The Instigator
annawaters
Pro (for)
The Contender
GrimlyF
Con (against)

Should we focus on rehabilitating criminals?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
annawaters has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/30/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 1 month ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 238 times Debate No: 96530
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

annawaters

Pro

Hello and welcome to this debate, on whether or not prison sentences should be used much more sparingly in the judicial system, and have a system of rehabilitation for criminals become the primary sentence handed out in a court room. I am in favour of this.

In my eyes, the present system of judicial prison sentences, particularly in the United States (which is home to 5% of the world's population, and 25% of the world's prisons) is a complete waste of time and resources (as 2/3 of convicted and released criminals will offend again within the 3 years after release, and often more violently).[1]

This is all I will present in my first argument, and upon accepting, I expect my opponent to begin with a similar introductory argument.

Sources:
[1] 'Criminal Justice Fact Sheet' , NAACP, http://www.naacp.org...
GrimlyF

Con

Fistly, I am English living in England and am feverishly updating the information I garnered 2yrs ago (my last debate on this su bject).So to business.How to punish?What alternative do you have to prison that is visible to the Public.It is the NEED of the people to know the miscreant will not repeat his crime.That he is locked away and they are safe.To the people you may attemt re-habilitation, while the felon is safely locked up,as much as you wish but the public must SEE they are punished.You mention that 2/3 criminals re-offend.Of course they do and for the same reason they offended in the first place.They see their peers have cool clothes,cars,girls and money and that's what they want.You can "re-habilitate " these people until you are blue in the face but if you set them back down in their old society they will re-offend because criminality is the only way to get what they want.
Debate Round No. 1
annawaters

Pro

Thank you for accepting my debate and good luck.

I will begin by responding to your previous argument. You stated "It is the NEED of the people to know the miscreant will not repeat his crime.", but then contradicted yourself by saying "You mention that 2/3 criminals re-offend.Of course they do and for the same reason they offended in the first place". Yes of course the second statement is true, but only according to the way the system is now. Most criminals do re offend for the same reason they did in the first place, but this is exactly what a reformed system, based on rehabilitation would seek to eradicate. The point is not to place them back into their old society, or rather their old livelihood, because it will be possible for them to make a life for themselves by different means.

I will present my case using the study of Norway. Here prisoners have access the three functional living cells, music, carpentry, cooking and more workshops and have many responsibilities within the prison, which they are well respected for. And this is standard treatment in Norway's maximum security prisons. In Norwegian prisons their philosophy is that they are preparing these damaged people for reentry into society. The philosophy seen in most other countries' prisons is lets make these damaged people more damaged and angry, and then let them go. It's simply not logical.
GrimlyF

Con

(Again capitals for emphasis only).Contradiction how?My 1st miscreant is in prison to the publics relief.The 2nd miscreant is free and I make no mention of the public because they are not the same miscreant. YOU HAVE MADE A FALSE CONNECTION......I am glad you admit that 2/3 of criminals re-offend thus proving that re-hab doesn't work.Or does it?.....You choose Holland but ignore that it is part of the Netherlands WHICH IS A MONARCHY.Holland is therefore a part of a much larger single state.You choose Holland because it has the most lenient criminal punishment sytem in Europe....(GOOGLE:BEHRING BREIVIK).....You write about how easy the prisoners lives are in their nice,comfy jails but you don't mention HOW THEY ARE RE-HABBED......Q1.WHAT IS THE RE-HAB PROCESS?....Q2.IS IT VOLUNTARY?....Q3.WHAT IS THE SUCCESS RATE?....Q4.HOW IS THE SUBJECTS PROGRESS DURING RE-HAB MONITORED?....Q5.WHO CHECKS ON THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RE-HAB PROGRAMME?....Q6.IS BEING IN RE-HAB LOOKED UPON FAVOURABLY IN PAROLE HEARINGS?....Q7.IF SO,DO SUBJECTS JOIN RE-HAB ONLY TO GAIN FAVOUR WITH THE PAROLE BOARD?....Q8.HOW EFFECTUAL ARE THE "RECLASSERING NEDERLAND" GIVEN THAT RE-HAB IS ONLY PART OF THEIR WORK?.....Q9.YOU SKETCH SUCH AN IDYLLIC LIFE FOR THE PRISONERS BUT WHERE IS THE PUNISHMENT?.....Q10.APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY SUBJECTS RE-OFFEND TO GET BACK PRISON EVEN TO THE POINT OF BECOMING INSTITUTIONALISED?.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by GrimlyF 1 month ago
GrimlyF
I apologise for any grammatical errors.My P.C. is apparently on its last legs.I can't even make new paragraphs.
Posted by GrimlyF 1 month ago
GrimlyF
Thank you for the friendship.I Will begin my argument in approx' 2hrs.
Posted by GrimlyF 1 month ago
GrimlyF
Hello Annawaters.I would be glad to accept your challenge.May I make 1 suggestion?. It is that we use this comments section to clarify any points that may seem unclear but shouldn't "muddy the waters" of the main debate.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.