One Year of Prison Costs More Than One Year at Princeton

#51
#51
I tend to think that being secure and free from convicted murderers and rapists is something I am willing to pay for; that said, the money should be used efficiently.

I agree on the secure part, but they could efficiently keep the cost down to me and you that had nothing to do with their crime.
 
#52
#52
I agree on the secure part, but they could efficiently keep the cost down to me and you that had nothing to do with their crime.

The problem is that once they start selling goods/services in order to pay for their incarceration, they compete against a businessman and employees that are not criminals. The competitive advantage, due to labor costs, would presumably go to the prisoners; thus, by paying for their incarceration, they could be putting an "upstanding citizen" out of work. This happened quite a lot in 17th and 18th century France and Britain; trade guilds eventually fought to keep prisoners from working.
 
#53
#53
He did frame houses for 5 years or so after we graduated. He works for a local city government now as a janitor basically.

Hopefully not from UT? Yikes, what a waste of $
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#55
#55
I would be fine with rapists and murderers (first degree) being sentenced to life imprisonment with no parole.

Everything under that should be handled with caning (serial offenders ending up with life terms).

The myth that prisons can be corrective does not hold up to empirical evidence; recidivism rates are extremely high and many times the crimes committed after prison are more severe than those committed prior to prison. Once someone goes away, the key should as well.

I always get a chuckle when ordinances are propsed to protect communities from convicted child predators (e.g. they cannot be closer than 500 ft to a school or church). Why are they being released from prison if we can't trust them to live in our communities without these restrictions?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#56
#56
I always get a chuckle when ordinances are propsed to protect communities from convicted child predators (e.g. they cannot be closer than 500 ft to a school or church). Why are they being released from prison if we can't trust them to live in our communities without these restrictions?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Same can be said about restraints on the ability to purchase weapons, vote, etc. If these persons have served their time, are "corrected", and are no longer a threat to society, then why are any restrictions still forced upon them that are not forced upon everyone else?
 
#57
#57
Same can be said about restraints on the ability to purchase weapons, vote, etc. If these persons have served their time, are "corrected", and are no longer a threat to society, then why are any restrictions still forced upon them that are not forced upon everyone else?

Our rehabilitative system is a farce. "Ok inmate you are being released today because you have been successfully rehabilitated from your criminal ways... but just in case you're not, we're going to place these restrictions on you for the remainder of your life."
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#59
#59
I always get a chuckle when ordinances are propsed to protect communities from convicted child predators (e.g. they cannot be closer than 500 ft to a school or church). Why are they being released from prison if we can't trust them to live in our communities without these restrictions?
Posted via VolNation Mobile


I wouldn't be opposed to applying the death penalty to child predators.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#60
#60
Our rehabilitative system is a farce. "Ok inmate you are being released today because you have been successfully rehabilitated from your criminal ways... but just in case you're not, we're going to place these restrictions on you for the remainder of your life."
Posted via VolNation Mobile

We gotta release violent and sexual offenders to make room for non-violent drug criminals.
 
#62
#62
The problem is that once they start selling goods/services in order to pay for their incarceration, they compete against a businessman and employees that are not criminals. The competitive advantage, due to labor costs, would presumably go to the prisoners; thus, by paying for their incarceration, they could be putting an "upstanding citizen" out of work. This happened quite a lot in 17th and 18th century France and Britain; trade guilds eventually fought to keep prisoners from working.

Shawshank Redemption had this theme as well. I like your take on corporal punishment and life imprisonment.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#64
#64
I would be fine with rapists and murderers (first degree) being sentenced to life imprisonment with no parole.

Everything under that should be handled with caning (serial offenders ending up with life terms).

The myth that prisons can be corrective does not hold up to empirical evidence; recidivism rates are extremely high and many times the crimes committed after prison are more severe than those committed prior to prison. Once someone goes away, the key should as well.
Rapists and murders should be given the death sentence IMO. Also don't let them set on death row for twenty years.

The ones that commit crimes of lesser degree and can't be corrected, give them life sentences. You can't let them back out into society anyway.

Make the punishments more severe and you'll have less of it. It's human nature too want to live on and this would lesson all of it. Crime rates would go down if they thought they commit child rape or murder today, get convicted and be put to death the week after. Make a lot of these idiots think twice before they commit these crimes. Truth is some have it better in prison than they would on the outside and that's the sad reality. Prison is bad, but they should make it even worse.
 
Last edited:

VN Store



Back
Top