The “university of crime” effect of socialising prisoners into further offending.

But I do quite agree with this. I think that there are a lot of offenses for which punishments other than prison would be both more productive and more effective. Save the prisons for the most incorrigible and violent.

I think I’m like a lot of people that don’t like prisons and don’t like the current system. But I don’t see a better alternative for the real service prisons provide by keeping the truly dangerous away from the rest of us.

If you have a different solution what is it? If you don’t, than it’s not prison abolition. It’s criminal justice reform.

just my $0.02

This post is about the way the work of having loved ones in prison is women’s work. It only mentions my support of prison abolition in passing. Maybe the post wasn’t very clear on this, I’m feeling my way into this, how to use my experience without claiming to be something I’m not. But I wonder if the work of having someone in prison is just that invisible.

I’m not convinced that the same kind of thing would work outside of a Scandinavian socialist utopia, though. Once you have established a culture of lawlessness (and that’s what we have here in the US, from the President on down), shame and ostracization aren’t really much of a deterrant to crime any more.

“Let’s abolish prison because it’s horrible and unjust.”

“Ok. What about murders?”

Seems like the logical first question to me.

but I’d really like it if every post i wrote about prisons didn’t get distracted with ‘what about the murders’.

Well, if you were writing about prison abolition for only non-violent crime, then I think people wouldn’t bring up violent crime. That’s not what your argument seems to be…

After checking a few of Daran’s posts, I stand corrected and apologize for suspecting him. I should have done that before posting.

I still feel that he is naive in thinking that by removing the threat of punishment by the government you will end up with a society without threat of punishment. And I believe that a government would have to be very oppressive, worse than any in the Western World, to be less desirable than vigilantism.

> Plus I think it’s really hard to troll on a post which argues for prison abolition,
> by arguing for prison abolition.

I disagree. One could speak for prison abolition using inflammatory language or weak arguments, with the objective to provoke other posters into responding. Which I believe matches the most common definition of trolling.

Now, I think that there is a lot wrong with the US prison system, and I would be interested in a discussion of alternatives. But saying “Because few people are deterred by the threat of punishment, leaving the offenders in the community will not necessarily increase the violence in general” is such a weak argument that I felt stupid answering it.

I promise I’ll write about prison abolition - but I’d really like it if every post i wrote about prisons didn’t get distracted with ‘what about the murders’. To me that’s just an excuse to turn away from the reality of prison, by focusing on the few rather than the many I promise to have a post that will talk about the rapists and murders soon.

Speaking for myself, I doubt I would be tempted to steal if there was no threat of
punishment. But I know for a fact that I would not hesitate to beat up a thief,
cripple a mugger, or kill a rapist. Or rearrange the face of one who threatens me.

Frankly, I think you are a troll. If you are not, you are hopelessly naive. It is
enough if one person in a thousand decides that instead of working, he will take
other people’s property. The rest will organize to stop that tenth of a percent.

What do abolitionists propose as the alternative for violent offenders?

All violent offenders would live in the community.

This contrasts with the situation as it is now, where most violent offenders live in the community.

Ignoring secondary effects, this should result in a small increase in the level of violent crime, proportionate to the percent increase from “most” to “all”. Civilization will not collapse.

But secondary effects are significant. One secondary effect often cited is deterrence, but deterrence is only really effective is the punishment is reasonably certain and follows more or less immediately from the offence, something which criminal justice fails to do. Contrary to popular belief, most people refrain from offending, not because they are deterred by the possibility of punishment, but because they are socialised into not offending.

Another secondary effect lies in the other direction: The “university of crime” effect of socialising prisoners into further offending.

There is also the opportunity cost. Money spent on prisons is money that can’t be spent on, say, high quality pre-school education, which is known to significantly reduce offending in later life.

Abolishing prison would eliminate all violent crime and oppression that takes place within prison today. The effect it would have on violence in general isn’t clear. There may be a small increase, but there could just as well be a reduction.