Total Posts:30|Showing Posts:1-30
Jump to topic:

Norway's Prisons

drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2013 11:45:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
A lot of you have probably heard of Norway's prisons, and have thought of them as too soft on crime. Especially with a mere 21 year sentence for murder, a lot of Norway's justice system seems rather lax.

However, Norway sees a lot less prisoners returning to prison (20% in Norway as opposed to 52% in the US and 70% in the UK). This calls into question the actual effectiveness of punishment as opposed to rehabilitation. It would seem to me that rehabilitation is working quite well for Norway - would it not be worth a try in the US?
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2013 4:06:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Is this in jest? 21 years for murder, while lower than I believe is correct, is still much higher than in a lot of countries. In fact, that's higher than a lot of states.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2013 5:50:35 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/5/2013 4:06:10 AM, muzebreak wrote:
Is this in jest? 21 years for murder, while lower than I believe is correct, is still much higher than in a lot of countries. In fact, that's higher than a lot of states.

Yes, you cannot get more than 21 years, no matter the crime, because they believe in determinism and the individual has no free will, and is thus not culpable for his crimes.

@ the OP:

There are a lot of factors that go into criminal recidivism, and the conditions of the prison can play a very minor role. A greater role is the conditions that the ex-con meets when he leaves a prison, and in this our country does poorly.
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2013 2:39:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/5/2013 5:50:35 AM, innomen wrote:
At 6/5/2013 4:06:10 AM, muzebreak wrote:
Is this in jest? 21 years for murder, while lower than I believe is correct, is still much higher than in a lot of countries. In fact, that's higher than a lot of states.

Yes, you cannot get more than 21 years, no matter the crime, because they believe in determinism and the individual has no free will, and is thus not culpable for his crimes.

@ the OP:

There are a lot of factors that go into criminal recidivism, and the conditions of the prison can play a very minor role. A greater role is the conditions that the ex-con meets when he leaves a prison, and in this our country does poorly.

Studies disagree with you: http://jpubhealth.oxfordjournals.org...

The amount of re-arrests for violent crimes were significantly recuced for prisoners who received rehabilitation. I agree with the conditions ex-cons experience having significant influence, since this study found that general re-arrest rates were often because of ex-cons being unable to find a job, and having to find alternative means of getting an income. However, rehabilitation isn't about telling criminals that they can't help what they do, like you seem to think. It is about helping offenders realize the consequences of their actions and why their actions were wrong, so that they can accept it and not do it again. From the paper I linked:

The three main components that make up RSVP include: offender accountability, victim restoration and community involvement. Goals of the programme are to reduce recidivism and to promote offender accountability by:
(1) taking responsibility for one's actions and accepting the possibility for change;
(2) identifying and analyzing the social, cultural and personal belief systems that promote one's violent behaviour;
(3) recognizing that one has a choice at the critical time of violent response;
(4) increasing awareness of the effects of one's behaviour and empathy for victims; and
(5) preparing to take on a restorative role when back in the community.
Offender accountability is considered to be one of the core concepts of the programme, for it is felt that punishment does not work on criminal offenders who lack the capacity for guilt feelings or remorse, or even the sense of self. As long as violent offenders see no alternatives to their own behaviour but see themselves as a victim of the correctional system, punishment will only serve as a hindrance to reform.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2013 3:00:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/4/2013 11:45:35 PM, drhead wrote:
A lot of you have probably heard of Norway's prisons, and have thought of them as too soft on crime. Especially with a mere 21 year sentence for murder, a lot of Norway's justice system seems rather lax.

However, Norway sees a lot less prisoners returning to prison (20% in Norway as opposed to 52% in the US and 70% in the UK). This calls into question the actual effectiveness of punishment as opposed to rehabilitation. It would seem to me that rehabilitation is working quite well for Norway - would it not be worth a try in the US?

i know right? people believe that rehabilitation is too soft on criminals. we make them look like scum who can't do anything but commit crimes. but we are wrong. they can do something that betters the community we just need to treat them the right way
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2013 3:04:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
We really need to get over this century or so of rampaging individualism, because it doesn't reflect reality at all. Not only is rehabilitation for the criminals and society because of lower crime rates, it is also good for the society because it engenders a sense of compassion and community. Which - guess what - also contributes to lower crime rates.
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2013 3:11:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/5/2013 3:04:19 PM, Graincruncher wrote:
We really need to get over this century or so of rampaging individualism, because it doesn't reflect reality at all. Not only is rehabilitation for the criminals and society because of lower crime rates, it is also good for the society because it engenders a sense of compassion and community. Which - guess what - also contributes to lower crime rates.

yeah unfortunately death penalty supporters have a strong "eye for an eye mindset"
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2013 5:45:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/5/2013 3:04:19 PM, Graincruncher wrote:
We really need to get over this century or so of rampaging individualism, because it doesn't reflect reality at all. Not only is rehabilitation for the criminals and society because of lower crime rates, it is also good for the society because it engenders a sense of compassion and community. Which - guess what - also contributes to lower crime rates.

Both rehabilitation and strict punishment are collectivist. In fact, no type of prison system could be labelled as "individualist."
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
thett3
Posts: 14,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2013 7:48:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
1. No. The purpose of punishment is to punish, not benefit the criminals at the expense of take victims (taxpayers). I wouldn't argue against rehabilitation as a secondary goal, I think it's an excellent idea to try to reform people but the primary purpose has to be punishment to justify locking people away at all.

2. This is a pretty big correlation causation fallacy. Where's the evidence that Norways low recidivism rate is because of this? Moreover comparing it to the US to compare it to a retribution based system is also flawed because the US system isn't based off retribution. It's just awful
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2013 11:30:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/5/2013 7:48:32 PM, thett3 wrote:
1. No. The purpose of punishment is to punish, not benefit the criminals at the expense of take victims (taxpayers). I wouldn't argue against rehabilitation as a secondary goal, I think it's an excellent idea to try to reform people but the primary purpose has to be punishment to justify locking people away at all.

And the purpose of prisons are to isolate dangerous people from society, and to (hopefully) reduce the chance of them being dangerous again when released. Hmm, what sounds like it'd do the latter better - rehab or punishment?

In addition, plenty of Norwegian prisons have the convicts grow their own food, which significantly cuts the costs for the prison. In addition, the reduction in crime rate offsets any extra prison costs. Would you rather invest in failure?

Lastly, I'll point out that punishment really doesn't do much to solve the problem. It might discourage it, but it doesn't solve the underlying problem.

2. This is a pretty big correlation causation fallacy. Where's the evidence that Norways low recidivism rate is because of this? Moreover comparing it to the US to compare it to a retribution based system is also flawed because the US system isn't based off retribution. It's just awful

The study linked in my second post shows the link between rehab and reduced recidivism, as well as highlighting possible ways to further reduce recidivism.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2013 11:38:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Yes, I'd agree that Norway's prison system do achieve recidivism. However, creating a prison system that do not punish also weakens deterrence. In other words, prisoners are less likely to return, but more people will choose crime due to weak punishments.

However, the main issue, which I've argued before, that criminal behavior is largely heritable, and to reduce crime one needs to stop criminals from reproducing.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
thett3
Posts: 14,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2013 11:48:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/5/2013 11:30:53 PM, drhead wrote:
At 6/5/2013 7:48:32 PM, thett3 wrote:
1. No. The purpose of punishment is to punish, not benefit the criminals at the expense of take victims (taxpayers). I wouldn't argue against rehabilitation as a secondary goal, I think it's an excellent idea to try to reform people but the primary purpose has to be punishment to justify locking people away at all.

And the purpose of prisons are to isolate dangerous people from society, and to (hopefully) reduce the chance of them being dangerous again when released. Hmm, what sounds like it'd do the latter better - rehab or punishment?

Did I not say "should"? I understand that as it stands prisons are worthless drags on society, but the moral purpose of punishment is compensation to the victim. Making the victims tax dollars pay for their assailant to go to self help classes or whatever is just wrong. It's amazing how twisted even the concept of justice has become


In addition, plenty of Norwegian prisons have the convicts grow their own food, which significantly cuts the costs for the prison.

That's awesome, sounds like a great idea.

In addition, the reduction in crime rate offsets any extra prison costs. Would you rather invest in failure?


Lastly, I'll point out that punishment really doesn't do much to solve the problem. It might discourage it, but it doesn't solve the underlying problem.

There's no warrant on solving the problem being the purpose of punishment. I agree that rehab is a great thing, but the very reason we deprive people of their rights after they commit a crime is because they fundamentally deserve it. Rehab has to be secondary to retribution.

2. This is a pretty big correlation causation fallacy. Where's the evidence that Norways low recidivism rate is because of this? Moreover comparing it to the US to compare it to a retribution based system is also flawed because the US system isn't based off retribution. It's just awful

The study linked in my second post shows the link between rehab and reduced recidivism, as well as highlighting possible ways to further reduce recidivism.

I'll check it out later
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2013 2:01:05 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Prison has never been a good idea. And has never taught anyone to be a better person. They usually teach people the opposite.

Violent offenders are mentally disturbed and are often the result of violent upbringings. They are human beings with dignity that deserve to know what it's like to live like the rest of us, peacefully and productively.

You can judge a society by how it treats it's worst.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2013 3:27:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/5/2013 5:45:23 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Both rehabilitation and strict punishment are collectivist. In fact, no type of prison system could be labelled as "individualist."

I wasn't talking about the prison system; I was talking about the social structure and narrative underlying it.
Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2013 4:41:14 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/5/2013 7:48:32 PM, thett3 wrote:
1. No. The purpose of punishment is to punish, not benefit the criminals at the expense of take victims (taxpayers).

Why is the point of prison to punish?
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."
thett3
Posts: 14,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2013 10:18:41 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/6/2013 4:41:14 AM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
At 6/5/2013 7:48:32 PM, thett3 wrote:
1. No. The purpose of punishment is to punish, not benefit the criminals at the expense of take victims (taxpayers).

Why is the point of prison to punish?

Because it's a reactionary response to an initial crime. If prison was all about making people better people, it wouldn't be an involuntary locked up place and people need not commit crimes to get there. But they do. Of course our system is pretty screwed up regardless I would rather have a rehabilitation based system than ours which basically teaches criminals how to be better criminals. The primary purpose of any justice system however ought to be justice, and this entails forcing the criminal to compensate the victims before anything else.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2013 10:27:54 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/6/2013 4:41:14 AM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
At 6/5/2013 7:48:32 PM, thett3 wrote:
1. No. The purpose of punishment is to punish, not benefit the criminals at the expense of take victims (taxpayers).

Why is the point of prison to punish?

Because it's called the "justice system"; rehabilitation is great and all, but it isn't justice.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2013 1:02:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/5/2013 7:48:32 PM, thett3 wrote:
1. No. The purpose of punishment is to punish, not benefit the criminals at the expense of take victims (taxpayers). I wouldn't argue against rehabilitation as a secondary goal, I think it's an excellent idea to try to reform people but the primary purpose has to be punishment to justify locking people away at all.

2. This is a pretty big correlation causation fallacy. Where's the evidence that Norways low recidivism rate is because of this? Moreover comparing it to the US to compare it to a retribution based system is also flawed because the US system isn't based off retribution. It's just awful

oh it definitely is
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 9:45:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/5/2013 7:48:32 PM, thett3 wrote:
1. No. The purpose of punishment is to punish, not benefit the criminals at the expense of take victims (taxpayers). I wouldn't argue against rehabilitation as a secondary goal, I think it's an excellent idea to try to reform people but the primary purpose has to be punishment to justify locking people away at all.

Sacre bleu! I disagree with thett, at last! Anyway--the problem is that punishment and rehabilitation I feel are VERY closely tied together, with the two basically needing each other. A punishment isn't a punishment unless the punished understands the necessity for them to BE punished--appreciate the moral criminality of their action (ie, rehabilitation). And further, a prisoner cannot be rehabilitated without the recognition that they were being punished for a wrongdoing to begin with.

2. This is a pretty big correlation causation fallacy. Where's the evidence that Norways low recidivism rate is because of this? Moreover comparing it to the US to compare it to a retribution based system is also flawed because the US system isn't based off retribution. It's just awful

I suppose I can't disagree. Except I'm pretty certain the US is largely based off of retribution, though.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/10/2013 1:18:54 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/4/2013 11:45:35 PM, drhead wrote:
A lot of you have probably heard of Norway's prisons, and have thought of them as too soft on crime. Especially with a mere 21 year sentence for murder, a lot of Norway's justice system seems rather lax.

However, Norway sees a lot less prisoners returning to prison (20% in Norway as opposed to 52% in the US and 70% in the UK). This calls into question the actual effectiveness of punishment as opposed to rehabilitation. It would seem to me that rehabilitation is working quite well for Norway - would it not be worth a try in the US?

It could be worth a try, but not for recidivism issues.
As a criminal, I can tell you the number one reason recidivism is high:
Nobody let's you forget it.

Name a job in the U.S. that doesn't ask you if you've been convicted of a felony (and a lot are now asking about any crime) and does not issue a background check on applicants? You will be hard pressed to find one.

So, released prisoners turn to a life of crime because they don't have a choice. If they have friends/family, the might not be too desparate, but if they don't, how are they to eat or have shelter when no one will hire them?
My work here is, finally, done.
suttichart.denpruektham
Posts: 1,115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/10/2013 5:48:12 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
The scum go to prison, there they meet a lot more scum, they are abused both by their fellow scum and possibly their warden. Years passed the scum and their scum friend are acquainted and so they start their scum business when they are both released.

I never believe the prison can make a better man out of criminal, the best they can do is o keep them lock for as long as possible and decrease their likehood of crime in the future.

So yes rehabilitation should be a better alternative, provide that it is done extensively and do not allow those convicted to make contact with one another.
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/10/2013 10:11:47 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/10/2013 5:48:12 AM, suttichart.denpruektham wrote:
The scum go to prison, there they meet a lot more scum, they are abused both by their fellow scum and possibly their warden. Years passed the scum and their scum friend are acquainted and so they start their scum business when they are both released.

I never believe the prison can make a better man out of criminal, the best they can do is o keep them lock for as long as possible and decrease their likehood of crime in the future.

So yes rehabilitation should be a better alternative, provide that it is done extensively and do not allow those convicted to make contact with one another.

I don't think contact is inherently bad except with abusive captors.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
suttichart.denpruektham
Posts: 1,115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/10/2013 10:19:29 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/10/2013 10:11:47 AM, drhead wrote:
At 6/10/2013 5:48:12 AM, suttichart.denpruektham wrote:
The scum go to prison, there they meet a lot more scum, they are abused both by their fellow scum and possibly their warden. Years passed the scum and their scum friend are acquainted and so they start their scum business when they are both released.

I never believe the prison can make a better man out of criminal, the best they can do is o keep them lock for as long as possible and decrease their likehood of crime in the future.

So yes rehabilitation should be a better alternative, provide that it is done extensively and do not allow those convicted to make contact with one another.

I don't think contact is inherently bad except with abusive captors.

Actually no. Abusive or not, convicts can exchange their criminal contact, train in skill related to crime, and argument their anti social idea which only further their criminal tendency.

A convict should be associated with an honest man as mush as possible as it helps expand their employment opportunity, soften negative opinion on people with criminal record, hopefully that would teach them the meaning of the law, because otherwise they will starve and starve again until they do.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2013 1:21:24 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/10/2013 5:48:12 AM, suttichart.denpruektham wrote:
The scum go to prison, there they meet a lot more scum, they are abused both by their fellow scum and possibly their warden. Years passed the scum and their scum friend are acquainted and so they start their scum business when they are both released.

Are you suggesting that I learned much about how to be a better criminal in the three weeks I was in the county jail? What about those that are convicted of crimes, but serve no time in jail (like first time drug offenses)?

I never believe the prison can make a better man out of criminal, the best they can do is o keep them lock for as long as possible and decrease their likehood of crime in the future.


So yes rehabilitation should be a better alternative, provide that it is done extensively and do not allow those convicted to make contact with one another.

Are you suggesting that a one-time criminal (bar fight) is just as bad as the serial rapist? Is the embezzeler more or less of a threat to society than the guy who gets speeding tickets every month?
My work here is, finally, done.
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2013 8:20:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/6/2013 2:01:05 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Prison has never been a good idea. And has never taught anyone to be a better person. They usually teach people the opposite.

Violent offenders are mentally disturbed and are often the result of violent upbringings. They are human beings with dignity that deserve to know what it's like to live like the rest of us, peacefully and productively.

You can judge a society by how it treats it's worst.

You'd like Daniel D'Amico
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2013 8:59:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/4/2013 11:45:35 PM, drhead wrote:
A lot of you have probably heard of Norway's prisons, and have thought of them as too soft on crime. Especially with a mere 21 year sentence for murder, a lot of Norway's justice system seems rather lax.

However, Norway sees a lot less prisoners returning to prison (20% in Norway as opposed to 52% in the US and 70% in the UK). This calls into question the actual effectiveness of punishment as opposed to rehabilitation. It would seem to me that rehabilitation is working quite well for Norway - would it not be worth a try in the US?

Of course. People are a product of their environments. And you'd think actually that this is pretty decent argument for the left too. It'd be more their line fixing up problem neighbourhoods...

or we could cut their welfare and them f*cks would get jobs. Nice environment bro. Charity? http://en.wikipedia.org... Ah sh*t they killed us all before we had a chance to be charitable...
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2013 9:03:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I suppose we could also adopt corporal punishment though as well as eliminating welfare like Roy Latham suggested and see where that gets us... I dunno tbh.........