Rehabilitation for Criminals - would it ever be enough.
- Thread starter Quantum Quack
- Start date
interesting point.
>>>just as an aside what sort of rehabilitation do you think would work for most prisoners? <<<
Just noticed that post ...I'll think about that and get back to you,I'm aware of the current programs I'm a bit skeptical of most of them.
Basically you need to address the traits I mentioned before ie
- substance abuse
- risk taking personality
- lack of the tendency to consider the consequences of your actions
>>>interesting point. <<<
The more you think about it the more subtle the statement gets
Just noticed that post ...I'll think about that and get back to you,I'm aware of the current programs I'm a bit skeptical of most of them.
Basically you need to address the traits I mentioned before ie
- substance abuse
- risk taking personality
- lack of the tendency to consider the consequences of your actions
>>>interesting point. <<<
The more you think about it the more subtle the statement gets
Thomo said:
Haha, in the US substance abuse IS the crime that they are incarcerated for. And unfortunately our drug laws define usage as abuse. I'm no fan of pot, I have terminated friendships before because they were turning into worthless stoners, If it can be said that there's a huge negative-propaganda campaign designed to brainwash average Americans against pot, then I readily admit I'm probably one of the brainwashed. But even I can see that our laws for marijuana possession, usage, and paraphernalia ownership/selling are entirely disproportionate to the severity of the crime.
That's what I find ridiculous. Drugs should not be a crime. If someone commits a crime (murder, robbery, etc) while on drugs then sure, arrest them. The problem isn’t them being on drugs but rather commiting the crime. Unfortunately it’s the other way around here. I find the title “rehabilitation for criminals” to be silly because it shouldn’t be a crime. But those that commit crimes while on drugs, rehabilitation won’t do jack squat because that person has a screwed up mind regardless of drugs being involved. Rehabilitation isn’t going to help them from commiting further real crimes, it’ll only help with taking less drugs which is silly because all this time and money is spent trying to help them cure a problem which isn’t really a problem (drugs) yet does nothing for the real problem (true crime).
And yes, I know there are those that seriously abuse drugs and those are the types that should seek and receive help, but they’re screwed up regardless with their addictive personality so they’d just switch to something else such as gambling (which is funny in how it’s like drugs.. illegal yet not.. like pot vs alcohol). However, most people that use these “illegal” drugs have no problem with it, but unfortunately the law doesn’t care so even those types get sentenced to jail for long periods of time.
For people to be thrown in jail for using drugs, the same should apply to smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol otherwise it’s inconsistant and hypocritical. This whole “war on drugs” only exists to limit the power of the people to use mind-altering substances so that fewer are in charge which in turn makes them more powerful due to lack of competition. In other words, it’s to make the alcohol and cigarette companies more richer and powerful as opposed to helping “clean-up” society as it’s made to seem.
- N
What do you think would happen if all drugs were legalised and freely available?
and
Why, do you think, are most drugs of addiction are made illegal?
What is the motivation behind such legistlation? [- say assume for a moment with out drawing conspiracy theories ]
and
Why, do you think, are most drugs of addiction are made illegal?
What is the motivation behind such legistlation? [- say assume for a moment with out drawing conspiracy theories ]
Last edited:
The consumption would be no different than one who drinks alcohol. There will be those that abuse it (alcoholics) and there will be those that use it every now and then for recreational use.
Those that abuse drugs and alcohol are no different from one another. The problem isn’t the drug but rather the person. They have an addictive personality which applies to many things. If it weren't drugs or alocohol they're abusing, it'd be something else like gambling to possibly become broke or processed food to possibly become obese. All are harmful but nobody seems to really regulate those activities.
Because of the amount of money made from them. By making them illegal, it limits the competition for other legal, addictive, and harmful drugs that run this country. Consolodation of power is the #1 reason anyone with power wants. For the simple fact that there are legal drugs available that are addictive and harmful shows that these are not the reasons why the drugs that are illegal are illegal.
Creating alcohol and cigarettes are a bit more time consuming than drugs that are illegal. This is another perk to those in power that create alcohol and cigarettes. If everyone could easily create their own recreational drug of choice, it would put those other industries out of business and we all know nobody wants to be run out of business.
Power buys anything anywhere. Power can easily buy votes and legislation. You may consider that a “conspiracy theory”, but it’s not. Most conspiracy theories are simple, common sense, every day practices. It’s just that most people don’t believe something like that could ever happen since we all have good faith in our corporate and political leaders. It's all about money and power. Look at alcohol and opium wars of the past. This "War on Drugs" is no different.
- N
so it could be inferred that the ilegal drug syndicates will conspire to keep their drugs illegal, so as to keep their market value high....
If drugs became legal, the price of illicit drugs would fall. So it is in the interests of organised crime to keep the drugs illegal.......
.....speaking of conspiracy theories......
If drugs became legal, the price of illicit drugs would fall. So it is in the interests of organised crime to keep the drugs illegal.......
.....speaking of conspiracy theories......
If you remember, in Key Largo, Rocco, the escaped gangster fantasises about the reintroduction of prohibition.Quantum Quack said:
That is leaving aside the effects on the economy if thousands of people currently supposedly stopping the import and use of these drugs weren't employed doing that.
Turning back to the original topic: surely compulsory rehabilitation would only be possible if criminality was considered an illness? Courts spend a lot of time deciding whether someone was "mentally ill" when they committed a crime: if they are mentally ill they are "treated" and can be given "therapy" whether they want it or not. If they are ordinary criminals they can refuse to participate in "therapeutic" regimes. This pplies in general: if someone in custody tries to starve themselves to death they have that right if they are not mentally ill. If they are ill they can be force-fed.
Last edited:
Yup. Not only does making a product illegal reduce the amount of people able to sell the product, but it also makes the product more valuable. The more important part though is that it makes it easier and legal to get rid of competition. Something that cannot easily be done if people were selling legal products other than buying the company out which would cost loads of money and that's a bad thing since the point is to make money, not spend it.
Conspiracy theory? It's called basic business strategy.
- N
Thersites,
Of course this is an area of huge debate for sure.
One could simply argue that we are all suffereing in soime way an illness, and simply claim it to be "the human condition"
Can a man who assaults his wife and children because he considers it the right thing to do, due to his own prior conditioning [child abuse] be deemed to be menatly ill? [ Btw I am not suggesting menatlly ill in a legal sense]
>>>Why, do you think, are most drugs of addiction are made illegal?
What is the motivation behind such legistlation? [- say assume for a moment with out drawing conspiracy theories ] <<<
This made me think,
I'm a smoker but if cigarettes were made illegal I doubt if I would be. Yes making things illegal is a form of censorship and restriction of freedom but the overall effect is one of enhancing the quality of life within that society.Tobacco,alcohol and caffeine have been around us for a long time we have to varying degrees learned to deal with the risks, I believe if the current illegal drugs were made legal they would have a greater but detrimental effect in society
What is the motivation behind such legistlation? [- say assume for a moment with out drawing conspiracy theories ] <<<
This made me think,
I'm a smoker but if cigarettes were made illegal I doubt if I would be. Yes making things illegal is a form of censorship and restriction of freedom but the overall effect is one of enhancing the quality of life within that society.Tobacco,alcohol and caffeine have been around us for a long time we have to varying degrees learned to deal with the risks, I believe if the current illegal drugs were made legal they would have a greater but detrimental effect in society
The problem with your argument is that opium, morphine and cocaine [heroin hadn't been invented then] were all perfectly legal until shortly after the First World War. Drug addiction was a problem. Drug smuggling and all that goes with it was not. In the UK until the early 1970s the standard treatment for drug addicts was to prescribe legal maintenance doses. There were only a few thousand addicts. Since the options became abstinence or illegal use...Thomo said:
Quantum Quack said:
at least in the case of marijuana: American corporate vendors would emerge, farming and selling at a better price and much less hassle than talking to some sort of shady drug-dealer, the economic power is taken out of the hands of street thugs and given to American businesses, making it regulateable and taxable. People in my area won't be shooting eachother over drug deals or to try to steal the huge stash hiding in a residential building having come in from Mexico recently and awaiting distribution.
Stupid American children will still take pot, some just won't know when to quit and become hopelessly stupid stoners, but then that isn't any different from the situation we've got right now. Pot will probably seem a lot less evil, more people will likely try it once or twice, or hell now and again just recreationally, potato chip sales will go up, and tobacco companies will lose some of their market share, but somehow the world won't fall apart and will manage to move on.
Our prison systems will become less crowded, drug related crime will go waaaaay down, we'll all be paying less taxes (or at least have more tax money to put toward other more worth wile endevors) and we'll have rid ourselves of a completely unessisary headache (and glaucoma, too for that matter).
Quantum Quack said:
I don't know, why was sodomy made illegal in many places? Our government has a lot of time invested in heeding the irrational and loud urgent complaints of conservative wacos who think that they've got a monopoly on morality and truth, and need to tell everyone how to live. Maybe tobacco companies and alcohol breweries just wanted to be sure that they'd hold onto their market shares without having to branch out into new products. At any rate we have a long sad history of demonizing some drugs, while glorifying others, and at this point I don't think that anyone who is able to just take a step back from this strange culture we've built for ourselves and really take an objective look at things is in a position to be setting policy about these kinds of things.
>>>There were only a few thousand addicts. Since the options became abstinence or illegal use... <<<
Hello Thersites
Do you think (and I'm refering to "hard" drugs not pot) if they were legalised that the problem would reduce? I'm not so sure...the problem is also ,the risk ,if we re legalised those drugs and it was found that the problem increased.
Hello Thersites
Do you think (and I'm refering to "hard" drugs not pot) if they were legalised that the problem would reduce? I'm not so sure...the problem is also ,the risk ,if we re legalised those drugs and it was found that the problem increased.
This is obviously a hugely vexatious area of discussion, that invokes considerable passion.
It would be quite easilly proved that by legalising illicit drugs would increase their use significantly. Probably the level of dependancy would increase. Simply because the casual whim of youth may lead them to try something that they would not normally try.
In society we have at least two dynamics happening here. [I m sure there are many more]
The need to censor our populations activities with legistlation. And the need to protect our children so that they can when older make better informed decisions.
But by the same token this protection can also have the effect of generating a weak and dependant on LAW society as well.
Censorship also breeds weakness.
The problem however is that the child has to be still alive to learn lessons and if drugs like heroin and Crack , ice etc were legalised a lot of our youth woudl never live long eneough to learn their lessons.
So there are many fears involved in the legalising of drugs.
Suffice to say that children have many ways to get off and many options are cheap and free to take. Still most survive regardless. But I wonder if open slather on the availability of potent and highly addictive drugs would destroy our societies future.....
The point being that we as a society have a duty of care towards our children simply becasue they are unable to emotionally deal with the possibilities due to their imaturity.
The horror stories of 10 year old kids experimenting with heroin sends shivers down my spine. And legalising it would just magnify the problem enourmously I would speculate.
Some wise people once said:
"it is true that a way of determining the value and success of a society is in how it deals with those that are less fortunate, disadvantaged, disabled and vulnerable"
It would be quite easilly proved that by legalising illicit drugs would increase their use significantly. Probably the level of dependancy would increase. Simply because the casual whim of youth may lead them to try something that they would not normally try.
In society we have at least two dynamics happening here. [I m sure there are many more]
The need to censor our populations activities with legistlation. And the need to protect our children so that they can when older make better informed decisions.
But by the same token this protection can also have the effect of generating a weak and dependant on LAW society as well.
Censorship also breeds weakness.
The problem however is that the child has to be still alive to learn lessons and if drugs like heroin and Crack , ice etc were legalised a lot of our youth woudl never live long eneough to learn their lessons.
So there are many fears involved in the legalising of drugs.
Suffice to say that children have many ways to get off and many options are cheap and free to take. Still most survive regardless. But I wonder if open slather on the availability of potent and highly addictive drugs would destroy our societies future.....
The point being that we as a society have a duty of care towards our children simply becasue they are unable to emotionally deal with the possibilities due to their imaturity.
The horror stories of 10 year old kids experimenting with heroin sends shivers down my spine. And legalising it would just magnify the problem enourmously I would speculate.
Some wise people once said:
"it is true that a way of determining the value and success of a society is in how it deals with those that are less fortunate, disadvantaged, disabled and vulnerable"
I think that if all drugs were legal the problems society has would change. It's worth remembering that in the countries that produce drugs there are probably even bigger problems than in Europe and the USA because of the power held by criminals as well as the problems of addiction. Making drugs legal does not mean making them uncontrolled: they would be liable to taxation, restrictions on where they could be taken, restrictions on who can sell them- all the controls- and more if necessary- that govern alcohol and tobacco. My own guess would be that there would be more drug users, more drug addicts [not all, or even many, drug users become addicts] and a much lower crime and death rate resulting from it. Opiates themselves are much less lethal than alcohol or tobacco- they don't cause other diseases that kill; the conditions under which they are taken- adulterated, of uncertain strength, taken communally using shared and dirty needles etc- they do kill. It's certainly easier to get hold of cocaine or heroin outside pub opening hours in London than it is to get alcohol and it's probably cheaper. I've seen children playing with discarded needles in parks. It's already easy for children to get hold of "hard drugs" and there are no legal restraints to stop them. The big problem is that it would require world-wide legislation and reform to bring this about.