= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Psychohistorian comments on Crime and punishment - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (189)
This is entirely correct. But we hide it because we think it's wrong. The condition of our prisons is due more to extremely powerful guard unions and other general incompetence than it is due to an affirmative desire to make prisoner's lives miserable.
Unless you're saying we do have some covert policy of torturing prisoners. That may be true across some extremely limited scope, and it's done purely as a means to an end. I don't think there's much of a case for saying that we deliberately and gratuitously torture prisoners as an intentional part of their punishment, which was my point.
This doesn't sound right. Russia's prisons are pretty horrible too, but we don't have powerful guard unions.
I'm inclined to agree with you-- the prison-industrial complex affects the number of people in prison in the US, but it's not the only way that sort of thing can happen.
As for the US, it's not just the guards' unions, though the unions have lobbied for "tough on crime" measures-- there's money in constructing prisons and in for-profit prisons. Also, prisons can be a major source of employment in rural areas, and prisoners count as residents for counties (I think-- it might be at some other organizational level) to get Federal aid, but the money need not be spent on them.
History of treating teenagers like adult criminals
Surely its effect is above zero, but I'm highly suspicious of how significant it really is. I wasn't around back then, but from what I know, it seems pretty evident that the crime wave of the sixties, seventies, and eighties produced a genuine popular sentiment in favor of tougher criminal law, which hasn't subsided to this day. In fact, this is one of the few major political trends in recent decades that looks like an authentic democratic response to popular demand.
Eh...
We have a fairly strong taboo to the effect that government should stop at the prisoner's skin. However, there are a lot of ways of making people acutely miserable without breaking the taboo.
I don't think it's a bad taboo-- it's better than overtly mutilating people, I think.
Torture and Democracy is a history and analysis of no-marks torture, and concludes that no-marks torture is generally a result of monitoring by human rights groups.
I second Torture and Democracy's analysis; it's a great, if very long and very depressing, book.
Some large proportion of Americans, perhaps a majority, seem to be in favor of the rape of male prisoners.
Also, a large proportion seem to favor life imprisonment because it's more painful than execution. I used to think they said that as an excuse to be against the death penalty, but I'm no longer so sure.
I don't believe this is quite correct. I think a large number of Americans support (to an extent) the status quo in all areas, and this prevents them from taking prison rape as seriously as other rape. But I've met nobody who'd be willing to pay ten cents to increase the amount of prison rape.
Nor have I seen many people who disfavor execution as being "too easy". I won't say zero on this one, however.
Can you unpack where you're getting the "because it's more painful" clause?
I mean, I assume you're talking about revealed preferences here, where the fact that X happens and I don't stop it is evidence that I'm in favor of X. I don't entirely buy that, but I don't think discussing it will be productive.
But I don't see how you can use revealed preferences as evidence of my putative reasons for being in favor of X.
I've heard a number of Americans say that. I haven't heard argument against it, and there's a lot of sentiment against making prison conditions more humane.
I don't have statistics from polls-- I don't know if polls have been taken on that question-- but I think I'm making a reasonable deduction.
I asked about this in my livejournal, and some people have run into that argument (one used it in the tactical way I imagined), and some haven't.
I'm concluding that it's within the range of possible beliefs for Americans, but not very common. It may have been more common in the past than it is now.
Fascinating! I sorta wish I'd ever heard anyone say that, I'd really want to know how much money they're willing to spend every year on causing pain to convicted criminals.
I wonder if there's a generational difference. I believe I'm rather older (age 57) than the typical LessWronger.
Opponents to capital punishment, like Geoffrey Robertson QC, argue that it is "much worse for an individual to spend the rest of their life in prison than to be executed immediately"
That's the only example I've been able to find in about 15 minutes of googling (and British, not American), so it may be a less common view than I thought. Or maybe I don't have the right search terms.