Inprisioned or in treatment?

Stemming from the recent sex offender thread:

Is there a movement to treat the underlying causes of criminal behaviour, rather than letting the perpetrator rot for ___ years?

Child molesters are a great example. There's something deeply psychologically wrong with these people, and putting them in the can isn't going to do much. If the prison offered counseling services, followed by a full evaluation after release, then the sex offender could be allowed to return to society more fully (rather than the church, school, park bit). Conditions of their freedoms include ongoing treatment, employment, and positive recommendations from the psychiatrist.

What is your take on the issue?
Would programs like these help convicts, like sex offenders and domestic abusers?

Putting criminals in jails does us one good thing, it keeps them from making another crime and makes our neighborhood a lot safer. This scums choose to do a crime that they are fully aware that's it's wrong and they know that it has consequences but still choose to be. I for one will never ever trust the safety of my love ones go any near a convicted molester or rapist or murderer even though they done a full treatment with a psychiatrist, no sir I will not give them that chance. Would you hire a convicted murderer on your shop? Would you have your kids go to school/park where a convicted child molester work? Will you really trust them?

Problem #1: The gaol does not reform people. It takes them out of sight and thus out of the collective mind, and it serves as a form of civilized, domesticated revenge. However, jails being some of the more violent total institutions do not teach offenders any lesson other than violence and falsehood being the answer to all things.

Problem #2: The nutbin isn't much better. Actually, they're often worse. If you'd ask me whether I'd rather go to prison or to the loony bin, I'd pick prison, thank you. Even for normal inmates, the insane asylum can make matters worse (scientific and anecdotal literature on this abounds; cf. Miguel Bombarda), and even post-turn institutions resort to cripplingly heavy use of medication in place of long-term therapy, because it makes patients manageable and increases compliance. That, however, contributes zero to sustainable, lasting therapeutic success.

Problem #3: Effective therapy is long-term, requires lots of professional staff, etc., and is therefore expensive. Try telling people that "their tax dollars" are being "wasted" on that instead of simply banging up perpetrators 'til kingdom come. Not to speak of how that would do plenty little to quench the public thirst for revenge - even only speaking of therapeutic measures to a crowd demanding drawingquarteringcastrationbeheadinghangingandfeedingtothelions is madness.

Conclusion: The status quo is counter-productive and wasteful, but it's the most humane thing possible in a democratic system.

To answer the bolded question. Yes, I would (as long as his skill set and work experience match my criteria). The person has paid their debt to society and we should not be judgmental. For a "Christian" society we seem to forget that Jesus preached a lot about forgiveness.

Throwing a man in prison for 40 years isn't going to change him. We should abolish mandatory minimum sentences and focus on rehabilitation so we can actually try to prevent him from doing it again. softbanker actually provokes the idea with his argument that the person was fully aware. If you are aware of your actions, you can change them.

Many of softbanker's ilk seem to think that the only good pedophile is a dead one. Which runs into the wall of "No man has the right to take the life of another".

Edit: Gibbous says it best.

I admire your stupidity. Good luck and I hope the said criminal you hire would not get his criminal instinct turn on again and not butcher you and your family. And don't tell me shit about forgiveness. I do forgive but I will not give you a chance. Scumbags only need just one moment, just one chance and your dead.

And as a tax payer I condemn my hard earned money to be spent paying professionals fees, medicals, and facilities for this scumbags. I rather have it spend on foods and medical supplies or on scholarships for special children.

Well, I do live by the mantra "be the change you wish to see in the world". There are repeat offenders but, they never worry about getting a job anyways. The few who are seeking jobs have paid for their crimes and want to better themselves. I doubt anybody else would give them a chance so, I'll take the first step and lead by example.

I must be rather high up since you still admire me from your soap box.

So being admired due to your stupidity is a compliment? Ok I'm done here.

It was too much to assume you would have the comprehension skills to notice sarcasm. You think I'm scum and I won't degrade myself to participate in your little game of mocking and name calling. At the end of the day, I wasn't the one slinging mud.

I agree with Penguin and Gibbous, the status quo is the problem.
I don't know if you guys read, but my idea is ONGOING treatment for these issues, and it is the psychiatrist with the final word on what these people are allowed.

I believe in forgiveness, I don't think a man's very nature will change, but self control can be built, and this is the way to do it.

Edit: Re-read, everyone's saying the same thing (spare Banker-or whatever).
It would be expensive, but think about the money saved with repeat offenders?
I'm not an expert, but I think twice weekly sessions would cost less than daily food, clothing, and shelter.

"I admire your stupidity" When someone disagrees, but does not have a valid reason or argument, they pull this. They insult you, then continue on with their ignorant beliefs.


"Good luck and I hope the said criminal you hire would not get his criminal instinct turn on again and not butcher you and your family." Where did you get your information, movies? You assume that every person who has commited a crime is a murderer, they are not. There is no such thing as a Killer instinct (it was a movie title, shut up). And as for the Instinct turning On? what grade are you in? sixth? It doesn't work like that, our hunting instincts don't just "turn on", I've never suddenly started hunting rabbits while waiting for the bus.
The murderers who actually would kill your entire family would not be applying to a shop you own, they would still be imprisoned.

"And don't tell me shit about forgiveness. I do forgive but I will not give you a chance." If you don't give anyone a chance for forgiveness, you won't forgive anyone. You didn't think that through at all.

"Scumbags only need just one moment, just one chance and your dead." No, people kill out of compulsion, reaction, or necessity. People just don't suddenly go "well, perfect life, wonderful family, grea-I need to kill" and those who do usually suffering from some form or mental problems, which falls under compulsion.

"And as a tax payer I condemn my hard earned money to be spent paying professionals fees, medicals, and facilities for this scumbags." You do not "condemn" your money. The government subtracts a percentage of the money you earn, and it is collected as a lump sum which is divided as seen fit by those in the government. Not to mention that reforming prisoners is one of the better uses of our tax payers money. Do you realize how much money is wasted on pointless research endeavours? How about the millions wasted on our governors salaries? You have no idea what you're talking about.

"I rather have it spend on foods and medical supplies or on scholarships for special children."
You do realize that very little tax dollars go towards anything close to this? and nice try throwing in how you want to help the mentally impaired. lemme guess, if we argue with you, We hate mentally impaired children.

And from your second post


You completely Missed the point. and, when a complete idiot admires you, because in his eyes you're an idiot, It should be taken as a complement.

Good work on putting together a solid argument step by step but, for the love of all things small cute and penguiny, use the quote brackets. Anyways, good work and hope to see more from you in the future.

That last part, I might me missing what you are trying to say but, no matter how many times I reread it I feel like your calling me an idiot as well.

Nah, Im saying he's calling you an idiot, but he is an idiot, so an idiot is calling you an idiot
that help any?

Ah the old "takes one to know one" routine. Gotcha.

Yeah so we can keep paying an absorbent amount of money to keep people incarcerated for umpteen years? People that be treated and evaluated need to be to make room in prisons for life-term accused. Wouldn't have to force the ludicrous death penalty, help actually take care of our own citizens, and might even put an ease on tax burdens after a while (although arguably it'll be tax payers who have to pay for treatment, which very well might be more expensive than incarceration for a set amount of time.)

I agree with softbanker. Not to such an extent, but I just don't have the kind of trust that most of you have. I don't believe that reformation is really possible in most situations. I think there are some who we might be able to turn back, but I believe if someone has done it the first time, they'll do it again and it'll be much easier the second time around as they've already made the choice to do so the first time.



I'm glad you did me a favor by foiling your own argument for me. You can argue that it's for a set amount of time, but what if the guy repeats the crime? There are many repeat offenders out there, and in my opinion, treatment seems like a lesser punishment than imprisonment which might encourage the individual to repeat the crime once again. What I'm trying to get at is this: the problems with repeat offenders will burden the tax payers much more with a counseling system. Also, think about hiring a counselor for 10 prisoner's at a time, or in a serious case, the offender will probably need one-on-one counseling. Additionally, they will probably have to house the criminals in a compound that is much friendlier than a prison, meaning even more money. That's a lot of counselors and a lot of money for a system we're not sure will even help these people.

First of all it depends on, from which standpoint you take a shot at it.

1) You view everyone as a great mass. In that case you get a whole bunch of statistics, telling you exactly how many % of those who go to prison, psychiatry or the like, are going to be cured / a better person after thinking about what they have done / receiving help.
2) You look at the individuals. First of all, it depends on the crime, the circumstances and the criminal himself. Depending on those you might actually have a good chance of "reforming" an individual to see his mistake.

Now the main problem we encounter is the sentence someone receives. Let's take an example of someone convicted for man-slaying, who regrets his mistake. If you give him e.g. 15 years to think about what he has done, the chances are that he will try his best to live a life without harming a person once he get's out.

That would basically mean, that said man / woman could re-enter society after regretting properly what he has done and (maybe) making repairs to the victims family incase the victim was maintaining the family.

However if you take someone that has been sentenced to jail for the third time for robbery and inflicting serious injuries upon others, the chances are, that he won't care about the punishment and once he is set free again, will most likely continue in his ways the same way as he did before.

Thus I think it is a question of morality, as we have to judge everyone as an individual person and not as a statistic on the sheet.

Man, i AM one of the mentally lessened people on this planet and i tell you, there is no government on Earth who gives a dogs crap about us. I had to fight my way up whilest being seriously disadvantaged.
You say you won't hire someone who has paid for their crimes, yet i feel i have alot more trouble. I get no's based SOLOLY on my social handicap.

And tell me this. Who are the people who spend that tax money? Now, who CHOOSES them?

You sir is the biggest dumbass. What makes you think that your idiotic wall of txt would change my views. You don't understand shit what the hell your blabbering about. You focused to much to the offender but you never mention about the victim. Your just naive thinking that things will go smoothly in handling scumbags. Damn I really wanted to meet you in person so I can give you my point at the end of my fist. Where do you live man let us meet in person pretty pls??

And why would he want to meet a scumbag such as you?
Oh, but I agree with you to a certain extent. It is naive to think that just because someone went to jail, they have repented from their crimes. But if no one gives them a chance, then you are making it even more likely for them to return to their old ways. Alas, in this issue there's no perfect way out.

I believe a crime done is done, if the convict want to be forgiven after the long years in jail, he will surely change. I think there isnt much theraphy or treatment to be given to the vast numbers of criminals, most of them spent alot of time in jail and be given ALOT of time thinking, if they regret what they did, i believe we should give them another chance.

That said, being living in a small town, ex-criminals arent usually accepted so easily, being jailed first time, its hard but there is still chance, but two times guilty charges, i believe it is the end of the road. I would hire an 1 time ex-criminal after serious conversation interviewing but surely not someone who is a frequent jail customer.

So i guess, theraphy or treatment isnt needed because it cost way too much to treat each and every single convict one by one given that they are alot different. It's more on a personal side of weather they wanna change or not. Every person is different, there isnt a general way of treating everyone because someone will still continue being an asshole