Comments by "Mat Broomfield" (@matbroomfield) on "Secular Talk"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** No, the incarceration is NOT the punishment. It's part of it. The punishment is _whatever_ society deems the punishment is. In many prisons that already includes forced labour, forced counselling, extreme risk of violence and sexual abuse by other inmates. None of those are part of the sentence either - they just come with the package. And incidentally, no, I don't agree with the latter two.
I agree that incarceration has huge psychological impacts upon people, and I'd be the first to argue that we should consider whether incarceration is even the way to go in most cases, and if it is, why we cannot make it safer and more therapeutic. I am ABSOLUTELY in agreement that our objective should be a reduction in recidivism by turning inmates' lives around and teaching them the value of playing by the rules. Forcing them to pay their way is one way of doing that.
I'd give them the opportunity to earn significantly more than their keep by doing meaningful work that either benefits the prison community or society in general. I'd charge them for their keep, but also permit them to make their lives more comfortable by their own hard work. What better education could there be?
I'm the one who argued that even Anders Breivic should be released scott free if he could be deemed safe, and it was in the best interests of society.
1
-
SomeCartoonChick No go on, demonstrate your insecure need for moral superiority by starting with a patronising and ill-conceived insult. Do you feel better now?
1. Demonstrably not true. Each state and jail has their own rules on what inmates are expected to do whilst in jail. Some spend 23 miserable hours per day in their cells. Others work. The ones who work are the lucky ones. The monotony of their day is broken up, and they get to increase their income if they are paid.
2. I was PRECISELY addressing the original poster's point. He was saying that financial inequality should not be an issue once in prison. I pointed out that at EVERY stage of the judicial system, financial inequality is a reality of life. But for the record, my preferred means of administering this system would be that the prisoners are FORCED to work, and all of their expenses are taken from their pay.
I agree that it's utterly injustice that a rich kid can kill 4 people and get off lightly with a defence of affluenza whilst a poor black teenager can be sent to prison for 2 years for accidentally receiving stolen property. But it's the reality of a judicial system where defence costs money, and more money equals better defence. How would you address this without unfairly denying the wealthy of buying the best lawyers money can buy?
3. I said to raise their KIDS right, not their parents. If you're not even going to read what I wrote, you really have no business commenting on it.
Bad parenting, whether brought about by poverty or disinterest, is a massive factor in criminality. There are plenty of poor kids in violent areas who do NOT turn to crime. Parents SHOULD to some degree, be held accountable for the children they raise.
Please, finish this point with a silly unfounded assumption about me "wanting poor people down". That really improves your credibility.
4. Did I make a fucking exception in the case of the death penalty or did I just imagine it?! Jeez, read my words before strawmanning me would you?
But just for the hard-of-thinking (that's you), I'm not for the death penalty at all, for precisely the reason that it cannot be retracted if someone is found to be innocent at a later date.
I did not comment about the FAIRNESS OF THE SENTENCE. I merely commented that we must act on the assumption that everybody in prison deserves to be there equally. You can't determine the sentence based upon whether or not you think that they might actually have been innocent. That is not the prevue of the judge. The judge's job is simply to determine a sentence.
If you want to address the fact that the poor are far more likely to be found guilty than the wealthy, blacks more likely than whites, males more likely than females, then I am VERY willing to have that discussion, and you will find that I am TOTALLY on the side of redressing these inequities, even though it's an insurmountable problem, and the only way to address it is to unreasonably convict more rich people.
5. Again, you have wandered off on a strawman tangent. Whether inmates work in prison or not makes little to no difference to their ability to get a job after prison. Employers are perfectly understandably reticent to hire a convicted felon, regardless of how they spent their time in prison.
Many inmates justifiably have serious emotional problems after prison. These are caused by the feral nature of prison, the sexual abuse by inmates and guards alike, and being treated like scum for months or years. These are issues that are utterly independent from whether or not they are charged something for their keep.
Giving them the self esteem of a regular job in prison, as well as contributing towards their incarceration is unquestionably a positive move not a negative, as is offering them the opportunity to educate themselves and earn qualifications.
And did I for one second, suggest that anyone tacks on a huge debt when they leave? I agree that such a move would be utterly counterproductive.
Now we can both continue to be insulting, or we can have an adult exchange of views on this issue?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Tell you what, why don't you just write an entire biography for me whilst you're simply pulling stuff out of your ass.
But let's just address your comments one at a time:
1. Kyle is being an ultralib because, like you, his kneejerk reaction is "poor prisoners" not, poor society that has to deal with them. He immediately characterised them in the mildest possible was to elicit sympathy for them, rather than taking the balanced approach that recognised that very many prisoners deserve to be there.
2. The punishment is whatever society deems the punishment is - re-education, community service, jail time or execution. To simply state that jail time "is the punishment - FACT", precludes the possibility that society might find more beneficial means of dealing with criminals.
And you prove to me that that's a fact. You won't be able to, because you won't find a statement of intent by the penal system regarding imprisonment.
3. At no time did I EVER suggest that we SHOULD load prisoners up with debt. Do you have any idea how ignorant it was of you to assume that that was what I was proposing?
Your posts are just one strawman after another. But just to be clear, I would propose that inmates should do paid work during their incarceration, from which is deducted money to pay a contribution towards their living expenses. They'll never repay as much as it actually costs, because it's expensive to keep people in prison.
I absolutely DO NOT advocate sending people out of prison with lots of debt. But I do advocate that they should work whilst they are inside. Why SHOULD prisoners be relieved of any burden of responsibility just because they are incarcerated? You're so trapped in chains of conventional thinking that you can't conceive the possibility that alternatives might actually be better for the inmates as well as society.
4. Demonize and spit down on? It's funny, but the person jumping to massive conclusions here at every possible opportunity, is you. At no time have I suggested ANY disrespect to prisoners (even though many are total scum - rapists, child murderers, robbers, gang bangers, etc). I also acknowledged in the final line of my original post, that the imprisonment criteria should be evaluated so as, for instance, to totally eliminate all drug USERS for starters.
So go on, why don't you try to take an unwarranted moral high ground by totally misrepresenting and strawmanning my position for the third time?!
Or maybe this time, you could stop your stupid posturing and actually try to evaluate my suggestions on their merits, rather than what you want them to say to make you feel morally superior.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1