Liberals are always talking about free will and choice. So why are we responsible to rehabilitate crimnals who use their free will to be a criminal. Why don't we just lock them up and throw away the key? Last time I checked we all played by the same rules.
2007-04-24 16:59:32 · 8 answers · asked by Miracle Mets 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Rules meaning laws obviously.
2007-04-24 17:07:42 · update #1
Most have had more than a second chance. That's why they are called career criminals. I'm a lib and I think they should either be locked away for good. (And at that - it is a waste of tax payer dollars at estimated $75,000.00 per prisoner locked away every year when decent law abiding citizens can't even make that much a year working manual and hard labor jobs.) Or put to death. I'm tired of hearing the argument that putting them to death for them killing, raping (victimizing) someone else doesn't change things. Yes it does - it stops another murderer and rapists (all murderers and rapists) from killing and victimizing someone else or many others. And that's a plus in my opinion.
As for the asker - please stop lumping all libs in your assumption to what we believe or don't based on what you heard.
2007-04-24 17:15:59 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, I'm not a liberal, but, from family experience and teaching experience, I can say that some people would make better choices if given the right chances... sometimes being locked up helps.
I have family members who have done jailtime and prison time... the time behind bars, combined with the support of family, helped tham get back on their feet.
Murderers? Yeah, lock 'em up for good. But the non-violent offenders? There's hope for them.
2007-04-25 00:08:17 · answer #2 · answered by scruffycat 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When an addict or user is arrested and court appointed to be rehabilitated he/she no longer has free will. It is against the law to do illegal drugs, but we can't be punished for using them unless we're already pressed under the state.
Drug addicts are considered a threat to themselves and others, so they must be rehabilitated simply because prison is not going to fix a cocaine withdrawal, but it may get someone hurt.
2007-04-25 00:12:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
played by the rules who's rules would that be? I don't play by the rules and everyone deserves a second chance. I guess if you got thrown in prison that you should not be rehabilitated
2007-04-25 00:06:43 · answer #4 · answered by plhudson01 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
your right ! we need to lock em all up...!! are you really that uninformed? will you agree to foot the 48 bucks a day per "PERSON" that it will take? just keep in mind that right now you would be talking about 10 million more bucks per state roughly. then you would need to consider the fact that if all law abiding joes like yourself were to throw away the keys you would only have intake of law breakers and nobody leaving the prisons...that would be a number that only would do 1 thing,......be the majority of the us citizens without constitutional rights making you the minority ruler and communist. unless of course you end up facing our already injustice system. i invite you to go to your county courts and spend a day or two watching our d.a's and judges at work then tell me that we are imprisoning only the bad ones. see who the players really are !!
2007-04-25 00:29:11 · answer #5 · answered by rick s 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
"Rehabilitation" usually does little for most people. It is simply something that makes some people in government feel better by saying they are trying to help people.
2007-04-25 00:33:13 · answer #6 · answered by InReality01 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
don't worry, it's a bright idea from the Criminals rights organisation (formally known as the human rights commission)
2007-04-25 00:09:47 · answer #7 · answered by bordasimus 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do not know if it is so much a "duty" as someones futile attempt to change the status quo.
2007-04-25 00:10:12 · answer #8 · answered by Terrie 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋