I am not sure how to pose this question that has been running around in my head for ages.

It seems that for some time now the Judiciary are tending towards rehabilitation of convicted criminals more and more as a part in their reduced sentencing.
I wanted to get some discussion if possible about how much value there is in philosophy and morality of rehabilitation.

To pose an Ideal:

Imagine in the not to distant future [in a galaxy far far away] medical science is able to treat and rehabilitate the criminal mind, the irrational mind and provide a complete cure for the conditions and conditioning that led to the crimes being committed.

I ask these few question:
Would it be enough to satisfy the need for justice?

Is punishment still required even though rehabilitation of the criminal is complete?

Is our maturity as a species in question when we require punishment for crimes committed even though we have the power to avoid those crimes in the first place?

Premise in abstract:
Most criminal behaviour are the product of systemic and personal abuse that conditions a person to act with criminal intent. That the criminal is in fact acting in a compensatory fashion for the percieved crimes already committed against him in the past.

I do understand that this is often an emotive issue and by all means let it all hang out so to speak.

Care to discuss?

What country do you live in? I live in America and we could use a bit more of progressive spirit towards the issue of rehabilitation. Our prison population has been growing ominously since the seventies and in 2003 it went over two million. We imprison a larger percent of our population than any other nation.

I favor rehabilitation over incarceration. I don't think a judicial system should be about revenge as such. It may sound cliché but our methods of incarceration don’t do anything to fix the root problems of what causes crime.

The formula of confine, beat, rape, release, doesn’t make law abiding citizens out of people. Violent offences should warrant prison time, but drug and property crimes just don’t warrant incarceration.

See, that's the problem with you damned liberals. Rehabilitation, what is that? Sounds to me like nothing but being soft on criminals, teaching 'em how to knit or whatever Nancy skills that you think they might actually help them get out of their ghetto lives and have some hope of holding a job and living a decent law-abiding life once they're released.

My opinion is that we're just not hard enough on criminals, we need to up the ante as it were. It's a well known fact that things are just flat out worse than they used to be, children don't respect their elders, and this country is going to hell in a handbasket. Criminals need to know that when they get caught they'll be held longer, beaten harder, and raped by bigger dicks. That's the only way to combat crime, to set up the government to be a drunk and angry father who will beat you to within an inch of your life with his belt for talking back to your mother. You've got to put the fear of the law into them, it's the only thing they know. That's the reason the draconian code worked so well, by the way, we'd all probably be better off if anyone (especially a person of color) accused of a crime was just executed on the spot.

When you rehabilitate a criminal to fully cure him, are you not manipulating his mind to use as a means to society's ends? Are you not forcing him to be useful to society?

On the other hand, it's useless to merely keep criminals around in jail and feed and clothe them and let them out only to bring them back to jail in a little while.

The problem is the crime, not the criminal. In our country, over 700,000 American citizens are arrested every year for marijuana. More than half of all inmates are incarcerated for non-violent crime associated with drugs.

"maybe we should put the innocent in jail and let the guilty roam free"
Some one once said.

"Where by the jailor becomes the jailed."
some one else,
and

"Society gets the criminals it deserves"

Possibly by focussing on the issue of rehabilitation society can learn how to prevent the disease and cure the problem rather than just relying on quarrantine......

For example:
If society devoted more resources towards providing education, poverty relief and social justice, then the need for society to pay the price for it's apathy would become less.

Afterall it is society that is paying the price .........yes?

I'm from Australia by the way......

Hi Quack
Just a few thoughts

The reasons for imprisoning a person are but not limited to:

To reflect societies out rage at the transgression (particular length of sentence)
To act as a deterrent to others
To be punitive
To in some cases protect the person from him/her self
To protect society from the person
When all other avenues have been exhausted but failed
As far as I'm aware rehabilitation is not a motive to incarcerate but it is seen as an ideal time to do it



>>>Would it be enough to satisfy the need for justice?<<<

I would find no matter how altruistic or genuine the motive ,to alter someones personality or ego is far to invasive

>>Is punishment still required even though rehabilitation of the criminal is complete?<<<

As far as I'm aware rehabilitation is not a motive to incarcerate but it is seen as an ideal time to do it,so yes its still necessary

>>>Most criminal behaviour are the product of systemic and personal abuse that conditions a person to act with criminal intent. That the criminal is in fact acting in a compensatory fashion for the percieved crimes already committed against him in the past.<<<

Over 95% of inmates in my experience (Australia) had substance abuse directly involved in their crime or lifestyle

Thomo, thanks for your post.

Would society be happy with just comprehensive rehabilitation or does the need to punish overrule any gains made by such rehabilitation?

>>>Would society be happy with just comprehensive rehabilitation or does the need to punish overrule any gains made by such rehabilitation? <<<

With no punishment it would appear that you would get one freebee crime ,then you got "rehabilitated",I'm sure thats not your intent but a crime deserves punishment.
There is precious little rehabilitation in gaol. Ok it comes from within ultimatley but the ideal time to do is lost.

don't get me wrong i have no set postion or ulterior motive on thi ssubject. I find it vexatious as I am sure most people do as well.

i agree teh time in Gaol coul dbe better spent with intensive rehabilitation, and ceertainly this woudl be better than just keeping them for a number of years, destroying any ability to reenter society and expect redeeming behaviours....

But I wanted to test the abstraction of an ideal. Complete rehabilitation would serve no purpose if the person was spending the rest of his life behind bars howver fro lighter sentences the prisoner and most importantly society could do well with an intensive rehab program. especially if it comes to drug dependancy etc....

>>>Complete rehabilitation <<<

It has a chilling ring to it,how much of your original personality would you lose?

>>>would serve no purpose if the person was spending the rest of his life behind bars <<

Not entirely correct IMHO :) a life behind bars is not ideal but is a life none the less,if rehab improved that life is the rehab not then worth while?

>>>Complete rehabilitation <<<

It has a chilling ring to it,how much of your original personality would you lose?

Complete rehabilitation would include the enhancemnet of an individual personality and not the mind washing scenario that you may be thinking of.

Proper rehabilitation and not motivated for control purposes...sort of thing is what i have in mind.....


>>>would serve no purpose if the person was spending the rest of his life behind bars <<

Not entirely correct IMHO a life behind bars is not ideal but is a life none the less,if rehab improved that life is the rehab not then worth while?
Yes I do agree that rehab could improve life behind bars for the criminal but siciety is not all that interested in that prisoners life afterall.....sad as it is.......

>>>Is our maturity as a species in question when we require punishment for crimes committed even though we have the power to avoid those crimes in the first place?<<<

Is it possible that the fact that we have punitive measures is an indication that we set high standards of conduct and morality for our members? Therefore we have a mature society.

>>>Proper rehabilitation and not motivated for control purposes...sort of thing is what i have in mind.....<<<

Sounds like a nice ideal.....one thought, it is the differences in us that makes society the interesting place it is.

Sounds like a nice ideal.....one thought, it is the differences in us that makes society the interesting place it is.
good question, however I would dare say that a person who has developed his personality to it's full potential would fail to be type cast into the genre of ciminal personalities and therefore interest or diversity of personality would be enshrined and maintained.

Scenarios of every one being the same just wouldn't happen. I dare say human nature would make that impossible.

I guess we get to the nightmare scenario where by people are expected to conform to a set government criteria as to what is nice and what is nicer.....but in my ideal i would let the person dictate direction as long as it involved the basic human rights of others.

I get the impression that you feel that criminality gives society flavour and I guess you are not wrong. It really comes down to whether you like the taste or not...hey?

>>>I get the impression that you feel that criminality gives society flavour and I guess you are not wrong. It really comes down to whether you like the taste or not...hey? <<<

I wouldn't have put quite like that :)
I do know personally a fair few and there is some real characters!...on a more serious note gaol is an ocean of wasted talent ,wasted lives and anger. Still you dont go to gaol for no cause.

>>>Would society be happy with just comprehensive rehabilitation or does the need to punish overrule any gains made by such rehabilitation? <<<

Victims and the families of victims (and possibly society as an entity) would probably not be happy.Revenge is often touted as the current catch phrase "closure".but revenge is a human motivator just as it usually has negative effects the presence of gaols could possibly been seen as a positive result.

so, if we assume for a moment that criminality is not of some genetic inherited causality, then really the only apporach is to rehabilitate society so that the societal causes of criminality are removed. In other words get the kids to blossom and solve the problem that way.
better education, social support structures, better parenting etc etc.

Rehabilitate society in conjunction with rehabilitating the inmate.
obviously rehabilitating the inmate alone would be insuficient.....

just as an aside what sort of rehabilitation do you think would work for most prisoners?

>>>so, if we assume for a moment that criminality is not of some genetic inherited causality<<<

To say "your average criminal " will invariably lead to over simplification and over generalisations but there are common traits:
-Generally some form of substance abuse
-A risk taking personality
-A lack of the tendency to consider the consequences of your actions

Address these traits and you will do wonders for possible and past offenders.Importantly get them young.

>>>Rehabilitate society in conjunction with rehabilitating the inmate.
obviously rehabilitating the inmate alone would be insuficient..... <<<

Yes but don't undermine societies principals in the process

In passing it occurred to me one way of reducing the number of criminal acts is to reduce the number of acts that are criminal

Must go to bed , a pleasure talking to you Quantum Quack, I should stop lurking so much and post more often as I enjoyed this.

In passing it occurred to me one way of reducing the number of criminal acts is to reduce the number of acts that are criminal
interesting point.

>>>just as an aside what sort of rehabilitation do you think would work for most prisoners? <<<

Just noticed that post ...I'll think about that and get back to you,I'm aware of the current programs I'm a bit skeptical of most of them.
Basically you need to address the traits I mentioned before ie
- substance abuse
- risk taking personality
- lack of the tendency to consider the consequences of your actions


>>>interesting point. <<<

The more you think about it the more subtle the statement gets :)

Over 95% of inmates in my experience (Australia) had substance abuse directly involved in their crime or lifestyle

Haha, in the US substance abuse IS the crime that they are incarcerated for. And unfortunately our drug laws define usage as abuse. I'm no fan of pot, I have terminated friendships before because they were turning into worthless stoners, If it can be said that there's a huge negative-propaganda campaign designed to brainwash average Americans against pot, then I readily admit I'm probably one of the brainwashed. But even I can see that our laws for marijuana possession, usage, and paraphernalia ownership/selling are entirely disproportionate to the severity of the crime.

The problem is the crime, not the criminal. In our country, over 700,000 American citizens are arrested every year for marijuana. More than half of all inmates are incarcerated for non-violent crime associated with drugs.

That's what I find ridiculous. Drugs should not be a crime. If someone commits a crime (murder, robbery, etc) while on drugs then sure, arrest them. The problem isn’t them being on drugs but rather commiting the crime. Unfortunately it’s the other way around here. I find the title “rehabilitation for criminals” to be silly because it shouldn’t be a crime. But those that commit crimes while on drugs, rehabilitation won’t do jack squat because that person has a screwed up mind regardless of drugs being involved. Rehabilitation isn’t going to help them from commiting further real crimes, it’ll only help with taking less drugs which is silly because all this time and money is spent trying to help them cure a problem which isn’t really a problem (drugs) yet does nothing for the real problem (true crime).

And yes, I know there are those that seriously abuse drugs and those are the types that should seek and receive help, but they’re screwed up regardless with their addictive personality so they’d just switch to something else such as gambling (which is funny in how it’s like drugs.. illegal yet not.. like pot vs alcohol). However, most people that use these “illegal” drugs have no problem with it, but unfortunately the law doesn’t care so even those types get sentenced to jail for long periods of time.

For people to be thrown in jail for using drugs, the same should apply to smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol otherwise it’s inconsistant and hypocritical. This whole “war on drugs” only exists to limit the power of the people to use mind-altering substances so that fewer are in charge which in turn makes them more powerful due to lack of competition. In other words, it’s to make the alcohol and cigarette companies more richer and powerful as opposed to helping “clean-up” society as it’s made to seem.

- N

What do you think would happen if all drugs were legalised and freely available?
and
Why, do you think, are most drugs of addiction are made illegal?
What is the motivation behind such legistlation? [- say assume for a moment with out drawing conspiracy theories ]

What do you think would happen if all drugs were legalised and freely available?

The consumption would be no different than one who drinks alcohol. There will be those that abuse it (alcoholics) and there will be those that use it every now and then for recreational use.

Those that abuse drugs and alcohol are no different from one another. The problem isn’t the drug but rather the person. They have an addictive personality which applies to many things. If it weren't drugs or alocohol they're abusing, it'd be something else like gambling to possibly become broke or processed food to possibly become obese. All are harmful but nobody seems to really regulate those activities.

Why, do you think, are most drugs of addiction are made illegal?

Because of the amount of money made from them. By making them illegal, it limits the competition for other legal, addictive, and harmful drugs that run this country. Consolodation of power is the #1 reason anyone with power wants. For the simple fact that there are legal drugs available that are addictive and harmful shows that these are not the reasons why the drugs that are illegal are illegal.

Creating alcohol and cigarettes are a bit more time consuming than drugs that are illegal. This is another perk to those in power that create alcohol and cigarettes. If everyone could easily create their own recreational drug of choice, it would put those other industries out of business and we all know nobody wants to be run out of business.

What is the motivation behind such legistlation? [- say assume for a moment with out drawing conspiracy theories ]

Power buys anything anywhere. Power can easily buy votes and legislation. You may consider that a “conspiracy theory”, but it’s not. Most conspiracy theories are simple, common sense, every day practices. It’s just that most people don’t believe something like that could ever happen since we all have good faith in our corporate and political leaders. It's all about money and power. Look at alcohol and opium wars of the past. This "War on Drugs" is no different.

- N

so it could be inferred that the ilegal drug syndicates will conspire to keep their drugs illegal, so as to keep their market value high....

If drugs became legal, the price of illicit drugs would fall. So it is in the interests of organised crime to keep the drugs illegal.......

.....speaking of conspiracy theories......

so it could be inferred that the ilegal drug syndicates will conspire to keep their drugs illegal, so as to keep their market value high.... If you remember, in Key Largo, Rocco, the escaped gangster fantasises about the reintroduction of prohibition.

If drugs became legal, the price of illicit drugs would fall. So it is in the interests of organised crime to keep the drugs illegal.......

.....speaking of conspiracy theories......That is leaving aside the effects on the economy if thousands of people currently supposedly stopping the import and use of these drugs weren't employed doing that.

Turning back to the original topic: surely compulsory rehabilitation would only be possible if criminality was considered an illness? Courts spend a lot of time deciding whether someone was "mentally ill" when they committed a crime: if they are mentally ill they are "treated" and can be given "therapy" whether they want it or not. If they are ordinary criminals they can refuse to participate in "therapeutic" regimes. This pplies in general: if someone in custody tries to starve themselves to death they have that right if they are not mentally ill. If they are ill they can be force-fed.

so it could be inferred that the ilegal drug syndicates will conspire to keep their drugs illegal, so as to keep their market value high....

If drugs became legal, the price of illicit drugs would fall. So it is in the interests of organised crime to keep the drugs illegal.......

Yup. Not only does making a product illegal reduce the amount of people able to sell the product, but it also makes the product more valuable. The more important part though is that it makes it easier and legal to get rid of competition. Something that cannot easily be done if people were selling legal products other than buying the company out which would cost loads of money and that's a bad thing since the point is to make money, not spend it.

.....speaking of conspiracy theories......

Conspiracy theory? It's called basic business strategy.

- N

Turning back to the original topic: surely compulsory rehabilitation would only be possible if criminality was considered an illness?
Thersites,
Of course this is an area of huge debate for sure.

One could simply argue that we are all suffereing in soime way an illness, and simply claim it to be "the human condition"

Can a man who assaults his wife and children because he considers it the right thing to do, due to his own prior conditioning [child abuse] be deemed to be menatly ill? [ Btw I am not suggesting menatlly ill in a legal sense]

Thersites,
One could simply argue that we are all suffereing in soime way an illness, and simply claim it to be "the human condition" If everyone is ill, is it an illness? Who can diagnose or treat it?

Can a man who assaults his wife and children because he considers it the right thing to do, due to his own prior conditioning [child abuse] be deemed to be menatly ill? [ Btw I am not suggesting menatlly ill in a legal sense]Well the only treatments for that are psychological and voluntary, not psychiatric, which can be compulsory.

>>>Why, do you think, are most drugs of addiction are made illegal?
What is the motivation behind such legistlation? [- say assume for a moment with out drawing conspiracy theories ] <<<

This made me think,
I'm a smoker but if cigarettes were made illegal I doubt if I would be. Yes making things illegal is a form of censorship and restriction of freedom but the overall effect is one of enhancing the quality of life within that society.Tobacco,alcohol and caffeine have been around us for a long time we have to varying degrees learned to deal with the risks, I believe if the current illegal drugs were made legal they would have a greater but detrimental effect in society

>>>Why, do you think, are most drugs of addiction are made illegal?
What is the motivation behind such legistlation? [- say assume for a moment with out drawing conspiracy theories ] <<<

This made me think,
I'm a smoker but if cigarettes were made illegal I doubt if I would be. Yes making things illegal is a form of censorship and restriction of freedom but the overall effect is one of enhancing the quality of life within that society.Tobacco,alcohol and caffeine have been around us for a long time we have to varying degrees learned to deal with the risks, I believe if the current illegal drugs were made legal they would have a greater but detrimental effect in society
The problem with your argument is that opium, morphine and cocaine [heroin hadn't been invented then] were all perfectly legal until shortly after the First World War. Drug addiction was a problem. Drug smuggling and all that goes with it was not. In the UK until the early 1970s the standard treatment for drug addicts was to prescribe legal maintenance doses. There were only a few thousand addicts. Since the options became abstinence or illegal use...

What do you think would happen if all drugs were legalised and freely available?

at least in the case of marijuana: American corporate vendors would emerge, farming and selling at a better price and much less hassle than talking to some sort of shady drug-dealer, the economic power is taken out of the hands of street thugs and given to American businesses, making it regulateable and taxable. People in my area won't be shooting eachother over drug deals or to try to steal the huge stash hiding in a residential building having come in from Mexico recently and awaiting distribution.

Stupid American children will still take pot, some just won't know when to quit and become hopelessly stupid stoners, but then that isn't any different from the situation we've got right now. Pot will probably seem a lot less evil, more people will likely try it once or twice, or hell now and again just recreationally, potato chip sales will go up, and tobacco companies will lose some of their market share, but somehow the world won't fall apart and will manage to move on.

Our prison systems will become less crowded, drug related crime will go waaaaay down, we'll all be paying less taxes (or at least have more tax money to put toward other more worth wile endevors) and we'll have rid ourselves of a completely unessisary headache (and glaucoma, too for that matter).

Why, do you think, are most drugs of addiction are made illegal?
What is the motivation behind such legistlation?

I don't know, why was sodomy made illegal in many places? Our government has a lot of time invested in heeding the irrational and loud urgent complaints of conservative wacos who think that they've got a monopoly on morality and truth, and need to tell everyone how to live. Maybe tobacco companies and alcohol breweries just wanted to be sure that they'd hold onto their market shares without having to branch out into new products. At any rate we have a long sad history of demonizing some drugs, while glorifying others, and at this point I don't think that anyone who is able to just take a step back from this strange culture we've built for ourselves and really take an objective look at things is in a position to be setting policy about these kinds of things.

>>>There were only a few thousand addicts. Since the options became abstinence or illegal use... <<<


Hello Thersites
Do you think (and I'm refering to "hard" drugs not pot) if they were legalised that the problem would reduce? I'm not so sure...the problem is also ,the risk ,if we re legalised those drugs and it was found that the problem increased.

This is obviously a hugely vexatious area of discussion, that invokes considerable passion.
It would be quite easilly proved that by legalising illicit drugs would increase their use significantly. Probably the level of dependancy would increase. Simply because the casual whim of youth may lead them to try something that they would not normally try.

In society we have at least two dynamics happening here.

The need to censor our populations activities with legistlation. And the need to protect our children so that they can when older make better informed decisions.

But by the same token this protection can also have the effect of generating a weak and dependant on LAW society as well.

Censorship also breeds weakness.

The problem however is that the child has to be still alive to learn lessons and if drugs like heroin and Crack , ice etc were legalised a lot of our youth woudl never live long eneough to learn their lessons.

So there are many fears involved in the legalising of drugs.

Suffice to say that children have many ways to get off and many options are cheap and free to take. Still most survive regardless. But I wonder if open slather on the availability of potent and highly addictive drugs would destroy our societies future.....
The point being that we as a society have a duty of care towards our children simply becasue they are unable to emotionally deal with the possibilities due to their imaturity.

The horror stories of 10 year old kids experimenting with heroin sends shivers down my spine. And legalising it would just magnify the problem enourmously I would speculate.

Some wise people once said:

[I]"it is true that a way of determining the value and success of a society is in how it deals with those that are less fortunate, disadvantaged, disabled and vulnerable"

I think that if all drugs were legal the problems society has would change. It's worth remembering that in the countries that produce drugs there are probably even bigger problems than in Europe and the USA because of the power held by criminals as well as the problems of addiction. Making drugs legal does not mean making them uncontrolled: they would be liable to taxation, restrictions on where they could be taken, restrictions on who can sell them- all the controls- and more if necessary- that govern alcohol and tobacco. My own guess would be that there would be more drug users, more drug addicts [not all, or even many, drug users become addicts] and a much lower crime and death rate resulting from it. Opiates themselves are much less lethal than alcohol or tobacco- they don't cause other diseases that kill; the conditions under which they are taken- adulterated, of uncertain strength, taken communally using shared and dirty needles etc- they do kill. It's certainly easier to get hold of cocaine or heroin outside pub opening hours in London than it is to get alcohol and it's probably cheaper. I've seen children playing with discarded needles in parks. It's already easy for children to get hold of "hard drugs" and there are no legal restraints to stop them. The big problem is that it would require world-wide legislation and reform to bring this about.