this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
565 points (94.3% liked)
Asklemmy
44152 readers
766 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I can see where you are coming from but heck, after a criminal is caught, it's not in state's interest to punish him except for making an example out of him so other people won't think of committing the crime.
Deterence is not a great strategy for preventing crime. Criminals don't actually do much cost benefit analysis before committing a crime; they will consider the chances they have of getting caught, but not the severity of the punishment. Rehabilitation programs are worth considering over punitive justice so long as they are more effective at preventing recidivism, which is certainly an interest for a state.
Is this survivorship bias?
"Criminals don't consider whatever about committing crimes" doesn't seem representative of people in general.
I agree that deterence is not a great strategy, it's just an odd way to phrase your point.
I do sympathise with that argument but I would argue that loss of freedom is a powerful disincentive. For some crimes disincentive's don't work anyway. If the goal is smaller recidivism rates I reckon you'd get better results treating them well as opposed to poorly. If you don't treat them like people you can't expect them to act like people.