Is punishment for crime really the best approach?

[MysticMissMisty]

Salvete, omnes!

I heard a TV news story earlier today that got me thinking. The story basically involved a town whose crime rate was quite high and whose gun crime rate was caused by in large by only about twenty or so people. The city thought that, instead of incarcerating these 20 people, it would track them down and pay them money to enroll in a therapy program to rehabilitate them from their crimes instead of punishing them in the typical way or sending them to jail or something of the like. As I understand it, these people were paid not only to attend the therapy but also afterwards to prevent them from engaging in further criminal activity. According to the news story, a considerable percentage of the people who enrolled in the therapy and were paid to do this did not go on to commit further gun crimes.

So, if it works, why shouldn’t all towns and even all nations adopt such a policy?

Some might argue that it is not right to pay someone to be virtuous. However, I would counter that even punishment proper cannot truly change the deepest heart within a person as far as making them more virrtuous. It only acts as a deterrent for them so that, even though they may not be virtuous of heart, they would be less likely to commit a crime because ofthe potential punishment. So, even punishment proper does not, arguably, correct a person’s heart. At the most, it, arguably, protects the rest of society against them and, in some way, protects them from doing harm to others and/or themselves.

Again, it seems that, in the town under discussion, the payment method did act as a sufficient deterrent against crime, if indeed the purpose of punishment proper is more deterrent that to instill virtue.

So, then, since even punishment, we might say, does little to nothing to “make a person virtuous”, the moral argument that some pose that punishment is better on these grounds falls short. Therefore, I would ask, is not the paying someone not to commit crimes a better option than punishing them for those crimes? If it is not and if punishment is still the best way, then, why is it?

Some may argue that God used punishment as remedy to crime in ancient Israel. They may also argue that Paul states that human justice through punishment acts as God’s wrath against crime. They may also state that God uses punishment indeed in the Final Juddgment. In the first case, though, one may counter that God may have used punishment purely for symbolic purposes to highlight the seriousness of sin generally and of each sin particularly. In the case of the Judgment, one may also counter that it is somehow of greater consequence than crimes considered in themselves on this Earth. In the case of Paul, one could counter that, even though he stated that punishment was used to reward the good and punish the bad, he never said that this was the best and indeed the only possible way to remedy crime.

So, again, I ask the question: Would the method of paying people not to commit crime actually be a better method than the traditional one of punishment and even one God Himself would advocate over punishment, or not? Please argue using evidence for or against either position.

Gratias.

 

[mikekle]

I think its time to try something new. Certain laws have been in place for many decades, yet people still are willing to break these laws, imo, this shows the law/ punishment is not effective. The goal of any law is to stop or reduce the crime, if you look at crime statistics though, this does not work, the US has prisons at capacity in every state, we imprison many more people than any nation on earth, yet people are still committing these crimes.

However it does seem like some laws, they do alter and change to make them more effective, but usually this does not work either, and some laws, even though offenses rise every year, they do nothing with them.

A great example would be DUIs/ alcohol related crimes, they dont change much, but if you talk to any ER nurse, alcohol is the number one cause of problems, accidents and murders committed by people who are drunk are fairly common, on the other hand street drugs, lawmakers go after these VERY aggressively, sometimes changing them a few times a year, they do this if they see a certain part of the law not working or could be better…so it appears with certain crimes, they want them to be effective and others, they could care less…???

 

[Lynxdk]

I like the ideas of Restorative justice, where a person learns to account and take responsibility for their mistakes, giving them the opportunity to change themselves and become better people.

I thought the old Eye for an Eye, retributive forms were supposed to go out with Christ’s message…

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Some people, though, are simply too dangerous to be around others. The public good demands that they be isolated from society. And others can’t be rehabilitated. They won’t let go of the evil in their lives.

I think the criminal justice system needs an overhaul, but I think some people need isolation and total confinement.

I am against paying people not to commit a crime, though. It’s those who have committed crimes who owe society.

 

[Micosil]

I am against paying people not to commit a crime, though. It’s those who have committed crimes who owe society.

That is fine and all, but remember, jails, prisons and other methods of incarceration aren’t free either.

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

Salvete, omnes!

I heard a TV news story earlier today that got me thinking. The story basically involved a town whose crime rate was quite high and whose gun crime rate was caused by in large by only about twenty or so people. The city thought that, instead of incarcerating these 20 people, it would track them down and pay them money to enroll in a therapy program to rehabilitate them from their crimes instead of punishing them in the typical way or sending them to jail or something of the like. As I understand it, these people were paid not only to attend the therapy but also afterwards to prevent them from engaging in further criminal activity. According to the news story, a considerable percentage of the people who enrolled in the therapy and were paid to do this did not go on to commit further gun crimes.

So, if it works, why shouldn’t all towns and even all nations adopt such a policy?

Some might argue that it is not right to pay someone to be virtuous. However, I would counter that even punishment proper cannot truly change the deepest heart within a person as far as making them more virrtuous. It only acts as a deterrent for them so that, even though they may not be virtuous of heart, they would be less likely to commit a crime because ofthe potential punishment. So, even punishment proper does not, arguably, correct a person’s heart. At the most, it, arguably, protects the rest of society against them and, in some way, protects them from doing harm to others and/or themselves.

Again, it seems that, in the town under discussion, the payment method did act as a sufficient deterrent against crime, if indeed the purpose of punishment proper is more deterrent that to instill virtue.

So, then, since even punishment, we might say, does little to nothing to “make a person virtuous”, the moral argument that some pose that punishment is better on these grounds falls short. Therefore, I would ask, is not the paying someone not to commit crimes a better option than punishing them for those crimes? If it is not and if punishment is still the best way, then, why is it?

Some may argue that God used punishment as remedy to crime in ancient Israel. They may also argue that Paul states that human justice through punishment acts as God’s wrath against crime. They may also state that God uses punishment indeed in the Final Juddgment. In the first case, though, one may counter that God may have used punishment purely for symbolic purposes to highlight the seriousness of sin generally and of each sin particularly. In the case of the Judgment, one may also counter that it is somehow of greater consequence than crimes considered in themselves on this Earth. In the case of Paul, one could counter that, even though he stated that punishment was used to reward the good and punish the bad, he never said that this was the best and indeed the only possible way to remedy crime.

So, again, I ask the question: Would the method of paying people not to commit crime actually be a better method than the traditional one of punishment and even one God Himself would advocate over punishment, or not? Please argue using evidence for or against either position.

Gratias.

And what would you suggest for the young man who viciously killed and raped his teacher, dumping her body in the trash? Or the two men who broke into the home of a doctor in Connecticut, murdered his family, and burnt down his house to supposedly cover their crimes? Just write them some checks if they promised not to do it again? And apart from those situations, where is the equity or justice in paying someone NOT to commit a crime? If society is going to pay person X - say for example an “urban youth” - not to commit a crime, what about person Y who has been law-abiding their whole life? Where is the equity if society pays them nothing for that?

 

[Lynxdk]

I think some people need isolation and total confinement.

I am against paying people not to commit a crime, though. It’s those who have committed crimes who owe society.

These things most often represent the repeating the same crimes against a person, that they learned growing up, abused and neglected. More of the same will not change them. Only the opposite has a chance of that… Back to Christ’s message.

I agree that it doesn’t make much sense to pay people, in Cash, to not commit a crime. That’s a hostage situation, but incarceration is more than enough, and a good place to start, for folks willing to learn, whether it be a trade, or a degree in something they’re interested in, so they Can be useful upon re-entering society.

The way things are now, people are Marked for the rest of their lives, unable to get even jobs no one else wants, because of a stigma now attached to them, that they are not always wholly responsible for, themselves.

 

[Allegra]

I can see this sort of approach working for petty thieves and drug criminals, but not violent offenders.

 

[Lynxdk]

I can see this sort of approach working for petty thieves and drug criminals, but not violent offenders.

The difference might be in degree, and for certain, we need to take a lot more care with violent offenders than others. I may speak of this myself, as a rape “victim”. But people are capable of change, if they want to, if they’re willing to try. Certainly they are capable of being Changed by God, if they’re open to that, also, and not just faking it to get free and cause more trouble… that’s not so hard to judge, with focus on such things, fro a mental health point of view, if we were to invest that type of time and attention to “the least of these” in our prisons, etc.

Does God categorize sins? I realize the Church does does, to a certain extent… similarly though, can our justice system.

 

[Allegra]

The difference might be in degree, and for certain, we need to take a lot more care with violent offenders than others. I may speak of this myself, as a rape “victim”. But people are capable of change, if they want to, if they’re willing to try. Certainly they are capable of being Changed by God, if they’re open to that, also, and not just faking it to get free and cause more trouble… that’s not so hard to judge, with focus on such things, fro a mental health point of view, if we were to invest that type of time and attention to “the least of these” in our prisons, etc.

Does God categorize sins? I realize the Church does does, to a certain extent… similarly though, can our justice system.

It isn’t about the criminals degree of sinfulness or culpability. My objection is that it doesn’t keep people safe.

 

[AnneElizabeth]

I agree with the majority of posts here. However, if psychology is correct in its theory that some people are born sociopaths and psychopaths, then the only way to really keep others safe would be to incarcerate them. Its said they were born that way, without empathy and without the will to do good towards others. In the light of the Faith, I’m not sure where that fits though. I don’t recall Jesus saying anything about that there are some people who can’t ever be saved? Where does this leave free will? Anyway…

Jesus also said never to expect a utopia on earth. There will always be problems…always be sin… in in that light, I think its good to ponder over how we can better improve things so that people get saved and turn around their lives for good, but that there is no one solution. I’m totally in favor of helping inmates break through their issues and getting empowered to turn their lives around.

Sadly, there will always be sin here on earth until Christ comes back… only then or we are in heaven with Him.

 

[Lynxdk]

It isn’t about the criminals degree of sinfulness or culpability. My objection is that it doesn’t keep people safe.

Rehabilitation keeps people safer, than torturing them for at time, and then setting them free.

 

[Lynxdk]

Sadly, there will always be sin here on earth until Christ comes back… only then or we are in heaven with Him.

This, then, is how you should pray:

Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done,
** on earth as it is in heaven.**

Just up to the important part. People say it by rote, often. How often do we Really Mean it though?

I’m sure there are people who are born with abnormalities that can lead to behavior you describe, sociopaths and the like, but often enough these things are confused with the results of abuse, neglect, and other traumas. They’re Still very often, highly intelligent people, and can certainly learn that, in order to remain free, they have set rules to follow, for the sake of remaining free, if nothing else.

A lack of self control and discipline is more often, in my experience, a result of pain. Look at how disciplined and self-controlled many Serial killers are noted to be. What if they had been afforded the opportunity to learn differently? There could be a great Many sociopaths who don’t give a **** about others, and others feelings, but fit perfectly well into society, invisible, and probably excelling at whatever occupation they’ve chosen.

 

[AnneElizabeth]

This, then, is how you should pray:

Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done,
** on earth as it is in heaven.**

Just up to the important part. People say it by rote, often. How often do we Really Mean it though?..

From my understanding the "on earth as it is in heaven’ part is a bidding of God to his people to do on earth as it is done in heaven… i.e. do good. (His Will) This in no way means earth is a utopia or ever will be until Christ comes back. God’s Kingdom is utopia, yes, but as long as we sin, as long as we don’t shine the reflection of Christ perfectly back to others, its going to fall short. We must aim to try and seek God first… which is why we pray the Our Father.

Doing this kind of good would go hand in hand with rehabilitation of those who mean to transform their ways.

 

[GEddie]

There’s no doubt that our justice system is broken. The “Land of Freedom” now has more residents imprisoned than any other.

What gun crimes are you referring to however? If someone actually shot or threatened to shoot somebody, I’d not be ok with paying them not to do it again. Some acts deserve punishment.

Sometimes punishment is needed to lead someone to repentance. That is why we have “penitentiaries” and “corrections departments.”

ICXC NIKA.

 

[PolarGuy]

Paying offenders not to commit crimes?

A terrible idea. Terrible.

Who exactly will pay for this? The non-criminals who work and pay taxes, that’s who, as if they aren’t soaked enough.

 

[Dorothy]

I know a few people from my parish who do prison ministry, and that appears to work very well in rehabilitating people.

The prison ministry has a heart for those who have been caught up in crime, and they truly bring Christ to them. Over a period of time they trust the prison minister and have a good relationship with them. The prisoners begin to attend Mass, when available, and those of other denominations attend other services.

I recently heard of a prisoner who, at his request, took instructions to join a Third Order from a person in the prison ministry, who is in that Order. The prisoner was quite serious about it and became more prayerful. He was recently received into that particular Third Order at a Mass in the prison.(The Reception in the Third Order came after about 15 months of instruction. Instructions for him will continue. Out of that, another inmate is interested in the same Third Order. Thanks be to the Lord!

The love from Christ, working through others, is a great power for all that is good.

I pray that this mission of love will continue!

 

[edwest2]

Prison ministry is a very good idea but one should be counseled on how to go about it first. Some people in prison aren’t ready to talk, or criminal behavior has become the only way they know how to get by, or some will just not listen. That should not stop anyone who feels called to do this.

I grew up in Detroit. I have gone to the bad parts of town. There are young men who have nothing to do. For the black community, fathers are rarely or never there. It may be that mom has a boyfriend, who, unless he’s able, will not become a part of that young man’s life. A lot join the military or sell dope or get low-paying jobs. Too many young black men are in prison.

One answer is training. Training for a job. Any job that might interest them. And partnering with local businesses that will give them on the job training. And mentoring. It will put their minds on things other than: “When I get out in 5 years or 2 or 3 due to overcrowding, I got nothing new waiting for me.”

But, there are some, and it will take a proper examination to provide evidence of this, who, for whatever reason, cannot stop. In Detroit, for example, young men are shooting it out for $200.00 shoes (Give it up or else.) or jewelry or for dissing somebody. A recent Detroit Mayor even asked Church ministers to help.

God can change people. However, there may be circumstances where they are a not just a danger to others but have been a danger to others for a long time and they show no remorse or may also have a mental condition where putting them in jail is the only answer, along with treatment. But even then, God can intervene.

Even if the 20 people who commit the majority of the crimes in a given area are put away, how long before 20 more come in to take their place? Selling dope, guns, and doing whatever?

I do pass the occasional Christian billboard showing a group of young people encouraging others that being close to God is good.

Ed

 

[Dorothy]

Ed,

The prison ministry people do get prepared for it, and have rules to follow.

Peace,

Dorothy

 

[mikekle]

I can see this sort of approach working for petty thieves and drug criminals, but not violent offenders.

Some people are able to and do change though, if they were violent as a young person, there is no guarantee they will remain violent their entire lives, its up to the person and how they develop. If they are sent to prison for the rest of their lives though, this does not take possible change into consideration.

As our understanding of the human mind increases, we should be able to determine if someone is truly changed or not, making prison sentences uniform for every single person is really kind of ridiculous, every person is different.