Prison without bars

[pendell]

The author proposes the use of electronic monitoring (http://www.vox.com/2014/6/27/5845484/prisons-are-terrible-and-there-is-finally-a-way-to-get-rid-of-them) for nonviolent offenders, reserving prison space for violent killers and the like. It's an intriguing idea, I think.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Azraile]

I think jail time should only be a sentence for violent ofenders

[Nourjan]

Or simply adopt a Norwegian style prison.

[Bulldog Psion]

Definitely has potential, in my view.

[Knaight]

The author proposes the use of electronic monitoring (http://www.vox.com/2014/6/27/5845484/prisons-are-terrible-and-there-is-finally-a-way-to-get-rid-of-them) for nonviolent offenders, reserving prison space for violent killers and the like. It's an intriguing idea, I think.

More specifically, the article notes that the replacement would be house arrest - there's still confinement, just not within a prison system. Which helps a lot with some cases. Electronic tracking does relatively little to deal with repeated petty theft, as that can easily be from places where it makes perfect sense for people to be. Enforced house arrest does work here.

Obviously, this doesn't work for everything. Homicide and sexual assault are specifically highlighted within the article, but battery, a pattern of any assault, attempted murder, some fraud, etc. are also pretty unsolvable within this system. Which still leaves a great deal of people eligible. Basically, it's a pretty solid deterrent, which is completely unhelpful when dealing with the sort of people who just need to be removed from the broader society entirely.

With that said, this still leaves problems with prison conditions, that still need to be solved. This still leaves problems with sentencing. So on and so forth. I'd continue, but I'm already a bit closer to the border of politics than I'd like to be, and continuing blows right past it.

[PallElendro]

This is far in the future, and whilst there may be several problems with this sort of thing, I've found this episode of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine intriguing.

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Hard_Time_(episode)

[Wardog]

This is far in the future, and whilst there may be several problems with this sort of thing, I've found this episode of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine intriguing.

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Hard_Time_(episode)

I haven't seen that episode, but from reading the description, that sounds really bad. The single most useful think about prison is that while someone is in prison, they can't commit crimes. (At least not against people outside. Usually).

That ST alternative loses that advantage, and would probably count as torture. Plus, it also seems to include many of the problems with normal imprisonment, namely that it can turn you into a worse person than you were before.

[Recaiden]

The article plays up the benefits a bit much, but I think it would be a good alternative for some offenders. Using it for nonviolent crimes would be a good way to reduce prisons, but as said, it doesn't fit all crimes, probably not even very many. Also it would seem to have less of a backup if the GPS system (or much more likely, the tracking device) has some fault, compared to actual penitentiaries.

The ST episode is a terrible idea, because it inflicts all the negative consequences of prison, and offers only punishment as a possible upside. Now, if we could somehow install 20 years of helpful reforming memories, that would be a little better, but still might not be ethical.

[Max™]

Might not be ethical?

Your memories are a huge part of who you are, implanting a huge chunk of your natural lifespan worth of horrible memories is most definitely torture, worse it is torture with no upside, as was stated above, so it is trying to punish a crime with an arguably worse crime.

"Oh hey, you stole some information from us? Here, have 20 years worth of awful information forcefed into your brain!"

[Coidzor]

Might not be ethical?

Your memories are a huge part of who you are, implanting a huge chunk of your natural lifespan worth of horrible memories is most definitely torture, worse it is torture with no upside, as was stated above, so it is trying to punish a crime with an arguably worse crime.

"Oh hey, you stole some information from us? Here, have 20 years worth of awful information forcefed into your brain!"

What are you talking about with "horrible memories" or "awful information?" Do you think torturing people works to reform them and is the only thing that works or something? :smallconfused:

Because it seems like if memory modification to lead to reformation is in play, it's more about creating memories that involve working through the root causes of their issues, like super-accelerated therapy.

So while there are definitely ethical concerns, the scenario you're envisioning is a bit of a non sequitur.

[Kato]

Uuuuh... I feel like we might be treading a bit too deep into politics here?

But just as a quick note, from what I know both the American system of prisons and people's view on the purpose of them are quite a lot different from most of the rest of the civilized world. Most European countries aim to reform criminals, the US wants to put them away and... hopes they won't do it again out of fear of going back, I guess. The idea of a person bettering themselves seems to not be part of the whole plan.

[Jeff the Green]

Uuuuh... I feel like we might be treading a bit too deep into politics here?

But just as a quick note, from what I know both the American system of prisons and people's view on the purpose of them are quite a lot different from most of the rest of the civilized world. Most European countries aim to reform criminals, the US wants to put them away and... hopes they won't do it again out of fear of going back, I guess. The idea of a person bettering themselves seems to not be part of the whole plan.

It is in some states in some prisons. I know here in Oregon, while the situation is still far from acceptable, let alone good, there are a number of programs for offenders to learn trades, get degrees, receive counseling, etc. But then there's places like Maricopa County where it seems like the whole point of imprisonment is to give the guards "acceptable targets" for their abuse.

[Max™]

What are you talking about with "horrible memories" or "awful information?" Do you think torturing people works to reform them and is the only thing that works or something? :smallconfused:

Because it seems like if memory modification to lead to reformation is in play, it's more about creating memories that involve working through the root causes of their issues, like super-accelerated therapy.

So while there are definitely ethical concerns, the scenario you're envisioning is a bit of a non sequitur.

More than a small confused needed there, as you seem to have read my post to mean something besides I intended.

To clarify, I think it's an awful idea, and one can only hope that if memory alteration becomes feasible then human rights laws will be updated accordingly to prevent it being abused like they did in that episode of star trek referenced above.

[Knaight]

But just as a quick note, from what I know both the American system of prisons and people's view on the purpose of them are quite a lot different from most of the rest of the civilized world. Most European countries aim to reform criminals, the US wants to put them away and... hopes they won't do it again out of fear of going back, I guess. The idea of a person bettering themselves seems to not be part of the whole plan.

Keeping out of politics here, while it's true that different things are emphasized, the same few do tend to come up. The "four R's" are relevant here: deterrence, rehabilitation, removal, and retribution are the general terms used, though retaliation is also relevant here (mostly as something that does happen at times but shouldn't). They're also usually conditional on crimes - removal is seen as much more acceptable for, say, serial killers than petty thieves, just about everywhere.

With that in mind, it's worth looking at the system as presented under the four. The house arrest and tracking is functional as a deterrent, though the matter of how often people get caught is extremely relevant to that purpose - plus, deterrents tend to be pretty worthless for crimes of passion. It's also decent for rehabilitation, in that it at least takes people out of the prison system, which is a pretty excellent institution at making things worse, and can easily work with various non-prison reform systems. It's outright worthless for removal, and there are cases where that is very much necessary. As for retribution, I suppose it's worthless, but as I don't see it as useful in the first place I don't see this as a downside.

[Coidzor]

More than a small confused needed there, as you seem to have read my post to mean something besides I intended.

To clarify, I think it's an awful idea, and one can only hope that if memory alteration becomes feasible then human rights laws will be updated accordingly to prevent it being abused like they did in that episode of star trek referenced above.

The post you were replying to did not involve using the technology in the stupid way that it was used in the Star Trek episode, making your reply to that particular scenario inappropriate, because you weren't really replying to the post itself, you were responding to the episode, apparently.

[Kato]

Hm... the thing is, the topic is interesting but I really don't want to infringe on "no politics" so I'd feel more likely to discuss this if a mod gives at least general approval...

At least in regard to the DSN episode: I vaguely recall the events even though it's been likely ten years or more since I saw it. While DSN is an American show and from what I can tell the prison/punishment was designed a lot like US jails (from what I know about them mostly from fiction, I'll admit) it seemed to me to pretty much serve most of the purpose, apart from the "removal" bit, but then saving a lot of money. Miles certainly wouldn't want to go through it again, so while there's no rehabilitation (not that he needed any) he's at least scared of going there again and going through the same again which... well, some people would argue it works just as well. And now instead of having lost years of his life he has the chance to live longer as a "better" (or "more scared of the law") man. It's not exactly win-win but really not much worse than other jails... in a way.

[Duck999]

I think jail time should only be a sentence for violent ofenders

If they don't jail people who deal drugs, or other non violent offenders, I assume they would be assigned to rehabilitation. The only problem with that is that people like drug dealers aren't going to be solved with rehabilitation. Police would have to keep some sort of watch on them at all times to prevent any further breaking of the law. A prison without bars solves this because they aren't going to get drugs while in prison.

Also, the only problem with this is that prisoners with a deep determination to escape would have more people to work with. It does have a lot of potential though.