Each criminal offender convicted of X crime will be given the option of prison or to use this program. Prison keeps offenders from offering anything to society, they are locked up with people who school them on how to commit more crime, they are subject to an environment which breeds more hate and crime, criminals often come out worse than ever, and the cost is tremendous as well as plenty of other issues.
My program gives an offender the option to remain on the outside of prison walls yet still be just as harmless to the public as if he were imprisoned. A shocking device will be attactched to the offender's body. A transmitter is installed so that whenever the device is not 100% funtional, it will alert another device which will in turn alert authorities to the offender's location where he can then be apprehended. A device is also implanted in the prisoners body which can be activated to release a drug to put him to sleep. This is mainly for when the shocking collar quits working or is tampered with in some way, so that authorities have plenty of time to track the offender down to fix the problem.
Every non offender is issued a device which alerts them when an offender is near. This device also can be used to activate the shocker if need be. Giving non offenders a definite defense against criminals.
In other words, all non offenders to X crimes will have the ability to render any offender to X crimes harmless upon command. Devices could also be installed in people's homes that could prevent any offender from entering without getting shocked.
The cost will probably be much much less than it is now. Since the offenders will be free to work, we may be able to collect fines from the to pay for the program. It will surely be much cheaper than prison costs. It cost something like 30k per year to keep a prisoner last time I heard.
This basically accomplishes the same things as prison, but with less loss to society. They will still be free for the most part, they just won't be free to commit crimes! This would seem to be a good plan to me.
2006-08-27
02:30:18
·
14 answers
·
asked by
aaron g
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Other - Politics & Government
I'm not sure that I can understand what's cruel and unusual here. The offender has the choice to either go to prison or join the program. In prison, you are kept from fullfilling any dreams, you might get rape, you can't go grab a pop out of the kitchen when you feel like it, you are devoid of freedom. This program is much more humane and kind.
As for people who abuse the shocker, the answer is simple, take it away from them. There is still a very high probability that even without his shocker, someone will be near who could active an offender's shocker if the person without a shocker were nearby. I have every solution to any problem you want to present me.
2006-08-27
03:07:34 ·
update #1
I mentioned that the program will be used for X crimes. X stands for, I'm not sure what crimes should fall under this punishment. Besides, I have already stated that the offender should have the choice of either his conventional punishment or that of this program.
2006-08-27
03:10:23 ·
update #2
i'd vote for it .............the present system does indeed have many flaws , as you have pointed out .
cheers ...........
2006-08-27 02:35:08
·
answer #1
·
answered by BIGG AL 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
No I won't vote for it.
I think physical restraint and isolation is necessary while they're are well educated with special programs that will guaratee or minimize the possibility of them commiting criminal acts again when released. I don't believe a fixed amount of time per crime is something adecuate. The offender can spend as many time is required to his readaptation. I agree, today the penal system is not good, taxpayers are paying a lot of money in return receive prison population that gets out of prison worse than how they got in, penal system is not only not effective, is detrimental. putting collars with electro-shocks is treating them like dogs, will not be effective neither.
2006-09-01 00:09:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by tetraedronico 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why not put the offender in a state of suspended animation and let him sleep off his term in jail.
We can hook him up to a life support system and place him on a shelf in a temperature-controlled cell.
The cost will be minimal, food will be minimum, and we need not worry about him escaping or learning dirty tricks from his fellow inmates.
He will be a young person when he gets hooked-up and an old man when they release him,--if they ever do.
If he gets a life without parole sentence, the authorities can check on him periodically and when he dies they can simply roll him over into a grave.
It's all simple, no trouble and very effective. For those who call such a system inhumane, ask " Why did he commit the crime ?"
2006-08-31 23:59:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by Mr.Been there 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Prisoners are people, not robots or cattle. And nobody deserves to wear a scarlet letter of shame that identifies their weaknesses for all of society to see. Sometimes crimes are committed for good reasons.
For example, if a person's family were living under the bridge of an interstate overpass and had nothing, would it be fair to assume that this person would have a difficult time finding work? And how about all of these Civil Rights pioneers - - haven't many of them been arrested for civil disobedience or other infractions of varying degrees? Do you think that it would have been fair to use one of these devises on MLK or all of the other brave men and women who have been wrongly convicted?
Quite frankly, I'm damn tired of society dehumanizing people and their problems. Prison was initially intended "to correct" and rehabilitate. We need to help people identify and correct their physical and psychological needs through professional help, not through the bars of animal cages, or other bizarre and inhumane punishments. It will take a brave society to deny its own instinct of wanting to seek revenge against those who have somehow wronged them.
2006-08-27 10:01:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by YahooAnswers 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
wow! a couple of things must pointed out here....
first it totally depends on the crime committed, for example NO, i wouldn't want a pedophile, murderer, etc. loose on the streets for ANY reason transmitter or no transmitter
second i wouldn't want to be the person that just happens to be unknowingly driving behind the offender if someone just zapped him & he goes to sleep..... at the wheel!
but i do agree with most of what you say... prisons are just a place to hang out and meet more criminal minds and come out of much worse when finished serving your time (the majority anyway)
it sux, its a catch 22!
why cant we just put them on an island
2006-09-03 11:31:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by desert monkey 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
This is the craziest most unworkable idea I've ever heard.
You really think criminals so dumb as to not figure out how to bypass the devices. Then there's the ACLU. Cruel and unusual punishment will be their battle cry as they rush into court.
2006-08-27 09:46:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by Hank 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Non-violent offenders only .
Sentences of under 5yrs .
Drop arming non-offenders with shockers , you'd have peiole hitting the button just to see who jumped .
The ACLU would fight this as , cruel and unusual punishment .
2006-08-27 09:43:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
sounds like Big Brother to me. How about Cor pal Punishment? Less crimes with higher penalties How would steal if they lost the hand,who would rape if they lost thier manhood who would commit what crimes?
2006-09-02 22:41:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by autumnbrookblue 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Way too expensive and way too complicated! You seem to be smart. Think up some other, less costly options.
2006-09-03 11:13:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by correrafan 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Since there is so much corruption with labs, and crooked D.A.'s I'd say all are innocent unless the accused admits to his/her crime.
2006-09-01 19:44:20
·
answer #10
·
answered by rc 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
when a dog attacks people for no reason it gets put to sleep...I like that method of crime prevention
2006-08-27 09:38:22
·
answer #11
·
answered by D-Train 3
·
0⤊
0⤋