Something GOOD Bush did- or do you think he is too evil to do anything good?

[emprworm]

A zygote of totipotent cells is not a person.

how about a feuts of 7 months?

It can become a person, but then again so can a sperm.

so can a strand of hair. but only the zygote will passively become a human, while the others will not.

Exactly where is this law in place? It's not a human right, that's for sure.

it is called moral law. Equal punishment for equal crime. You wouldn't consider it very just would you, if you gave a serial rapist lesser punishment than his crime...say a slap on the wrist and a 10 dollar fine? Of course, the victims to you mean far less than the criminal. No justice for them. You want vigilantism? I hope not, because that is what you will get when you put criminals before victims.

I think you're a smart guy, but right now your neck is absolutely FLAMING red. Is that literally what you think prison is like?

yea, and so do many criminals. Prison is a weak deterrent, except in the case of petty crimes. Obviously you have never really took it upon yourself to learn much about the criminal world. You should, because any wise General will know the armies that he is up against.

Unless punishment fits the crime, there is no justice in your society.

[Acriku]

Sorry but people try to help the people with their problems, they don't just give them an eye for an eye, that doesn't help the situation. It may ease the pain for you, but it is selfish.

[TMA_1]

You said that "God told jews to slay people"

I substituted "God promoted jews to kill people"

In this context, telling to kill is the same as promoting to kill.

Dad told his son to kill a snake

Dad promoted his son to kill a snake

Dad told his son to kill the snake if it is threatening him

Dad promoted his son to kill the snake if it was threatening him.

In your example you changed the sentence completely and on purpose to hide that you are wrong.

But it doesn't matter, the meaning of what I said remains even with your trying to hide your own mistake in previous posts with a picking on a certain term.

Dude, you are using semantics and stupid smileys to try and attack what emprworm is saying. God promoted the jews to kill people. America promotes executioners to kill criminals. When you family is being slaughtered, that owuld promote you to kill the man who is trying to kill your family. The words make no freaking difference. Stop being so damn immature.

[emprworm]

justice requires punishment, Acriku.

If your mother was murdered, slowly, painfully, and sexually,

and videotaped

and downloadable as a snuff film on the internet as the 3 men laugh and drink booze, urinating on her body as she is gasping for her last breaths, multiple stab wounds, bleeding and begging for her life....while the men laugh and masturbate over her ....

sick? YES

REAL? YES!

You now can either: trust that your society will deal with them justly

or seek revenge and deal out justice yourself (because your society is not just and cares only for the criminals)

Unless you PUNISH those who did this (not just give them 10-step AA psycho-babble meetings)...and unless that PUNISHMENT FITS THE CRIME, not only will your society be unjust, but you will have massive amounts of vigilantism and chaos.

I am weary of all you using the BIble...some of you not even believing in it...to then MISQUOTE the eye-for-an-eye verse, taking it out of context, which has nothing to do with justice. You imply that there should be no justice in a society, and that is morally bankrupt.

JUSTICE MUST FIT THE CRIME- that is an eye for an eye, but it is not vengeance because it is not done by the victim.

So you take a serial rapist and child molester and give him one night in jail and a 10 dollar fine? After all, we dont want to be 'eye for an eye' right? Lets be merciful and just set him free...right?

[Acriku]

When the hell did I quote the bible? I included eye for an eye, with literal meaning, this has nothing to do with the bible. When I have something like that done to me, of course I would want justice to fit the crime. But that is emotion. Emotion clouds reason, allowing irrationality to seep through. It doesn't make it right. And emprworm, stop asking those kinds of questions when you know the answer: Of course you don't give them a night in jail and a 10 day step-by-step program, that is not what rehabilitation is.

[emprworm]

lol, what happened to justice? Does it just not exist? And who are you to say what is right and wrong? Where is that standard coming from? I would think you of all people would be for the principle of equal crime, equal punishment.

ahh, so its all about rehabillitation, then? no justice? Fine. let them go back home and require them to attend weekly 10-step psychobabble meetings, spend millions of tax payer dollars on them and just let the victims get full of rage, excercise their own vigilantism and then they too can go through 10 step programs.

meanwhile, other murderers, knowlegeable of the "free pass" for killing others, show little restraint in bringing down the knife on other innocents.

no justice=more blood

[emprworm]

what is more important consideration with child murderers for a soceity?

Justice & Deterrence

or Rehabillitation and set free

[emprworm]

"Emotion clouds reason, allowing irrationality to seep through"

what is irrational, Acriku, about justice?

[SurlyPIG]

A zygote of totipotent cells is not a person.

how about a feuts of 7 months?

The medical standard for aborting fetusis, of which I support, is six weeks. After a fetus is six weeks old they will not abort it. I support this. Six weeks is by far a large enough opportunity to abort the zygote.

It can become a person, but then again so can a sperm.

so can a strand of hair. but only the zygote will passively become a human, while the others will not.

No it will not. It needs a host (the mother) and the host must be conscious of the zygote/fetus/baby and plan her activities of those 9 months accordingly ie not drink, eat the right foods, take care of the fetus, etc. If someone didn't ask to be pregnant, they didn't ask to do those things and it is absolutely unfair for YOU to think that YOU, of all people, have the right to tell them they don't have a choice.

I havn't even so much as alluded to abortions = good, yet you're playing me off as some child-mutilating sociopath with your "pro-death" nonsense. On the contrary. In a perfect world, abortions would never be needed. I just think it's of the utmost arrogance and disregard for others to take that choice away from someone. It's not up to me. You are not a judge. You are not God. It's not up to you. Stop shoving your beliefs down the throats of people whom it really matters to.

Exactly where is this law in place? It's not a human right, that's for sure.

it is called moral law. Equal punishment for equal crime. You wouldn't consider it very just would you, if you gave a serial rapist lesser punishment than his crime...say a slap on the wrist and a 10 dollar fine? Of course, the victims to you mean far less than the criminal. No justice for them. You want vigilantism? I hope not, because that is what you will get when you put criminals before victims.

An eye for an eye eh? Well why don't you just mutilate the genitals of sex offenders? Or forbid tax evaders from ever utilizing a government service? Or for theives to never own property? The punishment must fit the crime, but it cannot be the same as the crime. If it is, it's not punishment, it's vengeance.

yea, and so do many criminals. Prison is a weak deterrent, except in the case of petty crimes. Obviously you have never really took it upon yourself to learn much about the criminal world. You should, because any wise General will know the armies that he is up against.

Clearly YOU know nothing of what I'm referring to. I'm not talking about the police jail where you're stuck for having too many parking tickets. I'm not referring to the drunk tank either. I'm talking about criminal prisons, the state penns to be precise. Few would survive such an environment. Prison isn't some slaphappy place where your every need is taken care of for you, it's terrible. There's unbelievable violence occurring on a daily basis. Few can survive such an environment. And if they do, it often warps them even more than when they started. Prison can turn a shoplifting teenager into a murderous psycho.

[emprworm]

No it will not. It needs a host (the mother)

uhhhh...any Zygote that is the result of impregnation already has a host, thus, it will passively become a person. You must actively intervene (i.e. removing it from the host) in order to kill it- you must *interferre and stop* it from passively becoming a person, thus the definition of passive (look it up dude). This is far different from a sperm cell...which #1) will not passively become a human being, and #2)lacks the information necessary to be a human being. It really is a weak argument you pose, Ace.

"An eye for an eye eh? Well why don't you just mutilate the genitals of sex offenders?"

Why? That would be like cutting off the hands of a thief. A sexual offender most likely does not mutilate his victims. This is not just. Punishment should fit the crime, this is the only true justice. Jusice does not necessitate doing the exact same thing to someone in the same manner. I.E. A guy toruters and rapes someone. Does justice mandate that you now torture and rape the criminal? no. Jusice mandates that whatever sentence he recieves, must be equal to his crime. That sentence does not have to be identical to what he committed. Justice alsom must be administered by society- neutral third parties...NEVER the victim. THis is vigilantism, and this is what "eye for an eye" means. "eye for an eye" does not mean no justice as so many "Bibllical scholars" in here seem to think. There is no vengeance whatsoever in justice being administered by third party moral individuals who are not related to the victims or criminals. A society putting Goebels of Nazi Germany to death, for example, for being responsible for the killing of perhaps millions of people is not seeking revenge. Its just simple justice.

"I'm talking about criminal prisons, the state penns to be precise. Few would survive such an environment. Prison isn't some slaphappy place where your every need is taken care of for you"

But you want it to be. Its all about "rehabillitation" right? Thats what it is all about for you and company. How can a guy get rehabillitated with a crappy prison life? You want their prison life to be much better...more...tolerant....and comforting...right? kiss justice goodbye, if that is so.

Many prisons ARE nice places to live. I dont know about canada, but there are prisons here that are more like dormatories. Did you see a show on VH1 called "Music Behind Bars" where murderers in hard-core maximum security prison got to be in a band and play concerts in prison where everyone gets to party and have a good time, and get fame and glory for their artistry? Point rested.

[Anathema]

A zygote of totipotent cells is not a person.

how about a feuts of 7 months?

Abortion is only carried out if the fetus is less then 3 months old.

but only the zygote will passively become a human,

No, it becomes a human because a woman carries it and nurtures it. The burden is on the woman, and so should the choice be.

Equal punishment for equal crime.

This is not just, it's barbaric. Aside from the high number of innocent executions, you deny the criminals the ability to learn of their mistakes. Even criminals have rights.

or seek revenge

'nuff said.

ahh, so its all about rehabillitation, then?

No, some people cannot rehabilitate. Show me where anybody here said that, or stop talking in circles.

Fine. let them go back home and require them to attend weekly 10-step psychobabble meetings, spend millions of tax payer dollars on them and just let the victims get full of rage, excercise their own vigilantism and then they too can go through 10 step programs.

You actually think the cheapness of an execution is an argument to kill criminals? Then you are truly a pure capitalist pig in the truest sense of the word. A judge determins wether or not rehabilitation is possible, and if not, throw him in jail for the rest of his life.

And I'd like to point out that the prisons for most "heavy" criminals are down right unhuman, at least in the US. It's not luxury as you say it is.

[VigilVirus]

The words make no freaking difference.

Exactly what I was trying to prove to emprworm

[emprworm]

[quoet]Quote:

but only the zygote will passively become a human,

No, it becomes a human because a woman carries it and nurtures it. The burden is on the woman, and so should the choice be.

uhhh...what is it with you guys in here?

does anyone here know what passive means?

dont make me look it up for you.

Just like earthnuker's heart will passively continue to beat another 10,000 times until something interferres with the process, so too the fetus will passively become a person until something interferres with the process. there is no "NO" about it. This point is irrefutable. Since people are actually going to argue this point, and since I know with certainty that I will win this line of reasoning, I will now pick and chooose my debates and I now choose to debate this.

How anyone in here can say that a fetus does not passively become a person is beyond me. The fetus is a dependent life form...but so is the adult (food, oxygen, etc). But that does not make the situation non-passive. Stopping the process requires active intervention , hence by definition it is passive. Dependencies are irrelevant since those conditions (that the mother will eat food and drink water) can be assumed because they were prior existing conditions. Something must interferre with the process...it must be stopped . THis means, by definition, that the fetus will passively become a person.

you guys in here sometimes I think just argue anything I say just "because". However, it doesn't look too smart.

Equal punishment for equal crime.

This is not just, it's barbaric. Aside from the high number of innocent executions, you deny the criminals the ability to learn of their mistakes. Even criminals have rights.

equal punishment for equal crime is not just? What exactly, then, is justice?

i'd like to think that giving a serial rapist a 10 dollar fine and 1 day in jail is barbaric, rather then punishing him with 30 years in prison (equal time for equal crime). I think the barbarism is with those who say "equal punishment for equal crime is not just"

ADDENDUM to Arguing that dependencies negate a passive body:

but since so many people in here just like arguing no matter what, I will provide the proof.

(even though it is plainly obvious)

To say that dependencies are mutually exclusive from a passive body is fallicious and makes passive a term without meaning.

Logical Demonstration

1: A Hill exists with a straight, smooth slope.

2: A ball begins rolling down the hill until it reaches the bottom and its kinetic energy dissipated.

3: The process of the ball rolling down the hill is passive, in that it will continue to do so unless interrupted.

4: The rolling ball is dependent upon the hill- if the hill were to suddenly vanish or change drastically, of course the rolling ball might stop rolling. But in this case, the dependency was the initial and prior existing conditions, that if left uninterrupted would not interferre with the ball.

[Acriku]

Emprworm, anybody who is not able to sacrifice one person for the good of the team is not fit to lead. You were in the military, does this ring a bell? Leaders were forced to put their men in danger, and some in inevitable death, but they did it without hesitation. That is how you win battles, and possibly the war. And the war on disease, and death is not to be won so lightheartedly.

[emprworm]

good analogy, Acriku. I like how you think...you bring up the military cuz you know it would strike home. lol....did I give you permission to use my debate tactics? :P

anyway, the team unit of the military is that each person on the team understands his role. a commander would sacrifice those under his command that served under him. No commander would sacrifice a civillian without war crimes retribution. no commander has the authority to sacrifice another soldier that was not under his command. All on the team understand this principle. The ultimate purpose of the team is to protect the weak and defend the helpless. The team does not sacrifice them, and no commander has that authority.

[SurlyPIG]

any Zygote that is the result of impregnation already has a host, thus, it will passively become a person.

No shit. That's not what I meant at all. I meant that the mother needs to be absolutely 100% willing to do whatever it takes to deliver a healthy baby. Abstain from eating certain things, be willing to put up with feeling sick all the time, gaining weight, multiple visits to the doctor, etc. Who the HELL are you to tell them that it's YOUR choice, that YOU get to tell them they have to carry the baby? A baby developing depends completely on the mother.

Jusice does not necessitate doing the exact same thing to someone in the same manner. I.E. A guy toruters and rapes someone. Does justice mandate that you now torture and rape the criminal? no.

Then how come your "justice" calls for the death of a murderer? Like you said, an eye for an eye. The least you should do is be consistent...

"eye for an eye" does not mean no justice as so many "Bibllical scholars" in here seem to think.

Who are you to say what the bible means. Anyone who reads it can take it exactly the way they want. I mean, that's what it's for, right? Warping to meet your own needs? You've done it in this very thread by supporting capital punishment. The phrase you quoted from Genesis 9 isn't referring to organized capital punishment, it's referring to the vengeance of man. "Spill blood and yours shal be spilled." Not "Spill blood and an independant third party tribunal shalt choose to spill yours." You support the death penalty independantly from Christianity...clearly your God would be against it. I mean, "Thou shalt not kill" pretty much says it all. It leaves no holes. No escape scenarios. No exceptions.

Personally, I think the only time killing somoene is justified is when another person's life is in jeopardy. Like this police video I saw of a hostage situation...a guy held up a convenience store and when the cops arrived he took a hostate. The second he pointed the gun away from her head (and at the police) a sharpshooter put a bullet through his head...IMO that's the only time when killing another is acceptable.

"I'm talking about criminal prisons, the state penns to be precise. Few would survive such an environment. Prison isn't some slaphappy place where your every need is taken care of for you"

But you want it to be. Its all about "rehabillitation" right? Thats what it is all about for you and company.

DO NOT PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH

When did I EVER say that prisons should be even a slightly enjoyable place to live??? WHEN?

Many prisons ARE nice places to live. I dont know about canada, but there are prisons here that are more like dormatories. Did you see a show on VH1 called "Music Behind Bars" where murderers in hard-core maximum security prison got to be in a band and play concerts in prison where everyone gets to party and have a good time, and get fame and glory for their artistry? Point rested.

Is that where you get your information about prison? VH1? I suppose you think the government buys them drinks and snacks so they can party while they watch a performance. ::) You think they'll show you what goes on behind the scenes? The violence? The gangs? The murder? The rape? You think prison guards stop this from going on? Fat chance. Think about it...you're in a place packed FULL of the scum of society. The rapitst. The murderers. The wife-beaters. The gangsters. The drug dealers. You think that most of them stop once they get in prison? Hell no. Most get even worse. And when you're subjected to that, by everyone around you for your entire term, it'll drive you insane.

I'll never forget the story of this 17-year-old kid convicted as an adult of a rape-murder and sentenced to life. 22 years after his conviction, DNA evidence proves his innocence. He was given a rather pathetic of just under a million, as if any amount of money could make up for 22 years in a maximum security hell hole. A news team followed him around for a while and did a documentary showing how completely unable he was to function in society. Everything from him not having a clue what to do in a 7-11, to his futile attempts to find a job even though his record was wiped, to his flipping out at someone cutting in line etc.

But he was still alive. He had a chance to start over. In your country, under the death penalty in 38 states, he wouldn't have that chance. How would you feel if you were on the Jury that convicted him? Or the judge that sentenced him? Or the executioner that killed him?

[emprworm]

No shit. That's not what I meant at all. I meant that the mother needs to be absolutely 100% willing to do whatever it takes to deliver a healthy baby.

she does not. She only needs to maintain her own health (a prior existing condition), and the baby develops on its own passively. The baby will develop whether she mentally wants it to or not. In order for her to disrupt the health of the baby, she must disrupt her own health. Assuming the woman will continue to maintain her health (as she did prior- this is a pre-existing condition), the baby passively becomes human- unlike sperm. I really truly cannot understand why you are arguing this. Your other points have much more logical consistency to them. This is really irrefutable here. A fetus is in the active process of becoming a person and in order to prevent it from happening, the process must be stopped- hence the term "termination" when referring to abortions. A sperm cell will not passively become a person, it requires intervention for the process to begin.

Who the HELL are you to tell them that it's YOUR choice, that YOU get to tell them they have to carry the baby?

this wasn't about choice, it was about the active process of a fetus developing passively into a person in contrast to the inactive stasis of a sperm cell which requires intervention for the process of developing into a human to even begin.

A baby developing depends completely on the mother.

Didn't we already go over the fact that dependencies do not mutually exclude a passive process? No matter how you twist it, intervention is required to terminate the process of a fetus from developing into a person- unlike sperm in which intervention is required to begin the process of developing into a person. Not to mention the other point that a sperm cell lacks the necessary information to be a person, so it is also different in that regards.

Can we please just debate other things, this is really sad you would debate this point.

Then how come your "justice" calls for the death of a murderer? Like you said, an eye for an eye. The least you should do is be consistent...

I am consistent. no amount of time can rationally equal a human life. It can rationally equal temporary suffering/pain inflicted on someone.

Who are you to say what the bible means. Anyone who reads it can take it exactly the way they want.

I suppose when I read the phrase "The capital of Washington State is Olympia" I could take it to mean that green birds fly invisible at night. But that wouldn't be a very diligent use of reading text. Why do people get all "mystical" when reading Bible text and read other text at face value? If read at face value, that is what it means. But its irrelevant anyway since you dont even believe in the Bible.

"Spill blood and yours shal be spilled." Not "Spill blood and an independant third party tribunal shalt choose to spill yours." You support the death penalty independantly from Christianity...clearly your God would be against it. I mean, "Thou shalt not kill" pretty much says it all. It leaves no holes. No escape scenarios. No exceptions.

I would argue this, but it is futile with one who doesn't believe in the Bible anyway, so there is really no point.

DO NOT PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH

When did I EVER say that prisons should be even a slightly enjoyable place to live??? WHEN?

well then now is your time to make a positive affirmation on the purpose of prison. Dont just say "when did I say this...yada yada" actually SAY something. If you don't want me speculating on your views, then how about spilling them. Here you go- please answer these questions so i wont have to speculate:

1. What is the purpose of a prison?

2. What kind of conditions should a prison have to meet that purpose?

3. Can the purpose stated in #1 be better met with improved prison conditions?

Is that where you get your information about prison? VH1?

That is where I received the empirical data that physical video footage was scientifically recorded in time and space inside a maximum security prison in which convicted child murderers were on a stage playing musical instruments and singing wildly to a partying crowd of happy spectators. This video was catpured by use of gathering light and focusing it onto a small semiconductor image sensor. The charge-coupled device, measured light with a panel of photosites and translated the information into electrons, and recorded it onto a tape as magnetic patterns. This data demonstrated maximum security prison life where murderers were having a great time, partying, playing rock and roll, and getting their own show on national television in which to popularize their music. Empirical data. Very reliable as factual.

I suppose you think the government buys them drinks and snacks so they can party while they watch a performance. You think they'll show you what goes on behind the scenes? The violence? The gangs? The murder? The rape? You think prison guards stop this from going on?

yes. of course there is some violence but overall there is not that much- at least in US prisons. Prison guards do stop voilence from happening- not always, but majority. If they do not their careers are on the line, not to mention such an action would be immoral. I am not quick to say that the majority of prison guards are corrupt people. They have families like anyone else. They are not as rotten as you like to sensationalize them to be.

[Acriku]

Emprworm, i actually did watch that, and believe me, doing something like that is heaven to them. In the documentary, there were interviews where people were truly sorry for what they did, and wish to take it all back, and just goes to remind you that they are still human. And do you know how many strings the guardmaster had pull to get one guy a keyboard? It wasn't easy, and wasn't common at all. It did not show you empirical evidence proving that prison is a nice place to live, because it does not show you the whole day of the jailbird, or the whole duration of his time there. So no, it does not prove anything.

There may not have been physical markings to show the hardships of jail, but there were mental scars that I'm sure of.

[emprworm]

I am not saying that prison life is wonderful, I am saying that it is not a life of misery. Think of prisons in 14th century France and you'll know the definition of misery my friend. The first year of prison is the worst, but once adjusted people learn the routines. Many prisons are still horrible because their primary purpose is jutsice! But now, with moral decay, people want prisons to start focusing on rehabillitation which means increased standard of living. Prison life gets better all the time due to the shift in philosophy. If the ultimate goal is rehabillitation, then you need to give them more amenities. but bye bye justice.

[DukeLeto]

uhhh...what is it with you guys in here?

does anyone here know what passive means?

dont make me look it up for you.

You know what "cirumlocution" means? It describes your arguments nicely. ::)

[emprworm]

You know what "cirumlocution" means? It describes your arguments nicely. ::)

uhhh...no i dont know what "cirumlocution" means...and my dictionary doesn't either.

circumlocution is kinda close, but I'm not sure if that is what you meant.

Now for you: Do you know what brassbound means?

[VigilVirus]

Lol, never seen this before. I guess this thread turned into a vocabulary quiz ::)

[Acriku]

Well when you got nothing to say, why not attack the words and not the meaning?

[emprworm]

lol. :D

[SurlyPIG]

No shit. That's not what I meant at all. I meant that the mother needs to be absolutely 100% willing to do whatever it takes to deliver a healthy baby.

she does not. She only needs to maintain her own health (a prior existing condition), and the baby develops on its own passively.

Drinking in moderation is good for your health (small glass of red wine per day shown to be good for your heart). But it'll permanently disable the child for its entire life.

A fetus is in the active process of becoming a person and in order to prevent it from happening, the process must be stopped- hence the term "termination" when referring to abortions. A sperm cell will not passively become a person, it requires intervention for the process to begin.

I think of it this way; like you said, a piece of hair can become a human being. So can a sperm. So can a zygote. I have a black and white definition of what is and is not a human. None of this can be/will be passive/active crap. I mean, we're all going to passively die, so why don't we just actively kill ourselves?

this wasn't about choice, it was about the active process of a fetus developing passively into a person in contrast to the inactive stasis of a sperm cell which requires intervention for the process of developing into a human to even begin.

Did you not say that abortions should be forbidden to anyone who wasn't impregnated through rape?

I am consistent. no amount of time can rationally equal a human life. It can rationally equal temporary suffering/pain inflicted on someone.

So why doesn't an independant third party rape rapists and steal from theives? If they're going to kill killers, why stop there?

Why do people get all "mystical" when reading Bible text and read other text at face value? If read at face value, that is what it means.

That is a good question. Why do you Christians do it? Oh thats right, the Bible is packed full of tall tales, contradictions, and BS. Why don't you take the flood, for example, at face value? Or why don't you just take the commandment "Thau shalt not kill" at face value and stop promoting the killing of prisoners at face value? You've even done it in this thread. The bible is written in backward and "artistic" english instead of plain, black and white english. It works very well for Christians to justify basically whatever they want to through some randon unrelated bible text, as you have done here today trying to justify capital punishment...no offfense of course...

To all Christians, everything in the Bible that is undisputed is fact. Everything that is in dispute is fact. Everything that is un-disprovable is fact. Everything that has been disproven is suddenly an ALLEGORY.

I would argue this, but it is futile with one who doesn't believe in the Bible anyway, so there is really no point.

Hehe of course that's why you ignore it...if it was defensible you would just pretend I was not Christian.

1. What is the purpose of a prison?

2. What kind of conditions should a prison have to meet that purpose?

3. Can the purpose stated in #1 be better met with improved prison conditions?

Next time just ask me that instead making baseless assumptions of what you think I believe.

1. The primary purpose of a prison is to protect society from criminals by isolating them in captive, controlled environments. The secondary purpose should be twofold; to punish the convicts proportionately to their crime, and to discourage them from ever committing a similar crime, or any crime, again. This can be done a number of ways.

2. The prison has to be bad enough that nobody in their right mind would want to live there. But it must be CIVILIZED. Not a filthy, disease infested ces-pool. It should be boring. The prisoners should be allowed to participate in certain activities with supervised moderation, all of which should be positive and rehabilitative. I'm not talking about some shrink sitting them down on a couch asking "how do you feel", I'm talking about getting them to do things that are productive. Do something that's good for society. Perhaps learn skills that'll get them a job when their time is up. I saw a documentary on a prison in Los Angelos that runs a program in conjunction with the city's animal shelters. A select group of volunteering prisoners split up from the rest of the population for 6 hours per day and work with stray cats. They clean them, groom them, cut their nails, give them vaccinations, and fix them up so their nice, healthy and beautiful to maximize their chances of adoption. I mean, right in front of me was this "filth" that, according to, shouldn't even be alive, and he's bathing a little kitten. All of them said they want to do something like it when they get out. All of them said it was a perfect escape from the stresses of prison life where, from 8 to 2, they could forget about it and just relax. But it isn't as if they're eating chips and watching football. Their doing community work, learning new skills and turning themselves into someone productive when they get out of prison. The documentary caught up with ex-cons who went through the program. Several worked in dog grooming stores. A couple had even gone through a little extra education to certified veterenary assistants.

3. Not necessarily improved; but modified. For starters, the food is too diverse and too good. A good example of what all prison food should be is the food in Arizona pennetentiaries. They use highly processed, highly nutritious, extremely bland food for their prisoners. Healthy, dull, no variety, and boring. Perfect for prisons. As a result, just from something as simple and basic as food, Arizona has the lowest prisoner return rate for petty crimes in the country - and I mean DRASTICALLY lower. About the outdoor exercies comment a while back...it's necessary for health. People need to exerciese. They just do. Exercise in most prisons is fine, as long as it always accessable. Second, allow them to work if they want to. Perhaps do the equivalent amount of work that they might have stolen or vandalized as a theif/vandal. It shouldn't be mandatory, but it should be accessable. In other words, if they don't want to rot in their cells all day, they work. And while they work, they learn. Learn skills that can help them when they get out, help them to be proper members of society - and I mean as courtesy of volunteers. The LA Penn-SPCA project was initated by volunteers. There are similar programs in some prisons that involve a business training prisoners in exchange for X hours of work they're obligated to do by contract. Beneficial to the prisoners and the businesses. Often when the prisoners get out, the company has one more employee. NOTE : this should NEVER be publically funded. Prisoners are a social and labour resource, and private companiess, as well as charities and other non-profit organizations, will be willing to utilize such opportunities. These types of programs are starting to come into place, but they are still extremely rare and you have to dodge a huge deal of policy and beaurocracy to set them up. In conclusion, make the prison seem so bad that nobody would want to live there, but give them a taste of the outside; an incentive to work towards, let them see what they can become, that they don't have to be another ID number in the penal system.

...Since when is VH1 "empirical"...

I am not quick to say that the majority of prison guards are corrupt people. They have families like anyone else. They are not as rotten as you like to sensationalize them to be.

What makes you think I say they're corrupt? They only have so much manpower. A lone, minimally armed guard can't do much to stop a gang from beating and killing another prisoner. They're forced to call for backup...