Yes of course what you say makes sense to me. Again though, I was only saying Yes I belive that prision should be punishment.
In answer to your question, I would punish both the same. The level of remorse shown does not lessen the fact that a bad thing has happened. A thing that demands punishment. On 22 Apr, 15:23, Drafterman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Apr 22, 5:36 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > My words spoke nowt about that one Draft, I was just replying to the > > your question. > > > 'Do you believe that is the way it should be?' > > > Asked if we belive that prision should be punishment, as opposed to > > what I can only assume you mean the other side of the coin, > > rehabitlitation. > > Actually I was talking about neither, but rather protection of > society. > > > > > In essane I say that as we punish children for bad behaviuor then why > > should we stop punsihing adults and instead rehabilitate? > > I think the discipline of adults and children is qualitatively > different. In fact, it is less a consideration of their physical > status as a child or an adult and more of a consideration of their > mental state. Hence legal minors being tried as adults and adults > being punished less if they are considered mentally not at fault. > > The key here is knowledge of right and wrong and awareness of > consequences. We punish children in the way that we do because we are > teaching them about right and wrong and the consequences of actions. > Adults are supposed to have that knowledge so the punishment is > different. > > > Perhaps a long winded way of answering yes to your question and giving > > you a little insight as to possible reasons I say this. > > > Now let me ask you this one. > > > If you had two children both responisble for the braking of your > > kitchen window via a football. One unrepentant and the other on the > > verge of tears from remorse. > > > Would you give them both equal time on the naughty step, or lessen the > > time for the remorsefull child? > > I'd lessen. Now, how about you? > > > > > > > On 20 Apr, 15:25, Drafterman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Apr 20, 4:42 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Yes sure. As parents when our kids are naughty they get punished. Why > > > > does should that stop once a human becomes adult. > > > > So, between person A and person B, having committed the same crime, > > > person A feels remorse and person B blatantly threatens to do it > > > again, the punishment should be the same? > > > > > On 19 Apr, 16:12, Drafterman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Apr 17, 9:10 am, AmandaRheen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > To my understanding, a jail sentence is imposed as punishment for > > > > > > crime/s committed. > > > > > > And do you believe that is the way it should be? > > > > > > > Jail is the punishment. Quadriplegia is not by > > > > > > laws of which I am aware, criminal punishment. > > > > > > > If the parole board considers that the granting of parole is based > > > > > > on > > > > > > certain conditions being met by the prisoner and these conditions > > > > > > are > > > > > > not met, parole does not logically need to be granted. I suspect > > > > > > that > > > > > > remorse about the crime for which a prisoner is currently being > > > > > > punished plays a central role in the granting of early release from > > > > > > jail for THAT crime/s. Surely a clear lack of remorse would still > > > > > > be > > > > > > a reasonable factor affecting the outcome of even a compassionate > > > > > > parole hearing, when the medical condition is of a chronic not fatal > > > > > > nature. > > > > > > > Sustaining quadriplegia does not erase the historical facts of > > > > > > previous crimes, nor does it erase the impact the crimes, for which > > > > > > the prisoner is currently serving sentence, have on his / her > > > > > > victims. Jail not quadriplegia is the punishment. Idealistically, > > > > > > parole is the outcome of good behavior whilst in custody, not the > > > > > > outcome of sustained physical injury. Pragmatically, parole is a > > > > > > means of managing prisoners between secure custody and the > > > > > > community, > > > > > > not the means by which possibly good old ‘common law justice’ within > > > > > > custody can be used to remove increased financial costs to the > > > > > > prison > > > > > > system. > > > > > > > As the victim of a crime the prisoner suffering quadriplegia also > > > > > > has > > > > > > the right to take recourse through the legal system in the same way > > > > > > the murder and rape victims of his / her own crimes have been > > > > > > required. The outcome of this legal process will be presided over > > > > > > by > > > > > > a judge and or jury, not a parole board. > > > > > > > On Apr 8, 12:48 am, Drafterman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Not sure how on topic this is, but consider the following thought > > > > > > > experiment: > > > > > > > > A man commits a series of various heinous and grevious crimes > > > > > > > (murder, > > > > > > > rape, etc), such that he gets life in prison (though parole is > > > > > > > not off > > > > > > > the table). > > > > > > > > During his imprisonment, a confrontation with a fellow inmate > > > > > > > results > > > > > > > in the man becoming paralyzed from the neck down. > > > > > > > > At his parole, one of the primary considerations is how much of a > > > > > > > threat the man poses to society. As a quadriplegic, he poses > > > > > > > minimal > > > > > > > threat. He is, however, completely unrepentant about his crime > > > > > > > and his > > > > > > > state of mind is still that of a viscious killer. > > > > > > > > Another consideration is that, above and beyond the cost to > > > > > > > society of > > > > > > > keeping someone imprisoned for life, he now has intense medical > > > > > > > care > > > > > > > that the state must absorb. > > > > > > > > With these considerations, should he be released on parole? > > > > > > > > The core of this lies in the philosophical underpinnings of > > > > > > > incarceration. Is the primary function of prison to punish? To > > > > > > > rehabilitate? To simply isolate society from dangerous elements? > > > > > > > > It seems clear that rehabilitation is off the table. Furthermore, > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > seems unlikely that prison would provide more punishment then him > > > > > > > simply being paralyzed. In fact, if released he would have to > > > > > > > account > > > > > > > for his own medical costs, probably resulting in worse care. Being > > > > > > > free may be more punishing tham keeping him in prison where he has > > > > > > > guaranteed medical care, shelter and food. As a quadriplegic, he > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > also a minimal threat to society. (I say minimal because such > > > > > > > people > > > > > > > have managed to commit crimes, but the rate is as probably as low > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > you are going to get for any person). > > > > > > > > I feel this situation reveals an underlying paradox. In most > > > > > > > situations, people would espouse the utilitarian aspect of > > > > > > > prison: it > > > > > > > reduces harm to society by acting as a deterrant through the > > > > > > > threat > > > > > > > and enactment of punishment, isolating threats from society, and > > > > > > > rehabilitating people so they are less of a threat if and when > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > reenter society. > > > > > > > > What is often underplayed is the emotional aspect. If a person > > > > > > > shows > > > > > > > genuine remorse at a crime committed, they are generally treated > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > being less of a threat. This makes sense since not all crimes are > > > > > > > acts > > > > > > > of malice. A person that genuinely feels guilt *is* less of a > > > > > > > threat > > > > > > > and should be treated as such. But this association remains valid > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > when there is a tie between a person's mindset and their ability > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > commit a crime. When that tie is severed, a person's emotional > > > > > > > state > > > > > > > no longer represents their potential to be threatening and can no > > > > > > > longer be used in this manner. The paradox arises from the fact > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > most people would continue to use emotional state as requirement > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > release and would recoil at letting an unrepentent killer be freed > > > > > > > from prison. > > > > > > > > Notes: > > > > > > > > This situation is an based on an actual case > > > > > > > -http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/C061031.PDFthoughsome > > > > > > > elements have been generalized for this philosophical exercise. To > > > > > > > summarize the actual case, the prisoner was attemtping to involve > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > special statute that allows prisoners to be released under > > > > > > > "compassionate" consideration if certain conditions apply > > > > > > > (terminal > > > > > > > illness, medically incapacitated or otherwise no longer a threat > > > > > > > due > > > > > > > to medical condition). The parole board denied the claim under the > > > > > > > ruling that quadriplegics can still pose a threat, as evidenced by > > > > > > > several intances they were able to find. A court overturned that > > > > > > > ruling on the basis that, on a long enough time line you can find > > > > > > > instances of anyone being a threat and the statute does not > > > > > > > require > > > > > > > that a person be no threat what-so-ever. A superior court then > > > > > > > overturned the lower courts ruling, so it would appear that the > > > > > > > man > > > > > > > remains in jail. > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > > > > Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > > > > [email protected]. > > > > > > For more options, visit this group > > > > > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.-Hidequotedtext- > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > -- > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > > > Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. > > > > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > > > [email protected]. > > > > > For more options, visit this group > > > > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.-Hidequotedtext- > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > -- > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > > Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. > > > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > > > To unsubscribe from this > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
