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

Entrepreneurs in Prison

kashflow.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 62 posts

Re: Entrepreneurs in Prison

#51

Post by anamax »

ahi wrote: post #34
olalonde wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which part is wrong, the punish part or the cost part? Is it controversial to punish criminals?

Yes. At one point in our history the criminal justice discussions were about how best to rehabilitate the offender rather than punishment. Punishment that neither makes the victim whole or rehabilitates the offender is just useless vengeance.

> Punishment that neither makes the victim whole or rehabilitates the offender is just useless vengeance.

You're ignoring deterrence. And yes, deterrence works. I don't park in red zones all that often.

You're also ignoring the benefits of "warehousing". If person A commits an assault a week, general society avoids an assault every week that person A is in jail.

You can argue that the cost exceeds the benefit, but you don't get to ignore the benefit.

> At one point in our history the criminal justice discussions were about how best to rehabilitate the offender rather than punishment.

Yes, that's what they talked about, but what did they accomplish?

Re: Entrepreneurs in Prison

#53

Post by jeremyarussell »

Mz wrote: post #46
jeremyarussell wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't agree more in regards to Jim Crow laws. Also the war on drugs. Prostitution (seems like a victimless crime to me.) Etc. etc. I'm mostly referring to prisoners that do things like kill, rape, extort, and pounce on another's freedom to pursue happiness and such.

The problem with your standard is that even in the case of murder and other violent crimes, sex, race and socioeconomic status (also influenced by race and gender) play a big role in who actually does time. As a woman, here is one example I am painfully aware of: A woman who defends herself with lethal force against a husband who has beaten her for years does more time on average than an abusive husband who finally g…

In a better system (basically the system we as citizens of our respective countries should be pushing our lawmakers into.) socioeconomic trends, race and sex shouldn't have anything to do with how bad someone gets punished.

Also, I would appreciate it a lot of you did go into details about the wife versus husband abuse. Seems to me that the only answer to that is sexism though. For many years it's been held in certain groups that women being the child bearing gender and men being the "bread winners" meant that men were somehow above women. In many area's of the world it's much worse then others but regardless you see that everywhere. It would seem to go without saying that that's wrong, but I'm speaking as a man who respects people equally, and leaves it to each individual to prove to me their merit. A whole ton of people think that their race is best, and that their gender is best, for reasons they all think are good. It makes me wonder how we might be able to change this, I feel it starts with leading by example.

Re: Entrepreneurs in Prison

#54

Post by mistercow »

olalonde wrote: post #25
mistercow wrote: post #6

But here in America we punish our prisoners, no matter the cost to society!

Which part is wrong, the punish part or the cost part? Is it controversial to punish criminals?

It isn't controversial, no, which is the problem.

Well, let me back up a little first. Criminal penalties as deterrent do work up to a certain point, and there is nothing wrong with embracing them to a civilized and practical degree. But the retributive nature of the American justice system is beyond fetishistic. This is harmful for two reasons.

First, evidence suggests that draconian penalties are counterproductive as a deterrent. The exact psychological reasons for this are being researched, but it is thought that it is a matter of respect for the rule of law. When people perceive a law as unjust and disproportionate, they are more likely to break that law, and that applies to the punishment as well as the crime. It seems paradoxical, but increasing the penalty for a crime beyond what people view as equitable will actually reduce the deterrent effect of the penalty.

Second, we as a society have become so obsessed with retributive sentencing that we will, to that end, actively cut programs that are proven to reduce crime. Any program that helps felons to get legitimate work once they are out of prison is likely to be attacked as "soft on crime" and "wasteful", even though such programs are usually relatively inexpensive and actually save the government money in the long run by reducing recidivism.

It is not hard to understand why giving ex-convicts non-criminal career opportunities is good for society, yet the idea that we should at least throw a couple of bones in that direction is actually quite controversial.

Re: Entrepreneurs in Prison

#55

Post by Mz »

jeremyarussell wrote: post #53
Mz wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with your standard is that even in the case of murder and other violent crimes, sex, race and socioeconomic status (also influenced by race and gender) play a big role in who actually does time. As a woman, here is one example I am painfully aware of: A woman who defends herself with lethal force against a husband who has beaten her for years does more time on average than an abusive husband who finally g…

In a better system (basically the system we as citizens of our respective countries should be pushing our lawmakers into.) socioeconomic trends, race and sex shouldn't have anything to do with how bad someone gets punished. Also, I would appreciate it a lot of you did go into details about the wife versus husband abuse. Seems to me that the only answer to that is sexism though. For many years it's been held in certai…

"Justice is blind". Fair != equal. Men and women are different. Applying the same standard gets unequal outcomes.

The details:

You do more time if it is premeditated vs. a crime of passion. You do more time if you used a weapon vs. your bare hands. Most of the time, an abusive husband who kills his wife beats her to death with his bare hands. Most of the time, a woman who finally kills her husband to protect herself had to plan it and used a weapon to accomolish it. Men frequently have a size advantage and are also more likely to have served in the military, taken martial arts or otherwise be better prepared to do physical harm than a woman. The law currently does a poor job of accounting for such differences.

That is without getting into what happens if the judge or one of the lawyers is a wife beater. Edit: That is also without getting into other relevant factors, which don't get properly considered under the current system.

Peace.

Re: Entrepreneurs in Prison

#56

Post by ahi »

olalonde wrote: post #48
ahi wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. At one point in our history the criminal justice discussions were about how best to rehabilitate the offender rather than punishment. Punishment that neither makes the victim whole or rehabilitates the offender is just useless vengeance.

Rehabilitation is a secondary purpose of incarceration, its main purpose being to deter others from committing crimes and to isolate dangerous criminals. A lot of criminals don't even have to be rehabilitated (e.g. educated criminals or criminals serving lifetime sentences).

Rehabilitation has not always been a secondary purpose.

Re: Entrepreneurs in Prison

#57

Post by jeremyarussell »

Mz wrote: post #55
jeremyarussell wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a better system (basically the system we as citizens of our respective countries should be pushing our lawmakers into.) socioeconomic trends, race and sex shouldn't have anything to do with how bad someone gets punished. Also, I would appreciate it a lot of you did go into details about the wife versus husband abuse. Seems to me that the only answer to that is sexism though. For many years it's been held in certai…

"Justice is blind". Fair != equal. Men and women are different. Applying the same standard gets unequal outcomes. The details: You do more time if it is premeditated vs. a crime of passion. You do more time if you used a weapon vs. your bare hands. Most of the time, an abusive husband who kills his wife beats her to death with his bare hands. Most of the time, a woman who finally kills her husband to protect herself…

I don't think that's really fair to say that. Things really need to stop being about man versus woman, and more about the actual facts. Like who's actually bigger (I know of men that were beaten by their wives.)

That said...

If you premeditate kill someone then you did NOT do it to protect yourself from harm. At that moment you can and should leave and get help from whoever can help you. Restraining orders to start off with, and carry a weapon around for self defense, entirely different then premeditated murder.

That all said the current system is without a doubt messed up, our high crime rate is proof of that. What's scarier is how much crime goes un-caught.

Re: Entrepreneurs in Prison

#58

Post by Mz »

jeremyarussell wrote: post #57
Mz wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Justice is blind". Fair != equal. Men and women are different. Applying the same standard gets unequal outcomes. The details: You do more time if it is premeditated vs. a crime of passion. You do more time if you used a weapon vs. your bare hands. Most of the time, an abusive husband who kills his wife beats her to death with his bare hands. Most of the time, a woman who finally kills her husband to protect herself…

I don't think that's really fair to say that. Things really need to stop being about man versus woman, and more about the actual facts. Like who's actually bigger (I know of men that were beaten by their wives.) That said... If you premeditate kill someone then you did NOT do it to protect yourself from harm. At that moment you can and should leave and get help from whoever can help you. Restraining orders to start o…

Unfortunately, the facts don't fit your idea of how things should work. One study found that women who killed their abusive husband were the most severely abused, the most isolated, and basically were all out of options. They often killed after being told something like "In the morning, I am going to kill you.", which they had every reason to believe was absolutely true. They had typically already tried counseling, leaving, restraining orders, you name it. They typically were also told things like "If you leave and I can't find you, I will instead kill...(some other loved one such as your mother or sister or our children)"

I am not some man hating bitch. I'm quite fond of men. And I don't know how to fix this particular problem with the justice system. All I am saying is that doing time is not the ultimate proof that someone is depraved. It is more complicated than that.

Peace and carry on. I am not interested in being nailed to the wall with ugly insinuations and it looks to me like that is where this is going/has already gone to some degree.

Re: Entrepreneurs in Prison

#59

Post by olalonde »

mistercow wrote: post #54
olalonde wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which part is wrong, the punish part or the cost part? Is it controversial to punish criminals?

It isn't controversial, no, which is the problem. Well, let me back up a little first. Criminal penalties as deterrent do work up to a certain point, and there is nothing wrong with embracing them to a civilized and practical degree. But the retributive nature of the American justice system is beyond fetishistic. This is harmful for two reasons. First, evidence suggests that draconian penalties are counterproductive…

I agree with you. OP seemed to imply that America was unique for punishing criminals. I'm not American and can't comment on America's justice system specifically, but punishment seems like a fairly non-controversial purpose for prisons all around the world. I'm all for rehabilitation but it has to be balanced with the punishment component. Thinking that punishment is "useless vengeance" is beyond naive.

Re: Entrepreneurs in Prison

#60

Post by jeremyarussell »

Mz wrote: post #58
jeremyarussell wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's really fair to say that. Things really need to stop being about man versus woman, and more about the actual facts. Like who's actually bigger (I know of men that were beaten by their wives.) That said... If you premeditate kill someone then you did NOT do it to protect yourself from harm. At that moment you can and should leave and get help from whoever can help you. Restraining orders to start o…

Unfortunately, the facts don't fit your idea of how things should work. One study found that women who killed their abusive husband were the most severely abused, the most isolated, and basically were all out of options. They often killed after being told something like "In the morning, I am going to kill you.", which they had every reason to believe was absolutely true. They had typically already tried counseling, l…

I'd like to say that I'm sorry for saying anything that came across as me insinuating anything about you, that wasn't my point. My point is that the system is obviously flawed and that we need to work to get that fixed, this includes and is not limited to bringing anyone abusing their spouse to justice, so that no-one, man or woman, should ever suffer through it. (just one of the things that need fixed.)

I think we think we aren't agreeing, when in reality we agree much more then we realize, but I digress. Someone having been to prison doesn't mean they are depraved, BUT and this is a part I agree is complicated, we as a society need to be sending only the truly depraved to prison. Otherwise it's not about keeping the rest of us safe, it's about something like money, or some such.

Please accept my dearest apology, I don't mean to say that I'm sorry you were offended though, but to say that I'm sorry I said something offensive.

Post reply on HN