Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Think Debtors Prisons Are a Thing of the Past? Not in Mississippi

themarshallproject.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 138 posts

Re: Think Debtors Prisons Are a Thing of the Past? Not in Mississippi

#91

Post by 6510 »

klipt wrote: post #66
a_t48 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Women who murder their abusive husbands, for example, are almost never going to go and murder someone else. By your reasoning, they shouldn’t go to prison to punish them for their murder. That's a reasonable position to take, actually. Depends on the level of abuse, I'd say. https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/07/europe/uk-sally-challen-intl-...

The thing is, jail also acts as a deterrent to the first murder. If it's common knowledge that everyone gets one "murder your abusive spouse" consequence free, a lot more people might commit murders in cases where a divorce might have worked out better and less deadly.

Depends on the amount of domestic abuse doesn't it? I think the rate is so high we should give the gall a medal and a standing ovation.

Re: Think Debtors Prisons Are a Thing of the Past? Not in Mississippi

#92

Post by [deleted] »

geofft wrote: post #76
rayiner wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Potato potato, that person would not have been in prison had they paid off the debt. No. The meaning of words matters. Words, used precisely, are how people with different values and beliefs can communicate and reach agreements in a functioning society. When journalists, who are supposed to inform and educate the public, twist the meaning of words in order to make a point, that’s wrong. > Where the debt comes from…

> Women who murder their abusive husbands, for example, are almost never going to go and murder someone else. By your reasoning, they shouldn’t go to prison to punish them for their murder. Yes, correct, thanks for setting out that argument. The organization Survived and Punished advocates for exactly this, because the argument you're making is sound: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survived_and_Punished https://surviv…

[deleted]

Re: Think Debtors Prisons Are a Thing of the Past? Not in Mississippi

#93

Post by geofft »

mendelmaleh wrote: post #89
geofft wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then that's about jail as a deterrent (making society safer by discouraging future crimes), not as a form of punishment for someone who did a bad thing. It may be true that the deterrent is justifiable because it's also a legitimate form of punishment (for instance, saying "If anyone kills their spouse this year, I'll skin this puppy alive" might be a deterrent, but it's probably unjust), but it's not acting as punis…

Aren't all punishments deterrents tho?

No - 'rayiner gave the example of punishing someone who killed their abusive spouse. First, the actual punishment certainly doesn't deter them from committing the same crime again in the future (they are, statistically at least, not particularly likely to marry another abusive spouse). Second, the threat of future punishment is almost certainly insufficient to dissuade them from the original act: if they feel like they're in immediate physical danger, they probably are reasoning that it would be worth it for them to risk punishment.

Besides desperation, there's also passion and mental instability. There's enough cases where you might just not be thinking about the potential punishment at all when committing a crime, meaning it doesn't deter you. For mental instability, we as a society have mostly decided we're okay with reducing/eliminating punishment (and perhaps that you should be institutionalized instead); for passion we generally haven't decided that, except perhaps with the concept of "temporary insanity."

Re: Think Debtors Prisons Are a Thing of the Past? Not in Mississippi

#94

Post by coldtea »

rayiner wrote: post #45
romwell wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Potato potato, that person would not have been in prison had they paid off the debt . Where the debt comes from matters why exactly? The prison should be for one purpose only: to make society safer. If someone is dangerous enough to be in prison, they should not be out regardless of whether they owe money or not. In other words, if you can't buy your way out of prison, a debt should not bring you into one.

> Potato potato, that person would not have been in prison had they paid off the debt. No. The meaning of words matters. Words, used precisely, are how people with different values and beliefs can communicate and reach agreements in a functioning society. When journalists, who are supposed to inform and educate the public, twist the meaning of words in order to make a point, that’s wrong. > Where the debt comes from…

>No. The meaning of words matters. Words, used precisely, are how people with different values and beliefs can communicate and reach agreements in a functioning society.

A society that puts people in jail for not having $13000 to pay is not a "functioning society".

>Because a debt arising from a criminal conviction requires the convicted person to have engaged in a wrongful act in the first place. Mere failure to pay a civil debt does not.

If the convicted should go to jail, they should go to jail from a conviction for the wrongful act itself -- not for not being able to pay the debt created by it.

Re: Think Debtors Prisons Are a Thing of the Past? Not in Mississippi

#95

Post by Normal_gaussian »

mendelmaleh wrote: post #89
geofft wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then that's about jail as a deterrent (making society safer by discouraging future crimes), not as a form of punishment for someone who did a bad thing. It may be true that the deterrent is justifiable because it's also a legitimate form of punishment (for instance, saying "If anyone kills their spouse this year, I'll skin this puppy alive" might be a deterrent, but it's probably unjust), but it's not acting as punis…

Aren't all punishments deterrents tho?

No.

A punishment fails as a deterrent if:

+ it is not expected + it is not understood + it is not net negative

The first, not expected, fits when; one believes their actions are legal and then they are found not to be (correctly or incorrectly); one expects a different punishment to the one given, and the expected punishment was not a deterrent (often seen in fraud cases).

The second, not understood, fits when one expects the punishment but failed to understand its impact on them. For example, those incarcerated may misunderstand the lasting trauma of loss of privacy, agency, and family.

The third, not a net negative applies in cases where the punishment is deemed an acceptable risk or cost, or even desirable. Desirable has repeatedly been the case for the extremely impoverished or ill. Acceptable cost is seen in many corporate dealings, but mainly speeding and parking tickets for the individual. Acceptable risk is even more the corporate case (legal departments evaluate legal risk constantly) but is also the case for career criminals and moonshot criminals.

Re: Think Debtors Prisons Are a Thing of the Past? Not in Mississippi

#96

Post by coldtea »

Zenbit_UX wrote: post #86
rayiner wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Potato potato, that person would not have been in prison had they paid off the debt. No. The meaning of words matters. Words, used precisely, are how people with different values and beliefs can communicate and reach agreements in a functioning society. When journalists, who are supposed to inform and educate the public, twist the meaning of words in order to make a point, that’s wrong. > Where the debt comes from…

> No. The meaning of words matters. Words, used precisely, are how people with different values and beliefs can communicate and reach agreements in a functioning society. When journalists, who are supposed to inform and educate the public, twist the meaning of words in order to make a point, that’s wrong. You're correct in that words do matter but entirely incorrect in your position, this is a debtors prison, it's li…

>Also starting a reply with "No" makes you seem like an asshole and invalidates much of your credibility and people's desire to hear you out. The GP had a well reasoned (and correct) response to your original comment but you proceeded to devalue it with 2 letters.

Since he followed that "No" with several paragraphs, that's a moot point (not to mention much ruder that his reply, what with "makes you look like an asshole" and stuff).

And, no, "no" is not something that makes people look like assholes. It's just an expression of opinion -- whether accompanied by a justification/arguments or not. Even on its own, that is, without further arguments, it's still useful as a kind of "poll" (how many commenters agree or disagree with a thesis).

At worse, it's curt.

Re: Think Debtors Prisons Are a Thing of the Past? Not in Mississippi

#97

Post by ecoled_ame »

Zircom wrote: post #29
ecoled_ame wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People think pregnancy just .. happens?

I don't think they believe it "just happens", but they accept it/believe it's a natural and inevitable part of life and take it in stride if and when it happens.

It’s weird to live in a society where the assumption is that practically everybody is having/should be having sex. I abstain.

Re: Think Debtors Prisons Are a Thing of the Past? Not in Mississippi

#98

Post by ecoled_ame »

BubRoss wrote: post #27
ecoled_ame wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People think pregnancy just .. happens?

That's how the majority of humanity has come into existence.

I know, it’s one of the saddest aspects of existence in my opinion. I wish every child was planned for, had a job and housing lined up for them before birth. Instead we live in a random survival free-for-all. Sex is seen practically as a recreational activity, children as either unintentional accumulated byproducts or vague milestones of personal or economic achievement.

Re: Think Debtors Prisons Are a Thing of the Past? Not in Mississippi

#99

Post by stkdump »

paulddraper wrote: post #58
rubyn00bie wrote: post #40

Yeah, this is fucking insane, from top-to-bottom... left-to-right... inside-and-out... fucking insane. This is quite literally forced indentured servitude, or what I normally call "slavery." This is fucking slavery. At no point should one be forced to work before or after they've already paid their "debt" to society; extreme circumstances not withstanding (i.e. you still have a billion dollars after serving your time…

> At no point should be forced to work before or aftere they've already paid their "debt" to society Weird wording. The fact that the debt has not been paid is why they're working, no? My dad's accountant embezzled from his business. The person spent all the money over the years and by the the time they were caught, there was little left. And unfortunately, that's a pretty typical story. (FYI, business insurance may…

In genereal I find the wording "debt to society" very misleading. Does one have the right to commit a crime in exchange for punishment? I would say no. Punishment should serve as deterrant and as rehabilitation where possible, otherwise to keep society safe.

Re: Think Debtors Prisons Are a Thing of the Past? Not in Mississippi

#100

Post by MikeAmelung »

Zenbit_UX wrote: post #88
paulddraper wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At no point should be forced to work before or aftere they've already paid their "debt" to society Weird wording. The fact that the debt has not been paid is why they're working, no? My dad's accountant embezzled from his business. The person spent all the money over the years and by the the time they were caught, there was little left. And unfortunately, that's a pretty typical story. (FYI, business insurance may…

That really sucks for your dad and this may be hard for you to answer objectively given your proximity to the situation but imagine if the guy who robbed your dad got tossed into this place with $100k + court fees and maybe child support if he had kids. At minimum wage pay, with ~20% of his earnings going to pay down the debt that's effectively a life sentence. My question to you is, does that seem fair for what is e…

Where does it say they have to make minimum wage? If someone was stupid enough to hire the guy again as an accountant, he could make whatever he made before. Hell, like most of the geniuses in this story, he could embezzle from the next guy to pay the last one!

Edit: I do think the system they have going on is absolutely ridiculous, especially considering the infrastructure costs when it's only being used for "more than 200 people" (which I'm assuming means less than 300). But some of the responses here from bleeding hearts are insane.

Post reply on HN