I started wondering if there are any prison programs designed to reprogram criminals after reading this article about an 18 yr. old white supremist who committed a hate crime. In article it says: "David Henry Tuck, 18, was convicted Thursday of aggravated sexual assault in the near-fatal attack. Witnesses testified that he hurled racial insults and shouted "white power" while sodomizing the 17-year-old victim with the plastic pole of a patio umbrella." "He is an evil person, and he is not going to change or get better," Trent said. "We need protection from him. You are the only ones that provide that." "The prosecutor said David Henry Tuck was beyond rehabilitation." Entire artice is here: http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/11/18/party.attack.ap/index.html I don't know a lot about the prison system, but from what I have heard is that there are white, black and mexican gangs in prison. So, if that is the case I don't think he would be rehabilitated. He would just go do his time and get positive reinforcement from the white gang and then be released eventually back onto society. I thought they have him now in a controlled environment. There are ways you could reprogram his thinking, you could put him in a situation where he needs to get along with hispanics to survive. Are there any programs like this? I was just thinking he is an impressionable 18 yr. old, surely he could rehabilitate. Thoughts?
But the thing is, I don't think he is going to get the death penalty. He didn't actually kill the guy he abused (but close to it). The reality is that the white supremist will probably be set free eventually.
I think your joking? In this particular case, I'm not for the death penalty but I am not totally against it either. If someone tortures another human being like he did, then he gets what he gets. But the truth is he won't get the death penalty. So, knowing that at some time that person will be released back into society, I wonder what they are doing to actually rehabilitate and change his mode of thinking. Here is a job I found for you Grafstein, I think they would enjoy your fresh ideas on prison management
Pffft! Not a chance of rehabilitation. None. Zip. Zero. F*** 'im, anyway. He deserves what he got - 30 years before he can apply for parole. If it wasn't this victim it would have been someone else. He'd better join the White supremicists in jail real quick (if they let him) when he gets to prison or he'll end up everyone's bitch and get a good idea what it's like to get something shoved up his ass when he gets gang-raped by one or more of the other gangs as payback for what he did.
COOL,but im a little busy at the moment I just dont think prisoners should have any rights and when prisons are overcrowded:http://www.prisonpolicy.org/news/uwire041502.html There should be a extermination rather than spending hundreds of millions of dollars on constructing new ones.
But these prisoners received there sentence based on the law and American justice system and that is kind of sacred. I don't believe the sentence should be altered based on other outside issues like being overcrowded. But I see what your saying, for example some person may torture and kill someone and only get a life sentence...then society is suppose to house and feed this jerk for the rest of his life? I can think of a lot better things we can use the money for
I still can't believe this story! It is an absolute outrage. I never thought I'd be surprised again by something I read on the internet but there you go! What is the solution to crime and punishment, then? Should it be more black and white? Kill the killers, castrate the sex offenders and chop off the hands of thieves?
I think castration and chopping off hands reminds me of some radical Islamic regime, so wouldn't want those kinds of punishments I am not against the death penalty. But I read somewhere that in this country it actually cost the taxpayers more to implement the death penalty than it does for life imprisonment. Also, one concern is that when DNA testing became more sophisticated we found a few rare cases where some people that had been convicted of murder were actually innocent. I think the prison population could be significantly reduced by only imprisoning people that are a serious threat to others i.e. violent people. For example, did Martha Stewart really have to go to prison? Not trying to defend her, but why are my taxes going to house and feed Martha? She has money, they could have just given her a big fine and that money could have gone to some kids in a poor community for an afterschool program or? With the fines, I think they should have more programs that help keep people out of jail in the first place and encourage kids and adults to stay on a positive path. Non-violent crime should be given hefty fines, community service and some kind of daytime rehabilitation program.
So the rich get to do whatever they like (more so than happens already) because they can afford the fines? No deterrent in that. Maybe they should identify who are the psychopaths among the violent offenders and give them a lobotomy? They can never be rehabilitated by current conventional means but mushing some of their brain matter might be the answer?
My point is that people who have committed violent crimes should be locked away so that they will not hurt anyone. But they could alleviate overcrowded conditions by punishing people that commit non-violent crimes in a different manner, in a way that could benefit society. ie fines and community service. The idea of a lobotomy turns my stomach. Who is so great that they will be responsible for determining who is a psychopath unable to be rehabilitated and who is not? Personally, I would rather get the death penalty.
Psychopaths cannot be rehabilitated. It's just the way it is. Problem is they are some of the most dangerous people on the planet, if only a tiny minority of the population. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy So why not lobotomise the psycopaths who are in jail for violent crimes to try to modify their behaviour? It seems a dreadful contradiction to be willing to execute people for violent crime but not to be in favour of surgical procedures designed specifically to modify their offending behaviour to prevent their violent crime.
Just my opinion of course but I think a lobotomy is one of the cruelest forms of execution. The most important part of a person is there brain, if you destroy that then there is no reason for the body to go on. So are you saying we should give them a lobotomy and then release them back into society where they will be unable to support themselves? Or should they just get a lobotomy and stay in prison as they would have done without a lobotomy?
Ok, I was a little flippant when I used the term, 'lobotomy'. I should have said, 'psychosurgery' instead. Psychopathic prisoners doing 'life' or very lengthy sentences could have elective psychosurgery to modify their psycopathy. If it's a success, they have earned the right to be considered for parole and maybe a reduction in their sentence. I fail to see why on earth you are personally concerned with whether these people have a change of personality - isn't that the idea? That their personalities change to such an extent that they become 'rehabilitated'? Surely their personalities are so warped and distorted to have led them to commit their crimes and inflict the damage they have wrought within society that they must be radically altered? This type of surgery, although still quite rare, is performed today to treat a range of disorders. It has come a long way since the icepick through the eye socket, 10-minute day surgery that was meted out for everything from headaches to schizophrenia. So why not operate on the most destructive element in society - the criminal psychopath?