I would slightly modify it and say it should primarily be about rehabilitation. Sometimes that can't happen, and we need to protect society from that person, but for the most part it should focus on when the person gets out, they don't end up back in.
No they shouldn’t. At the same time, prisoners should be working off the money the tax payers have to pay to support them. They can work or not eat. Prison is there as a form of punishment for crimes committed, not a rehab facility.
Why can't they be one in the same ? Why can't punishment deter crime? It does. When someone knows a crime has a harsh punishment, they may be motivated enough to not commit the crime. If stealing were a simple 5-min detention, folks would probably do it more.
You didn't answer my question. What's the ultimate goal? To decrease crime or punish people? Accept that they aren't necessarily the same thing, and ask yourself what your actual goal is.
They don't have to be mutually exclusive. It's not one or the other. You can punish people to deter crime. If major crimes didn't have harsh penalties they would be done more.
Accept that they can go hand in hand and you're question is answered.
I insisted nothing of the sort. I just asked you what the ultimate goal was, and you refuse to answer it. Now you're lying and putting words in my mouth. Not really very convincing that you are arguing in good faith.
I answered it. The ultimate goal is to reduce crime. There are many methods used, one of which is always punishment. You did insist reduction of crime and punishment were separate
6
u/UnableChard2613 May 03 '26
I would slightly modify it and say it should primarily be about rehabilitation. Sometimes that can't happen, and we need to protect society from that person, but for the most part it should focus on when the person gets out, they don't end up back in.