Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 02:05 UTC

Re: Punishment vs Rehabilitation  

Like some of you said, rehabilitation is better than punishment and reducing the number of reasons for crime (acess to basic need like, water, power, food, entertainment, also having a stress free enviornment) is very important. And above all these, I believe, is to have a good root, meaning education, proper education given by both the system and the parents themselves, and ensuring that all children are treated right and that they are loved and cared for, for that's all a child wants, attention and love.

Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 17:20 UTC

Clearly rehabilitation is the logical option. Punishment is largely more an emotional response - even if it's in the punishee the emotional response is target at. That's not to say it doesn't have a place. It's just something that should concentrate on being productive - to the individual being punished as much as society as a whole - more then being vindictive.

Within the inital stages, it'll be much like current operations by existing nations. There's a specific purpose behind everyone up there. Additionally these people will of been selected - both physcially and psycologically - to represent the minimal possibility of such issues arising. Between this, and my expectations that the laws formed will reflect little tresspass upon anyone that isn't tresspassing against another, then I'd imagine there's unlikely to be much in the way of "illegal action" taking place until a significant bulk of populous is up there. Even when there's a significant population then it should be possible to engineer things to be free of unfilled needs vastly reducing the excuses for "unwanted behaviours".

In both phases of exapnsion quite what should be done about various transgressions should be merited by the transgression itself. Responses should be proportional. Decrompressing someone in the airlock 'cause they've used all the sugar for a three week trip in two days of drinking coffee is possibly a little harsh. Care should be taken in the final structure to avoid conditions where paticipants in legal disputes are able to behave like small children in the back of a car on a long journey. Some sort of tiered system of determining level of harm caused could serve for determining from a selection of responses, after weighing in the merits of the individual case(it's really not a world of entirely black and white. Much grey), for example: minor property damage/loss major property damage/loss minor physical/mental harm to an individual major physical/mental harm to an individual minor physical/mental harm to a group of individuals major physical/mental harm to a group of individuals inaction that could lead to mission failure action that could lead to mission failure inaction that does lead to mission failure action that does lead to mission failure inaction that could lead to loss of life to an individual action that could lead to loss of life to an individual inaction that does lead to the loss of life to an invidual action that does lead to the loss of life of an individual inaction that could lead to the loss of life of a group of individuals action that could lead to the loss of life of a group of individuals inaction that does lead to the loss of life to a group of individuals action that does lead to the loss of life to a group of individuals

This list is by no means complete, or comprehensive. Just an example of a tiered levels of harm that would make it simple to choose from a selection of responses "appropriate" to the teir of harm caused.

In the rare cases that for their own or everyones safety an individual is required total deprivation of freedoms and to be contained in a safe/secured environment, care should be taken to ensure this individual receives treatment that would optimise chances of societal reintergration whilst simultainiously preventing "institutionalisation".

Just as important as determining the "correct" way to handle a problem would be to ensure the administrators and effectors of justice are unable to act out of their own emotional bias. AI could possibly fullfil this role adequetely.

  Updated  on Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 17:21 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time
Reason: typo

Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 19:31 UTC

I agree, if we follow the Swedish people it would be nice. They are going this way, and the results are that they are more likely to close some jails, by lack of prisoners.

I feel concerned about people that cannot be rehabilitated :/

Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 23:45 UTC

Punishment should be on Earth. Asgardia doesn't need a prison, Send them back to earth for their crimes.

Dec 23, 16 / Cap 22, 00 02:51 UTC

Actually, Asdgardia might need a prison....

I'd like to believe that removed of the causes for, then people will have no need to commit crimes - at least in our society. That said, there's always one...

However, isolated detention facilities is something that a lot of countries of Earth are slightly in requirement of - and could potentially provide an income stream to further other projects.

I'd not suggest this actually be part of any other Asgardian facility. Isolated.

Dec 23, 16 / Cap 22, 00 18:22 UTC

The rehabilitation of criminals, such as the way done in Sweden is a subject that I agree on. Here is a link to a better description of Swedish prisons -

  Last edited by:  Christian Sheppard (Asgardian)  on Dec 23, 16 / Cap 22, 00 18:23 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

Dec 25, 16 / Cap 24, 00 02:03 UTC

There may need to be a combination. Are non-citizen visitors allowed? They may not take our philosophies to heart. I think law enforcement may he necessary, unless we could all agree to something like a more involved form of community policing; where, say for example, two men have a heated argument and someone appears to begin to lose control of his emotions. It would be the responsibility of every citizen in the vicinity to get involved to correct or even restrain that person, that is, without the existence of some form of police.

Dec 25, 16 / Cap 24, 00 22:22 UTC

Perhaps we need to look at a form of policing in which there is greater community involvement and integration between citizens and police as mentioned previously, as well as fairness in how rewards and costs in the nation are shared by citizens and actively avoiding social alienation. That could possibly do much to prevent crime in the first place. In so far as punishment versus rehabilitation are concerned I see no rational reason to utilise a penal system.Within rehabilitation I find restorative justice an interesting approach, having the victims and the offenders mediate a restitution agreement to the satisfaction of each, while involving the community.

Dec 26, 16 / Cap 25, 00 19:54 UTC

I would suggest reading L.Ron Hubbard, Introduction to scientology ethics. Or simply applying their criminon rehabilitation methods.

Dec 27, 16 / Cap 26, 00 08:36 UTC

Reeducation. In isolation. All needs ment. No human contact. Translation back to society. Based on time. Adds/subtracts time based on behavior. Monitored 24/7. Access to news feeds and entertainment. Training facilities. Robotic staff. On space station.

Just an idea

Dec 30, 16 / Cap 29, 00 01:27 UTC

There are two schools of thought at work with this argument, as seen in previous comments. The Liberal vs. Conservative approach (I'm not talking about political liberal or conservative, that is an entirely different arena) to criminal justice. The Liberal approach believes that rehabilitation is the best way to prevent crime (statistics back this up) and imprisonment should only be for those who have repeated offenses after rehabilitation. However, everyone takes rehabilitation differently, there is no guarantee it will work for everyone and require more resources. The Conservative approach is not favorable to rehabilitation; it prefers fines and short imprisonments over rehabilitation. This is proven to be more systematically efficient but overlooks the offender, and the adverse effects incarceration has on them.

A factor we should consider when crafting our justice system is how much resources we are willing to put in it, and that determines how which approach we take to punishments.

For example, my county adopts a Liberal Approach to misdemeanor offenses and some other forms of more severe crimes. However, county and city budget cuts have forced the Courthouse, therefore our local justice system, to scale back the number of rehabilitation programs and number of offenders that can undergo the programs. If more money was allotted for those programs, more of those programs could be offered, and more offenders could undergo those programs instead of going to jail.

Dec 30, 16 / Cap 29, 00 16:52 UTC

I believe to be successful we'll need a hybrid system comprising of both rehabilitation practices and punishment practices though. The system should heavily favor rehabilitation over punishment however. Punishment should be seen as a last resort, when all other rehabilitative options have been exhausted and a citizen is still being problematic.

The criminal justice system in Asgardia in general needs to be approached from many several angles.

Prevention. Most would agree that most crimes stem from issues such as a lack of resources or mental health issues yes? So we would need to make sure that everyone has their needs met. That everyone has sufficient food, water, basic living supplies. Maybe a basic income for all adult citizens. All in equality too. We must all be living in one class. No upperclass or lower class. No preferential treatments towards any group for any reason, including members of the Asgardian government. On the other hand, we will need a comprehensive and fully modern mental health care system, one that approaches all forms of mental health issues as legitimate diseases of the human mind. Should there be existence of citizens dealing with drug/chemical addictions, that needs to be seen and treated equally as a mental health issue rather than demonizing the person and labelling them as low lives. There will come a difficult question though that needs to answered, and that's what do we do with those who have such significant mental health diseases that they cannot peacefully live within the society? Tough because it is no choice of their own, but how can we allow these people to coexist within our community knowing that there's nothing that can be done to heal or rehabilitate them? It may be necessary to have a section for such potential individuals to live in Asgardia while removed from the community. We would need to ensure their safety however and that they are provided the best possible living conditions.

Education. This one is important. We will need a very extensive and comprehensive education system that starts young. This ties into prevention as well. Educate and prevent.

Rehabilitation. For those who commit crimes, like I said, the main focus should be in rehabilitation so the person does not repeat their crimes. Find out what drove the person to said crime and find out what can be done to prevent it from happening again. Like others have mentioned, Sweden is a good example that this system works.

Punishment. It would be foolish to say that everyone and all issues can be resolved with rehabilitation. In the event that all rehabilitative efforts have been exhausted and a person is still a significant reason for concern, then we need a penal system. This could be some form of jailing system. Or perhaps just banishment from the community/colony/space station all together. If we've done everything we can to turn someone back into a productive member of society, and there's just no way they can peacefully coexist with everyone else, why should we keep them in our community and provide what is surely to be limited resources for them? If it's not an issue of severe mental health where they have no control over their actions, then banish them. Send them back to earth. I don't believe we should adopt capital punishment. Banishment should also be a consideration for those who have committed truly horrendous crimes. At the same time, the decision to banish someone can not be left to one single person. There would need to be some sort of panel of peers, akin to a jury in the US, or even a colony wide vote on the matter. With the advancement of technology, it shouldn't be difficult at all to get every to quickly and securely put a vote in.

One other aspect I think about is actual law enforcement. I don't believe law enforcement personnel should have any sort of lethal weapons. They should all be trained in de-escalation techniques, rather than forceful techniques, when in confrontational situations with alleged criminals. If that doesn't work, I saw someone mention earlier that they should be trained in martial arts and perhaps with technological advances there will be better non lethal weapon options that can be used. I think law enforcement also needs to be much more Integrated within the community. A law enforcement official should be seen as a friend, as an equal member of the society rather than an authoritative figure who should be feared.

Jan 7, 17 / Aqu 07, 01 02:49 UTC

  1. Rehabilitation? Yes. If is not successful then other medical techniques should be applied, where the hospitalization is the last option. During all process, including during hospitalization, individual need to contribute to society more than society provide to him/her (if that is possible from health aspects of individual). Safety should be imperative, we need prevent that accident and/or crimes happened during any activity of that individual.

  2. No jail? Yes. We do not need jails, there are other options that can secure working condition of that individual.

  3. No death punishment? Yes. No matter what crime is done, right to live need to be protected.

  4. Punishment equal as intentional crime was done multiplied by x times? Yes.

  5. Punishment when accident crime was done? Yes.

A) If “safety rule” is intentionally broken and did lead to accidental crime then that crime should be seen as intentional crime from 4. (example speed limits of car driving).

B) If intentional crime was done by minor then punish need to be according to 4 no matter is that individual minor. Parents of minor that did do crime should be responsible, and punished, according to 5.

If accidental crime was done by minor then only rehabilitation without punishment is needed. Parents should be responsible, and punished, according to 4 (if they could prevent that accident happened) or 5 (if they could not prevent that accident happened).

Explanation: Parents need by example teach children how to respect all rights and freedoms protected by the constitution. Parents need to ask for official help if they see that it is needed. Parents need secure all so child cannot by accident commit crime against others nor hurt self. Parents need to be educated how to be parent if they think that is needed.

C) At first as crime I see (1) breaking the Constitution when one or more rights and/or freedoms of one or more individuals was taken away by one or more individuals (2) “not prevent” that possible accident happened and by that choosing to not prevent that the Constitution be broken by others (3) not provide information to person that is capable to prevent accident that did know that information. etc ...

Rights and freedoms protected by the Constitution should be unconditionally respected by every Asgardian and we should teach our children to respect differences between us no matter on what ground they exist.

Is 4 contradict to 3 if individual did commit intentional crime and by that did take away life of one or more individuals?

I think it is not. By law we can define punish that will take all freedoms away and leave just duties, something as "lost to be seen as citizen by law".

Many did suggest option that this person should lost citizenship. We cannot do that, since is not allowed to create no-state individuals by international law. And our law should be applied same way on all including the one that have only Asgardian citizenship as well the one that have two or more citizenships.

But I think we can, and we should, define that person as the one that did lost all rights and freedoms that are given to the citizen and / or visitor.

  Last edited by:  Tomislava Lovakovic (Asgardian)  on Jan 7, 17 / Aqu 07, 01 03:52 UTC, Total number of edits: 11 times

Jan 9, 17 / Aqu 09, 01 18:44 UTC

First of all, there must be a fair judicial system. Taking the United States as just one example (only because I currently reside there), it seems that if one person has sufficient resources/influence he or she could commit just about any crime in the middle of any major intersection in any major city and be found not-guilty or given a slap on the wrist. Likewise, a person of lesser means, could figuratively drop a cigarette butt on the pavement and be slam dunked in the judicial system and forgotten about.

As Asgardians, before we start talking about crime and punishment/rehabilitation, we must insure that justice is truly blind and does not favor one class (wealth, political, status, etc) over the other.

Jan 10, 17 / Aqu 10, 01 02:43 UTC

You don't even need to drop a ciggie. All they gotta do is shout "terrorist" loud enough and you're in gitmo. Doesn't even need evidence.

IMHO the only way to assure a lack of bias is to remove the human component. AI can do the job pretty well already - look at Dr. Watson in human rights cases. I don't think humans should be removed entirely. But AI can be used to handle most of the cases, appeals of the AI descision should be handled by humans for sure.