←back to thread

849 points dvektor | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.229s | source
Show context
mlissner ◴[] No.44289885[source]
Maine's remote work program is an incredibly promising development to prevent recidivism. The amazing thing about it is that it gives real jobs to prisoners that they can seamlessly continue after they get out of prison. Normally when you get out, it's impossible to get a job, and the clock is ticking. This leads to desperation, which leads to bad behavior.

There is a real risk of exploitation, but if it's properly managed, remote work for prisoners is one of the most hopeful things I've heard about the prison system. It gives people purpose while there and an avenue to success once they're out.

replies(7): >>44290046 #>>44290150 #>>44291513 #>>44291690 #>>44293165 #>>44293193 #>>44293353 #
lo_zamoyski ◴[] No.44290046[source]
This sounds good. It is important that we recognize all of the purposes of punishment instead of overemphasizing one or neglecting the other.

Punishment has three ends: retribution, rehabilitation, and deterrence. It is important that you pay for your crime for the sake of justice; it is charitable and prudent to rehabilitate the criminal, satisfying the corrective end of punishment; and would-be criminals must be given tangible evidence of what awaits them if they choose to indulge an evil temptation, thus acting as a deterrent.

In our systems today, we either neglect correction, leaving people to rot in prison or endanger them with recidivism by throwing them back onto the streets with no correction, or we take an attitude of false compassion toward the perp by failing to inflict adequate justice, incidentally failing the deterrent end in the process.

replies(7): >>44290096 #>>44290114 #>>44290672 #>>44290699 #>>44290776 #>>44295273 #>>44295295 #
ty6853 ◴[] No.44290114[source]
One of the most baffling elements of the justice system is how little the victim is involved in the justice. 'Society' should not lord the lion's share of the justice decisions over the victims. Quite often the victim would prefer compensation and release over getting fuck all while the perpetrator languages in prison at the tax dollar of the victim.

Much of 'justice' has been usurped from the victim into a jobs campaign for the state.

replies(6): >>44290260 #>>44290624 #>>44290744 #>>44291185 #>>44291186 #>>44291576 #
dfxm12 ◴[] No.44290260[source]
I think you're confusing or conflating civil and criminal courts. If someone breaks a law, that's generally a matter for the state to decide in a criminal court. If someone was damaged (i.e. if the victim feels the perpetrator owes them compensation), that's a matter for them to bring up themselves in the civil courts. These are separate functions; one situation could be tried in both courts. A famous example off the top of my head is that even though OJ Simpson wasn't criminally convicted of murder of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman, a civil court found him liable, awarding tens of millions of dollars in damages, to be paid to their families.
replies(3): >>44290298 #>>44290446 #>>44290634 #
1. Scoundreller ◴[] No.44290634[source]
> A famous example off the top of my head is that even though OJ Simpson wasn't criminally convicted of murder of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman, a civil court found him liable, awarding tens of millions of dollars in damages, to be paid to their families.

The trick here is to be fortunate enough to have a biiiiig monthly retirement pension that the courts can barely touch, or enough wealth to have already bought your mother a nice house (though I now read OJ screwed that up by not transferring her the title).

https://www.southcoasttoday.com/story/news/nation-world/1997...

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-dec-01-me-59847...