Lately I have been hearing arguements that criminals ought to be rehabilitated rather than being locked up in prison for life. Is there hope for convicted criminals or is prison the best best place to keep them?
2006-08-03 11:12:19 · 11 answers · asked by Joe K 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Bad Idea.
Rehabilitation is a lie.
Death sentence is bliss.
2006-08-03 11:19:15 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is always hope for a convicted criminal, but only if they want to change and that is the key.
One of my lecturers was a criminal. He was sent to the top prison here at a time when rehabilitation was not really looked upon as a good thing. The warden let him study while in prison. He came out with a Masters and then went to get a PhD and teach.
Prisons MUST have opportunities for rehabilitation, but it can not be forced upon a criminal because most often, they like who they are and do not want to change. But for those who do, systems must be in place.
Trusport: The death penalty is NOT a deterrent to crime. History has shown this.
Here in New Zealand, the death penalty was bought back for a brief period of time and crimes did not drop at all. Look at America and it's crime statistics.
cutiepie: Child molesters have the lowest recidivist rate of any known criminal type.
Therapy set to help further reduce the chances of recidivism are in fact successful. The international average is about 5-10% of all molesters will reoffend.
Does further work need to put in, definately, but they are able to be rehabilitated.
2006-08-03 18:47:41 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Joe K, it depends on the crime and the age of the perpetrator, murder is the act of an animal and this person has no hope of rehab. and should be locked away for life. Petty theft by a young offender would be better served if you did not send them to crime school which prisons are. But rather a vocational rehabilitation so that when they come out they at least have a chance to become responsible members of society. Repeat offenders should be treated more harshly, this should be left up to the desecration of the judge, not some idiot congressmen or legislator.
2006-08-03 18:23:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If this was a perfect society, rehabilitation would be the answer. But it's not. If someone is serving a life sentence, chances are the conviction was serious. I don't like what prisons are costing the American taxpayers each year, I don't like prisons that afford a lifer the opportunity of a college education, when I couldn't afford one, I don't like prison guards and prisoners being beaten and killed. I don't like prisoners being treated like animals.
Some judges need to get their self-righteous heads out of the clouds and our justice system needs a major revamping. Prison is not a deterrent to crime, rehabilitation is not punishment for a crime committed.
Serious crime should be dealt the death penalty. The lengthy appeal process should be streamlined or even eliminated. A deterrent to crime is DEATH.
2006-08-03 18:26:39 · answer #4 · answered by trusport 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Imprisonment is a form of punishment and rehabilitation. Prisoners are allowed to get their freedom if they behaved for a number of years. It is very hard if their rehabilitation is conducted outside the bars because they are convicts who have tendencies to commit felonies again.
2006-08-03 18:39:30 · answer #5 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that for the prisoners that care, that want to better themselves, and especially the ones who will be put back into society should be given some help to get them back out into the real world other wise they will end up right back in. Personally I think a lot of them should be given the option: jail or the military. I went to boot with some guys that were given that option and it really did them good. It got them out of the situation they were in, let them save up some money to better their lives, gave them money for college and career training. I think more of them should have the chance.
2006-08-03 18:55:22 · answer #6 · answered by 20mommy05 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that there needs to be a combination of both. Only those that are rehabilitated can be set free, but on a short leash.
2006-08-03 18:28:12 · answer #7 · answered by Tommy D 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on the offender and the offense. Some can be rehabilitated, others cannot. Child molesters cannot be rehabilitated.
2006-08-03 19:05:41 · answer #8 · answered by cutiepie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This procedure actually has beneifits and works.
2006-08-04 12:45:55 · answer #9 · answered by eg_ansel 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
if they wont to help them selfs then someone eles chould help them but if they don't then there is nothing nobody can do for them
2006-08-03 18:28:15 · answer #10 · answered by lettcandace 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋