Bitcoin Forum

Other => Politics & Society => Topic started by: em3rgentOrdr on July 17, 2011, 04:57:35 PM



Title: Ostracism vs. Imprisonment: how best to handle people like Casey Anthony
Post by: em3rgentOrdr on July 17, 2011, 04:57:35 PM
Casey Anthony free, but in another kind of prison (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2011/0717/Casey-Anthony-free-but-in-another-kind-of-prison)

Quote
Will Casey Anthony's notoriety over the death of her two-year-old daughter Caylee bring some measure of wealth and security, or will it, instead, condemn her to a different kind of prison?

Although released from jail, Ms. Anthony is embarking on an uncertain future, facing substantial obstacles to reclaim a normal life.

I prefer ostracism.  Imprisonment is a negative sum game for everyone involved: the criminal, the prison, and the taxpayers.


Title: Re: Ostracism vs. Imprisonment: how best to handle people like Casey Anthony
Post by: myrkul on July 17, 2011, 06:51:23 PM
+1


Title: Re: Ostracism vs. Imprisonment: how best to handle people like Casey Anthony
Post by: macharborguy on July 17, 2011, 07:10:51 PM
there is no way to reclaim a "normal life" after this.  Normally, you don't go to court over the death of a child.  Normally you aren't put in the public eye like she was.

Celebs don't have normal lives.  People involved in highly televised/publicized court cases don't have normal lives.

All she will have to be able to do is deal with it


Title: Re: Ostracism vs. Imprisonment: how best to handle people like Casey Anthony
Post by: myhoho on July 18, 2011, 03:30:26 AM
 Ostracism. Bitcoin people always have "ostracismic" predisposition...


Title: Re: Ostracism vs. Imprisonment: how best to handle people like Casey Anthony
Post by: lemonginger on July 18, 2011, 04:34:31 AM
It is worth pointing out that in some future societies shunning/ostracism could essentially be a death sentence. Not saying that makes it worse than imprisonment (I'm a prison abolitionist myself), but still worth keeping in mind.

Some sort of restitution and restoration process is of course needed as well.


Title: Re: Ostracism vs. Imprisonment: how best to handle people like Casey Anthony
Post by: Tawsix on July 18, 2011, 02:27:02 PM
I still have yet to be given a compelling argument for how ostracizing murderers keeps them from murdering again.  The last thread I had this discussion in ended up with those supporting ostracism switching to supporting capital punishment/imprisonment (http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=21217.msg290129#msg290129).  Also, please enlighten me on how ostracizing a woman who was found not guilty of murder in any way supports ostracism?


Title: Re: Ostracism vs. Imprisonment: how best to handle people like Casey Anthony
Post by: myrkul on July 18, 2011, 06:16:41 PM
Some sort of restitution and restoration process is of course needed as well.

Well, of course, you only ostracize if restitution is refused.

I still have yet to be given a compelling argument for how ostracizing murderers keeps them from murdering again. 

The idea is that you remove the social support structure, preventing the criminal from doing anything in the society, until restitution is paid. It does not keep them from murdering again, the idea is that it will enforce the repayment of his/her debt in the least inhumane way possible. What keeps them from murdering again is the fact that it's an armed society, and he's less likely to survive with each attempted murder.

That said, I support rehabilitation/restitution for lesser crimes, but premeditated murder, there is no way to repay. Let the family and friends of the victim decide what will best repay that debt.


Title: Re: Ostracism vs. Imprisonment: how best to handle people like Casey Anthony
Post by: ErgoOne on July 18, 2011, 07:26:47 PM
Ostracism isn't going to work with a few hardened murderers, rapists and the like.  IMHO we need prisons because there are people that you simply can't be safe from if they're walking around free.  But ostracism for those who aren't in that category (realistically, most of the people currently in prison in the U.S.) might work if enough people cooperated and if going underground/hiding who you are didn't work.  How would you enforce that, though, without reducing freedom for the rest of us?


Title: Re: Ostracism vs. Imprisonment: how best to handle people like Casey Anthony
Post by: myrkul on July 18, 2011, 07:46:23 PM
You won't have to. Most businesses would not deal with a known thief, or contract breaker, or what have you, and those that will, will probably charge more. (same demand, less supply = higher prices)


Title: Re: Ostracism vs. Imprisonment: how best to handle people like Casey Anthony
Post by: Denicen on July 18, 2011, 07:57:49 PM
I wish that there were some island we could send violent criminals to, like the british used to do with australia. In an ideal society violent crime would be punished with banishment and non-violent crime with reparations imo.


Title: Re: Ostracism vs. Imprisonment: how best to handle people like Casey Anthony
Post by: Tawsix on July 18, 2011, 09:30:39 PM
I still have yet to be given a compelling argument for how ostracizing murderers keeps them from murdering again.  

The idea is that you remove the social support structure, preventing the criminal from doing anything in the society, until restitution is paid. It does not keep them from murdering again, the idea is that it will enforce the repayment of his/her debt in the least inhumane way possible. What keeps them from murdering again is the fact that it's an armed society, and he's less likely to survive with each attempted murder.

That said, I support rehabilitation/restitution for lesser crimes, but premeditated murder, there is no way to repay. Let the family and friends of the victim decide what will best repay that debt.

I think ostracism would be fine if used against certain people who are non-violent or willing to pay restitution for their crimes.  But for violent murderers and others, you would be throwing people who lived in rural and remote areas to the wolves.  Just because your society is armed doesn't make the desperation of hunger any less sharp, especially if the hungry person committed crimes when they weren't hungry.


Title: Re: Ostracism vs. Imprisonment: how best to handle people like Casey Anthony
Post by: myrkul on July 18, 2011, 09:41:53 PM
I think ostracism would be fine if used against certain people who are non-violent or willing to pay restitution for their crimes.  But for violent murderers and others, you would be throwing people who lived in rural and remote areas to the wolves.  Just because your society is armed doesn't make the desperation of hunger any less sharp, especially if the hungry person committed crimes when they weren't hungry.

Ever heard the the phrase "don't do the crime, if you can't do the time"? Ostracism is for people who won't pay restitution. If you refuse restitution, you're not being part of the civilization, so why should the civilization support you?


Title: Re: Ostracism vs. Imprisonment: how best to handle people like Casey Anthony
Post by: JoelKatz on July 20, 2011, 03:44:50 AM
I still have yet to be given a compelling argument for how ostracizing murderers keeps them from murdering again.  The last thread I had this discussion in ended up with those supporting ostracism switching to supporting capital punishment/imprisonment (http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=21217.msg290129#msg290129).  Also, please enlighten me on how ostracizing a woman who was found not guilty of murder in any way supports ostracism?
The point is that the universe of wrongs is much greater than the universe of wrongs that can be effectively dealt with by a justice system. The point of ostracism is to punish, and therefore discourage, those wrongs that can't be dealt with by a justice system.