Our near neighbour has the death penalty, but lets face it how on the ball are they? 3 years jail for blowing innocent people up in the name of religion, and 20 years jail for a bag of weed (admittedly it was a large bag). Now I see the folks described as "convicted drug smuggler Schapelle Corby", but on the other hand "Drug mule Scott Rush". The fact remains, if the pot got through it would be no real problem but if the heroin got through several people would die. Just make them take their own product, and the responsibility is their own once more.

@Bugsy, good response. Thanks.

“I do not live in fear of error, and have not used this in my argument. That is your presumption. I don't like what the death penalty does to societies and the attitudes to crime it fosters in people that have it. “

Didn’t you say you were concerned about a wrongful conviction? Isn’t that error?

What is it that the death penalty “fosters” within societies? What attitudes are developed?

“One of the major arguments for the death penalty is precisely that it acts as a deterrent, although I am sceptical of that and you openly admit that you also think that it is not meant to be.”

Yes, it’s a misconception that I believe has been used in a political context as an over-simplified argument for the masses. An interesting stat…at the time that Howard revoked our ability to possess fire-arms, introducing stringent gun laws, would you like to take a quick guess as to what weapon was responsible for 60% of the murders in Oz? Ponder a minute…I’ll give you the answer…the Wiltshire Stay-Sharp Knife. Statistically, it should have been those knives that were banned, not guns…but I’m being facetious. The point is, it demonstrates that certainly 60% of the murders committed were crimes of passion…on-the-spot decisions. They were not planned or pre-meditated, but spontaneous. No thought about consequences or deterrents have even had time to enter the person’s head. Much of the crime that is committed is without thought, and more often than not, an emotional response to some perceived aggravation.

So prison is not a deterrent, but a consequence of actions, whether considered or not. As demonstrated, many decisions are not considered, but are made in the heat of the moment. As I suggested, neither is the death penalty a deterrent. The death penalty is a consequence for heinous actions, to permanently remove a problem from society. Let’s call it what it is. I’m no fan of political correctness, in fact, I detest it.

TBC...

But if I was a politician saying what I am, how much support would I receive? A few fringe-dwellers and rednecks, probably. So we concoct titles like Corrective Services, rather than Dungeons Incorporated. We don’t like to call it what it is, we like to dress it up (admittedly, I dressed it down). I’m not disabled, I’m gifted, or I’m special. It’s positive spin. We don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings…well, no-one that might vote for us, anyway. We use words that people want to hear. “Prison” says what it is,,,confinement in cells. How can that possibly connote “corrective” in any other way than, “that’ll fix ‘em for doing it!” As if confining someone in a cell can have any rehabilitative effect. But we call the same thing Corrective Services, and it must be so, for the name suggests it.

“The argument about deterring "honest people" is exceptionally weak.”

Not at all. Ask anyone that works in security. Door locks are predominately a joke, and do nothing to protect the home from a professional thief. Only amateurs and the average person. Put it this way, if you live in a conventional home with tiles on the roof, why would I use the door to gain entry? There’s absolutely nothing to prevent me coming in through the roof in most houses. Depending upon what it is I’m stealing, will determine the exit. And most alarms are nothing but toys to the professional thief. BTW, I’m not a thief, but in my profession, sometimes mix with bad company.:-)

“If prisons are not for rehabilitation, then why do they try and engage in rehabilitation?”

And what might that rehabilitation be? And before you answer, let me tell you that I work in mental health, and have worked in the prison system. So please elucidate. Let me also tell you that it was only 10 years ago that the first psychologist was employed by the juvenile justice system to work full-time in one of their centres in Sydney. Otherwise, it was, and still is, basically nothing but a holding area.

TBC...

There’s no programs of any substance occurring, and the ones that are, are limited and basically only with those detainees that will co-operate…very few.

The mental health staff there, are there only to assess potential self-harm/suicide risks, other psychiatric symptoms, and administer medications. They don’t run programs. They ensure relative stability.

“If they are not correctional facilities, where we at least attempt to study and to change the ways of the criminally minded, why have them at all? You seem to have (rather flippantly in my opinion) made up your mind as to the nature of correctional facilities, although the debate has been ongoing for hundreds of years and still continues.”

Flippant…I can see how you perceive that. I’m more crusty than flippant. After 30 years in my industry, I’m entitled to be jaded and cynical, and am usually quite strongly opinionated. Of course, that doesn’t make me necessarily right, but I’m just letting you know what I’m like.

“Correctional facilities”...are by name and not by function. It sounds nicer than Dept. of Prisons. Just like “madness” used to be an official term, today is an insult. We change euphemisms to represent departments. DOCs is a wonderful example of this…it’s first incantation was Youth And Community Services (YACS), but its name became synonymous with incompetence, so they changed their name, but not the management, to Family And Community Services (FACS), but retained their reputation, so changed again to Department of Community Services (DOCS) which then spawned Department of Aged, Disabilities & Health Care (DADHC), which has recently changed again to just ADHC. In 25 years they’ve had more names than average spy, and are even more incompetent than they were 25 years ago, but now the incompetence is systemic. But that’s another story.

My moniker of MindlessCruelty is chosen on the basis of what bureaucracies are to mental health…mindless cruelty. DOCS, ADAHC and Corrective Services would be amongst that lot.

TBC...

“I agree they are not hospitals for the mentally ill, even though they are increasingly being used as such in the US, such is the woeful state of their health care system.”

Welcome to Australia. We’re already headed well down that path. We already use an American company for the detention centres used for asylum seekers and boat-people. I know as I applied for a job at one...the contract they sent out was something you would have to see to believe, which is why I didn’t go, but it was with an American company. There was recently a tender by an American company to take-over our prisons in NSW. They’re just working out how to sell the privatisation of the prison system to the public, I suppose. But I was receiving e-mails from friends working in a jail about a petition against this very thing.

As far as studying the criminal mind…there’s more than plenty to go around, and for the very few that would face the death penalty, with the legal system and appeals, insanity pleas et al, there’s more than enough time in most cases. It’s not often that you strike something really NEW. The surprises are to the uninitiated, but after about 10 years or so, you don’t see too much that’s new.

“how do you ensure that the goalposts stay where they are?”

We can’t, nor should we. Societies change over time, as do attitudes towards many human activities. We had the death penalty, and now we don’t. We had a social shift in attitude. The time may come where we shift again…it only takes an event that outrages the community enough for them to demand its return, or a charismatic politician to push the point. In that sense, society is fickle, but that’s human nature and the nature of collectives. So I don’t believe it should be a concern for us, unless of course individually we feel strongly enough and decide to agitate for a change in policy. My agitation is not THAT strong. I just have an opinion that differs from current trend.

MindlessCruelty, you do realise that everything 'said' here is all written down and you can actually go back and check who said what?

I did not say I was concerned about a wrongful conviction. I don't know where you got that from. This is at least the second time that you have repeated the same mistake even after I corrected you. Never mind. Next time eh?

I say the argument about deterring 'honest' people is weak, because 'honest' people generally do not need deterring.

If prisons are nothing but a holding area, no deterrent and no rehabilitation, then why do we have them? To make 'honest' people feel safer, even though this must be an illusion? All your complaint about the current and previous state of the prison system is legitimate, however you do not give an alternative, except death for the bad murderers of course. I get the sense that you think that the prisons do nothing, quite likely so, but that maybe they could do something? Or is there no hope that the prison system could be even marginally effective at any stage?

This is still beside my other point in that supporting the death penalty greatly weakens our position when arguing against it to countries that use for what we consider relatively minor offences.

But I take your point, my agitation to mainatin teh status quo is not very active either, because it's the status quo and not likely to change any time soon, at least for Australia, which is just the way I like it.