Yes it should. Besides the ones that will be in for life and the ones that are executed, those prisoners are going to be released back into the public. If they aren't rehabilitated, then they are going to repeat their crime. Maybe if we worked more on this, then crime rates would lower.
2006-07-13 07:04:30
·
answer #1
·
answered by Mariners 5
·
4⤊
3⤋
If rehabilitation were happening, there would be no repeat offenders. I am a hard working individual. My spouse and I have worked our whole adult lives to provide for ourselves and our kids.
We have to pay for our own
cable/satellite
electricity
water
food
mortgage
transportation
medical care
Inmates pay for none of these. They are allowed to get college educations while I struggle to get grants and loans that still do not pay all of the fees.
My point is that if more effort were put into educating non-criminals before they became criminals there would not be overcrowding in prisons. Prison is a vacation from real life. In real life there are bills to pay and responsibilities. If a prisoner returns to society without this knowledge, they have no recourse but to return to crime.
Instead of having high school classes like "basket weaving" and "nuts and berries", maybe they should offer "real life 101". Then maybe these people will have an idea about what it takes to function in society as an adult.
2006-07-13 07:24:11
·
answer #2
·
answered by Blue Eyed Baby 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Since it OBVIOUSLY ISN'T doing a good job of rehabilitating anyone, then perhaps turning the prisons into tatoo parlors for the public would help them to work off their debts, since this seems to be the outcome of their time served! I do think that they should not be allowed to communicate with one another while they are doing time & their exercise time should be limited because these guys are getting out & after doing 2 or more years, they are fine tuned & more physically fit that body builders! Henceforth, fine examples to return into society? I think not.
2006-07-13 07:00:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is a two pronged system. One is yeah, punishment, and the other is to give the offender certain necessary tools to succeed in society. If he/she is uneducated, they get a GED. If they have no work skills they can learn a trade that is useful outside. They get them AA, NA and so on if the situation warrants it. I crack up when someone uses the excuse they were drunk or high at the time they committed the crime thinking that the judge will be easy on the sentence, because now, they have to go to these meetings. Believe me the inmates just don't sit on the yard pumping iron or slinging slop in the kitchens. Most have jobs they do while there and case managers who work with them.
2006-07-13 07:46:59
·
answer #4
·
answered by merlinsdragonfire 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, the effectiveness of all reinforcement methods besides threat of punishment is a psychological fact. That is why so many youth 'camps' designed for disciplinary purposes use incentives and priveleges as motivators. While I see prison primarily as a separation between society and people who have created a danger to it, and I do not see the benefit of many priveleges enjoyed by prisoners, I feel that if a prisoner is not equipped to thrive in society without being a danger to it, he/she should not be released.
2006-07-13 06:54:09
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Interesting you should ask this question. One of the primary problems in our "corrections/penal" system is we have never answered this precise question. What is it that we want our prisons to do? Depending on our answer, they will look very different from physical building to programs to personnel. Instead, we try to accomplish all possible goals simultaneously (punishment, retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation) and fail miserably at all of them.
2006-07-13 06:52:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by jurydoc 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think when you come to jail/prison the goal should be rehabilitation....when you reoffend and end up back in jail like most inmates do the goal then should be house them and forget them.
Now if were talking child molesters my opinion is 1st offence 20 yrs......2nd offence castration and another 20 yrs.....if there is a 3rd offence life....NO PAROLE EVER!
2006-07-13 10:00:09
·
answer #7
·
answered by GamberMan 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think we need two branches of our justice system - one where we aim to rehabilitate, and the other to incarcerate as punishment.
No matter what, we really need to keep those we trying to rehabilitate (and punish at the same time) away from those we're only trying to punish.
2006-07-13 06:50:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by justwebbrowsing 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Since 95% of all inmates will eventually be released back into our communities, i believe it is in our own best interest to give them every opportunity to do the right thing.
2006-07-13 07:00:11
·
answer #9
·
answered by tyrsson58 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
debt to society is a debt,charged a fine for a crime,work it off at a pay per day labor,reduce public debt for fighting crime,let the perp pay.
2006-07-13 06:51:01
·
answer #10
·
answered by Bushit 4
·
0⤊
0⤋