Crime and Punishment (Split from the Chainstore Massacre)

[Bud Struggle]

I used to be a police apologist, I was even in their youth group, trust me, if you experience th epolice you grow out of the idea of police being friends or comrades

I can't argue there.

I have NO experience of the police personally. I had a speeding ticket or two 20 years ago (deserved) but haven't talked to a policeman since, for any reason.

I do on the other hand teach (entrepreneurship) in a State Prison. The gurads there are nice and all of that--the people IN prison are interesting, most, a lot most are in there for drugs and drug related crimes. And that's one discussion--because most of that I think is really not needed. But there are those people that will kill you or rape you or do whatever--not because of property or love or whatever--they just don't care and they want to hurt. For those people we need police and prisons.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

. For those people we need police and prisons.

Or a trained and armed community.

[Pogue]

I can't argue there.

I have NO experience of the police personally. I had a speeding ticket or two 20 years ago (deserved) but haven't talked to a policeman since, for any reason.

I do on the other hand teach (entrepreneurship) in a State Prison. The gurads there are nice and all of that--the people IN prison are interesting, most, a lot most are in there for drugs and drug related crimes. And that's one discussion--because most of that I think is really not needed. But there are those people that will kill you or rape you or do whatever--not because of property or love or whatever--they just don't care and they want to hurt. For those people we need police and prisons.

On the last point, although I don't agree, I'd say its a major problem facing anarchists and specifically anti-prison anarchists like the ABC. Simply: Who deals with such people? That has to be thought about when the time comes.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Who deals with such people?

Community with hench trials.


That has to be thought about when the time comes.

Punishments could include:

Exile (for things like major arson)
Short jail sentances (for shit like vandalism)
Being watched by community while taking anger mangment courses at the like for things such as one off murders in a moment of madness
Execution (for scum such as serial rapists)

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Community with hench trials.

What's a hench trial? That sounds like mob rule.

[Pogue]

Community with hench trials.


Punishments could include:

Exile (for things like major arson)
Short jail sentances (for shit like vandalism)
Being watched by community while taking anger mangment courses at the like for things such as one off murders in a moment of madness
Execution (for scum such as serial rapists)

I'm assuming execution would be done under some highly regulated and democratic system?

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

What's a hench trial? That sounds like mob rule.

Bassicly i think communes should deal with crime though courts which take a large amount of people (few hundred maybe) and argue and vote for the best solution.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

I'm assuming execution would be done under some highly regulated and democratic system?

Of course. Like this:

http://www.indyscribe.com/photos/ourtown/lynching.jpg

Since the entire town is for execution then it's obviously democratic, and thereby justified.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

I'm assuming execution would be done under some highly regulated and democratic system?

Nah we would turn up at your house and beat you to death with a table leg for shits and giggles.

But seriously it would have to be highly democratic and i think in most cases the community would want large amounts of evidence to prove something. For example a his word vs her word case of rape should not end in a execution.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Of course. Like this:

http://www.indyscribe.com/photos/ourtown/lynching.jpg

Since the entire town is for execution then it's obviously democratic, and thereby justified.

Link to what event that was?

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Bassicly i think communes should deal with crime though courts which take a large amount of people (few hundred maybe) and argue and vote for the best solution.

That still doesn't solve the problem.

Whether a jury is made up of 7 people or 7,000 doesn't change the fact that they're often wrong.

[Pogue]

That still doesn't solve the problem.

Whether a jury is made up of 7 people or 7,000 doesn't change the fact that they're often wrong.

Its still the most fair way to try people, by jury of peers, randomly selected.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Link to what event that was?

Just another example of when a town acts as a jury itself, trying to make right an ill it saw in the town.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Its still the most fair way to try people, by jury of peers, randomly selected.

I agree completely. But I get a little worried by the idea of large groups of people determining the guilt of an individual. What I believe happens, more often than not, is that emotion either for or (usually) against the defendent overrides all rationale.

[Pogue]

I agree completely. But I get a little worried by the idea of large groups of people determining the guilt of an individual. What I believe happens, more often than not, is that emotion either for or (usually) against the defendent overrides all rationale.

Thats true, emotions can cloud judgement.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Just another example of when a town acts as a jury itself, trying to make right an ill it saw in the town.


Apart from I doubt they all sat down to have a thing about it , discuss it and then vote on it though a democratic trial. I suspect it was more of an adrenalin fueled angry mob not giving the situation much thought.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

I agree completely. But I get a little worried by the idea of large groups of people determining the guilt of an individual. What I believe happens, more often than not, is that emotion either for or (usually) against the defendent overrides all rationale.

And whats to say emotion wont override the the judgment of a small jurry?

[Pogue]

And whats to say emotion wont override the the judgment of a small jurry?

You could even argue more people makes for a more representative decision

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

You could even argue more people makes for a more representative decision

(Sorry im nackered today could you post that as if you were talking to a slow four year old).

I think another benefit of having large amounts of people is that it encourages debate amongst the decider's that you dont get amongst todays jury.

[Bud Struggle]

Its still the most fair way to try people, by jury of peers, randomly selected.

And here's a question--are you and I peers?

[Demogorgon]

The death penalty issue on this board makes me despair. Are certain so called Communists here being possessed by the ghost of Strom Thurmond? Not only do they support the hideously reactionary death penalty in general, but seem to advocate what looks like lynchings to achieve it.

How anybody who thinks cruelty and arbitrary "justice" has any place in the legal system of a civilised country can call themselves a progressive, I don't know.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Indeed, lynching seems to be the form of justice when the masses decide guilt or innocence.

You are absolutely right about the need to abolish the death penalty. In the US it's one of the more atrocious racist institutions we have. In principle, I have no moral problem with the death penalty (for only the most heinous crimes, of course). However, the system is run by imperfect human beings who often make false judgments. Here in TX, we've seen the release of literally dozens of prison inmates recently, some of whom had served decades, because DNA evidence finally proved that they were innocent of rape. It's almost beyond doubt that at least one man was murdered by the state for absolutely nothing.

[WhitemageofDOOM]

Its still the most fair way to try people, by jury of peers, randomly selected.

I think a tribunal of judges requiring a unanimous guilty verdict would be fairer. We can teach judges to be impartial, and how to make proper judgments while not allowing there emotions override logic. You can't really get a group of random peers to do that because they have different areas of expertise than impartial judgment in emotional charged criminal cases.

On the plus side, a communist utopia should eliminate all but crimes of passion/madness anyways.

[kiki75]

Why are judges deemed better than regular citizens? All people can be taught to use impartial judgment, if indeed it is possible to have such a thing.

[casper]

judges can be assholes to...

[WhitemageofDOOM]

Why are judges deemed better than regular citizens? All people can be taught to use impartial judgment, if indeed it is possible to have such a thing.

You intend to teach every single citizen a skill that will only be necessary if called upon for jury duty? That's a lot of man hours spent for very little gain, skills take quite a bit of time to develop.

Do you expect every citizen to learn saaaayyyyy nuclear physics?

[casper]

actually knowing the basics of nuclear physics(or any science) might be good for alot of people

[Octobox]

Well said Comrade Joe....."a trained and well armed community"

[Invincible Summer]

Execution? I thought we were against capital punishment by the state.

Although, there are very few "humane" solutions to deal with the criminally insane. You can't lock up a serial rapist/child molestor/serial killer and hope they'll "get better" in time. It's just a strain on society. However, it's indeed reactionary to enforce the death penalty on them.

I was thinking of a "three strikes" rule of some sort - say a serial killer kills one person, they get imprisoned for X amount of time. Second time, it'll be longer, last time would either be forever (the key is thrown away or something) or execution.

However, the problem with the "three strikes" is that it leaves room for multiple offenses, and people who are just mentally unstable will not understand/care about the repercussions of their actions against society.

[kiki75]

You intend to teach every single citizen a skill that will only be necessary if called upon for jury duty? That's a lot of man hours spent for very little gain, skills take quite a bit of time to develop.

Do you expect every citizen to learn saaaayyyyy nuclear physics?
Surely you see the difference between knowing nuclear physics and knowing how to use impartial judgment.

As for capital punishment: I am against the state, so it would follow that I am also against capital punishment by the state. It is just as reactionary to imprison someone as it is to "enforce the death penalty on them".


However, the problem with the "three strikes" is that it leaves room for multiple offenses, and people who are just mentally unstable will not understand/care about the repercussions of their actions against society.
Most of the solutions to crime leave room for multiple offenses. Should we just avoid all attempts at solution, then?

Also, if someone is mentally unstable enough to not understand or care about the repercussions of his/her actions, what is the benefit of allowing said person to live? Just curious. I want to understand the anti-capital punishment arguments minus the ethical and moral components.

eta: A truer problem with the 3 strikes rule is that many of the crimes ppl are arrested for are stupid. You get arrested for possession of marijuana three times and now you're in jail for the rest of your life? Absurd. That's happening more often than dealing with the mentally unstable (a questionable characterization).

[AtteroDominatus]

Hmm, I agree with all of it. There are cops who abuse power, there are judges who do such, senators, and governors. What would we do with such people if there were no jails (as i know many communists are opposed to it). And also, since I have read various places people are against the death sentence, what would happen to such people? Someone said exile, so may i ask to where?

the main problem I see, is what to do with people who don't want to become equal/want to kill/are insane/case problems? There are just so many thing s I haven't found answers to =/

[Invincible Summer]

As for capital punishment: I am against the state, so it would follow that I am also against capital punishment by the state. It is just as reactionary to imprison someone as it is to "enforce the death penalty on them".

But then what do we do?



Most of the solutions to crime leave room for multiple offenses. Should we just avoid all attempts at solution, then?

I think there must be a compromise (esp. as Anarchists) between being anti-state and dealing with heinous criminal offenses.


eta: A truer problem with the 3 strikes rule is that many of the crimes ppl are arrested for are stupid. You get arrested for possession of marijuana three times and now you're in jail for the rest of your life? Absurd. That's happening more often than dealing with the mentally unstable (a questionable characterization).

Well, I was mentioning the "three strikes rule" for use within the context of revolutionary/post-revolutionary society, where minor offenses are not going to be dealt with as you've mentioned.

Hell, marijuana shouldn't be restricted at all in post-revolutionary society.

[kiki75]

I don't have any answers, just an opinion or two. I think these types of issues are so emotional that it's difficult to find consensus. I know what I would do if I were somehow magically "in charge" and I know it would be highly controversial, too. As are all attempts at controlling any section of the population.