for rehabilitation through correction or simply punishment? I don´t see much punishment here. Just think of it towards Rikers Island or the former San Quintin. The prisoners from the film are outside in the fresh air every day, excercising, they can talk together, make plans, lots of fresh air and they can look as far as the eye can reach to the horizon. They even have their lunch brought to them like in a club for gentlemen.

Respectfully,

Yeah, I dont really see much punishment there - I guess the main punishment is supposed to be the feeling of humiliation and having to do some labor. But then again, I dont really see much punishment in putting someone in prison (im talking about institutionalized punishment, not violence and physical abuse that might happen while serving ones term).

The only problem that I can find with this system (and Im not sure if that only applies to juveniles), is that its voluntary. It shouldnt be voluntary - just make all of them get into chaingangs and do some labor (depending on severity of the crime of course).

[intet_at_tabe]

To answer your question, Intet (that is if it works, why not implement more of it) is what I and Krummhorn were saying all along - bacause we have IDIOTS in here, liberals who are burrying the society deeper and deeper into the ground just so that they can feel better! Because its unacceptable by human standards, because putting human beings in chaingangs is mean and embarrasing, because even criminals have feelings! Its absurd!

Just as a little example, do you think there is some economical benefit coming from Arpaio's prison? It certainly makes sense to me that it does, because first of all it costs less to run that kind of prison, and second of all - they are actually doing something productive which the county would probably have to delegate money to take care of otherwise. Remember that woman in the youtube clip - a member of some prison reform? She is arguing that its not so, and yet all she can say is "This is just Arpaio's perception, many will disagree". She really doesnt have anything of a substance to say - she cant say why its not true, why Arpaio is wrong, why she is right - no facts, no statistics, no reasons, not even attempted arguments. All that she knows is just to argue and oppose, for the sake of opposition. Just like the rest of liberals. Have no idea what they are arguing, have no idea of problems involved, just arguing...to promote open mind and understanding.

Thats why I am very happy and thankful to Joe Arpaio - he is a smart and a brave man. And Im happy that he is doing what he is doing, because I think its a little step towards getting society back on track. I hope that more of these little steps will be made (and I think that more people will follow Arpaio's example), and we will get closer to a better prison system.

Muza dear, Krummhorn and Corno Dolce in respect

I can´t nor will I disagree with you. Obviously Mr. Arpaio is on to something real improving here looking at his prison system, but one guy in one prison do not make a revolution.

My overall question is still the same. Do we as lawbinding citizens never having offended the law ourselves, expect prisoners to become better people while in prison, to be rehabilitated to be able to take part of a normal peaceful functional society (if such thing excist in the USA at all) after having done each their time?

Or do we send people/criminals to punishment for their crimes not to be rehabilitated, but only because we have no other alternatives than to luck them up far from society to keep all of us normal citizens safe, the convicted criminals never to be able to join the society again?

Who should decide for this? The US Congress for all of the USA or each State and Department of Correction or any local Sheriff?

The link below is an example of those there have been to many of, where innocent people have been convicted for crimes they never did.

If Corno Dolce reads this, then I agree with you about the label of racism in the past:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/2/...ectid=10507169

[Corno Dolce]

Deleted by author

[Muza]

Yeah, people get wrongly accused and that is one problem - but that is not the problem of punishment, that is the problem of steps that happen before punishment - police investigation, trials. Yes, thats horrible, but thats an exception to the rule, not the rule. I bet the number of wrongly accused is very very small.

To answer your questions, I really dont know. In my personal outlook (which I know is a bit different from the rest), I do not think that criminals can be rehabilitated (and Im not talking about car jackers, petty theft, I mean more of rapists, pedophiles, murderers). I think the problem is mental, and no amount of physical activity or whatever is going to change that. And that being said - I feel very shady about letting those people back into society.

Take this Austrian bastard for instance. Wasnt it you who mentioned that this horrible crime was not his first sexual offense? He was most likely responsible for raping some other child? The crimes do not stop! And should I add - they get more and more vicious every time. First it was someone else's kid, then it was his own kid....locked up and raped for years and years. If the old f..t wasnt so damn old, I bet he would have moved on to his grandkids next, and God knows what after that!

These people should not, should not be brought back to society. As for althernatives to locking them up for life - we do have them - they are called death penalties, and they should be used more often! And they do work.
I do think that there is hope for those criminals who have committed less serious offenses though. I think they can potentially be rehabilitated, but definitely not in our prisions. In a prison focused on order and labor, like Joe Arpaios. But definitely not the US prisons, where on one side criminal can "chill" all day, but on the other side there is drugs, disorder, and violence, which I think only develop killer instincts and make a stronger criminal.

Who should decide it? Ideally, thats what we have a judge and jury for, but that hasnt been working too well.

As for the revolution comment - I will disagree. I think in a society which has increasingly been going left, one person who takes of and suddenly goes right is all it takes to start a revolution. One man is enough. Now, i didnt say that we are having a revolution - no. but its enough to start one. If one man does that - more and more will follow.

[intet_at_tabe]

Dear Intet,

What does it have to do with me if I read the link that you provided? I read and I knew about the fellow who had been wrongfully incarcerated for 27 years earlier this week. What are you trying to prove Intet? That I'm a clown?

No Corno Dolce , please!!

You twist my words. You mentioned racism (I did not) according to the squeemish politicians reminding them of slaves in the past in the south and the ACLU towards Mr. Arpaio. You said:

"Hello Intet,

......So of course there are many politicians who are squeamish about reinstituting chain-gangs for fear of being labeled as racist. I believe Sheriff Joe Arpaio is of Mexican descent so its not so easy for ACLU to label him as racist.

Cheers,

CD

These were your words. Right? Not mine.

Beside it shows in the video, Mr. Arpaio certainly do not discriminate nor use racism towards any of the prisoners both black and white. They have to obey to the same system all of them men or women, black or white, wear the same clothes with the signature on their backs "Sheriff´s Inmate". So how can this be racism?

The racism done in the past as we both know, were on different levels of racism - the process of investigating the crime and the supposed criminal by the overall white police force back in the day, where alot of black people were sent to prison mainly because of the color of their skin, rather than the question to whether: Did they do the crime in question or was it someone else? Of course the KKK was visible then, which they are not anymore.

Their chances of a good lawyer was another problem, who would give them the same courtesy as anyone else (whites), the best defence whether they were guilty or not. It´s in the rules of the American Bar Association. It´s any lawyer´s first and foremost obligation to give any client the best defence no matter what.

What I miss for the USA as a so called democratical country from California to New York are common laws and rules for all Americans in all courts and prisons, no matter what. Whether a Sheriff looks to be Mexican or Chinese does not tell much about the prison system. You know the expression about some black people: He is more white than the white themselves?

Frankly, I find the ACLU rediculous. But one of these typical American groups, who believe they have the right to decide. This is why I asked - unanswered by Master Krummhorn - How did they, the ACLU react - only from out of curiosity, not to whether Mr. Arpaio is of Mexican descent or not, I couldn´t care less if he was of Mexican or Chinese descent for that matter, and frankly it does not say anything whatsoever whether his new prison system works or not. I only asked about the reaction from the ACLU?

Btw. When did I ever call you a clown?

[methodistgirl]

There is another problem with this system. A lot of people who were
innocent of wrong doing were punished for it anyway even killed.
That's the only place where I would draw the line. Someone goes
to prison over a lie and that person couldn't prove himself otherwise
for other witnesses swearing on the lie. Mastaken idenity does
happen when there are two people either with the same name or
look almost identical to each other.
judy tooley

[Krummhorn]

. . . . . Frankly, I find the ACLU rediculous. But one of these typical American groups, who believe they have the right to decide. This is why I asked - unanswered by Master Krummhorn - How did they, the ACLU react - only from out of curiosity, not to whether Mr. Arpaio is of Mexican descent or not, I couldn´t care less if he was of Mexican or Chinese descent for that matter, and frankly it does not say anything whatsoever whether his new prison system works or not. I only asked about the reaction from the ACLU?

Hi Intet,

Thanks for the reminder about the question, and I apologize for not answering it sooner.

This snippet, taken from an article dated December, 2003, sums up the ACLU's position as it relates to Sheriff Joe Arpaio and the tent city jail:

"Sheriff Arpaio's practices and policies not only harm the low-level offenders incarcerated in the jail, but pre-trial detainees who cannot go home only because they are too poor to post bail," stated Eleanor Eisenberg, Executive Director of the ACLU of Arizona. "It is our belief that detainees who have not even had a trial yet are entitled to a high degree of security and decent treatment."

The full article can be found here on the ACLU website.

(Disclaimer: I am not a member of the ACLU nor do I support their views.)

There is another problem with this system. A lot of people who were innocent of wrong doing were punished for it anyway even killed. That's the only place where I would draw the line. Someone goes
to prison over a lie and that person couldn't prove himself otherwise
for other witnesses swearing on the lie. Mastaken idenity does
happen when there are two people either with the same name or
look almost identical to each other. judy tooley

Makes one wonder whatever happened to "Innocent until proven guilty" (?)

[Corno Dolce]

I apologise to my brother Intet for my letting the misunderstanding betwixt us get so far.

Humbly,

CD

[Andrew Roussak]

I apologise to my brother Intet for my letting the misunderstanding betwixt us get so far.

Humbly,

CD

Exactly, CD!! I just wanted to say - why can't you guys black-eye each other and then be friendly?

Captain Andrew

[Muza]

Fight! Fight! Fight!

racism is a funny issue in America - its being taken too far anyways.
one of my favourites was I think last year - a black senator who was entering the court house or something like that was asked for id at the entry (which is the standard security protocol). She refused to give it to the police officer, and just kept saying "Dont you know who I am". She hit him on a face with her phone. And then pulled a racist card. So that kinda stupid thing is very very big in here fun isnt it?

[Contratrombone64]

"black eye" each other?

Um, "black-eye" is not a verb!!!! It's a noun :0