undefined

points

[-]

If they are committing crimes, they should be imprisoned for an appropriate period of time as a deterrent to crime, a punishment for their actions, and to facilitate rehabilitation (even though evidence shows this doesn't really happen).

If they are mentally ill and unable to care for themselves or pose a threat to the community because of their mental illness, they should be institutionalized and treated. If they are able to be released into the community after a period of time, checks should be performed to ensure compliance with treatment/medication.

by remarkEon16 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

The most important part of incarceration is removing what is a quantifiable risk to the public from the public square. Everything else is secondary. The point of a state having police powers is to ensure for the common good, it is not to continually indulge those who wish to damage that common good. To the extent that the state is responsible for e.g. punishment and rehabilitation, these are ancillary responsibilities that are (or were) downstream from removing threats to the common good from the public square.

Seems like, after all of these police and prosecutorial "reforms", we are back to deriving why many state powers exist from first principles. Fun to watch in real time.

by 476352741726354 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

I think you need to fix the cause not treat the symptom. I mean you should treat the symptoms as well, while fixing the cause of the issue.

Atm it seems everyone is trying to figure out how to treat the symptom, and they don't even know why, and they keep completely quiet about the cause of it all. Completely and utter mystery, or framed vague and unfixable enough that they do not have to really address it.

What the Swiss did back in the 80's with the heroin program...that's misinterpreted by US and they're specifically trying to mess it up in application. The Swiss didn't just give lab grade heroin to junkies, they ran a serious mental care and social reintegration program and used the heroin as basically bait. You had access to it but you had to go to their facilities where specialized people could start working with you.

What the US is doing is a mockery of that, they want it to fail so they can say it's not working and they shouldn't even try it in the future.

And I think it's quite clear to basically anyone with two neurons what the cause of it is, but authorities there are going to pretend they do not understand it. That it's some mystical unexplainable cause.

by alex435783 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Right now, many places in the US aren’t even “treating the symptoms”.

We can start there, then move to address the more structural, long-term problems that contribute to these issues.

An action that reduces drug use by 5% a decade from now is fine, but taking a criminal off the street today yields far greater present value.

by Dylan168075 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

If they're doing lots of vandalism then yes put them in prisons. Get rid of 90% of drug charges to make room.

You get a much better score if the imprisonment is trying to rehab them, of course.

by kraken_cult5 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Forced rehab if needed and then somewhere they can work to pay their way, learn the skills to help themselves. There's a ton of manual labor that needs doing, potholes to be fixed.

by csullivannet5 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Oh, so forced labour then?

by qwerpy5 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

If someone’s forcing society to pay for their living expenses, it only seems fair for society to force them to labor to cover the expenses.

I’m sure the next objection will be “what, so you’re going to concentrate them in some kind of camp?” Yes because that’s the smart thing to do with a large scale problem. Use scalable solutions.