Proposals for a future justice system that might allow us to achieve a 0% recidivism

[smityx]

Execution of any convicted person would achieve 0% recidivism.

[Endus]

As before, this is just Mengele-style horrorshow stuff.

The suggestion is worse than the problem it's supposed to fix.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Honestly I will have ZERO mercy on anyone CONVICTED of a heinous crime and refused the brainwashing. If in the future, correctional officers decide to beat and torture a convicted pedophile as a means to obtain consent, so be it, hell I may even partake in the activity if it became legal for civilians to participate, and I can think of many creative methods to force a consent from such evil subhuman individuals. I am absolutely NOT interested in giving compassion to those I deem as monsters who REFUSE to change.

Give the child rapist pedo two options:

1) Mental reprogramming

2) A pool of blood and a corpse on the floor from a failed attempt to gain consent leading to being tortured to death. And yes, I would love to participate in the process of obtaining the consent from the subhuman. The idea of torturing to death a 40 year old convicted kidnapped and raped a 6 year old fascinates me. I am very serious when I say IF it ever became legal to do so, I WILL. I WILL participate in making my country safer. Mental reprogramming, brainwashing should be tools for this. The very thought of torturing this monster to death as punishment for refusal of the brainwashing excites me.

It kinda sounds like your a prime target to test this stuff on if it ever did become a thing you sound pretty subhuman your self.

[Mythic-RaidLead]

As before, this is just Mengele-style horrorshow stuff.

The suggestion is worse than the problem it's supposed to fix.

The advancement of the human species requires experimentation. The problem; Recidivism, and people who know they have a problem who have not offended yet and want to be improved is a far bigger problem than testing it on the worst of the worst first to see what happens.

- - - Updated - - -

It kinda sounds like your a prime target to test this stuff on if it ever did become a thing you sound pretty subhuman your self.

Well, this is how most people think. I am not interested in political correctness. I will tell it as it is.

[Endus]

The advancement of the human species requires experimentation.

You could be quoting Josef Mengele, here.

Spare me your advocacy for the recreation of Nazi crimes against humanity.

The problem; Recidivism, and people who know they have a problem who have not offended yet and want to be improved is a far bigger problem than testing it on the worst of the worst first to see what happens.

You've already been handed the data which proves your desire to step up punishments will tend to increase recidivism, and that reduced sentences and rehabilitation are what actually lower recidivism rates.

You refused to consider the facts, because you determined that your irrational and baseless feelings on the matter were more important.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Well, this is how most people think. I am not interested in political correctness. I will tell it as it is.

No it’s not youd have to be deluded to the extreme to think most people think like that. There is a reason society has moved away from things like public execution and it wouldn’t have if most people thought like that.

You share a lot more in common with the people you want to reprogram then the average person.

[PC2]

The advancement of the human species requires experimentation. The problem; Recidivism, and people who know they have a problem who have not offended yet and want to be improved is a far bigger problem than testing it on the worst of the worst first to see what happens.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, this is how most people think. I am not interested in political correctness. I will tell it as it is.

Dude we can't experiment on people without permission, at least not in 99.9% of cases. You can't be a 'means justify the ends' utilitarian because how you get from point A to point B matters. The way in which you solve a problem is just as important as ultimately arriving at the solution.

[Moadar]

Execution of any convicted person would achieve 0% recidivism.

Ya I was about to say the dead cant reoffend.

[Ticj]

Jesus, I'd rather us just execute those criminals than do this brain reprogramming shit.

This idea of yours is extremely unethical.

[Polyxo]

If we're gonna invent the Matrix, it will be used for fucking first.

[lagiacrux]

I suppose that depends on what constitutes as killing somebody. Their body and mind are still very much alive and capable of producing a new personality.

that is a philosphical question and tbh, im not very versed in that topic.

but if you would "remove" the everything that makes you you (memories, etc), it would still be your body, but it wouldnt be "you" anymore. its just a new person living in your body. i would categorize that as "killing".

2) A pool of blood and a corpse on the floor from a failed attempt to gain consent leading to being tortured to death. And yes, I would love to participate in the process of obtaining the consent from the subhuman. The idea of torturing to death a 40 year old convicted kidnapped and raped a 6 year old fascinates me. I am very serious when I say IF it ever became legal to do so, I WILL. I WILL participate in making my country safer. Mental reprogramming, brainwashing should be tools for this. The very thought of torturing this monster to death as punishment for refusal of the brainwashing excites me.

how is this not bannable? talk like this would probably get you institutionalized very quickly.

[Mythic-RaidLead]

that is a philosphical question and tbh, im not very versed in that topic.

but if you would "remove" the everything that makes you you (memories, etc), it would still be your body, but it wouldnt be "you" anymore. its just a new person living in your body. i would categorize that as "killing".

If we are just changing the thing that makes you willing to rape, murder, assault, you are still you. And this modification should be mandatory and done through force. Modifying anything else beyond, ie political opinions, gender identity, etc would be excessive use and should not be permitted.

how is this not bannable? talk like this would probably get you institutionalized very quickly.

Luckily, we only institutionalize those who commit crimes in my state. That means the mentally insane who commit crimes, as well as minors who are better served in an mental institution.

- - - Updated - - -

When I read up stories about people torturing and killing trans people, my inclination is "lets also reprogram them to be trans to see how they like it", but than I realize that would probably be unethical and would serve no real purpose. I believe in just reprogramming out the willingness to commit murder through force medical procedures, or maybe manipulated form of consent. Like a good beating to get them to finally give in.

[Teleros]

We want a world that is extremely safe from violence.

A well armed citizenry, nation-states rather than multi-national empires, and an end to endless foreign adventures.

But sadly for whatever reason we have high recidivism rates in my country (United States), we tried making the prison conditions harsher and longer sentencing but our recidivism rates for whatever reason are still high.

Mandatory executions for any and all crimes then?

Basically we want to forcibly reprogram the worst criminals in such a way that they can never ever re-offend. We want this program to be an addition to their prison sentence. And some kind of regulation to keep forcible reprogramming limited to only those convicted of these crimes: Murder (both second and first degree, Rape, Grievous Assault, Torture). Someone driving 120 MPH in an 80 area would not qualify. We are only interested in enacting this extreme form of rehabilitation on monsterous people.

"Ve vill only use our powers for ze good ov ze peepul, ov course! Ve vould never - never - abuse our power, or broaden the scope of these new laws, or do anything like zat. Alzough, ve might vant to use zees technology to teach ze next generation how to be good citizens, jah?"

Proof once more that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and that once again, half the planet has no conception of either the law of unintended consequences, or the evil lurking in the hearts of men.

I do wonder, if we ever get to the point in technology that we can literally alter thinking patterns of a person

What do you think happens when you get drunk?

Okay, more seriously, this is a rather complicated issue because of the so-called problem of consciousness. See, if the radical materialists are right and humans are just meat robots with a fleshy computer running things, then it is indeed possible, at least in principle, to reprogram a mind like you would a computer. However, if our minds are immaterial, then simply put you're not going to be able to do this. It might be possible to make something like Sword Art Online by interfering with the parts of the brain linked to the sense organs, muscles etc, but that's "merely" a case of inducing very specific hallucinations or illusions and so on rather than reprogramming someone.

Anyway, go look up the issues surrounding material vs immaterial intellects and so on, because it's a pretty interesting philosophical rabbit hole.

I'm pretty baffled that so little has been talked about for this idea.

Because the technology isn't there yet. Sci-fi authors have used it for a long time though, and there was of course the good old MKULTRA program which tried this using drugs and so on.

It's humane and does not violate human rights

Except for the whole freedom of thought thing. If murderers have a human right to life (and apparently they do), they sure as hell have a right to freedom of thought.

I throw this suggestion with co workers and family and they think it's a pretty good idea as well.

I sincerely hope none of these people, you included, ever step into a voting booth.

They didn't respect the rights of their victims

That's irrelevant to the human right debate I'm afraid. If you buy into the concept of human rights, then murderers et al still have human rights, therefore those rights must still be respected.

[Mythic-RaidLead]

Dude we can't experiment on people without permission, at least not in 99.9% of cases. You can't be a 'means justify the ends' utilitarian because how you get from point A to point B matters. The way in which you solve a problem is just as important as ultimately arriving at the solution.

I tend to not let my emotions get in the way of judgement. The rational way to think is the utilitarian way of thinking. I determine that forced mental reprogramming to be a desirable outcome.

- - - Updated - - -

A well armed citizenry, nation-states rather than multi-national empires, and an end to endless foreign adventures.

"Ve vill only use our powers for ze good ov ze peepul, ov course! Ve vould never - never - abuse our power, or broaden the scope of these new laws, or do anything like zat. Alzough, ve might vant to use zees technology to teach ze next generation how to be good citizens, jah?"

Proof once more that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and that once again, half the planet has no conception of either the law of unintended consequences, or the evil lurking in the hearts of men.

There are little unintended consequences

Okay, more seriously, this is a rather complicated issue because of the so-called problem of consciousness. See, if the radical materialists are right and humans are just meat robots with a fleshy computer running things, then it is indeed possible, at least in principle, to reprogram a mind like you would a computer. However, if our minds are immaterial, then simply put you're not going to be able to do this. It might be possible to make something like Sword Art Online by interfering with the parts of the brain linked to the sense organs, muscles etc, but that's "merely" a case of inducing very specific hallucinations or illusions and so on rather than reprogramming someone.

Our minds and our thoughts, preferences are material and are in the brain.

Because the technology isn't there yet. Sci-fi authors have used it for a long time though, and there was of course the good old MKULTRA program which tried this using drugs and so on.

Hopefully it will be considered. Just wait until there is another public crime of depravity, the public will demand this be used.

Except for the whole freedom of thought thing. If murderers have a human right to life (and apparently they do), they sure as hell have a right to freedom of thought.

MOST thoughts are protected, but there are exceptions.

I sincerely hope none of these people, you included, ever step into a voting booth.


That's irrelevant to the human right debate I'm afraid. If you buy into the concept of human rights, then murderers et al still have human rights, therefore those rights must still be respected.

There are no human rights to "the right to have the willingness to murder innocent people or rape people". Those that refuse to accept must be forced to change against their will. For the most heinous, child serial rapists for example, I believe in legalizing torture to obtain a consent. Partly because I personally would like to inflict agonizing pain on these subhuman. I'd love to drag child rapist priests out of their home and and force them to be reprogrammed, and if they refuse, to torture them, beat them into submission or death -- whatever comes first.

I am brutal, but I believe in justice and fairness. I believe in human rights and dignity. But I am willing to dispense brutal methods to obtain what the world ultimately deserves: the right to be safe.

[Infraction]

[Teleros]

There are little unintended consequences

Put it this way: name a government program that has NOT expanded in size & scope since being founded.

I mean, if you want the government to literally brainwash the next generation into being obedient automatons then yes, I guess this would be an intended consequence, but otherwise if you think someone in government won't use this kind of tech to grab more power you're delusional.

Our minds and our thoughts, preferences are material and are in the brain.

The point I'm making is that this has not been proven. Oh, if you assume a materialist worldview then it's true by default, but the materialist worldview hasn't been proven so... well you get the idea.

Hopefully it will be considered. Just wait until there is another public crime of depravity, the public will demand this be used.

The media might, not so sure about the public at large. To take the US as an example though, probably half the public will start stocking up on ammo and supplies for the inevitable civil war :P .

MOST thoughts are protected, but there are exceptions.

That may be your view, but that is entirely contrary to human rights law, common law, and natural law. "Think whatever the hell you want, just be careful what you act out" is how the law approaches it IRL.

There are no human rights to "the right to have the willingness to murder innocent people or rape people".

See above, and note the difference between "a willingness to do X" and "doing X". You may be willing to rape people but never do so out of fear of punishment.

For that matter, simply locking people up in prison will prevent them from acting out a great deal of their thoughts even when they are minded to act on them. Again, I don't get the issue with not simply giving such people lead injections right between the eyes, but hey ho, apparently keeping murderers alive is important for some reason...?

Those that refuse to accept must be forced to change against their will. For the most heinous, child serial rapists for example, I believe in legalizing torture to obtain a consent. Partly because I personally would like to inflict agonizing pain on these subhuman. I'd love to drag child rapist priests out of their home and and force them to be reprogrammed, and if they refuse, to torture them, beat them into submission or death -- whatever comes first.

See, this I don't get. You're willing to execute bad people, including through grisly means, and yet... you're big into this Orwellian reprogramming idea. If anything, I find the reprogramming a more morally reprehensible fate than being tortured to death.

[prwraith]

that is a philosphical question and tbh, im not very versed in that topic.

but if you would "remove" the everything that makes you you (memories, etc), it would still be your body, but it wouldnt be "you" anymore. its just a new person living in your body. i would categorize that as "killing".

That's what makes philosophy so fun! You don't need to be versed in anything. You just need to make a good sensible argument.

[Mistame]

I tend to not let my emotions get in the way of judgement.

But you seem to have replaced it with stupid, as demonstrated by this statement:

The rational way to think is the utilitarian way of thinking.

Yeah, no. Anything that negates individualism is inherently irrational.

MOST thoughts are protected, but there are exceptions.

Objectively false.

the right to be safe.

There is no such "right".

[freezion]

There are no human rights to "the right to have the willingness to murder innocent people or rape people". Those that refuse to accept must be forced to change against their will. For the most heinous, child serial rapists for example, I believe in legalizing torture to obtain a consent. Partly because I personally would like to inflict agonizing pain on these subhuman. I'd love to drag child rapist priests out of their home and and force them to be reprogrammed, and if they refuse, to torture them, beat them into submission or death -- whatever comes first.

I am brutal, but I believe in justice and fairness. I believe in human rights and dignity. But I am willing to dispense brutal methods to obtain what the world ultimately deserves: the right to be safe.

[Infraction]

Jesus, this sounds like something straight out of the tv series Dexter.

Antisocial behaviour and violent/psychotic thoughts self-justified with some make-believe greater good or code.
''i am not truly a monster because i only want to hurt monsters''

If someone wants to cause serious harm to people through brutal and inhumane means, no matter who they are, there is something DIRELY wrong with someone.
Saying someone only wants to do it to ''subhumans and bad people'' is just a really shitty way of justifying ones own abhorrent mind and behaviour, so they can act out on it, and hopefully be perceived as a martyr for the greater good.

[Teleros]

Jesus, this sounds like something straight out of the tv series Dexter.

Eh, only a bit.

"Hey, this person just brutally raped and tortured your child to death. He's tied up. Here's a baseball bat."

Most normal people would go to town on said person.

I'd say in general that the further removed you are from the crime on an emotional level, and the less heinous the crime, the more unusual it is to go use them as a punching bag or w/e. Not being fuelled by rage yet acting in such a manner is definitely a sign something funny going on though.

[freezion]

Eh, only a bit.

"Hey, this person just brutally raped and tortured your child to death. He's tied up. Here's a baseball bat."

Most normal people would go to town on said person.

I'd say in general that the further removed you are from the crime on an emotional level, and the less heinous the crime, the more unusual it is to go use them as a punching bag or w/e. Not being fuelled by rage yet acting in such a manner is definitely a sign something funny going on though.

Most people might go to town on people like that, as in beat them up. But not brutally torture them (and potentially kill) in to submission as the OP suggests.
If someone can do that without remorse, empathy and being marked by it, there's something horribly off. And for some part i think it counts for the thoughts themselves; if you can think/fantasize about subjecting people to absolute brutalities and be serious about it, without knowing that the acts themselves are wrong and heinous, there's a fuse that's gone somewhere as well.
It would either smell like a) Unreal level of indoctrination in an ideology (''for the greater good'') b) severe antisocial behaviour or c) outright psychopathy.