Total Posts:144|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

A new place for criminals.

Freedomaniac
Posts: 365
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 6:27:14 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I spend most of my time entertaining my desire to be a political philosopher, I just thought of this today, I don't know if anyone has thought of this before, just try to imagine.

Instead of putting criminals in jail, all the criminals from a certain nation would be placed in a country all to there own that they would not be allowed to leave. The population of this country would be taxed heavily for their crimes and that money would go towards support for the other civil society that they came from. It would have the same laws as the other nation and if those laws were broken again, they would, yet further, be place in a another nation that is taxed even further, there would be several levels of this.

What do you think?
I am a moosepotomus, here me quack! *Grr, ruff, moo*

I am my own God and the free market is my Jesus.

http://freedomaniac.wordpress.com...
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 6:29:36 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 6:27:14 PM, Freedomaniac wrote:
I spend most of my time entertaining my desire to be a political philosopher, I just thought of this today, I don't know if anyone has thought of this before, just try to imagine.

Instead of putting criminals in jail, all the criminals from a certain nation would be placed in a country all to there own that they would not be allowed to leave. The population of this country would be taxed heavily for their crimes and that money would go towards support for the other civil society that they came from. It would have the same laws as the other nation and if those laws were broken again, they would, yet further, be place in a another nation that is taxed even further, there would be several levels of this.

What do you think?

You have a spare country? Ragnar has dibs.

You will tax a population of criminals how?

You will stop them getting guns how?

You will stop them becoming a giant Zimbabwe how?

You will make them productive how?
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 6:32:21 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Interesting idea, but...

LMFAO!
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
wonderwoman
Posts: 744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 6:32:23 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 6:27:14 PM, Freedomaniac wrote:
I spend most of my time entertaining my desire to be a political philosopher, I just thought of this today, I don't know if anyone has thought of this before, just try to imagine.

Instead of putting criminals in jail, all the criminals from a certain nation would be placed in a country all to there own that they would not be allowed to leave. The population of this country would be taxed heavily for their crimes and that money would go towards support for the other civil society that they came from. It would have the same laws as the other nation and if those laws were broken again, they would, yet further, be place in a another nation that is taxed even further, there would be several levels of this.

What do you think?

you have two countries?

How would you regulate them leaving or not leaving?

tax the crimes? What would be the tax for murder?

o0o several nations?

What civil society are we talking about?

What laws make up this civil society?

You're clearly not a libertarian for loving taxes.
Freedomaniac
Posts: 365
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 6:34:44 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 6:29:36 PM, Puck wrote:
At 12/2/2009 6:27:14 PM, Freedomaniac wrote:
I spend most of my time entertaining my desire to be a political philosopher, I just thought of this today, I don't know if anyone has thought of this before, just try to imagine.

Instead of putting criminals in jail, all the criminals from a certain nation would be placed in a country all to there own that they would not be allowed to leave. The population of this country would be taxed heavily for their crimes and that money would go towards support for the other civil society that they came from. It would have the same laws as the other nation and if those laws were broken again, they would, yet further, be place in a another nation that is taxed even further, there would be several levels of this.

What do you think?

You have a spare country? Ragnar has dibs.

Not if I have bigger guns.

You will tax a population of criminals how?

Same way everyone else does.

You will stop them getting guns how?

They are on a secluded nation, with no access to the outside world.

You will stop them becoming a giant Zimbabwe how?

Explain what you mean by that.

You will make them productive how?

I don't give a sh*t, they can handle their own problems.
I am a moosepotomus, here me quack! *Grr, ruff, moo*

I am my own God and the free market is my Jesus.

http://freedomaniac.wordpress.com...
Freedomaniac
Posts: 365
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 6:35:06 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 6:32:21 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Interesting idea, but...

LMFAO!

But what?
I am a moosepotomus, here me quack! *Grr, ruff, moo*

I am my own God and the free market is my Jesus.

http://freedomaniac.wordpress.com...
Freedomaniac
Posts: 365
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 6:40:42 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 6:32:23 PM, wonderwoman wrote:

you have two countries?

Me personally? Not at the moment.

How would you regulate them leaving or not leaving?

Borders and law enforcement.

tax the crimes? What would be the tax for murder?

Murderers would either be sentenced to death or automatically go to a higher level.

o0o several nations?

Ya.

What civil society are we talking about?

Just some random nation the criminals came from.

What laws make up this civil society?

I don't know. It doesn't matter for this argument.

You're clearly not a libertarian for loving taxes.

I actually don't believe in taxes in a normal scenario, but criminals don't have the same rights.
I am a moosepotomus, here me quack! *Grr, ruff, moo*

I am my own God and the free market is my Jesus.

http://freedomaniac.wordpress.com...
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 6:43:30 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 6:34:44 PM, Freedomaniac wrote:

You will tax a population of criminals how?

Same way everyone else does.

You have no desire to make them productive yet wish to enforce taxes as a just punishment? How will you enforce it?

You will stop them getting guns how?

They are on a secluded nation, with no access to the outside world.

N.Korea can't stop border crossings, so planning on a new East Germany?


You will stop them becoming a giant Zimbabwe how?

Explain what you mean by that.

A large population of disenfranchised males with the desire to make power centralised through violence. Contraband isn't new in prisons, nor are weapons, and you just initiated a country wide manufacturing zone for them.


You will make them productive how?

I don't give a sh*t, they can handle their own problems.

It's your solution so maybe you should.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 6:49:01 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 6:45:43 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Criminals should be placed into slavery. Simple as that.

Agreed, though only for a certain length of time, dependant on the crime. That is, they should be forced to do labor for free/to pay for their incarceration.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 6:54:22 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 6:49:01 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 12/2/2009 6:45:43 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Criminals should be placed into slavery. Simple as that.

Agreed, though only for a certain length of time, dependant on the crime. That is, they should be forced to do labor for free/to pay for their incarceration.

Naturally, the servitude would be temporary. In the case of debtors, they would be delivered into the service of their creditors, who could dispose of the debtor's labor in any way seen fit. For criminals, they would become the state's slaves (or the victim's, depending on the crime), for a period of time determined by the court.
wonderwoman
Posts: 744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 6:55:43 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 6:54:22 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 12/2/2009 6:49:01 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 12/2/2009 6:45:43 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Criminals should be placed into slavery. Simple as that.

Agreed, though only for a certain length of time, dependant on the crime. That is, they should be forced to do labor for free/to pay for their incarceration.

Naturally, the servitude would be temporary. In the case of debtors, they would be delivered into the service of their creditors, who could dispose of the debtor's labor in any way seen fit. For criminals, they would become the state's slaves (or the victim's, depending on the crime), for a period of time determined by the court.

I like this idea. Kudos to Cody
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 6:58:58 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 6:55:43 PM, wonderwoman wrote:

I like this idea. Kudos to Cody

I kind of like Cody's idea of debtors in forced servidude to their debtor, but the idea of forced labor for crimes has been around a good long while. You ever hear of chain-gangs.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 6:59:51 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 6:58:58 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:

I kind of like Cody's idea of debtors in forced servidude to their creditor, but the idea of forced labor for crimes has been around a good long while. You ever hear of chain-gangs.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 7:02:18 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 6:58:58 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 12/2/2009 6:55:43 PM, wonderwoman wrote:

I like this idea. Kudos to Cody

I kind of like Cody's idea of debtors in forced servidude to their creditor, but the idea of forced labor for crimes has been around a good long while. You ever hear of chain-gangs.

Indeed. I know that the forced labor for crimes is an existing idea, but I think that it's one which needs to be expanded. And I'm glad that you like the creditor-debtor idea.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 7:05:25 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 6:27:14 PM, Freedomaniac wrote:
I spend most of my time entertaining my desire to be a political philosopher, I just thought of this today, I don't know if anyone has thought of this before, just try to imagine.

Instead of putting criminals in jail, all the criminals from a certain nation would be placed in a country all to there own that they would not be allowed to leave.

Bad Idea Number One: A Country of Criminals

This fails for a number of reasons. One is that you'll never find a willing country, even if you pay them, which means you'll have to invade them, which means you'll have to go through the expense of war, then strained relations with other countries, which means trade issues, all for the purpose of setting up a country for criminals, which is quite possibly the stupidest excuse you can give.

Secondly, you'd be creating a situation whereby criminals have control over a country's resources, government, and manpower - because that is what a country is. You'd also be giving them room to breed, which means you'd have an unchecked population. Even if you exercised control over government and population, you'd end up with a very large population of criminals, whereby you have to spend money to do the things you wish to. Most likely it will not only fail to pay for itself, but have overrunning costs.

Thirdly, this would be such a horrid violation of rights and such an awful exercise of bureaucracy that I'm surprised you suggested it. Nevermind the whole issue with rights, actually - how would you even get the criterion for placement in this country? You can't throw every criminal in there, because you'd throw most of the population in. Would it be limited to murderers? Not enough of them to really sustain much. How about fraud crimes? Thieves? Trespassers? Prisoners of war?

The population of this country would be taxed heavily for their crimes and that money would go towards support for the other civil society that they came from.

Bad Idea Number Two: Taxing a Country of Criminals

In order for your idea to work, you need to:

a) spend to collect the taxes
b) spend to create a stable economy so you're actually able to collect taxes
c) spend to make sure laws and stability are enforced, which means spending on their government and authorities
d) hope to all hell they actually do commit crimes, because if they don't, there is no point, because there is no extra taxation, which means you'd be running a country's expenses for no reason, which is no different from today

Barring b), which instead you decide to use labour as "taxation", then you'll be spending more on government and authority to keep them in line.

It would have the same laws as the other nation and if those laws were broken again, they would, yet further, be place in a another nation that is taxed even further, there would be several levels of this.

Bad Idea Number Three: Creating the Laws of a Country of Criminals

In order for this to be worth it, you need to create the most tightly wound justice system in the world, because having laws similar to, say, the US, would mean little return on a big, big investment. Think Judge Dredd.

You also have to limit the judiciary. One of the biggest costs of law and order is that pesky court system which gives everyone a fair trial. That cannot exist in this sort of country - you need quick, on-the-spot rulings. Again, Judge Dredd.

So, unless you're willing to turn your back on every positive aspect of Western civilization, this won't work.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 7:11:16 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 7:08:56 PM, wonderwoman wrote:
Question.

Why not just kill the criminals?

Violates rights, criterion is just as fuzzy as a 'country of criminals,' also costly, waste of labour, etc etc.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 7:11:28 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 7:08:56 PM, wonderwoman wrote:
Question.

Why not just kill the criminals?

Puts them to no good use. Cody's 'idea' happens to be similar to one of the libertarian theories of justice, which holds that a convict should be palced in servitude to his/her victim (if possible) or to an appropriate friend or relative until damages are paid.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 7:14:21 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 7:08:56 PM, wonderwoman wrote:
Question.

Why not just kill the criminals?

Those who are consistently grossly inhumane sure, but for others I think financial restoration to the victim, and deprivation of general freedom, ought to be enough to deincentivize criminal behavior.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 7:17:18 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 7:11:28 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 12/2/2009 7:08:56 PM, wonderwoman wrote:
Question.

Why not just kill the criminals?

Puts them to no good use. Cody's 'idea' happens to be similar to one of the libertarian theories of justice, which holds that a convict should be palced in servitude to his/her victim (if possible) or to an appropriate friend or relative until damages are paid.

I don't think that can always be the case though. Slavery to the victim (or appropriate loved one) is more of a secondary thing to being the slave of the state. Truthfully, it depends on the crime. It probably isn't prudent, for example, to place a rapist at the whim of a victim. It might seem proportional, but it's more likely that the rapist's presence would only serve to heat up hostilities, and reinforce (if not extend) the victim's psychological trauma.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 7:18:09 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I have an idea. Find an unestablished, remote island and send all the criminals there with no resources. Wait and see if they can build and maintain a society of their own, straight from scratch.

No need to worry about escape or weapons (maybe some bow and arrows lol.)

.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 7:18:45 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 7:14:21 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 12/2/2009 7:08:56 PM, wonderwoman wrote:
Question.

Why not just kill the criminals?

Those who are consistently grossly inhumane sure, but for others I think financial restoration to the victim, and deprivation of general freedom, ought to be enough to deincentivize criminal behavior.

Financial restoration is bullsh*t as a general punishment. It really needs to fit the crime. Example: I would be in favor of castrating a rapist.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 7:19:25 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 7:18:09 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
I have an idea. Find an unestablished, remote island and send all the criminals there with no resources. Wait and see if they can build and maintain a society of their own, straight from scratch.

No need to worry about escape or weapons (maybe some bow and arrows lol.)

You'd have to enforce a barrier around the island to keep people from outside trading with these people. Still has costs, still has risks.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 7:19:58 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 7:17:18 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Puts them to no good use. Cody's 'idea' happens to be similar to one of the libertarian theories of justice, which holds that a convict should be palced in servitude to his/her victim (if possible) or to an appropriate friend or relative until damages are paid.

I don't think that can always be the case though. Slavery to the victim (or appropriate loved one) is more of a secondary thing to being the slave of the state. Truthfully, it depends on the crime. It probably isn't prudent, for example, to place a rapist at the whim of a victim. It might seem proportional, but it's more likely that the rapist's presence would only serve to heat up hostilities, and reinforce (if not extend) the victim's psychological trauma.

In reality, though, the criminal still has some rights (not to be abused) and the victim is not required to implement the repayment of damages in his own presence.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2009 7:20:58 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/2/2009 7:17:18 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:

I don't think that can always be the case though. Slavery to the victim (or appropriate loved one) is more of a secondary thing to being the slave of the state. Truthfully, it depends on the crime. It probably isn't prudent, for example, to place a rapist at the whim of a victim. It might seem proportional, but it's more likely that the rapist's presence would only serve to heat up hostilities, and reinforce (if not extend) the victim's psychological trauma.

Agreed, debtors ok, criminal generally ought to be incarcerated, and put to labor there, they can be sued in civil court by their victim.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."