I think with advances in the future, it would be possible to literally control the thoughts of people. We could in principle achieve 0% recidivism without killing the convicted.
Clockwork Orange gave me some pretty good ideas (without the dystopian twist). What are your thoughts on the idea of forcing CSA perpetrators to be reprogrammed in such a way that they would never harm a child again? There is a reason why innocent people like us would never harm a child, and why the perpetrators do such harm. Idea is to identify the causes that lead them to have the willingness to behave in a certain way and forcibly modify their thoughts so the sexual and violent recidivism will be 0%.
Do you believe we should extend this sort of sentencing beyond contact offenses? Such as child pornography related offenses.
Regardless of the perpetrator’s crimes and nature, wouldn’t that be a human rights violation? Don’t get me wrong, I like your idea, and would almost want to implement it in another manner, but what if it was misused or abused? What if people were targeted on even the slightest suspicions? What of those who want to overcome their seemingly raunchy desires, but are labelled and detained without even being given a chance? What would be the rules and regulations behind this system? I’d be dying to know, literally.
They never were able to cure Alex of his thoughts. But we know that we can change people’s actions, and that it doesn’t require any sort of dehumanizing mind control. In fact that could be counterproductive. For example, research has shown that tools like polygraphs (lie detectors) result in worse rehabilitation outcomes, not better. Treating perpetrators or would-be perpetrators begins by recognising that they are human beings and treating them as such.
Alabama punishes offenders with chemical castration. It’s a similar approach. I don’t believe there’s any evidence showing that these drugs decrease recidivism. Some pedophiles benefit from a lower sex drive but it doesn’t remove the emotional attraction to kids.
We won’t have mind-control devices in a long time because decision-making is so complex.
Yeah, I’m not going to start pretending that mind control, torture and genocide are perfectly fine things. These are way off the moral event horizon. It isn’t even worth trying to normalize these things.
I’m not going to justify myself either, as it isn’t worth lowering myself to defending basic human rights and decency. These are the sort of far far right solutions to go way off the mark (and likely don’t do anything, which of course they don’t, they are intrinsically intended to make people suffer.)
I have just challenged your world view that this is okay. It is not okay.
This isn’t a stab on you in particular for ingrained norms and hate, but too often, people like to treat people like distant things they can just manipulate like little lab animals. Zuckerberg has done this with his “emotions” experiments at Facebook.
“Mind control, torture and genocide”, one of those things does not belong. Guess what that is?
Mind control. We are suggesting limited mind and thought control. We are not interested in controlling arbitrary aspects of their personality, just the aspect that makes them an abuser or loose self control. They LGBTI, political, hobby or lackthereof status should be protected from modification, but their lack of sympathy towards those they have harmed must be changed, including the means of forced surgery.
I’m not sympathetic to the autonomy of child rapists’/murderers, serial arsonists/murderers/rapists, and sex traffickers “right” to keep their mind completely intact. If that was of concern, they would never have perpetrated such heinous crimes. I am however very sympathetic to the amount of fucking taxes I have to pay to keep unreformable criminals imprisoned for life, as well as prevention of future victims.
I’m an American citizen, we are the most powerful nation on Earth. If we decide to start experimenting with mind control, there is literally nothing any other nation can do to stop us. And that is the way it should be. Our criminal justice system and prison system is pretty lousy right now, but in the year 2100, we will be the nation with the most rehabilitative CJS in the world because we are willing to experiment with mind and thought control.
Don’t get me wrong; It’s nice to want to make a positive change to a person’s mindset, but forcefully changing one’s mind, whether they are morally sound or not, is almost unsightly in it’s moral ramifications and application. One mind alteration will obviously lead to another, and you keep on going further, and you might just destroy one’s mind entirely. Acting on emotions entirely will only unfurl society’s safety mechanisms. Imagine trying to preach about freedom of speech and all, but secretly tearing apart the personalities of individuals deemed “unsustainable” will paint a different picture; one of a hypocritical nation that severs even the tiniest amount of undesirable traits to create a moral hierarchy which to parade. No nation is immortal, and power should only be exercised by those who know how to use it in both an efficient but ethical manner. This might sound hypocritical of me, but… forget pride, forget “justice”; Creation & destruction are two halves of the same coin. Just don’t apply the labels to where they do not belong.
Being treated like dirt and dehumanised by people like you is what leads to this among many things.
Like most Nazis, you want to make it perfectly acceptable to step on other people, while they enjoy every minute of it. Get out of my sight, you disgust me.
They’re not unreformable. Your country just does everything it can to make the problem worse without trying to improve it to get vindictive vengeance.
Why is it that crimes are much lower in Japan? Germany? Even they aren’t really optimal. They’re far less vindictive and get much better results.
America will not last the next few decades, it is already ripping itself apart.
I agree. When trying to fan the flames of inner wrath and fury, one must take care to not be consumed or engulfed by them. Why would anyone enforce a punishment they wouldn’t ever personally accept? We can come to understand the struggles of others, but we shouldn’t unleash them ourselves. Also, I think criminals could possibly have a use in society; just not an open one. I can explain, if you wish.
That would benefit society immensely. But, a great precaution to take would involve keeping their identities secret, knowing that hostility and loathing would almost surely befall them if they were in the wrong place. I wouldn’t pamper them, but I wouldn’t degrade them either; I need to keep an open mind. Besides, not everything is as it seems.