Continuing do you think there should be a standard....?

Question

I understand that the grieving family of a murder victim might have some reservations about seeing the killer of their loved one being released; but that's something the grieving family has to work out in their heart. But if the criminal has done his time than he/she should be let back out into society.Calling prisons/jail/maximum security, correctional facilities i think misses its purpose if you lock someone up for life or some rediculaous amount of time like 150 yrs that pretty much gaurantees the criminal wont be coming out.True or false?the idea of a "correctional facility" is to try and fix or remedy the behavior that got the inmate put in their in the first place so that when their relesed their practically different people in terms of their attitude?Sure whatever the person did was very haneous,but for us to be any kind of society that will forgive and forget(not literally forget, but move on and start new)something needs to be done about the ridiculous sentences handed out:-)

Answer 1

Unfortunately when it comes to what we euphamistically CALL correctional facilities, there is very little done to correct and very much done to simply confine. I have always been of the belief that asylums have a system that should be implimented in all prisons. Is there such a thing as an irredeemably violent personality? I can't answer that. But in general, if you want to stop someone from committing a crime again, you have to find out what psychological reason caused them to commit it in the first place. "Hard luck" cases can often be found, as well as those who seemed sane, but have some psychological condition that is at the root of their behavior. I believe addressing this would allow for a much reduced crime rate.

Also, there is a HUGE societal stigma placed on ex-cons. How many of those 75% listed above couldn't find jobs and were persecuted based on their past in spite of the fact that they had served their time to society? If we used the reforms above, we could eventually reduce this prejudice against those who have committed crimes in their past. If they're given the chance to work out what's wrong with them and then given a chance to live again, I believe it's possible to truly make a difference.

Answer 2

society is very strange on this issue.
What society values most is not freedom (see Iraq, they're free but not happy) but stability. In the pursuit of stability, many societies are quite carefree about locking people up with little evidence and for long periods of time. Naturally, the people who are not locked up don't protest very much if a few innocent people are jailed (or if reformed criminals are kept incarcerated) because they're own lives are quite peacful and happy.

The USA tries to temper this by instituting a rule of law where people are "innocent until proven guilty" and must be convicted in a court by a jury of their peers. However, once convicted - and branded as part of "criminal" society instead of "civil" society - the majority of "civil" society is happy to wash thier hands of you and let the criminals rot in jail for any amount of time. Add to that the two factors that many criminals are psychologically incapable of reform and many "civilians" are likewise, incapable of remorse, the civilians find it hard to believe that a criminal has been reformed.

Answer 3

Our judicial system, both juvenile and adult, are sooooo antiquated that problems cannot be fixed. Instead of trying to get to the root of problems, we just keep fixing symptoms of the problem.

Then you add in parodoxes-sex offenders who have paid thier debts to society, yet have to register no matter where they go for the rest of thier lives-which further complicates the matter.

Then you look at the inequality for those who have financial means. If you come from a family of $$$ you will never see the inside of a cell. Look at OJ. If you live in South Central LA, the odds of you going to jail by 18 is greater than you graduating from high school.

If you look at the rehabilitation process for criminals, no matter what age, it is generally a criminal network. They don't come out of the system reformed, but smarter as to how not to get caught, new scams, new criminal associates. In order to be rehabilitated, a criminal must want to and actively take part in the process.

Answer 4

Criminals in over 75% of cases are not reformed. They learn new tricks of the trade, get stronger, meaner, and tougher in prison. The solution isn't to let them out. You either keep them locked up forever, or kill them. You need to eliminate the threat they pose to society. If you let them out, they will just commit crimes again.

Answer 5

specific, I additionally accept as true with Zim in this one. the place I artwork now (interior the some distance East) many human beings in 12 hours of artwork an afternoon, having 2 or perhaps 3 jobs to develop themselves in existence. opposition is rife and there are actually not any unfastened nutrients. Many at present reward South Africans are out of touch with what actual diligence and opposition ability, and assume the Mercs and massive residences to easily come from "someplace". the government, getting rid of the motivation for stress and opposition with the aid of their rules of favoritism, would not help the two. The ANC gannot enable the factors to upward thrust. a genuine non-racial midsection classification will lead them to out of date and could propose their political loss of life.

Answer 6

All these people do in prison is join gangs and crap, so they aren't being rehabilitated (well most of them anyway)