A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what? • Hacker News Board

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#391

Post by oscargrouch » Sat, Nov 16, 2013, 5:54 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #355

michaelt wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be less biased to show statistics for the kind of people sentenced under the three strikes law, but that wouldn't tug the heart strings as much. Perhaps we could aspire to have a law that works right in outlier cases, not just on average?

One of the most basic principles of system design is that there will be edge cases. Every engineer knows that. In a country with 300 million people, enough will fall into these edge cases for the ACLU to put together a pamphlet with a few examples. That's inevitable. That said, with three strikes laws, you don't need to resort to sob stories. The statistics are evidence enough: about half of three strikers in Califor…

>One of the most basic principles of system design is that there will be edge cases. Every engineer knows that. In a country with 300 million people, enough will fall into these edge cases for the ACLU to put together a pamphlet with a few examples. That's inevitable.

What if you are the next edge case in this system? with nobody to remember that you even exist, if its fair..

Just one person beiyng this edge case is enough to put the whole system down.. as every engineer knows this is what we call a bug, and can make the whole system irrelevant, and work agains its own purpose..

And that is what happens to the justice system.. the worst thing is that its all about property.. its f#$% stupid.. its unproportional, and minimize that is pure lack of humanity.. and its the real reason why things are still working that way.. because if you are not one of those "edge cases" you really dont care

And thats so many human lifes wasted, not only the people behind bars, but also their families, how they kids will grow up.. how can they support their families..

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#392

Post by enko » Sat, Nov 16, 2013, 5:55 PM UTC

reginaldjcooper wrote: post #386

enko wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see what you're driving at (ha!), but "attempted manslaughter" is a contradiction in terms. Attempt implies intent; manslaughter is by definition without intent. Look, I can see your point of view. There needs to be a deterrent, yes. Locking someone up and throwing away the key, though, should be reserved for only the most heinous offences. In my opinion, you should not be able to achieve that using only a six-pack…

"Attempted manslaughter" is an actual legal concept [0]. Gotta love the US legal system :) I think DUI three times is particularly heinous. Maybe life in prison is excessive, but the third time you do it you are well aware that it is potentially lethal, and the punishment should be on the level of attempted manslaughter. If that gets you nailed with some three-strikes thing, I think your argument should be against th…

Well, you learn something new every day..

It is hard to disagree with you about the third-time DUI. I guess I am against "automatic" laws in general; it reeks of populism and "tough on crime" rhetoric, ignoring the human variables - see above article for examples. Trying to legislate judicial discretion out of the equation is, to me, a foolish idea.

Couldn't agree more on the drug use issue. They should not even be in the same category of crime.

update: thanks for the link, it led me down an interesting path of "attempted manslaughter" reading. eg, from http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=645716

> in Virginia a few traffic offenses can be classified as attempted manslaughter. Such as, speeding well above what classifies as reckless driving or driving sufficiently intoxicated. I think the reasoning is that if one were to kill someone under those circumstances it would be manslaughter, and any reasonable person would know that excessive speeding or driving drunk carries a high risk of killing someone even though that person isn't exactly trying to kill anyone, therefore, even though they didn't kill someone, they still basically attempted to in being so careless. IOW, you really should be charged with manslaughter, you just were lucky enough to have no actually killed anyway

> I think different jurisdictions probably punish those actions similarly, they just may call it something other than attempted manslaughter, like maybe reckless endangerment or whatever.

Reckless endangerment - I admit that strikes me as a better term, although I now understand the reasoning behind "attempted manslaughter".

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#393

Post by nhangen » Sat, Nov 16, 2013, 5:59 PM UTC

EliRivers wrote: post #252

thaumasiotes wrote: post #47

My thoughts on the best and the worst: > Anthony Jackson has a sixth-grade education and worked as a cook. He was convicted of burglary for stealing a wallet from a Myrtle Beach hotel room when he was 44 years old. According to prosecutors, he woke two vacationing golfers as he entered the room and stole a wallet, then pretended to be a security guard and ran away. Police arrested him when he tried to use the stolen…

I can't get too worked up about a system that sentences this guy to life in prison. Is that seriously the best fucking option you can come up with? A massively expensive revenge-trip that causes far, far more damage than the theft of a wallet? Perhaps there's some kind of much, much more effective way to get him to stop taking things that don't belong to him. I say perhaps; of course there are. Lots, that are cheaper…

Are you kidding me? What do you want to do instead, cut his hand off?

If we have to pay to keep a criminal like this off the street, then I'm OK with that. We're paying for protection.

Not to mention, there's lots that could go wrong with lacking the 'impulse control' to enter someone's hotel room.

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#394

Post by summerdown2 » Sat, Nov 16, 2013, 6:00 PM UTC

rlanday wrote: post #363

bsandbox wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people's sense of personal safety is a bigger driver than revenge. In general, people want a hard line on anything that impacts their sense of personal safety. In order to feel safe, people want punishment to prevent others from committing the same crime. (Of course the flaw in this thinking is that punishment does not always prevent criminals from committing a crime).

If you lock up a repeat offender, you can at least prevent that person from committing more crimes.

Unless it turns out that the statistics work out otherwise?*

I tend to think the answer is evidence-based reform. Check out what works and do more of that. As far as I can tell, the best results are had by rehabilitation type systems.

* What I mean by this is it might be a tautology that someone locked up in prison forever can commit no more crimes, but I'm not sure it's as simple as that. If you lock someone up:

a) You deprive their community of that person. Maybe their children will now become criminals.

b) You deprive their community of their spending power and work. Maybe it will become poorer.

c) They have the chance inside prison to share experiences with novice criminals and teach them how to become old hands, increasing crime when their cell-mates get out.

Now if that person is a negative on all the above values, maybe there is a point in not letting them out. Maybe they have broken homes, never work, and teach others about crime anyway. But that's not the person I'm comparing them to.

I'm saying the criminal in their community has a negative effect on society. Putting them in jail makes it zero. Actually rehabilitating them makes it positive.

If we could get rehabilitation to work, everything gets better. Personally, I think evidence from round the world suggests this is possible.

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#395

Post by WildUtah » Sat, Nov 16, 2013, 6:00 PM UTC

enko wrote: post #369

chongli wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

instead of trying to paint an accurate picture with statistics. People are even more unmoved by accurate pictures painted by statistics than they are of "minorities living on the edge". That's the problem here. The ACLU is trying to relate to people on a human level so that they can build some support. So what if they end up producing something very biased? Is this a scientific paper in peer review? I think most peop…

> people are aware of the fact that the ACLU is a civil liberties advocacy organization and that this naturally biases towards the left wing Does it? I can think of any number of civil liberties which I would associate with the "right" wing of American politics. Right to bear arms, for example, freedom of speech and religion, right to life. The "stand your ground" phenomenon, a very American thing, is definitely righ…

I can think of any number of civil liberties which I would associate with the "right" wing of American politics.

The ACLU, for example, was a leading plaintiff working to get the Citizens United ruling in favor of freedom of speech including corporate advocacy. The same ACLU is a strong Second Amendment supporter.

And the NSA reform bills in the Congress have about equal support from both parties.

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#396

Post by summerdown2 » Sat, Nov 16, 2013, 6:04 PM UTC

bsandbox wrote: post #324

jmadsen wrote: post #285

I think at the root of this is a very prevalent attitude among a many people in America toward "not letting people get away with things" I don't think you can look at this in a vacuum - you need to see these punishments as simply another manifestation of this attitude. This is not a "this group vs. that group" thing; you may find this among "fire and brimstone" Democrats just as often as your "Limburgh Republicans".…

I think people's sense of personal safety is a bigger driver than revenge. In general, people want a hard line on anything that impacts their sense of personal safety. In order to feel safe, people want punishment to prevent others from committing the same crime. (Of course the flaw in this thinking is that punishment does not always prevent criminals from committing a crime).

I think the flaw in this thinking is that it's emotional. An alternative would be to do things that actually reduce crime statistics as proved by evidence, rather than things that people instinctively think might work.

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#397

Post by 632830 » Sat, Nov 16, 2013, 6:08 PM UTC

chongli wrote: post #361

rayiner wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ACLU page is rather manipulative in that they construe the facts very favorably to the convicted. E.g. "After serving two years in prison during his mid-twenties for inadvertently killing someone during a bar fight." Oh yes, he just accidentally killed someone in a bar fight. Happens all the time really, right up there with leaving your credit card with the hostess after getting a little too tipsy. It would be le…

instead of trying to paint an accurate picture with statistics. People are even more unmoved by accurate pictures painted by statistics than they are of "minorities living on the edge". That's the problem here. The ACLU is trying to relate to people on a human level so that they can build some support. So what if they end up producing something very biased? Is this a scientific paper in peer review? I think most peop…

> biases towards the left wing

The ACLU Is a Conservative Organization - Noam Chomsky

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tebAFbBb0gQ

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#398

Post by fnordfnordfnord » Sat, Nov 16, 2013, 6:11 PM UTC

silverbax88 wrote: post #385

enko wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that is attempted murder basically Oh come on. I've lost my license for what you'd call DUI - made a stupid decision to drive the 1.5km back home from a pub, got a 1 year ban and a hefty fine. Yes, it was a stupid thing to do and I deserve what I got, but attempted murder ? Don't be ridiculous. At most repeated DUI is criminal negligence, and negligence on the part of whomever supplied the offender with the vehicle…

I've got a massive 7 inch scar across my face from when a drunk driver plowed into our car when I was 8 years old. I had over 100 stitches in my head and my face was a criss cross of zipper scars for years. The only thing that saved my life was that I was reading a book when we were struck - the book literally saved my life by blocking the glass from slashing my throat. So, yea, murder. That's how serious DUI (or tex…

This guy makes some good points about the unfairness of how DUI suspects are treated: (full disclosure, he is a criminal defense atty) http://www.duicentral.com/dui/the-dui-exception/

TL;DR Breathalyzers are based on dubious science, system is unfairly tilted in favor of conviction. Guilt is presumed & punishment issued even before trial.

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#399

Post by PeterisP » Sat, Nov 16, 2013, 6:12 PM UTC

nhangen wrote: post #393

EliRivers wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't get too worked up about a system that sentences this guy to life in prison. Is that seriously the best fucking option you can come up with? A massively expensive revenge-trip that causes far, far more damage than the theft of a wallet? Perhaps there's some kind of much, much more effective way to get him to stop taking things that don't belong to him. I say perhaps; of course there are. Lots, that are cheaper…

Are you kidding me? What do you want to do instead, cut his hand off? If we have to pay to keep a criminal like this off the street, then I'm OK with that. We're paying for protection. Not to mention, there's lots that could go wrong with lacking the 'impulse control' to enter someone's hotel room.

You got me thinking - it would be 'cruel&unusual' and invoke flashbacks to barbaric times, but a '3-strikes' policy that would put a permenent, visible brand "i'm a thief" or "i'm a con-man" would probably deter opportunities future crimes.

It's not humane and it restricts liberty - but it's more humane and less liberty-restricting than the corrent "solution" of permanent imprisonment.

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#400

Post by mgkimsal » Sat, Nov 16, 2013, 6:13 PM UTC

silverbax88 wrote: post #385

enko wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that is attempted murder basically Oh come on. I've lost my license for what you'd call DUI - made a stupid decision to drive the 1.5km back home from a pub, got a 1 year ban and a hefty fine. Yes, it was a stupid thing to do and I deserve what I got, but attempted murder ? Don't be ridiculous. At most repeated DUI is criminal negligence, and negligence on the part of whomever supplied the offender with the vehicle…

I've got a massive 7 inch scar across my face from when a drunk driver plowed into our car when I was 8 years old. I had over 100 stitches in my head and my face was a criss cross of zipper scars for years. The only thing that saved my life was that I was reading a book when we were struck - the book literally saved my life by blocking the glass from slashing my throat. So, yea, murder. That's how serious DUI (or tex…

But... murder implies intent. The driver did not get in the car to say "I'm going to try to kill silverbax88", or even "I'm going to try to kill someone".