I have addressed your within the context of this thread. Where we are discussing the law surrounding a civil right and criminal transgression of the law, the disincentives involved will be criminal penalties.
This thread deals with a social problem. That problem is presently mainly dealt with through the penal system. That does not mean I need to restrict my thoughts to the penal code. Similarly, we do not have to only view it through the penal code, particularly as the causes of said social problem are very varied indeed; that's why I have difficulties with the topic returning to that one aspect: punishment
Where your suggestion is more state spending on education, I can assure that the option hasn't been overlooked. In fact, it has been tried for decades.
OK: Now this is something that I would have liked to know more about. Why has it not been brought up sooner? - From my perspective this is far more relevant to the ideas I've been trying to put forward than just the relative strengths of the penal system.
That is incorrect. At post 59 I note the differences in population vis a vis scandinavia, your offered standard, and in post 76 some of the constraints on both criiminal law and educational reform in the US.
You've touched on it, then, but you've certainly been more interested in my views on punishment: at least that is the impression I've been getting.
Someone who asks you what you think isn't dismissing your offered idea.
From where I'm sitting, yes, it is.
As I alluded to above, your questions have been focussed not on my idea, but on what I hope to move away from with my idea. I even suggested alternative schemes regarding perception of a criminal's role and place in society (post 75). You've not referred to those either.
So if I say I don't like A because of X, Y, Z; I want to focus more on B. And you then ask "Why don't you like A?", "Got any better ideas than A?"
It does leave me the impression that my idea B is being dismissed....
Some may see a clarity in a disinclination to answer a question directly,
Interestingly, you've over-looked the rest of the questions I posed to you in my last post. If this is a discussion then questions, as well as answers, should go both ways.
All the same, I have given your query some thought and while perhaps not what you are looking for, here is what I would do if I have the authority/means:
First, a caveat: this is not a sweeping, one-size fits all approach. Any given case would need to be looked at individually as they are now.
E.g. Violent people, ie with a propensity for violence, would need to be treated differently to people who were perhaps involved in a violent incident but are not inherently inclined to violence. In relation to the OP, I imagine that not all "gun crime" involves someone getting wounded/killed.
Prisons:
Generally shorter sentences but in more austere (but not inhumane) conditions. Far greater emphasis on counselling, education, training and rehab (undo/weaken criminal mindset as well as improve prospects once released). Less TV, more books. More security and better paid and more vetting (reduce the chance of prison staff getting involved in facilitating drugs entering the environment). Further heavy emphasis on sports/physical activity (reduce aggression/stress).
Introduction of readjustment schemes such as "meet the victim" (Victims can challenge the inmate to justify their actions: has shown to break the separation of cause and effect of their actions by criminals and raise empathy within the perpetrator.), "community service" (especially if not imprisoned) so that offenders develop a sense of responsibility and involvement in the area they may once just have exploited.
An A.A. style sponsor system for support on the outside which hopefully would provide greater 1:1 support than a half-way house or stretched over-worked parole officer.
Cities Pt1:
NY Giuliani style policing in high crime/drug areas together with heavy tax benefit incentives for both companies and workforce who set-up in those areas. (create income opportunities previously only provided by the criminal element and revitalise local economies)
Cities Pt2:
Investment in greater drug rehabilitation facilities for drug affected areas, preferably allowing for treatment in an area away from the drug users home environment where behavioural triggers and stressors would be most prevalent.
Many will cry: where's the money going to come from for all of this? but, of course, the costs would actually be investments as, if it worked, crime would drop, tax revenues rise and the associated costs of policing and prison population management would also drop. It may take a decade, but I doubt any such changes happen over night, but I feel the net result both financially and socially would be a gain
There you have them: my ideas for penal reform from a lay person's point of view. The greater focus education reform for the formative years I've already mentioned.
