Philosophy Discussion Forums

I realise that my last few posts are more about prison reform rather than the question of 'does society need prisons ?'
Also, my question re Norway welfare and education systems - and a comparison thereof - should perhaps best be asked in another thread.
I think it boils down to the different philosophies of life - the best way to live it...
So, which political policy, if any, can best structure societal needs.
Yes, that would be another thread.

To change the thinking of those who want prisons to be punitive there needs to be a media campaign to show comparative costs of crime prevention by reducing poverty, and punishment by punitive imprisonment. A comparison of Norway's and US crime prevention systems is difficult to understand .For instance I wondered how Norwegian costs can be compared with US costs.There are variables such as social education in both countries, racial tensions, and poverty levels in both countries. Nonetheless the general principle is true ,of education and medical care as more appropriate for the rehabilitation of many criminals.

NB I say "reduce poverty" and I mean not only better food, better housing and so on but also better education and better medical care so that the differential between rich and poor is reduced almost to vanishing.

Well, the problem is, if we abolish prisons, with which official punishment should a government threaten us to prevent crime. Even if you do think that prisons don't serve for this problem. I already mentioned then a bci-driven threat for people that do commit crimes.

One could do the argument that floating imprisonment, due to prison free times in which the convict can stay in the normal world don't make sense for the punishment of imprisonment and that then this punishment could be abolished. Another alternative would be a hypnopedia supported from a bci-driven hypnosis to prevent crime.

Perhaps we should define which sort of imprisonment should be discussed. For example floating imprisonment or an ankle monitor etc ?

For example in cryoprisons like in demolition man (actor sylvester stallone) , the main actor received during his cryo imprisonment a hynopedia and knew then how to knit with wool. What would happen , if we would implement a bci-driven hypnosis-treatment like this.

Georgeanna wrote: ↑November 3rd, 2018, 6:12 am
Below is a link to an interesting cost/benefit analysis comparing Norway's rehabilitative system with American systems.
Conclusion that it is cheaper in the long term for people to be rehabilitated. Better for all concerned, except those that would make profit from the continual misery of others.

https://www.reasonstobecheerful.world/a ... son-reform

Comparisons of recidivism rates between countries are usually uninformative, because the inmate populations typically differ in many ways. For the rates to be comparable demographic factors have to be normalized, for age, ethnicity, criminal histories, sex, education levels, etc. Also the followup period needs to be the same --- in the US recidivism is usually reported as re-arrests within 5 years. Some countries report it over 2 or 3 years.

GE Morton wrote: ↑November 3rd, 2018, 12:44 pm

Georgeanna wrote: ↑November 3rd, 2018, 6:12 am
Below is a link to an interesting cost/benefit analysis comparing Norway's rehabilitative system with American systems.
Conclusion that it is cheaper in the long term for people to be rehabilitated. Better for all concerned, except those that would make profit from the continual misery of others.

https://www.reasonstobecheerful.world/a ... son-reform

Comparisons of recidivism rates between countries are usually uninformative, because the inmate populations typically differ in many ways. For the rates to be comparable demographic factors have to be normalized, for age, ethnicity, criminal histories, sex, education levels, etc. Also the followup period needs to be the same --- in the US recidivism is usually reported as re-arrests within 5 years. Some countries report it over 2 or 3 years.

Yes. I understand the problems related to comparative analysis between countries, in any sphere not just recidivism.
So many interacting factors involved.
However, I think in terms of the individual, the victim and the community, it makes sense to focus on positive rehabilitation. A way forward.
Again, I'm no expert...there must be some studies out there which would clarify and inform...

Belindi wrote: ↑November 3rd, 2018, 7:50 am To change the thinking of those who want prisons to be punitive there needs to be a media campaign to show comparative costs of crime prevention by reducing poverty, and punishment by punitive imprisonment. A comparison of Norway's and US crime prevention systems is difficult to understand .For instance I wondered how Norwegian costs can be compared with US costs.There are variables such as social education in both countries, racial tensions, and poverty levels in both countries. Nonetheless the general principle is true ,of education and medical care as more appropriate for the rehabilitation of many criminals.

NB I say "reduce poverty" and I mean not only better food, better housing and so on but also better education and better medical care so that the differential between rich and poor is reduced almost to vanishing.

I don't know that the information is available on comparative costs of prevention v punishment ?
Isn't it difficult to assess the financial benefits of prevention ? I do believe that prevention is better than cure.
I agree about the difficulty in comparing different countries, given the many variables.

Perhaps we would have more joy in looking outwith philosophy...then again, I'm not sure that we need statistical analysis to use in any media campaign...
To change thinking - sometimes a little brainwashing does the trick - a slick slogan ?

Georgeanna wrote:

To change thinking - sometimes a little brainwashing does the trick - a slick slogan ?

Commercial advertisers using their skills sell unlikely products , and I do believe that people who don't think very much about these matters can be persuaded by clever public relations people. Why should the devil have all the good tunes!

Georgeanna wrote: ↑November 3rd, 2018, 1:59 pm
However, I think in terms of the individual, the victim and the community, it makes sense to focus on positive rehabilitation.

Rehabilitation programs of all kinds --- focusing on education, drug treatment, therapy, counseling, work training, etc., have been tried for decades in US prison systems. The best of these reduce recidivism rates by about 25% --- i.e., instead of 76% of released inmates re-offending within 5 years, only 56% re-offend. And those "best" programs tend to be small pilot programs intensively staffed by researchers and highly trained professionals. When those programs are expanded to real-world prison populations and implemented by the existing bureaucracy, the success rate drops.

Reported success rates for the various rehabilitation schemes suffer from another, endemic problem --- -selection bias. Inmates cannot be forced to participate in rehab programs. Hence random assignment of inmates with similar backgrounds and demographics to treatment groups and control groups is not possible. So those who choose to participate are very likely to be more motivated to change their ways, and thus less likely to re-offend, with or without the program, thus overstating the program's benefits.

No one thinks rehab programs, even if optimally chosen and implemented, will reduce recidivism by more than 15-20%.

https://www.nij.gov/journals/268/pages/ ... ubble.aspx

Advocates for rehab programs need to keep in mind the primary purpose of a criminal justice system --- protecting the public from the depredations of criminals. They are not welfare agencies. Some inmates will benefit from rehabilitation programs; most won't. And if those who won't are released early because they have participated in one of those programs, the system fails the public.

Rehabilitation institutions have to be backed up with social housing, free health care, and free quality education . All of those measures are more feasible economically when they are accompanied by a socialist government's skills in business and commerce instead of wasteful and corrupt privatisation.

Belindi wrote: ↑November 3rd, 2018, 8:09 pm Rehabilitation institutions have to be backed up with social housing, free health care, and free quality education.

Well, you can very likely reduce criminal behavior drastically if you provide everyone with everything they desire "free." Why not "free" concubines for rapists? Free children for pedophiles?

But while you will have reduced criminal behavior, you will not have reduced the burden it imposes on productive citizens. They're still paying to support the parasites. (Science fiction author Robert Heinlein once described muggers as "free-lance socialists").

Why not, GEMorton? I expect that you can answer that question if you think about it.

The parasites are always a nuisance. To deduce social parasites we need improved educational opportunities for disadvantaged minorities.The more productive citizens the better. It is universally acknowledged that prevention of crime is less costly than cure for crime.

Belindi wrote: ↑November 4th, 2018, 9:17 am Why not, GEMorton? I expect that you can answer that question if you think about it.

The parasites are always a nuisance. To deduce social parasites we need improved educational opportunities for disadvantaged minorities.The more productive citizens the better. It is universally acknowledged that prevention of crime is less costly than cure for crime.

"Disadvantaged minorities" have the same educational opportunities as everyone else. Public K-12 schools are open to all, and (in the US) so are government-guaranteed student loans for college.

But, as the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

Most criminals have no desire, and no intention, to ever become productive, Belindi.