Prisons in America and elsewhere.

Remove all ads!

That may (and that's a serious may) work in trench warfare, but in modern warfare it's a recipe for disaster (and fiasco). That being said, I believe one of the punishments in Rome was a mandatory term in the military. Usually on the front lines.

 

And lord knows Rome's is an example we want to emulate. Let's see, first we can get so obsessed about conquest for the sake of enrichment of the Senate that the military transforms our imperial republic into a straight empire. Then we can fail epically and collapse. Along the way we can crucify many thousands of people, including--allegedly--God.

It'll be great. Who wants to go first?

LKD: "if you aren't guilty you have nothing to worry about" is a terrible argument.

 

How many of us are from countries that have fought a proper war recently anyway? Don't mind the marketing, Iraq and Afghanistan aren't wars in the traditional sense. The actual war part against the foreign country lasted a few days in each case. Everything since then has been the army acting as policeman. Yeah, the crime rate is a bit higher than Delaware but that's basically what they're doing. Their job is to get on with the local community and treat them with respect and get their support for the nation building. Would you feel ok if Canada and Mexico sent their rapists and murderers to be America's policemen?

---------- Added 0 hours, 11 minutes and 40 seconds later... ----------

Most importantly because as a civilised society we regard there as being certain minimun standards by which other human beings should be treated. The fact that others fail to uphold these standards should in no way compromise our determination to maintain our standards for all, including those who have failed.

More practically, there is a need for a balance. Prison must be a deterrent. I don't agree with some of their conditions. On the other hand, casting prisoners aside from society may harden their attitudes completely and cause them to lose all empathy. If they are forced to live according to a savage law of the jungle then they may do the same when they are outside. Indeed they may only be able to. Prisons can be wonderful training grounds for criminals. Different prisoners will respond differently. A hardened gang member might not be too bothered, he can look after himself. Middle class people in on white collar crime or such may be terrified out of their lives and completely unable to fend for themselves.

 

Deise, unfortunately that's becoming the form of modern warfare more and more, especially where the US is concerned (who's stupid enough to really challenge us on open ground when they have a choice, after all). And yes, it is yet more reason not to use the army as a substitute for prison. It can work wonders for the misbehaving youths, because often they just need strict discipline and a sense of self esteem and teamwork, and if there's anything the Army is good at, it's those. Grown men, though, it's a little late for.

 

I think T2's reply was very good indeed.

I know of one example of an elite corps that would come close to that description and that is the French Foreign Legion. I'm not saying that all the recruits have a criminal past but you have to be an outcast to enlist. For instance after WW2, Germans constituted almost two thirds of the Legion.

That being said you have to take into account that beyond the myth there is the reality of a very severe training and a long military tradition focused on creating cohesion between individuals coming from many different cultures and countries.

You can't seriously expect criminals to become real soldiers as being a soldier requires many qualities that are directly opposed to criminal behaviour.

 

I'm not sure about a punishment, but I am certain that if you lived in a territory that was captured by the Roman empire, the only way you could become a Roman citizen is if you served in the military. You had to serve 20 years, and if you miraculously survived, you became a Roman citizen.

 

Actually that is not at all true, there where multiple ways off becoming a roman citizen. being rich enough and bribing a prokonsul was probably the easiest. Serving in the military and being given it as a reward was fairly normal, the problem was, there wasn't any law sating how long you should serve or even guarentying it.

getting your hometown turned into a roman town, this one was a bit tricky, but basically for most of the time, the roman empire worked with three types of towns, the foreigners, the ones with latin rights and the one with roman rights.

the last way I can think of right now, was trough slavery. by selling yourself as a slave and at some point being fried, you gained roman rights and your children would be fully roman.

 

In an ideal world, you are right, Ragusa -- as I mentioned, much more should be done to keep prisoners from hurting each other, but it is not a perfect world. Do-gooders like the John Howard Society and its ilk, in there efforts to make prisons some sort of rehabilitative Nirvana, have actually made things worse by increasing the amount of mingling that is done by prisoners, thereby exposing many prisoners to abuse. Their utter stupidity on believing that vicious criminals will suddenly start behaving like little angels behind prison walls has resulted in many rapes and assaults that would not have occurred in a prison under serious isolation standards.

By the by, the report you posted implied that while American prisons were the ones studied, there was no evidence that prisons elsewhere in the world were any better. Why is that relevant? Because to me it shows a universal problem, and one that merits some common sense responses.

By this I mean a person who is considering committing a crime must think that while it is not fair that rapes and assaults occur in prisons, the cold, hard fact is that they do, and he should take that fact into account.

You pulled out the whole "women deserving to be raped" argument, the one designed to make common sense advice into "blaming the victim". To use an exaggeration, if a woman walks buck naked into a Hell's Angels bar and shouts "nobody knows where I am and so if anything bad happens to me, the perpetrators will never get caught!" she still does not deserve to get raped -- no one I have ever spoken to thinks that. What I DO say is that she is gonna get raped, and that she should have taken some common sense precautions against that rape. More realistically, women should avoid unlit, deserted areas late at night, and should take other precautions as well. Saying that categorically does not mean that women who fail to take those precautions deserve what happens to them.

Which brings us back to the criminals. Prisoners should not be subject to this sort of thing. But they are. Knowing that, people should be obedient to the law and thereby avoid prison. That's not rocket science. I've been tempted in my life to do some pretty horrible, illegal things, but the knowledge of what would happen to me behind bars was a factor in my exercise of self control.

The problem I see is that many people have no respect for the law, violate the rights of others, and then are utterly flabbergasted when they end up actually suffering consequences for their crimes and have their own rights violated. The consequences might not fit the crime (ie -- rape is neither just nor proportionate) but the consequence is there. Avoiding unpleasant consequences by making good choices is always "helpful", in my opinion.

 

Dude, it's not just their rights that are being violated. I mean they are actually being violated! Getting F'd in the butt is a bit more than simply "disproportionate".

 

I know that, Aldeth, and I totally agree -- I was trying to avoid the overly dramatic hyperbole that I am often prone to falling into.

Please don't get me wrong -- I am not minimizing the seriousness of prison rape, or any rape for that matter. The Golden Rule makes me put myself in their position -- would I want this done to me? The answer is obviously a big "NO".

That said, though, once I do that, I also say "how can I -- or anyone -- avoid this awful fate?" And the answer is clear -- don't commit crimes. Be a decent citizen. Respect the rights of others in your private conduct. Show respect for laws.

 

That's right but what if you find yourself in a position where you are accused of something you haven't done and yet face serious charges with incriminating evidence but can't actually prove your innocence, no alibis, no luck. That may be farfetched but it's always a possibility. Wrong time and wrong place.

I don't trust the legal system to be infallible. Errors are made. Do you think that all prisoners are guilty? Most are probably but it is only fair to assume that some are victims of the system. I'm not saying that you say that it is alright for them to get violated, I'm just saying that even following a logic that would argue that they had it coming it simply doesn't make sense.

 

I addressed that in an earlier post -- I have yet to hear of a person who had absolutely no earlier criminal record being sentenced unjustly to hard time. Every case I've ever heard of wrongful conviction has been the conviction of a career criminal. I know that the justice system isn't infallible. But I firmly believe that if you behave properly, generate a good reputation, and don't commit any crimes, you will in all probability never end up in prison.

On the other hand, if you are constantly being an antisocial <censored> and having run ins with the law, don't be surprised if things go badly for you. It may not be fair, but it is the logical conclusion to such behaviour.