Fifth Avenue Forum

I watched a documentary last night called Lost for Life, which interestingly was produced by Ted Leonsis. It was about teenagers who murdered others and were sentenced to life in prison for it.

It was moderately balanced but ultimately sympathetic to teens who were potentially subjected to "cruel and unusual punishment" as a result of their life sentence.

So I'm asking I guess two questions, one being fact based and one opinion:

1) What exactly is the role of prison in our society, legally? I see three options:
--a)as a deterrent (if you commit a crime you will lose your freedom)
--b)as a punishment (the penalty for your crime is loss of freedom)
--c)as a debt obligation to society (the cost of your crime is your loss of freedom)

2) What do you *think* it should be?

I think the whole prison system is a giant criminal-producing enterprise.

It is neither just nor what is best for the criminal or the victim.

Restorative Justice is the way to go.

a combination of the three

I don't have much sympathy for people that kill other people. Life in prison sounds about right.

I'd rather be dead than in prison.

I understand the need for prisons as well as the necessity to punish criminals, especially the violent kind, but prisons in the U.S. are a huge business and keeping a sizable portion of the population behind bars keeps many, many people very wealthy.

It certainly isn't for rehabilitation, as it should be.

doesn't seem like prison does a very good job at actual rehabilitation. if you reduced populations, maybe there would be more resources to devote to the cause...which is an important one.

low level non-violent drug offenders who don't directly impact children should not be in jail. ever. get them out and use their allotment of the budget to do something useful.

I think it should be a combination of all three.

I think it is a deterrrent and a punishment.

And, as Hockeynut said, it's a HUGE business. It's not about about rehab, it's about cash.

How about for a teenage murderer? Should they be allowed a chance at "rehabilitation," or should they pay for their cruelty forever?

This is the first case profiled in the doc, and it sickened me more than any true crime story I've ever seen. Hearing them think they should be freed after this is outrageous. They thought it would be fun to mash up Columbine and a Scream movie, so they stabbed a friend to death, and filmed themselves planning it and afterward http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_ ... o_Stoddart

I think a combination of all three.

I think it should be a combination of all three. However, it shouldn't be used nearly as much as it is. It should mostly be used for violent criminals and those who do or perpetuate harm against others.

How about for a teenage murderer? Should they be allowed a chance at "rehabilitation," or should they pay for their cruelty forever?

This is the first case profiled in the doc, and it sickened me more than any true crime story I've ever seen. Hearing them think they should be freed after this is outrageous. They thought it would be fun to mash up Columbine and a Scream movie, so they stabbed a friend to death, and filmed themselves planning it and afterward http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_ ... o_Stoddart

it doesn't make a difference. They ruined a kid's life and his family's as well. They don't deserve to be freed and I don't want them roaming the streets.


it really isn't that hard not to murder someone.

that's probably harsh but that's my initial reaction.

Deterrant. As it should be. Legalize drugs and get those people out and i think it would be fine.

Honestly if we are going to have long-term prisons (which I do not really like) they should only be for violent, capital crimes (murder, rape, and Aggravated Assault).

Everything else should be Restorative (Eye for an Eye, in the non-literal sense of that).

I think any murderer with 3 or more witnesses and conclusive evidence should be put to death.

Looking at you Mumia.

Hard drugs should never be legal.

Hard drugs should never be legal.

Why not legalize, control, and tax? Like guns, people who want them are going to get them, so why not make the process transparent?

They should all be legalized and regulated.

Shyster seems to have a specific set of metrics to determine membership in the libertarian club.
I wonder where full drug legalization fits into that.

i don't think meth or heroin, for instance, should be sold in stores. but under no circumstance should someone be incarcerated for possessing it.

i support legalization for mushrooms and weed. decriminalize every other drug. make it a small ticket.

Shyster seems to have a specific set of metrics to determine membership in the libertarian club.
I wonder where full drug legalization fits into that.

Not sure I care whether I fit a strict libertarian.

http://mic.com/articles/110344/14-years ... -happening

Good read on what's happened in Portugal after decriminalizing drugs.

Much like with the Welfare State in Sweden or the educational system in Finland I do not always think it really is an apples to apples comparison with these small, European countries and our quite large (geographically and population) nation.

Much like with the Welfare State in Sweden or the educational system in Finland I do not always think it really is an apples to apples comparison with these small, European countries and our quite large (geographically and population) nation.

you're right. we need decriminalization even more.

Much like with the Welfare State in Sweden or the educational system in Finland I do not always think it really is an apples to apples comparison with these small, European countries and our quite large (geographically and population) nation.

I certainly agree. It's difficult to make the comparison exactly apples to apples, but it's an interesting place to at least start and think about the discussion.