Prison abolishment

[NewLeft]

If prisons were to be abolished, what type of rehabilitation institutions would be formed? How would it work?

[EvilRedGuy]

Prisons aren't there to help/improve the people its there to punish them, that can't be used to anything it will only make them worse people (punishing = makes people worse), rehabilitating centers will exist to help people with their personal-problems/mental health issues, economic/safety-needs-pleasure issues, etc.

[TheWhiteStreak]

What about someone who kills someone else or just can't really be helped? I'm curious about this as well.

[o well this is ok I guess]

That's a good question. We could, on one hand, go with rehabilitation centers. However, a system of rehabilitation must borrow from the innovations of the penal system, and I understand that such would probably not sit well with many. So, some may choice to do away with anything to do with the penal system (including the rehabilitation system).

We are probably in agreement with these two central points: The majority of crime is the result of the current composition of society, and that the prisons do not exist for the purpose of reducing crime (just as inner city or reservation schools do not function for the purpose of education).

Now, the questions we need to ask are such: What, in our new society, constitutes crime? And from there, what do we wish to salvage from the old penal system (if anything)?

So, let me ask: To you, in our new society, what will be considered "criminal"?

[#FF0000]

Rehabilitation (for things one can be rehabilitated for) is good. Doesn't work for everything.

I think we ought to focus on restorative justice, as opposed to retributive justice.

[PC LOAD LETTER]

What about sociopathy and serial killers? I'm genuinely curious.

[CommunityBeliever]

In capitalism there is a hugely inflated pool of criminals for two reasons:

1) The capitalist "criminal justice system" puts people into prison for all sorts of things that aren't even crimes like peaceful drug use, immigration, etc.

2) A great deal of people are led to violent activity due to capitalist-onset economic conditions (see economic determinism).

As such, in pure communism, most would be "criminals" won't be a problem. The remaining people can be put into rehabilitation centers as already mentioned.

[o well this is ok I guess]

1) The capitalist "criminal justice system" puts people into prison for all sorts of things that aren't even crimes like peaceful drug use, immigration, etc.

2) A great deal of people are led to violent activity due to capitalist-onset economic conditions (see economic determinism). Let us not forget criminals who are so as a result of the penal system. The criminal record given to offenders isn't exactly a good thing to have when one exits the prison system, as employers don't take kindly to it. Of course, when a man is given to ability to enter back into society it should be of no surprise to anyone when he goes back into crime. What was then the point of incarcerating him in the first place?

[PC LOAD LETTER]

In capitalism there is a hugely inflated pool of criminals for two reasons:

1) The capitalist "criminal justice system" puts people into prison for all sorts of things that aren't even crimes like peaceful drug use, immigration, etc.

2) A great deal of people are led to violent activity due to capitalist-onset economic conditions (see economic determinism).

As such, in pure communism, most would be "criminals" won't be a problem. The remaining people can be put into rehabilitation centers as already mentioned.
I don't mean to kick a dead horse, but what about serial killers and sociopaths?

People with no regard for other people, no empathy, masters of deception, killing is exciting for them, etc. Would they be permanently in rehabilitation? At what point does that cease being rehabilitation?

Say there was another Ted Bundy.

[Le Socialiste]

As someone above me already noted, prisons aren't in place to rehabilitate those inside - they're there because 1) the ruling-class is in a position to dictate what is and isn't a punishable offence, thus leaving the door wide open for those whose actions are best defined as being linked to the social and cultural foundations of capitalistic-bourgeois society; 2) they committed acts that were - in most cases - due to their sociopolitical and class status; 3) society (especially American society) isn't concerned so much with the cause of the crime but the crime itself (and how to punish those taking part in it). Prisons serve no other purpose but to recreate the social structures and conditions that permeate entire layers of the class system. Prisons should and must be abolished during and after the revolution, with focus being placed on full and complete rehabilitation. There is no denying that certain elements of what constitutes crime or socially taboo acts will continue to occur, but they must be approached in a manner that recognizes the exact cause of the action taken and seeks to aid those involved.

The above also takes into consideration those hostile to the concepts and efforts of any potential workers' uprising and/or revolution. However, in times of conflict (like the act of revolution itself) I find it hard to imagine that methods such as execution will not be used. I myself find such acts repulsive, but I've yet to fully address that point on a more personal theoretical level.

[o well this is ok I guess]

I don't mean to kick a dead horse, but what about serial killers and sociopaths?

People with no regard for other people, no empathy, masters of deception, killing is exciting for them, etc. Would they be permanently in rehabilitation? At what point does that cease being rehabilitation?

Say there was another Ted Bundy. It depends on how much scruples our new system will have.

There are plenty of extremely dubious practices by which such serial killers and sociopaths can be reconstituted in the composition of our liking (from the ground up, if you will) that I'm sure many Stalinists would love to hear about.

[PC LOAD LETTER]

It depends on how much scruples our new system will have.

There are plenty of extremely dubious practices by which such serial killers and sociopaths can be reconstituted in the composition of our liking (from the ground up, if you will) that I'm sure many Stalinists would love to hear about.
Are you implying they would be assigned an aggressive post within a militia or am I reading too much into it?

[Le Socialiste]

I don't mean to kick a dead horse, but what about serial killers and sociopaths?

People with no regard for other people, no empathy, masters of deception, killing is exciting for them, etc. Would they be permanently in rehabilitation? At what point does that cease being rehabilitation?

Say there was another Ted Bundy.

I've often wondered about that too, but such cases are usually few and far between. In the possible instance of "another Ted Bundy", punishment in the form of imprisonment isn't going to do much short of stowing him/her away from the public eye. There will be those who will commit violent acts based on their mental state, but the answer isn't solitary confinement (at least in the way we typically think of it). I'd be in favor of creating certain facilities that are more akin to Norway's prison system: comfortable, clean, "humanitarian", etc. in the event of such cases. While these people may have taken other people's lives, harming/killing them isn't going to solve anything short of providing a brief moment of happiness or relief for the victim's families and society at large. Rehabilitation can only go so far; for those who's mental states are incapable of changing the best method of action is some form of imprisonment that retains the basic qualities and essentials of life in a manner that is healthy and open. That's the best I can come up with at present. I just can't accept imprisonment in the way it's practiced today. Anything remotely resembling such institutions in a post-revolution society serves little purpose but to mar said society's revolutionary scope and vision.

[PC LOAD LETTER]

I've often wondered about that too, but such cases are usually few and far between. In the possible instance of "another Ted Bundy", punishment in the form of imprisonment isn't going to do much short of stowing him/her away from the public eye. There will be those who will commit violent acts based on their mental state, but the answer isn't solitary confinement (at least in the way we typically think of it). I'd be in favor of creating certain facilities that are more akin to Norway's prison system: comfortable, clean, "humanitarian", etc. in the event of such cases. While these people may have taken other people's lives, harming/killing them isn't going to solve anything short of providing a brief moment of happiness or relief for the victim's families and society at large. Rehabilitation can only go so far; for those who's mental states are incapable of changing the best method of action is some form of imprisonment that retains the basic qualities and essentials of life in a manner that is healthy and open. That's the best I can come up with at present. I just can't accept imprisonment in the way it's practiced today. Anything remotely resembling such institutions in a post-revolution society serves little purpose but to mar said society's revolutionary scope and vision.
That's fair enough. I wasn't trying to start anything, like I said I was genuinely curious. You've provided the best answer for that so far.

[o well this is ok I guess]

Are you implying they would be assigned an aggressive post within a militia or am I reading too much into it? I'm not suggesting anything. Anything suggested along those lines is likely to leave one with a feeling of disgust.

I am simply saying that the methods of reform for those some consider "beyond reform" is possible, although highly undesirable. I'd much prefer to believe that nobody is beyond gentler means of rehabilitation.

[PC LOAD LETTER]

I'm not suggesting anything. Anything suggested along those lines is likely to leave one with a feeling of disgust.

I am simply saying that the methods of reform for those considered "beyond reform" is possible, although highly undesirable.
Ah, okay. So I was misinterpreting it. Gotcha.

[Le Socialiste]

That's fair enough. I wasn't trying to start anything, like I said I was genuinely curious. You've provided the best answer for that so far.

Oh, I know. I wasn't accusing you of anything. I was just responding to your question. :)

[EvilRedGuy]

Rehabilitation. Period.


You can't kill yourself away from mental illness. It has to be educated/taught.

[NewLeft]

Has anyone read the book Haunting Humans? Apparently serial killers are the most class concious people out there..

[#FF0000]

Has anyone read the book Haunting Humans? Apparently serial killers are the most class concious people out there..

Ha, how so?