Americans discover Norwegian prison systems - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;36080631]Congratulations failing debate 101.[/QUOTE] Welcome to life, though be warned, it doesn't follow debating formalism. If you want to articulate something constructive, how about the citizen/noncitizen distinction as it relates to the provision of welfare? Why should those who engage in verboten activities be treated better than the 'law-abiding' based (predominately) on the lottery of location of birth?

[QUOTE=scout1;36080650]It's a rhetorical statement to bring up a point. The point is why is it even on trial? If it turns out to work, will you advance it through the prison system? All prisoners (or even just some) prisoners get access to this stuff because it'll help the re-integrate to society? What then? Better living conditions in your prisons then in your streets? People killing people for government sanctioned food and welfare?[/QUOTE]Yeah uh, we don't really have a lot of people who live on the street, considering we've got a proper welfare system so you don't have to kill someone to get food. Also helps people to get a job.

[QUOTE=Electrocuter;36080071]And this is what other countries should strive to do. A prison's objective isn't to deal punishment to criminals, it's to reintegrate them into society.[/QUOTE] Aye; it's something i've said should be done for ages. A prison shouldn't be a place of punishment, it should be a place of healing; a hospital for the mind. The only real flaw in this is that right now we probably don't have the resources and technology to fix minds like we can fix bodies, not to mention the moral implications of being to significantly alter the minds of men, and the sci-fi terrors that could arise from abuse of the technology. That's only for cases otherwise deemed "unfixable", though; some people can change on their own without any high-tech Resoc, and sometimes some laws are just so retarded that otherwise good individuals get done for petty offenses like growing weed or unintentionally pissing off a bad apple cop or simply having different political stances (looking at you China; don't you even try to research Resoc).

[QUOTE=scout1;36080650]It's a rhetorical statement to bring up a point. The point is why is it even on trial? If it turns out to work, will you advance it through the prison system? All prisoners (or even just some) prisoners get access to this stuff because it'll help the re-integrate to society? What then? Better living conditions in your prisons then in your streets? People killing people for government sanctioned food and welfare?[/QUOTE] *sigh* The Nordic model stresses the role of the state in provisioning welfare. There would be no point having an effective rehabilitative prison system if similar social welfare structure did not exist on the 'street' level. This indicated by their low return-to-prison stats.

[QUOTE=Bobie;36080704]find me a credible source that would imply (statistically) a trend of prisoners being admitted for extremely serious crimes because they wanted a slightly better lifestyle (in norway specifically), and ill personally buy a plane ticket to wherever you live, come to your house and admit to being your bitch forever in time[/QUOTE] I can cite men doing it for lesser reasons, but can't do it for things such as murder because this terrible system isn't implemented yet For example see "The Cop and the Anthem" which is an older tale born of the culture of the day which illustrates this problem perfectly here is something I'd like to point out from the article by the way [quote]Some of the 115 prisoners here -- all men and serving time for murder, rape and trafficking heroin, among other crimes[/quote]

I would have no problem with this if it weren't for the fact that many law abiding people live in poverty. I agree that this system seems to work better at keeping re-offending rates down but the thought of a murderer sunbathing and living in a little painted cottage whilst there are perfectly good people stuck on the streets doesn't sit well with me. But I also know that life isn't fair and poverty isn't going to be going away any time soon.

[QUOTE=ironman17;36080744] The only real flaw in this is that right now we probably don't have the resources and technology to fix minds like we can fix bodies, not to mention the moral implications of being to significantly alter the minds of men, and the sci-fi terrors that could arise from abuse of the technology.[/QUOTE] That is not true. We have always had such tools, but they are as messy as people and lack specificity. Language-culture is a better big 'fixer'

[QUOTE=scout1;36080763]I can cite men doing it for lesser reasons, but can't do it for things such as murder because this terrible system isn't implemented yet For example see "The Cop and the Anthem" which is an older tale born of the culture of the day which illustrates this problem perfectly here is something I'd like to point out from the article by the way[/QUOTE] i asked you to cite me a source and you gave me an irrelevant quote from the article, accompanied with a short story from 1904. you're not serious. this debate is over

[QUOTE=scout1;36080763]I can cite men doing it for lesser reasons, but can't do it for things such as murder because this terrible system isn't implemented yet For example see "The Cop and the Anthem" which is an older tale born of the culture of the day which illustrates this problem perfectly here is something I'd like to point out from the article by the way[/QUOTE] Please cite men doing it for lesser reasons. That is the United States. You note that culture is relevant, yet fail to mention that such a thing is entirely culturally/structurally dependent. It is also a narrative story, which isn't generally considered the most persuasive form of evidence (though, still and important one).

Even if they have spent their time in prison, I doubt anyone would hire a murderer. There's welfare though but it only gets you enough money to live poor.

[QUOTE=scout1;36080650]It's a rhetorical statement to bring up a point. The point is why is it even on trial? If it turns out to work, will you advance it through the prison system? All prisoners (or even just some) prisoners get access to this stuff because it'll help the re-integrate to society? What then? Better living conditions in your prisons then in your streets? People killing people for government sanctioned food and welfare?[/QUOTE] Go back and check the parts where the prisoners preferred being outside of jail regardless of the luxuries.

Norway. Manly seafaring bearded badasses in the past, awesomely progressive paradise in the present. Why couldn't I be born Norwegian? Then I could probably grow a decent beard.

[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;36080965]Go back and check the parts where the prisoners preferred being outside of jail regardless of the luxuries.[/QUOTE] people don't seem to get that no matter how "great" it is to live in prison, luxury wise, the time spent there is something you'll never get back.

[QUOTE=Contag;36080710]Welcome to life, though be warned, it doesn't follow debating formalism. If you want to articulate something constructive, how about the citizen/noncitizen distinction as it relates to the provision of welfare? Why should those who engage in verboten activities be treated better than the 'law-abiding' based (predominately) on the lottery of location of birth?[/QUOTE] So, because there are more pressing issues to debate about, it's fair game to be an idiot about other issues? And the point isn't that the prisoners deserve better lives, it's about doing it to maximize productivity. that's why welfare exists, unemployed people do nothing to deserve the money you give them but you give them because it's better than letting everyone die of hunger.

[QUOTE=scout1;36080393]Why's that, hrm?[/QUOTE] Drive down to the store or visit your parents. There's your advantage over them. You have freedom, they do not.

[QUOTE=Bomimo;36080607]Stop yourself before i climb through your monitor.... Are you sure you can sustain manual breathing functions with this kind of mental activity level?[/QUOTE] lol implying breathing is manual like clenching your fist.

[QUOTE=Gears of duty;36080907]Even if they have spent their time in prison, I doubt anyone would hire a murderer. There's welfare though but it only gets you enough money to live poor.[/QUOTE] Construction sites etc. don't really care about such as long as you do your work. Also, I bet you all know that feeling when somebody's angry at you and when someone's disappointed for you. The latter makes you feel much worse, I guess that is part of the concept of the Norwegian prison system.

[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;36080990]So, because there are more pressing issues to debate about, it's fair game to be an idiot about other issues? And the point isn't that the prisoners deserve better lives, it's about doing it to maximize productivity. that's why welfare exists, [b]unemployed people do nothing to deserve the money you give them[/b] but you give them because it's better than letting everyone die of hunger.[/QUOTE] everyone on fp is a fan of generalisation eh

[QUOTE=Bat-shit;36081017]lol implying breathing is manual like clenching your fist.[/QUOTE] It is. it's controlled by your brain, the irrational part, but it needs brain power to happen.

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;36080597]Excellent read and very thought provoking. Thanks OP[/QUOTE] You're welcome!

[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;36080990]So, because there are more pressing issues to debate about, it's fair game to be an idiot about other issues? [/quote] I don't follow? [quote]And the point isn't that the prisoners deserve better lives, it's about doing it to maximize productivity. That's why welfare exists, unemployed people do nothing to deserve the money you give them but you give them because it's better than letting everyone die of hunger.[/QUOTE] I find it laughable that you seem to know the (sole) 'reason why welfare exists' as opposed to a number of diverse considerations. The prevalent discourse on Nordic welfare is not to maximize productivity, but to maximize happiness. That happy people are productive people is a nice little benefit. [quote]The goal, Nilsen said, is to create an environment where people can build self-esteem and reform their lives.[/quote] Of course, you betrayed your ideological position very plainly by constructing unemployed people as undeserving of money and someone to give money to (as opposed to sharing in wealth). Perhaps they are deserving because they are human? Perhaps conceptions of 'deserving' do not even enter into the debate. A critical marxist analysis would have a fair amount of fun with that. Note that this is should only serve as a starter to critically digest your own views, I don't care for an actual debate.

[QUOTE=scout1;36080266]I'm pissed because those prisoners live a lot better than me as a law-abiding citizen.[/QUOTE] They don't have freedom, you do

[QUOTE=Socram;36080231]While this system would definitely be optimal, it just isn't feasible with our current incarceration rates. The u.s. leads (of course) with 730 incarcerations per 100,000 people, while Norway is ranked 170th with 73 per 100,000, a 10th of that of the u.s. In my opinion the U.S. should focus on reducing the number of pointless sentences first so the real criminals can get the treatment they need (like they do in Norway).[/QUOTE] This is true. Pointless sentences and laws are some of the reasons why our incarceration rate is so high. And then there's the ever growing threat of privatized prisons (an idea which I am certain everyone here will agree is absolutely retarded) we need to address urgently before it spreads any further. Incidentally, does anyone here actually know how much Norway's penal system costs the state each year? Looking around, I can't seem to find a straight answer. I've found figures for how much the actual individual prisons originally cost to build, but not much else.

[QUOTE=Contag;36081154]I don't follow? I find it laughable that you seem to know the (sole) 'reason why welfare exists' as opposed to a number of diverse considerations. The prevalent discourse on Nordic welfare is not to maximize productivity, but to maximize happiness. That happy people are productive people is a nice little benefit. Of course, you betrayed your ideological position very plainly by constructing unemployed people as undeserving of money and someone to give money to (as opposed to sharing in wealth). Perhaps they are deserving because they are human? Perhaps conceptions of 'deserving' do not even enter into the debate. A critical marxist analysis would have a fair amount of fun with that. Note that this is should only serve as a starter to critically digest your own views, I don't care for an actual debate.[/QUOTE] For the first part, I misread your post, I thought you were talking about other issues. Define productivity as you wish. And there is a sole reason for anything. Because it's better than not doing it, all I did was identify one of the consequences of not having it, which alone is enough to make my point. And for someone so verbose, you seem to have little knowledge of ad absurdum attacks. The argument I was attacking stated that it was wrong for prisoners to get more luxuries than lawful people because lawful people deserved it more. I simply turned it around to say that, according to it, it was wrong for people who did not work to receive more welfare than people who did, because they didn't deserve it as much. And I can say this because the definition of "deserving" I was working with implied doing beneficial work in return. Unemployed people did not do as much beneficial work to the country than working people did, much like inmates and lawful people. Believe it or not, I share the idea that the concept of deserving is ridiculous and empty

I can't feel sorry for a murderer, and it churns my stomach that he will walk the streets again, it is not just. It doesn't matter how many cows you deliver or potatoes you plant. Anyone who sympathizes with them probably never had someone close die by the hands of another person. Nevertheless, for most things like fraud, drugs, and other stuff like that, I can sympathize with. Jails like these need to be more prevalent than the shitholes in America. The rate of re-offending speaks for itself I guess.

[QUOTE=Socram;36080231]While this system would definitely be optimal, it just isn't feasible with our current incarceration rates. The u.s. leads (of course) with 730 incarcerations per 100,000 people, while Norway is ranked 170th with 73 per 100,000, a 10th of that of the u.s. In my opinion the U.S. should focus on reducing the number of pointless sentences first so the real criminals can get the treatment they need (like they do in Norway).[/QUOTE] Maybe it's because the system of Norway keeps incarcerations down? [editline]24th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. N;36081368]I can't feel sorry for a murderer, and it churns my stomach that he will walk the streets again, it is not just. It doesn't matter how many cows you deliver or potatoes you plant. Anyone who sympathizes with them probably never had someone close die by the hands of another person. Nevertheless, for most things like fraud, drugs, and other stuff like that, I can sympathize with. Jails like these need to be more prevalent than the shitholes in America. The rate of re-offending speaks for itself I guess.[/QUOTE] Congrats, you just got nothing out of the OP, the thread or any logical thinking about human interaction and it's consequences.

nice to see everyone forgets about the victims of the crime.

[QUOTE=Bobie;36080792]i asked you to cite me a source and you gave me an irrelevant quote from the article, accompanied with a short story from 1904. you're not serious. this debate is over[/QUOTE] I pointed out that this system is intended for the worst offenders, and the short was a lot easier than [URL="http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/12277990-418/hungry-homeless-man-gets-arrested-on-purpose.html"]finding a relevant article[/URL]. It doesn't get a lot if any media attention, despite being a widespread problem.

[QUOTE=Killuah;36081416]Maybe it's because the system of Norway keeps incarcerations down? [editline]24th May 2012[/editline] Congrats, you just got nothing out of the OP, the thread or any logical thinking about human interaction and it's consequences.[/QUOTE] How did you arrive at that conclusion? I am not interested the debate going on I guess, yeah, I read the article and posted my view after a quick skim of the general consensus here. I just can't feel sorry for that Vala guy, while a bit of this thread is "Aww how cute he pets cows" despite how he ended the life of a young girl. Does he deserve a nice place? Sure. Should he walk the streets? In my opinion, I'd find it abhorrent.

[QUOTE=scout1;36081493]I pointed out that this system is intended for the worst offenders, and the short was a lot easier than [URL="http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/12277990-418/hungry-homeless-man-gets-arrested-on-purpose.html"]finding a relevant article[/URL]. It doesn't get a lot if any media attention, despite being a widespread problem.[/QUOTE] wow. this is an isolated article from the US (of all places, did you even read my posts?) please, just give up and think [i]logically[/i] for a second. put your pride past yourself and open your mind to the facts. the statistics from the OP alone overpower anything you've shown me so far (and everything you've shown me so far has been a load of shit)