Register to reply

Would some criminals not commit crimes if...

by tarekatpf
Tags: commit, crimes, criminals
Share this thread:
tarekatpf
#1
Dec13-13, 01:40 AM
P: 138
... they were reared in a different environment, and if they would not, should we still punish them?

Such as, some criminals might have not commit the crime if they did not have a history of abuse by family members or other members in the society. Or some criminals may have not been able to handle poverty, because of their poor social intelligence which might have been affected by his relationship with other family members? Is it possible that they wouldn't commit the crime if they didn't have such a history? ( Of course, it's never 100% down to the genetic makeup of the criminal, since conditions that negatively affect social relationships and to which they were genetically predisposed can be controlled by altering the environment, at least, to a functioning level. Though it may not be true for some cases. )

And if they wouldn't, how can we conclude that it was the criminal's fault ( since, they might not commit the crime if they had a better family or social or economic life ) and we should punish them?
Phys.Org News Partner Social sciences news on Phys.org
Why plants in the office make us more productive
Precarious work schedules common among younger workers
Research shows over half of shared-path users frustrated by the actions of others
julian
#2
Dec13-13, 05:38 PM
PF Gold
P: 341
What about the crimes of society (it is not like groups evolved to be rational or sane) and that the individual cannot be an innocent victim of the irrationality of a group ("When a group of people come together to make a decision, every demon in the psychological bestiary will be summoned. Conformity, rationalization, stereotyping, delusions of grandeur - they all come out to play, and no one is willing to fight them back into hell...") - “It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society” -Jiddu Krishnamurti.
tarekatpf
#3
Dec16-13, 12:59 AM
P: 138
Quote Quote by julian View Post
What about the crimes of society (it is not like groups evolved to be rational or sane) and that the individual cannot be an innocent victim of the irrationality of a group ("When a group of people come together to make a decision, every demon in the psychological bestiary will be summoned. Conformity, rationalization, stereotyping, delusions of grandeur - they all come out to play, and no one is willing to fight them back into hell...") - “It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society” -Jiddu Krishnamurti.
Yes, that's true. And that's why when change is needed, the whole society has to change together. That's a difficult task, but not an impossible one.

arildno
#4
Dec16-13, 02:57 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
PF Gold
P: 12,016
Would some criminals not commit crimes if...

Do you "punish" a rabid dog by killing it?

I think not.

So, if your prime concern is in a frankly silly name shifting game concerning the practice of incarceration, that we shouldn't call it "punishment", but something else entirely, I don't see the point of the thread.
tarekatpf
#5
Dec17-13, 03:59 AM
P: 138
Quote Quote by arildno View Post
Do you "punish" a rabid dog by killing it?

I think not.

So, if your prime concern is in a frankly silly name shifting game concerning the practice of incarceration, that we shouldn't call it "punishment", but something else entirely, I don't see the point of the thread.
Rabid dogs are curable. Many criminals are fixable.

How about a restorative, rather than a retributive approach towards dealing with criminals?
arildno
#6
Dec17-13, 08:33 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
PF Gold
P: 12,016
Why should we cure?
tarekatpf
#7
Dec17-13, 10:49 AM
P: 138
Quote Quote by arildno View Post
Why should we cure?
Why do we want to cure anybody?
nitsuj
#8
Dec17-13, 11:35 AM
P: 1,098
Quote Quote by tarekatpf View Post
... they were reared in a different environment, and if they would not, should we still punish them?

Such as, some criminals might have not commit the crime if they did not have a history of abuse by family members or other members in the society. Or some criminals may have not been able to handle poverty, because of their poor social intelligence which might have been affected by his relationship with other family members? Is it possible that they wouldn't commit the crime if they didn't have such a history? ( Of course, it's never 100% down to the genetic makeup of the criminal, since conditions that negatively affect social relationships and to which they were genetically predisposed can be controlled by altering the environment, at least, to a functioning level. Though it may not be true for some cases. )

And if they wouldn't, how can we conclude that it was the criminal's fault ( since, they might not commit the crime if they had a better family or social or economic life ) and we should punish them?
oh fun! not sure of your age but in my early teens these kinda of philosophical questions popped up in my head, along with "hey there isn't any "real" right/wrong, good/bad, it's defined.

the criminal code too is defined, and more less based on prior experience. Most often it's great. Like no stealing, not violence. Sometimes it's bad, like putting drug addicts/abusers in jail.

All that said it is all quite fair, quality governments protect citizens from unjust laws mostly via charters/constitutions like the bill of rights or charter or rights & freedoms.

One thing I know for certain is, if someone steals from me or physically attacks me I don't give two hoots of your up bringing, it's not a cause/effect thing....it's a correlation thing. no excuse imo, and at the end of the day that's all the criminal code is. And majority agree more less with the punishments/defining of crimes.
cpscdave
#9
Dec17-13, 12:16 PM
P: 138
This may vary based on where you are from.
But in Canada the stated goal of the criminal justice system isn't to "punish" criminals but rather to rehabilitate them back into a functioning member of society.
However the results are somewhat dubious these days.

While I would conceed that the actions of many criminals stem from enviromental behaviours. As sentient beings they are still ultimately responsible for their actions, and as such must be held accountable for them.

Further it is still the responsibilty of society to protect individuals, and the easiest method in achieving this the segergation of the criminal element from the rest of society.
nitsuj
#10
Dec17-13, 12:42 PM
P: 1,098
Agreed, though I see it more as a "parental" thing. In that prison is just an extreme case of removing your rights (more specifically though, privileges, for example cruel and unsual punishment isn't removed because you re a prisoner) . Not sure prisoners can even vote. In the case of my fine for not paying for a sticker in time, if I don't pay that fine in time I lose the privilege to drive.

Hopefully the OP doesn't fall into thinking this is a citizens being ruled by government. The government is put there by citizens. So if the OP doesn't agree with certain laws/punishments, it's more less the majority of citizens they disagree with...not the "enforcer/executor " of the laws/punishments.
arildno
#11
Dec17-13, 05:03 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
PF Gold
P: 12,016
Quote Quote by tarekatpf View Post
Why do we want to cure anybody?
Perhaps because they have the moral worth obliging others to cure them, in contrast to criminals, who by their own actions, have thrown that worth away?
tarekatpf
#12
Dec18-13, 06:03 AM
P: 138
Quote Quote by nitsuj View Post
oh fun! not sure of your age but in my early teens these kinda of philosophical questions popped up in my head, along with "hey there isn't any "real" right/wrong, good/bad, it's defined.

the criminal code too is defined, and more less based on prior experience. Most often it's great. Like no stealing, not violence. Sometimes it's bad, like putting drug addicts/abusers in jail.

All that said it is all quite fair, quality governments protect citizens from unjust laws mostly via charters/constitutions like the bill of rights or charter or rights & freedoms.

One thing I know for certain is, if someone steals from me or physically attacks me I don't give two hoots of your up bringing, it's not a cause/effect thing....it's a correlation thing. no excuse imo, and at the end of the day that's all the criminal code is. And majority agree more less with the punishments/defining of crimes.
Not all of the criminals are product of social anomalies, but most of them are. When you find correlation between criminals and their defective upbringing that strong, it is cause-effect. That of course doesn't exclude other causes, but upbringing is the major one.

Quote Quote by cpscdave View Post
This may vary based on where you are from.
But in Canada the stated goal of the criminal justice system isn't to "punish" criminals but rather to rehabilitate them back into a functioning member of society.
However the results are somewhat dubious these days.

While I would conceed that the actions of many criminals stem from enviromental behaviours. As sentient beings they are still ultimately responsible for their actions, and as such must be held accountable for them.

Further it is still the responsibilty of society to protect individuals, and the easiest method in achieving this the segergation of the criminal element from the rest of society.
But better for the society is first segregate them, then rehabilitate them as countries like Canada, Norway do.

Quote Quote by arildno View Post
Perhaps because they have the moral worth obliging others to cure them, in contrast to criminals, who by their own actions, have thrown that worth away?
"Their own actions?" Social factors contribute to their actions as well.

Quote Quote by nitsuj View Post
Agreed, though I see it more as a "parental" thing. In that prison is just an extreme case of removing your rights (more specifically though, privileges, for example cruel and unsual punishment isn't removed because you re a prisoner) . Not sure prisoners can even vote. In the case of my fine for not paying for a sticker in time, if I don't pay that fine in time I lose the privilege to drive.

Hopefully the OP doesn't fall into thinking this is a citizens being ruled by government. The government is put there by citizens. So if the OP doesn't agree with certain laws/punishments, it's more less the majority of citizens they disagree with...not the "enforcer/executor " of the laws/punishments.
Right, but I want to know why the majority of the society thinks that retributive approach is useful for the society.
TitoSmooth
#13
Dec18-13, 06:57 AM
P: 163
The system creates so called criminals. Without these criminals their would be no judges, mayors, police officers,
politicians, modern day slavery. etc. It is the prison industrial complex research it.

I believe that prisoners should be rehabilitated. Oftentimes a drug offender is incarcerated for petty marijuana only
to turn into a cruel and hardened criminal in jail. Les Miserables is a great example of how if a convict is shown genuine compassion he can be of better service to society. Ie better then a citizen who was never in an abyss.
cpscdave
#14
Dec18-13, 09:14 AM
P: 138
Quote Quote by tarekatpf View Post
But better for the society is first segregate them, then rehabilitate them as countries like Canada, Norway do.
I am personally against the death penatly in 99% of cases. There are however a few cases that are so horrific, that the shake the foundations of society. Cases like this, and the crimes commited being so horrible that the chance of legitimate rehabilitation is 0.
The best example I can think of is the Paul Bernado (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Bernado) case.
nitsuj
#15
Dec18-13, 10:21 AM
P: 1,098
Quote Quote by TitoSmooth View Post
Oftentimes a drug offender is incarcerated for petty marijuana only
to turn into a cruel and hardened criminal in jail.
Try and support that claim, presuming youre referring to "western" countries. For example in Canada "petty" marijuana is oftentimes merely confiscated. If the officer had the option to fine the individual surely that would be the "punishment". If the person is sent to the courts, often as a substitute for non existing fines the punishment is a donation.

surely even in Texas possession of a petty amount wouldn't result in prison time for first time offenders.
nitsuj
#16
Dec18-13, 10:30 AM
P: 1,098
Quote Quote by tarekatpf View Post
Not all of the criminals are product of social anomalies, but most of them are. When you find correlation between criminals and their defective upbringing that strong, it is cause-effect. That of course doesn't exclude other causes, but upbringing is the major one.

It's not cause effect, not every terrible upbringing results in criminal behavior. That's crazy! to think those criminals who had terrible upbrinings are autonomous/not at fault for their actions.

If you were a judge, would you suggest to put the caretakers of a criminal in prison instead because they provided a terrible upbringing for the law breaking individual? Ultimately a line must be drawn. Heck what about a case of manslaughter? perhaps as a result of a bar fight. Would you suggest that no one is at fault...that accidents happen?

What about the Menendaze brothers (sorry don't know the proper spelling of their name, didn't wanna google it) do you think they are justified in their actions?
TitoSmooth
#17
Dec18-13, 03:05 PM
P: 163
Quote Quote by nitsuj View Post
Try and support that claim, presuming youre referring to "western" countries. For example in Canada "petty" marijuana is oftentimes merely confiscated. If the officer had the option to fine the individual surely that would be the "punishment". If the person is sent to the courts, often as a substitute for non existing fines the punishment is a donation.

surely even in Texas possession of a petty amount wouldn't result in prison time for first time offenders.
Depends what color you are in America bro.
nitsuj
#18
Dec18-13, 03:45 PM
P: 1,098
Quote Quote by TitoSmooth View Post
Depends what color you are; in America.
Ah I see your perspective now, including the comment about "Prison business". I agree with you on that, it resembles a business model/industry.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Is it ok to commit fraud if it's widespread? General Discussion 3
Afraid to commit to a PhD Career Guidance 7
How To Commit Political Suicide: Current Events 63
Did US Marines commit a massacre? Current Events 57
Criminals and soldiers. General Discussion 21