Execution of Stan Tookie Williams

[miles]

I agree with Jough that the usefulness of a law is more important than it's morality. Not only are morals very subjective but if we judge laws by their usefullness it is easier to argue for a law to be discarded if it no longer serves it's purpose. Laws should be about what is best for the community as a whole when we start using morals as a basis for laws we end up only serving certain groups and victimising others. Not that I'm saying moral based laws are always bad just that they should be useful to the community as a whole as well.

Who knows where morality comes from, but what you just described is a system of morality.

[Doc]

AD: The level of violent crime over here isn't as bad as what I am lead to believe it is in many parts of america however we certainly have our fair share of organised crime and situations where the death penalty could be used a bargaining chip in the way you describe. Nevertheless it seems our police force are able to deal with it by other means.
I also probably worded my other point badly, what I should have said is that wherever we derive our laws from (and morals have seemed to work in many cases) the fact that morals are subjective mean they are at best an iffy way of judging a law's worth.
Not sure if that was any better, but it's late. From what you said before I think you got me alright.

Miles: Damn those 'should' statements. You're right of course and I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with morals being the basis of laws just that since morals are subjective morals alone is probably not quite good enough. Which is another moral statement so there you go.

[AlohaDawg]

I wonder if it also works a little like this -

Early in the development of mankind, when individuals began to come together, there was a good deal of superstition and dependence on some form of deific thoughts to explain natural phenomena and a natural urge also to seek direction from what seemed to be a very powerful supernatural being. "Natural Law" and "Divine Right" was the norm.

The individuals evolved intellectually and also began to refine the spiritual systems too. Rationalism gained ground as science took root. Cause and effect was clearly documented and objective measures for all manner of things became a normal part of everyday life. Law became based on what makes communities work well together (and also the birth of a wonderful thing called 'litigation' was witnessed)

There seem to be perioidic swings between more secular and more spiritual thinking dominating thought and speech now. I wonder if, also, there is a longer cycle of swing between secular and spiritual preponderance in leadership and lawmaking.

I'm glad to be here in America where we have freedom of speech and assembly - these kind of swings usually cause intellectual discomfort for some but not wholesale social upheaval.

[Carlos del Vaca]

Death is an absolute; imprisonment in the US is, as Asherdan pointed out earlier, is a lifestyle choice complete with cable and playstations and drugs and sex and zero accountability to anyone except yourself and that is disastrous. When you take someone who has spent several years in a 100% selgiraffe self-preservation environment and release them into society, you find that that individual has very limited ability to negotiate ordinary social transactions and inability to function interdependently with other people. And the only method they have any skill or experience in for resolving the inevitable conflicts that arise from these these two problems is violence.

Any question about why 2/3 of the prison population is on a U-shaped treadmill beginning and ending in prison is answerable to some degree in the above. "Jail" is not a deterrent in it's current incarnation and unless you make prison far more unpleasant, uncomfortable, and difficult the only tool you have to push criminals toward cooperation with authorities and to possibly make them think twice about committing a heinous crime is an applied and credible threat of a death penalty.

What HAS been shown to most effectively prevent a return trip to jail is education programs and the like, to help convicts actually develop useable skills so they can get a damn job when they get out.  (I don't have stats and such readily available, but could probably dig them up if necessary--I read an article about a prison in Pennsylvania that was really good at this and had the lowest repeat offender rates of any prison of its class in the country.)  But such programs are often cut off, because those who want to make prison "far more unpleasant" think they constitute "coddling" prisoners.  What say you to this?

[AlohaDawg]

I would first defer to Asherdan's statements based on his experiences with convicted criminals in the California Correctional system. He knows that system and he's seen how people succeed (or not) in it.

I agree with you in the sense that a motivated man or woman in a prison who takes advantage of training and education should have a much better chance of creating a legitimate and crime-free life when released.

My experience with formerly incarcerated people tells me, though, that there is a lower success rate than you would want and certainly than you would expect for a lot of reasons, many of which are not in the sphere of control of the released individual.

For the large number of people convicted of crimes related to drug addiction, there is a huge relapse rate. Combine this with the difficulties an ex-con already has getting work and you have huge hurdles for people to overcome. The return-to-prison rate is fueled in part by frustration with dealing with life on the outside because it can be a pretty harsh environment for an ex-con, especially one who may have been marginalized in the first place and now is further marginalized. For others, release from prison means returning to a neighborhood or a family or an organization/enterprise which is engaged in the activities that got them convicted in the first place. It becomes a matter of time.

I don't disagree that a society should try to empower people to improve their chances of success. Tools are useful in the hands of people committed to doing the job - and there are people in prisons who are sincere in their desire to better themselves and never return. Even some of them return, possibly for the reasons above.

I think that there is social change that needs to happen in the neighborhoods and communities beginning at the level of the family. I don't think the education or skills training you can get in prison is any better than that which you might get outside of prison. The difference is the controlled environment. Strong parents and strong communities could accomplish the same education/training goals for young people without the crippling addition of a felony conviction hampering their prospects.

[Asherdan]

Dudes, I don't think I've been real harsh on this topic. In regards to the death sentance I stated pretty blatantly 'when in doubt, life without' and I'm even willing to say 'or if the doubt meets the standards of your states jury instructions find for a lesser offence if warranted or none at all'.

'Dawg hits it right on the head in regards to these fuckers condition. Even in the best of prison programs there is a healthy recidivism rate. For example, Cali makes great use of the Fire Camp system. Low end early offenders get to go out and live in camps in the Sierra range and learn applied skills (equipment maintenance, heavy machinery operation, welding, etc.) and with good work and behaviour dudes earn more priveledges. I heard all about how great it was from guys back in for the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, whatever time.

See, for reasons 'Dawg mentioned, these dudes reach grown up prison already completely fucked. The first visit to the penal system is also a last chance to reform oneself. IF vast resources are going to be committed to this issue and these people it's going to have to happen precisely at the level 'Dawg placed it at.

Also, I was a guest of the Federal BOP 'cause my problem occurred on Fed Turf. I got to get a review of most states + the federal system.

It's not like I had anything better to study.

[AlohaDawg]

For example, Cali makes great use of the Fire Camp system. Low end early offenders get to go out and live in camps in the Sierra range and learn applied skills (equipment maintenance, heavy machinery operation, welding, etc.) and with good work and behaviour dudes earn more priveledges. I heard all about how great it was from guys back in for the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, whatever time.

I would be interested to know if a shoplifter or guy caught holding went to a Fire Camp, got all these skills and came out with enhanced skills as, say, a car thief or with a cutting torch as a chopper - Skills are just tools and if you give someone with flawed values skills and return them to an environment that fosters bad behavior, how do you expect those skills will be used?

[miles]

I would be interested to know if a shoplifter or guy caught holding went to a Fire Camp, got all these skills and came out with enhanced skills as, say, a car thief or with a cutting torch as a chopper - Skills are just tools and if you give someone with flawed values skills and return them to an environment that fosters bad behavior, how do you expect those skills will be used?

That's a good point, but I think that the idea behind programs like that is that some criminals are criminals because they lack certain practical skills.  Who knows if it's true, but I imagine that was part of the idea.  In a criminology class I took a while back the professor (who worked for the Utah Department of Corrections and did a lot of research in that area) said that some prison systems have tried a program where morality is taught through the study of literature.  I don't remember the details but it sounded interesting.