It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Does harsher punishment lead to less crime?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 09:32 AM
link   
I've heard both sides of this topic, not exactly in a unique thread but just bits and pieces. Some advocate for harsher punishments while others use "the punishment doesn't fit the crime" quote more often...

My question is, what happens to crime, when crimes are punished harshly ?

If a dui was an instant six months jail, thirty thousand dollar fine .. Would duis go down?

If proven rape lead to a death sentence... Would there be less rape?

Or would we will live in a police state where we constantly fear being arrested for the smallest crimes? Would cop corruption be more rampant than ever and the citizens be on the losing side of this?




posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope




would we will live in a police state where we constantly fear being arrested for the smallest crimes?


If you're black/ some other minority, or have a substance abuse problem or mental illness, you already live in fear of being arrested (or injured, killed, etc.) for the smallest of crimes.

I don't think harsher punishments would deter people from doing these things though - automatic death penalty sentences for rapists would probably not even affect the number of rapes even in the slightest. If someone is a rapist, they have something very, very wrong with them in their head. The punishment for if they even get caught, would not even cross their mind when they are about to/are in the process of comitting such an act



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

I am going to refer you to this link.

Remember how the administration, specifically the Dept. of Justice, came out with the idea that the disproportionate suspension rates in schools among black students were actually racist and discriminatory and they challenged school districts to do something to bring those rates of suspension more in line with the percentages of black students?

Minneapolis did that. And that link describes the results of the policy. Now the Minneapolis schools are a complete mess. There is a even a quote there from a veteran black teacher who finally gave up and went to teach in a private charter school.

It seems the schools loosened their suspension rates to avoid removing problem students, particularly if they were African-American, and now the schools are turning into war zones because those students are allowed to misbehave in ways that would normally see them removed.

You can make the argument that the bad actors are going to act badly regardless of the policy, sure, but is that the point? If the aim of the school is to educate students who are there to learn, it seems to me that students who are disrupting that aim ought to be removed. They aren't learning, and they are inhibiting the students who do wish to learn, preventing everyone from learning when all is said and done. So are we ahead or behind to remove them?

You can draw those conclusions across to larger society. If the bad actors are left in larger society, does that make it a better or worse place for everyone? You can argue that harsher laws and sentences don't deter, but if they do remove those elements from the larger peaceful society and citizens who are working to make the society and place we all want to live and work in ... where should the balance be?



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 09:52 AM
link   
The punishment comes after the crime, seldom criminals actually think of that detail, so it has minimal effect to have higher punishment.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

Let us concern our discussion with simple theft. In some countries they will remove the offending hand from a thief. Do we see thousands and thousands of one-handed former thieves in those countries? No! That severe punishment works.

Suppose that was the law of the land in the US. Would there be a sizeable number of the total population walking around with just one hand? No, not like the numbers of two-handed former or continual thieves out there today of those with prior convictions.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

Every time they interview serious criminal they always say something like, "I had a hard childhood".

Somewhere in their past they were abused, usually severely, leading to deep seated anger in their later life and a tinder box as it were, of pent up emotion looking for a spark to set it off.

Some commit serial crimes, others go off all at once.

This is true of some world leaders, too. Hitlers dad beat him brutally, one time leaving him for dead.

So 'harsh punishment' tends to harden people into worse criminals, imo.

Look at how bombing the populations of Germany and Japan still did't make them surrender, only steeling their resolve to fight back. Look how prisons today instead of being 'reformatories', are often referred to as Gladiator Academies.

Others will say the threat of execution isn't what deters murderers from killing. It just stops them from killing again.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

I can follow this line of thinking - lessen the standards you hold any group to, and that group will just be reflective of those lessened standards.

Don't the nation's with the least crime in the world have the most cops in the world, yet the prison system is more about rehabilitation?

I wouldn't want the police force to grow much in America as things are. We would need some changes before even discussing that, since the biggest gang in America is Leo., so I've heard.

What do you think? More or less Cops? Are we at a good point with punishment or are we a Minneapolis school?



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

But that's no excuse either. How many people had hard childhoods who went on to lead prosperous, productive, happy lives?

In the end, the only person who controls you is you. You may be shaped by your experiences, but they do not control who you are. If they did, everyone who had that kind of childhood would either turn out bad or turn out good, no exceptions, but that is not the case. At some point, a person has to own that they do make their own choices in life too and those are their own and no one else's. Daddy's beatings and mommy's drug use and indifference don't make you do anything.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 09:58 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

It's an interesting point, I mean Norway is known for its low crime, and some of its jails are more like hotel suites. They treat the criminals very humanely, and end up with the least people coming back to jail after they are related, so I've read.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Aliensun

Hmm, good point here as well. I heard that public beatings were introduced in some middle America country and crime went way down. Not saying I'm an advocate of such things, but you do wonder the overall impact on a society - detrimental, or positive?

I do see some other countries use compassion instead, and wonder if America could adopt such a model or not.

Of course corporations make too much money for them to allow rehabilitation and forgiveness, but still.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

I've heard that and even seen documentaries on it. Over here in the states we run prisons as a business owned by private corporations, hardly focusing on rehabilitation just mostly filling cells for profit.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

I think our problems are societal, but you can't change society by legislating it. As the article itself reads, many of the worst kids on Minneapolis come from single parent families and that's likely a generational culture for them by now. Most of them are likely boys growing up without a father. Like it or not, boys learn a lot about how men should behave in a family and the larger world by growing up with a daddy in their lives.

In the inner cities where just a mommy is normal, boys tend to learn about appropriate male behavior by joining gangs who take the place of daddy.

In order to really change that pattern, we have to break that culture and elevate the importance of family - mom, dad, kids. I don't see our society going there anytime soon because we've all been trained that it's not PC to push the traditional family model because that somehow denigrates single mothers and gay families. However, it would maybe start to solve some of these issues in our inner cities.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope
Harsher penalties do not equate to a reduction in crime. However, as Ketsy rightly pointed out, it does remove the offending factor from the populace. Which is needful, depending on the circumstances.

In my opinion, crime is directly related to economics, education, leadership(government), and equality. These are the main factors in a "free" society that can increase or decrease crime rates. Educate your people, give your women and minorities true equal rights, hold your government accountable, and your economics will vastly improve, thereby reducing crime given that the laws on the books are fair to begin with. If you make criminals of those who were law abiding citizens before you enacted unfair laws, you create an atmosphere conducive to lawlessness.

"The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws." Ayn Rand
edit on 3/22/2016 by Klassified because: grammar



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Oh for sure - This thread is more about the debate on the topic, not the actual implementation. We have a lot of things to fix in the way of corruption of the elite before we actually tackle such things.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Klassified

Oh yeah, I've ALLEGEDLY likely broken several laws just today. There's probably millions of pages describing every tiny little thing you could do.

Didn't I read something lately about suspected terrorists including those that question government, have conservative views, uphold the 2nd amendment - Just crazy things like that, or am I imagining?



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr




Somewhere in their past they were abused, usually severely, leading to deep seated anger in their later life and a tinder box as it were, of pent up emotion looking for a spark to set it off.





So 'harsh punishment' tends to harden people into worse criminals, imo.


I was severly abused by an alcoholic father. In 51 years, I have never murdered anyone, committed a felony of any kind, robbed a store, raped anyone or am in any way a violent person, unless pushed to defend myself or others.
Using the "I was abused" excuse doesn't fly. It is a choice to be a criminal or not. No one forces you to rob a store or rape or be violent.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Klassified

To be plain, I think there are way too many laws on the books.

The man who died after a police confrontation in New York? He was selling cigarettes on the street and by law in New York, they had to bring him in. Stupid! That should never have been a law. Why? Just exactly who was he harming so badly that he needed to be incarcerated for that?

Instead, the police had to try to enforce the stupid ordinance, he resisted, and someone wound up dead.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

I've heard a lot of people say punishment makes no difference and if you were to increase the severity of the punishment it would still make no difference. Let's turn that around. If there were no penalty at all for any crime, would everything be the same? We wouldn't need prisons or lawyers anymore. Would the roads be as safe if nobody worried about getting ticked for speeding or drunk driving? If someone knew they could kill in public and get away with it, everybody would be just as safe?

If we were to test the results of varying penalties, I think we would see diminishing returns as penalties got harsher. But I think there would always be some statistical effect.

One reason I've heard we don't have a death penalty for rape is because it would encourage the rapist to murder the victim. I do think penalties should be harsher than they are now though. Someone who rapes (not just statutory rape) children should never be allowed in a position to do it again, yet released offenders are known to have a high rate of repeat offenses, and they are released anyway.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: intrptr

But that's no excuse either. How many people had hard childhoods who went on to lead prosperous, productive, happy lives?

Not all of them, it seems. The ones that do aren't the topic of discussion, and before you judge those that can't cope, walk a mile in their shoes.

This isn't a justification of bad behavior, just a search for causation.

Take your average bad tempered, or tinder box, ticking time bomb, quiet silent type. They are seething inside, they have 'issues' usually deep seated, often related to their upbringing. They maybe haven't been given the coping tools to deal with rejection or peer pressure, how to respond to teasing or ridicule. There parents either were too busy or didn't know how to impart those lessons to their kids. Because they were never taught it.

See where this is going, we have a nation run by adult children, a police force of childish bullies, greedy, selfish business men, like kids playing in a sand box. This is getting worse as time goes on.
i turn on what passes for politics and see a bunch of insulting and spite, average Americans lapping it up.

Present company excluded.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko
Exactly. Similar instances have happened to children with lemonade stands, and people trying to feed and clothe the homeless, among others. I do understand laws aimed at protecting public health from tainted food or drink, but local law enforcement went overboard, and treated these people as criminals.

edit on 3/22/2016 by Klassified because: grammar



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join