Terrorists SUCK

[Thorne]

Yeah. Exactly. It rests on the assumption that only real pain, (ie pain transferred from the physical body) can count as torture. But if we simulate it, we transfer the same torture to the brain, which is what counts. The sum of the effects from pain transferred to the brain is what torture is. So it would be exactly as inhumane. At least as far as the pain is concerned.

I don't know about you guys, but when I was a kid and did something wrong I was punished. The punishment varied with the severity of the action (or inaction) but it was still punishment. And I'll tell you one thing, a swat on the bottom got my attention one hell of a lot faster than standing in the corner.

This is strictly my opinion, but any person who has committed inhumane acts probably shouldn't expect to be treated humanely when he is caught.

[TomOfSweden]

I don't know about you guys, but when I was a kid and did something wrong I was punished. The punishment varied with the severity of the action (or inaction) but it was still punishment. And I'll tell you one thing, a swat on the bottom got my attention one hell of a lot faster than standing in the corner.

This is strictly my opinion, but any person who has committed inhumane acts probably shouldn't expect to be treated humanely when he is caught.

That wasn't my issue. My issue was that if we decide that torture is inhumane, then virtualising it won't make it less inhumane, because it's the same act. I wasn't arguing for or against torture.

[Thorne]

That wasn't my issue. My issue was that if we decide that torture is inhumane, then virtualising it won't make it less inhumane, because it's the same act. I wasn't arguing for or against torture.

I'm not necessarily arguing for torture either. I'm arguing for making the punishment fit the crime. Stop coddling criminals and really punish them for what they've done. I've heard a few ex-cons claim that their lives were much easier in prison than on the streets. There's something radically wrong with that.

[TomOfSweden]

I'm not necessarily arguing for torture either. I'm arguing for making the punishment fit the crime. Stop coddling criminals and really punish them for what they've done. I've heard a few ex-cons claim that their lives were much easier in prison than on the streets. There's something radically wrong with that.

Yeah, well there's a problem there. All the research shows that punishment that fits the crime just breeds more crime. Yeah, I know. It's very counter intuitive. Research shows that opportunity doesn't make the thief. It's a lot deeper than that. Crime is just a symptom of a huge complex problem with marginalised people feeling excluded by society. And they don't feel any more included by society by having a criminal record.

You may feel that we should punish criminals hard for the sake of justice. I really can't argue against that. But don't pretend it'll solve anything or make the world any safer. It's easy to check the statistics. The longer the prison terms the higher the chance of repeat offending. So even if they're not doing any crimes while in jail, they're more likely to do it again once they're out. Or we could have capital punishment for every offence no matter how small. That would fix it. Nothing I'd vote for, but it'll work.

Nobody thinks life in prison is better than on the streets. I don't believe it for a second. I've not personally been to jail, but I have a less than clean and sober background, so I know a large variety of dodgy characters. One of my oldest friends just went to jail for armed robbery. I'm sitting with his latest letter in front of me. No... nobody thinks jail is worth it. It may be easy, but it kills the soul. He's gay and in his jail they've got a club for gay convicts. Funny. I just can't picture how they look. At his jail there's two other gay guys apart from him and they're both convicted murderers. Being a gay murderer just goes against all my preconceptions. I do like having my preconceptions challenged. But this is very difficult for my brain to wrap itself around.

[Thorne]

Crime is just a symptom of a huge complex problem with marginalised people feeling excluded by society. And they don't feel any more included by society by having a criminal record.

I agree with you here, Tom. Most criminals are small time thieves or junkies who steal to support their habits. Their socio-economic situation drives them to crime more often than not. Executing or "torturing" these kinds of criminals would have very little effect on the causes of this kind of crime. There may be ways to fight those causes, through urban development and real rehabilitation efforts, but those things are very expensive and probably not nearly as effective as people would like to believe.

The longer the prison terms the higher the chance of repeat offending. So even if they're not doing any crimes while in jail, they're more likely to do it again once they're out. Or we could have capital punishment for every offence no matter how small. That would fix it. Nothing I'd vote for, but it'll work.

I wouldn't vote for that, either. And I don't necessarily advocate longer sentences, either. What I would like to see is less coddling of prisoners. I don't know what jails and prisons are like in Sweden (and I have no first-hand experiences here, either, thankfully) but many prisons in the US provide medical care for prisoners which is far better than anything that is provided for the poor. While I don't think they should withhold necessary medical care, I don't think a prisoner should be given, for example, sexual-reassignment surgery at the expense of the taxpayers. (See: http://www.oregonlive.com/news/orego...211.xml&coll=7)
I would also like to know who has paid for these lawsuits. Probably the taxpayers again.
As for repeat offenders, there is a county sheriff in Arizona who treats his prisoners more in line with what I've been saying. While not inhumane, his prisoners are not coddled. "For example, he banned smoking, coffee, movies, pornographic magazines, and unrestricted TV in all jails." (http://www.mcso.org/index.php?a=GetM...mn=Sheriff_Bio)
And they absolutely do not like it! And the rate of recidivism is the lowest in the country! People DO NOT want to wind up back in HIS jail!

[TomOfSweden]

And they absolutely do not like it! And the rate of recidivism is the lowest in the country! People DO NOT want to wind up back in HIS jail!

Again. I doubt there's any connection. People don't commit any crimes if they think they'd get caught or convicted. The state of the prisons is irrelevant. I had a period a few years ago when I was very interested in this subject and read any research on it I could find. Now, when I'm not a student any more I don't have access to the research databases for references. Crime is the result of a very complex set of issues. If Arizona has low recidivism it must be based on their programmes where ex-cons find alternative ways to support themselves once they're out, or they simply leave the state and make it somebody else's problem.

Being hard on crime is a traditional right wing, (conservative in USA) issue. Those political parties want to give the impression of being unflinching do'ers rather than having endless debates about what to do. But their "solutions" are only based on what makes the voters feel safe. They're never based on anything that actually works. Again, this I'm sure is because crime is the symptom of a large group of problems which solutions are either too expensive and/or won't fit as a campaign slogans. Instead they do stuff like that sheriff in Arizona. It's pure emotion. It feels good for the voter, but is utterly worthless as far as preventing crime is concerned.

We have the exact same dynamic in our political system in Sweden. Neither side is talking reality, because it's too complex to have a TV debate about. It always gets reduced to mythical abstractions and moral vagueries.

Crime is a very complicated issue with no simple solution. The only really effective way to stop crime is to prevent it from happening in the first place. Once it's done it's only down to harm reduction for everybody involved.