[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Evolved or not, I’m not sure how you came to the conclusion that everyone here is insinuating that “this” topic is black and white when most people aren’t talking about the topic you are and the few that are have suggested nothing remotely similar?

None of these posts are talking about the side topic of rehabilitation vs. punishment as justice system concepts?

Really? Corsi's is especially hilarious. He writes that, I reply to it, and then he says 'hey stay on topic'. Uh, I was literally replying to you?

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You know, because of those on this board who work in law enforcement or work adjacent to it, I’ve actually learned a lot and my perception has definitely changed from where it was even an couple of ago. I’ve done my best to listen and keep an open mind, especially in recognizing the vast difference between police in Calgary and in some areas of the US.

You’re siding with someone who wants the death penalty and a much crueler justice system than the US. I didn’t take you for the type who wanted to kill and abuse criminals, honestly. Had you wrong.

Originally Posted by MBates

Should him taking genuine steps toward rehabilitation and getting on the 'right track' matter if it took him going to prison after a person's life was taken before he got the message? Again, our law says it matters. I have heard other homicide victim's family members talk about how it matters to them. Not always of course.

I fully appreciate my perspective is shaped by my career experiences. I know your comment was directed at others but I am not sure it is 'making excuses' for people to advocate for a principled and restrained approach to punishment for crimes.

I also, take no issue with people advocating for a more harsh / longer sentences approach.

For those that do, however, I would prefer to see them also do two things:

1. Address the costs and how it assists society to pay for significantly extended incarceration of people at a cost of about $118,000 per year per person; and

https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/r...dex-en.aspx#s1

2. Address why they are uncritical of the deplorable manner in which incarceration in Canada systemically ignores internationally recognized standards of care.

https://macleans.ca/news/canada/hous...tem-is-broken/

I raise the first issue because at our current punishment practices our jails and prisons are in disrepair, over crowded and understaffed. If you added 30% to every sentence starting tomorrow, well, let's just be honest...you couldn't. Because apparently nobody wants to pay taxes at a level to properly incarcerate people now, never mind more often and for longer.

I raise the second issue because well, after 20 years of watching us use methods of systemic abuse (including for example solitary confinement to a level recognized internationally as torture, and in Alberta completely ignoring the "Mandela Rules" a Canadian-signed UN treaty setting Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners), I can't help but wonder how we think behaving that way will help offenders learn to respect the law and society when they get out?

Maybe our manner of using incarceration is itself not on the 'right track'? It is at least worthy of debate.

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

There just seems to be a bright line in here between the posters who believe the criminal justice system should primarily be a punishment mechanism and those who think rehabilitation of offenders and their subsequent reincorporation into society as the primary goal of that system.

If you're in the former camp, how much jail time is enough punishment for a particular crime seems to be really subjective and is obviously uninformed in nearly all cases - is ten years enough for this crime? How do you know? How do you know what ten years in prison is like, as opposed to two, having never been incarcerated yourself? And why not nine, or eleven?

If you're in the latter camp, long sentences are actually counterproductive, particularly for someone who's 20 years old. If our ultimate goal is for the convicted kid to be able to live a productive life after he's released, it seems like leaving him in jail for too long will actually make that outcome far less likely, both in terms of his development and the likelihood for recidivism as a result of just the culture that would have become ingrained in him by spending age 20-25 (for example) behind bars.

I don't think that punishment and rehabilitation are incompatible, in fact I think some amount of punishment is crucial to rehabilitation as a deterrent. But it also seems like there is a point where it's not just diminishing returns but actively counterproductive.