Do you fancy the criminal justice system? (EU/USA)

Post Reply New Topic

I once read that long prison terms are a relatively new development. In the old days they would use the pillory or stocks to humiliate and physically discomfort petty criminals. Serious crimes were punished by public hanging.

Those methods worked just fine for the people of the time. Crime was uncommon and the justice system operated on a budget so much smaller than today’s that is makes comparisons almost meaningless. The USA spends $30,000 to $40,000 dollars to house one inmate for one year. Combine that with cost of courts, attorneys, and police you have a system that costs more to catch and punish a law-breaker then it does for the average person pay for his living expenses.

You would still make them go to prison? Or are you just thinking of knee-capping them...?

on the OP.. the way the prison system is run may be flawed, but that doesnt neccesarily mean that the system or concept itself is wrong. The liberal concepts of early release, rehabilitation, open prisons, and mis-applied bail are wrecking my country and getting my people killed, so I would be wary of applying them to yours for fear of the same.

It seems extremely obvious that an offender placed in a brutal sequestered society for a specific period of time has little if any relationship to discovering why and how a person has offended society. What is needed is discovering how the attitudes that placed him or her there might be suitably modified so that on return to the outside he or she will become a useful civilian. In all this probably would be an intricate and expensive and even a long time project of great expense. It might also have great long time rewards to society. I doubt society would be willing to lay out the proper procedures on those terms so it is likely the misery will continue.

wow, you guys are the kings of BS...

Well, depends what the people want, personnally i still think criminals should be punished, but with the abuse of power that's infecting the system being translated by free violence and torture, there should be some other way. Heck, already being detained is a big deal enough. (for me it would)

Torture you say? TBPH describing the sexual assault of violent felons as torture makes you sound like a liberal crybaby.
Jail isnt supposed to be Fun! Speaking of the falsely accused, you do realize though that Execution is IRREVERSABLE and
there is the VERY grave potential that innocent people will be executed, which is why I believe that if capital punishment is going to allowed there should be severe restrictions on its use-I.E.: a death sentence should only be carried out of if the defendent was convicted based on PHYSICAL EVIDENCE(think Habeas Corpus)!

Hrm, i don't recall saying jail had to be fun, i did say criminals should be punished, but that torture should be avoided. Isn't there enough pain already in this sad world?

Yeah, but IMO they are necessary costs to prevent facist control. Without checks and balances, there's nothing to stop a government from just hanging anyone they don't like. I can't think of a single country without a complicated and somewhat forgiving judicial system that I'd want to live in. While it costs more, the fact that citizens trust the governement to give them fair trials and trust that if there is injustice they will have some recourse benefits society greatly. Combine that with the feeling that they are relatively safe, and you've got the best method for preventing rebellion and terrorism developed so far.

Hanging serious offenders doesn't mean they won't get due process and a fair trial.



Preventing rebellion and terrorism? I thought we were talking about common crime and punishment. 99.99% of the criminal justice system deals with non-political cases. They have special procedures and prisons for the other .01% LOL.

I was under the impression that jail was a blast!

Listen, if you were imprisoned wrongfully (let us say for rape considering that many have been wrongfully accused), more than likely you too will be raped. How accepting of the "jailhouse justice" would you be?

Well I certainly wouldnt be very accepting of it at all now, would I . What I think is that IF a falsely accused person is raped in prison, they should be able to file a Class Action Lawsuit against the prison system-including personal suits against the guards who set it up! But Oscuria, if you're so concerned about the falsely accused that How can you justify the Death Penalty?!?
You do understand that once a person is executed that can be NO RECOURSE OR REPARATIONS TO THAT INDIVIDUAL BECAUSE THEY ARE DEAD!

Lemme give you folks an outstanding example of *Jailhouse Justice* (BTW,FYI, I am NOT being sarcastic here!!) :

Surely most of you folks have heard all about serial killer JEFFREY DAHMER by now; who for some twisted reason a Lot of straight White women who are true crime buffs really seem to feel sorry for him because he was gay . Dahmer was sentenced to multiple consecutive life sentences for the 17 men he killed and mutilated cuz his trial and conviction took place in Minnesota which doesnt have capital punishment. 2 years into his sentence he was raped and then savagely beaten to death by another inmate(a Brotha named Charles Scarver ). What happnend to Mr. Dahmer was poetic justice-he died a death just as violent and gruesome as he had inflicted on victims. If he had been sentenced to death and/or were in Protective Custody, he'd Still be alive today writing his memoires, reading fan mail, and doing TV interviews. Not to mention he would be excuted in a very humane fashion. So THAT is a good example of why Im such a believer in Prison Justice .

The way inmates can and do treat each other is cruel and unusual; the system is unjust irrespective of whether the people are wrongfully accused or not. A governing body has no right to subject even delinquents and high criminals to certain things.

It goes against my beliefs, religion, and principles to subject a person to such treatments. If a person is going to be killed, put him to death--not brutalize him. That to me is an act committed by animals, supported by animals. The Law is something that should be respected, yes the Law fails at times, but it is still the Law and should be respected. In such an event, there should be a rewriting of laws that ensure punishment to be executed justly and with the trial, defendant, and victims in mind.

Yeah, but you would still have to pay for the police work, the judge, two lawyers, the jury, and still have to wait a few years to ensure that no further evidence would come to light. So there wouldn't actually be any savings. If you add in the bad PR, it would probably cost more. You might also run into martyr issues: the more gruesomely you kill someone, the more likely people will rewrite the facts to make him look like a hero.



It's not about the criminal system directly punishing terrorists or organized crime. It's about making people feel safe and motivated enough to squeal on anyone who obviously starts engaging in those activities. By tieing one hand behind the criminal justice system's back, you ensure that it's really difficult for them to collaborate with groups like that, whether out of idealology or greed for bribes. Yeah you get a few, but at least you can be sure that the majority are not; the risk of exposure during a trial is simply too great.

The areas where you get really major crime groups are where people don't trust that the system will be fair with them or protect them. Ghettos, where many become convinced that the system doesn't give a s*** about them; war-torn areas, where people don't believe that the system can protect them from retaliation; and crooked coporate offices, where potential whistle-blowers believe that the CEO has the system in his pocket.

Make people confident in the trustworthiness of the system, and you can kill groups like that before they can even get started. If people fear that they might be treated unfairly because there's a chance the officials are corrupt and will protect the criminals for bribes, or even might be the criminals themselves, groups like that flourish. When you look at countries that have less constrained and more efficient ways of handling criminals, you get way more corruption, organized crime, and terrorism. Just look at the mess in Myanmar - people think Katrina was bad, but at least the officials weren't actively preventing aid workers from entering the city or trying to steal the foriegn aid.

The "justice" system in western countries, first and foremost, maintains law and order. Justice is subjective, and the "justice" system is not universally "just". However, laws change, and so can be altered to fit closer or move farther away from what one and society views as "justice". The court systems and law enforcement can be abused by groups and individuals who wish to maintain their own control, and suppress that which is threatening to their interests, but the court system, in its most basic form, is neither "good" nor "evil". No system is, until it is operated and applied in a certain manner. What one views as "good" and "evil" is subjective. Such systems are objective.
To one man, communism is good; to another, it is downright evil. One man's "terrorist" is another man's freedom fighter.