DS9: Force and Motion by Jeffrey Lang blurb

[rahullak]

Even in the Federation, I'd say rehabilitation does not allow for full freedom once someone's released. It's possible his release would have conditions attached: No having any command of your own; No playing a role higher than bridge officer or Chief Engineer.
The man has actually committed genocide. So if he is given the death penalty or life imprisonment in our time, rehabilitation in the Federation would have riders, I think.

All that would be Starfleet, not the Federation; rehabilitation shouldn't ever have riders, because if you need riders then you're not rehabilitated yet and should just be kept in and put through rehabilitative processes until you are. There might be a stage where you're eased back into normal life under restrictions, but that would just be the continuation of a sentence with a potential for eventual end should you continue to prove yourself a changed person. Saying that someone should ever just be hit with a guaranteed-permanent situation like that is still a punishment-oriented perspective of criminal justice, that this person is bad and deserves to be hurt because he is bad.

And while he did commit mass murder, he didn't commit genocide which is a much worse crime; that might seem like legalistic or semantic quibbling, but the word "genocide" doesn't deserve to be diminished.

What you're saying is not nuanced. It's not that the person is bad forever. It's about how much power are you willing to put in the hands of someone who has committed genocide. How do you know that someone has truly rehabilitated until you put him in that situation again? Rehabilitation for common criminals is easy. You do your "rehabilitative processes", you hear them speak the right way, make the right noises. You put them back into society and watch whether they steal, forge or kill someone again. Are you willing to put this man in a position where he can kill hundreds of people again? And once he does that again? "Oh we need to improve our rehabilitative processes." I'm sure that's reassurance to the families of those killed because you let a former maniac loose again.

Reasonable restrictions make sense according to me. He would still be free to live any way he wants to. Just that he would not be in a position of power to kill hundreds of people on his whim or due to his emotional weaknesses.

And what's the difference between mass murder and genocide? Number of people killed?? It's abhorrent and deserving of extreme punishment either way.

 

[Idran]

Even in the Federation, I'd say rehabilitation does not allow for full freedom once someone's released. It's possible his release would have conditions attached: No having any command of your own; No playing a role higher than bridge officer or Chief Engineer.
The man has actually committed genocide. So if he is given the death penalty or life imprisonment in our time, rehabilitation in the Federation would have riders, I think.

All that would be Starfleet, not the Federation; rehabilitation shouldn't ever have riders, because if you need riders then you're not rehabilitated yet and should just be kept in and put through rehabilitative processes until you are. There might be a stage where you're eased back into normal life under restrictions, but that would just be the continuation of a sentence with a potential for eventual end should you continue to prove yourself a changed person. Saying that someone should ever just be hit with a guaranteed-permanent situation like that is still a punishment-oriented perspective of criminal justice, that this person is bad and deserves to be hurt because he is bad.

And while he did commit mass murder, he didn't commit genocide which is a much worse crime; that might seem like legalistic or semantic quibbling, but the word "genocide" doesn't deserve to be diminished.

What you're saying is not nuanced. It's not that the person is bad forever. It's about how much power are you willing to put in the hands of someone who has committed genocide. How do you know that someone has truly rehabilitated until you put him in that situation again? Rehabilitation for common criminals is easy. You do your "rehabilitative processes", you hear them speak the right way, make the right noises. You put them back into society and watch whether they steal, forge or kill someone again. Are you willing to put this man in a position where he can kill hundreds of people again? And once he does that again? "Oh we need to improve our rehabilitative processes." I'm sure that's reassurance to the families of those killed because you let a former maniac loose again.

Reasonable restrictions make sense according to me. He would still be free to live any way he wants to. Just that he would not be in a position of power to kill hundreds of people on his whim or due to his emotional weaknesses.

And what's the difference between mass murder and genocide? Number of people killed?? It's abhorrent and deserving of extreme punishment either way.

It's simple: genocide requires the intent to wipe out a cultural or ethnic group, however that's done. It doesn't even need to just be murder: the Ukranian Holodomor, the Trail of Tears in the US, or the forced fostering of Australian Aboriginal children are all examples of genocide that involved no violence against the people so harmed, direct or indirect. Maxwell did not want to end the entire Cardassian race, so it isn't genocide. Mass murder is horrible, and I'm not seeking to diminish that. But genocide is far, far beyond just killing a large number of people. It's believing that a certain type of person doesn't deserve to exist in any form and desiring to end all measure of their way of life by whatever means necessary. Not all horrifying crimes are equal.

And what you're describing isn't rehabilitation at all. That's probation. Rehabilitation is a continuous process of treatment whereby you don't just wait for them to say the magic words that have you let them go, it's a combination of psychiatric treatment, therapy, and slow, metered reintroduction into society where once it's done, you don't give them any closer attention than you would any other citizen. If someone's in a place where they need to be closely watched to ensure they don't recidivate, then they aren't yet rehabilitated and the state's work hasn't finished. But the point of a rehabilitation-focused criminal justice system is that everyone could reach the point where the state's work is finished, even if there's no guarantee that they will; that the state never gives up on a person and goes "nope, we can't do anything, you'll never be a normal citizen again." Maybe someone spends the rest of their life in some degree of rehabilitation, but there's always the chance for complete reintroduction where the state can step back and allow them to act as any other member of the populace again.

And yes, he very likely would never reach the point of deserving to be in such a position again, and maybe he'd never become rehabilitated enough to deserve it. But not definitively so. I truly do believe that there is no act such that there is no possible way that person can be made a well-functioning member of society, even if the path to that position is nearly impossible. And given the level of technology we've seen in Trek in terms of determining a person's mental state and given the existence of telepaths that can determine it easily, I'd say the question of "is this person truly rehabilitated" is far easier to answer than it is in modern-day society.

 

[E-DUB]

Personally, I think that during the Dominion War Maxwell would have gotten some kind of work release deal. Vreenak made reference to a "manpower shortage" and a qualified starship captain would have been too valuable a resource to let rot in prison.

 

[Idran]

There's that too, yeah; I could imagine at the very least him being some kind of civilian advisor. Probably not on the front, or even off Earth, but a resource to tap in some respect at least.

 

[Corran Horn]

I was basing it on the fact a dishonourable discharge from the military can basically haunt you for the rest of your life...

In our time and culture, yes. That's my point. The Federation is supposed to be more enlightened, less judgmental.

It's not unlike Tom Paris, who despite doing his time was still shunned by members of Voyager's crew, like Commander Cavit or the human doctor, and as we saw in Non Sequitor would have ended up a barfly had he not been on Voyager.

Okay, fair point. It doesn't always succeed at living up to its ideals.

Similar situation with Ro Laren.

 

[The Wormhole]

Personally, I think that during the Dominion War Maxwell would have gotten some kind of work release deal. Vreenak made reference to a "manpower shortage" and a qualified starship captain would have been too valuable a resource to let rot in prison.

People frequently say something along these lines, but the simple fact of the matter is, regardless the Federation's stance on rehabilitation leading to second chances, Maxwell would never be placed in command of a Starfleet ship again. A captain who goes against orders and acts on his own can not be trusted with a command. A best case scenario for them would be demotion and/or a transfer to a desk job, and that's assuming they don't commit mass murder.

Also, contrary to popular belief, Maxwell is probably the last person you'd want commanding a starship in the Dominion War. Oh sure, he's qualified and experienced and probably could contribute to a victory here or there. But war does have rules, and the Federation at least tried to adhere to them during the Dominion War. As Maxwell slaughtered hundreds of innocent Cardassians in unprovoked attacks during peacetime, in war he could commit actions which could make things much worse. For example, there could be a situation where Cardassians try to surrender or POWs end up under his responsibility. He'd could very well allow them to die, if not actually killing them himself, which would be a war crime and could be factor in preventing a peaceful resolution to the war.

No, I can't imagine Starfleet giving him back his command during the Dominion War.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Agreed. Maxwell may have served his time in prison, but there's no way in hell he deserves to ever serve in Starfleet again. Giving him back his command would be like handing a loaded firearm to a convicted serial killer.

Besides, like I said, the Cardassians surely have not forgotten this. They know Maxwell murdered hundreds of innocent Cardassian crew. If Maxwell gets off scot-free, they'll go after him, and possibly declare war on the Federation.

So what is Starfleet supposed to do with him? No idea. Instructor at Starfleet Academy, perhaps. Part of his rehab should be that he is made to remind every cadet that he teaches, exactly what his crimes were, and to describe them in detail. Kind of like a "Don't do what I did" kind of thing. And I can't say I'd be that upset if somebody like him was made to relive their crimes in a manner like this.

 

[Idran]

People frequently say something along these lines, but the simple fact of the matter is, regardless the Federation's stance on rehabilitation leading to second chances, Maxwell would never be placed in command of a Starfleet ship again. A captain who goes against orders and acts on his own can not be trusted with a command. A best case scenario for them would be demotion and/or a transfer to a desk job, and that's assuming they don't commit mass murder.

^ Agreed. Maxwell may have served his time in prison, but there's no way in hell he deserves to ever serve in Starfleet again. Giving him back his command would be like handing a loaded firearm to a convicted serial killer.

Besides, like I said, the Cardassians surely have not forgotten this. They know Maxwell murdered hundreds of innocent Cardassian crew. If Maxwell gets off scot-free, they'll go after him, and possibly declare war on the Federation.

So what is Starfleet supposed to do with him? No idea. Instructor at Starfleet Academy, perhaps. Part of his rehab should be that he is made to remind every cadet that he teaches, exactly what his crimes were, and to describe them in detail. Kind of like a "Don't do what I did" kind of thing. And I can't say I'd be that upset if somebody like him was made to relive their crimes in a manner like this.

Who on Earth is saying "scot-free"? Yes, he certainly shouldn't have been in command of a ship during the Dominion War, but are both of you really saying that rehabilitation is so ineffective that there's absolutely no chance that Maxwell would have changed 30 years later? 50? 70?

And how is that part of rehab? Rehab isn't about guilting someone into changing their ways, it's about changing the way they see things so as to prevent the patterns of thought that initially led to them committing the crime in the first place. Taking them to a position in which they would no longer want to perform such an act. Correcting whatever failure of society or biology led them to become the sort of person that would do something like that. Yes, he certainly shouldn't forget what he did, and perhaps he'd choose to do such a thing were he to become an instructor so as to prevent it or seek personal atonement, but what would it actually achieve to enforce that?

I can see the foreign relations arguments, at least; yes, the Cardassians would certainly not want to see him in command, and that is a fair consideration. But from the perspective purely of criminal justice, if rehabilitation had been successfully completed and he was correctly judged to no longer be the sort of person that would have desire to perform such an act, what would be achieved in giving him more restrictions than any other citizen that also doesn't have the desire to perform such an act? This kind of thing only increases chances of recidivism because they serve as subconscious suggestions that encourage reversion to old modes of behavior.

Honestly, setting aside the diplomatic concerns (which again I can agree are valid, yeah), a lot of this seems to be predicated on the idea that rehabilitation can never actually be effective and someone that commits one crime will almost certainly commit another crime eventually regardless of what actions are taken. Which is ridiculous; it's been shown in practice that rehabilitative systems of criminal justice noticeably reduce rates of recidivism as compared to punishment-based systems even under modern day techniques. With the sort of resources the Federation has, I'd think that rates of recidivism would be near zero once a person has completed their course of rehabilitation.

I know it's counter-intuitive, but if someone is aware that they are constantly being observed for the chance that they will commit a crime while others around them do not have the same level of observation on them, or if they are considered a criminal by authority figures regardless of what steps they've taken to move beyond the crime they committed, even without rehabilitation, they will be more likely to commit a crime than if that wasn't done. Not even just ex-cons. Even someone that never committed a crime, if constantly suspected of eventually committing a crime, will be more likely to commit a crime.

If our goal is to prevent future crimes, which I would hope would be the goal as opposed to hurting those that have already committed them, this stuff won't get you there. Having even someone that committed a crime on Maxwell's level have the opportunity to eventually conceivably reintegrate into society, even if it's a vanishingly small chance that's no easy road to follow, does. I mean, look at Lenore Karidian in Foul Deeds Will Rise.

I think I'm getting away from things, though. I can concede that Starfleet might be stricter on the matter for a variety of reasons beyond the pure criminal justice concerns. That, yeah, there's concerns to be acknowledged beyond the goal of preventing criminal behavior.

 

[Christopher]

A captain who goes against orders and acts on his own can not be trusted with a command.

Unless their name is Kirk, Picard, or possibly Janeway.

 

[Sto-Vo-Kory]

This book had me at the "by Jeffrey Lang" bit.

 

[DEWLine]

Yep. Looking forward to this one. Looking back, Maxwell is indeed a good choice for a follow-up story.

 

[Idran]

Sorry, by the way, I'm getting things way off track in this thread. I didn't even realize this was a button for me, but apparently it is. I'll try to cool things in the future.

Back on track, I'm definitely looking forward for this one as well. I'm glad we're getting some focus on O'Brien again; it's been sorely missed lately.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I always thought that Maxwell would have ended up in the Maquis, actually. They might well have tried to bust him out of prison to recruit him. Maxwell is exactly the sort of person the Maquis would have wanted - to exploit his obvious hatred of Cardassians to serve their own ends.

 

[Thrawn]

This book had me at the "by Jeffrey Lang" bit.

Yep.

 

[tomswift2002]

A captain who goes against orders and acts on his own can not be trusted with a command.

Unless their name is Kirk, Picard, or possibly Janeway.

Even Sisko went against orders in "For The Uniform". He made the Maquis colony uninhabitable for non-Cardassian species. Of course the Maquis had made a Cardassian planet uninhabitable for Caradssians, but perfectly fine for humans and other non-Cardassian races.

 

[The Wormhole]

They might well have tried to bust him out of prison to recruit him.

I never got the impression the Maquis were powerful enough to launch an attack a secure Federation penal facility and extract a prisoner. Hell, aside from Tom Riker's actions when he hijacked the Defiant, did the Maquis ever go deep enough into Cardassian territory, or even outside the DMZ? Even if the were somehow capable, I would think those resources would be better channeled towards a crippling blow against the Cardassians than attacking a Federation prison, which could have resulted in the escape of other inmates, others who even the Maquis would agree should have been locked up.

People frequently say something along these lines, but the simple fact of the matter is, regardless the Federation's stance on rehabilitation leading to second chances, Maxwell would never be placed in command of a Starfleet ship again. A captain who goes against orders and acts on his own can not be trusted with a command. A best case scenario for them would be demotion and/or a transfer to a desk job, and that's assuming they don't commit mass murder.

^ Agreed. Maxwell may have served his time in prison, but there's no way in hell he deserves to ever serve in Starfleet again. Giving him back his command would be like handing a loaded firearm to a convicted serial killer.

Besides, like I said, the Cardassians surely have not forgotten this. They know Maxwell murdered hundreds of innocent Cardassian crew. If Maxwell gets off scot-free, they'll go after him, and possibly declare war on the Federation.

So what is Starfleet supposed to do with him? No idea. Instructor at Starfleet Academy, perhaps. Part of his rehab should be that he is made to remind every cadet that he teaches, exactly what his crimes were, and to describe them in detail. Kind of like a "Don't do what I did" kind of thing. And I can't say I'd be that upset if somebody like him was made to relive their crimes in a manner like this.

Who on Earth is saying "scot-free"? Yes, he certainly shouldn't have been in command of a ship during the Dominion War, but are both of you really saying that rehabilitation is so ineffective that there's absolutely no chance that Maxwell would have changed 30 years later? 50? 70?

And how is that part of rehab? Rehab isn't about guilting someone into changing their ways, it's about changing the way they see things so as to prevent the patterns of thought that initially led to them committing the crime in the first place. Taking them to a position in which they would no longer want to perform such an act. Correcting whatever failure of society or biology led them to become the sort of person that would do something like that. Yes, he certainly shouldn't forget what he did, and perhaps he'd choose to do such a thing were he to become an instructor so as to prevent it or seek personal atonement, but what would it actually achieve to enforce that?

I can see the foreign relations arguments, at least; yes, the Cardassians would certainly not want to see him in command, and that is a fair consideration. But from the perspective purely of criminal justice, if rehabilitation had been successfully completed and he was correctly judged to no longer be the sort of person that would have desire to perform such an act, what would be achieved in giving him more restrictions than any other citizen that also doesn't have the desire to perform such an act? This kind of thing only increases chances of recidivism because they serve as subconscious suggestions that encourage reversion to old modes of behavior.

Honestly, setting aside the diplomatic concerns (which again I can agree are valid, yeah), a lot of this seems to be predicated on the idea that rehabilitation can never actually be effective and someone that commits one crime will almost certainly commit another crime eventually regardless of what actions are taken. Which is ridiculous; it's been shown in practice that rehabilitative systems of criminal justice noticeably reduce rates of recidivism as compared to punishment-based systems even under modern day techniques. With the sort of resources the Federation has, I'd think that rates of recidivism would be near zero once a person has completed their course of rehabilitation.

I know it's counter-intuitive, but if someone is aware that they are constantly being observed for the chance that they will commit a crime while others around them do not have the same level of observation on them, or if they are considered a criminal by authority figures regardless of what steps they've taken to move beyond the crime they committed, even without rehabilitation, they will be more likely to commit a crime than if that wasn't done. Not even just ex-cons. Even someone that never committed a crime, if constantly suspected of eventually committing a crime, will be more likely to commit a crime.

If our goal is to prevent future crimes, which I would hope would be the goal as opposed to hurting those that have already committed them, this stuff won't get you there. Having even someone that committed a crime on Maxwell's level have the opportunity to eventually conceivably reintegrate into society, even if it's a vanishingly small chance that's no easy road to follow, does. I mean, look at Lenore Karidian in Foul Deeds Will Rise.

I think I'm getting away from things, though. I can concede that Starfleet might be stricter on the matter for a variety of reasons beyond the pure criminal justice concerns. That, yeah, there's concerns to be acknowledged beyond the goal of preventing criminal behavior.

Even ignoring the implications of should someone being rehabilitated after committing a crime be granted the complete freedom they had prior, command of a ship is only given to those who have earned the trust of both their superiors and the crew who serves under them. Betray that trust, in criminal actions or otherwise, you are removed from command. End of the matter. Even ignoring his criminal actions, Maxwell betrayed the trust his superiors placed in him and by doing so placed his crew in unnecessary danger, thereby betraying the trust they placed in him too. That's enough to permanently have him removed from command.

Of course, Star Trek is replete with captains disregarding orders or acting without due authorization. This is often times forgiven for no reason other than they're the show's leads and need to keep their jobs. And while it's true not everything is black and white and there are gray areas in these matters, the simple truth of the matter is pretty much all the main captains for the shows really should have been transferred to desk jobs. Hell, Sisko did have a desk job.

 

[rahullak]

And what you're describing isn't rehabilitation at all. That's probation. Rehabilitation is a continuous process of treatment whereby you don't just wait for them to say the magic words that have you let them go, it's a combination of psychiatric treatment, therapy, and slow, metered reintroduction into society where once it's done, you don't give them any closer attention than you would any other citizen. If someone's in a place where they need to be closely watched to ensure they don't recidivate, then they aren't yet rehabilitated and the state's work hasn't finished. But the point of a rehabilitation-focused criminal justice system is that everyone could reach the point where the state's work is finished, even if there's no guarantee that they will; that the state never gives up on a person and goes "nope, we can't do anything, you'll never be a normal citizen again." Maybe someone spends the rest of their life in some degree of rehabilitation, but there's always the chance for complete reintroduction where the state can step back and allow them to act as any other member of the populace again.

With reasonable restrictions, Maxwell can very easily act as any other member of the populace. Fully integrated too. But no command of his own.

There's a problem with the rehabilitative system. You're assuming people can't game it. If Mr.X wanted to kill someone out of passion in the moment, he would do so knowing fully well that in 5 years in a paradise penal colony he would be out and fully integrated back into society. You're talking about a breakdown in the criminal justice system, where disincentives and deterrents for criminals are removed. No society or civilization can function this way, and I think this would lead to more crimes not less. I am not advocating for a fully punishment oriented system, but if you are rehabilitating someone there have to be real consequences for their actions. Long-lasting consequences. "Maxwell, you're a free man. But you can't ever have command again, you can't ever brush those 600 souls under the carpet of rehabilitation."

You may argue that rehabilitation is such a sure-shot that it will be a 100% guarantee every time. I can't agree. History has shown that if any system can be gamed, it will be gamed. Heck, despite all the security over internet transactions and servers, there are still hacks and cracks happening taking away billions of dollars.

And yes, he very likely would never reach the point of deserving to be in such a position again, and maybe he'd never become rehabilitated enough to deserve it. But not definitively so. I truly do believe that there is no act such that there is no possible way that person can be made a well-functioning member of society, even if the path to that position is nearly impossible. And given the level of technology we've seen in Trek in terms of determining a person's mental state and given the existence of telepaths that can determine it easily, I'd say the question of "is this person truly rehabilitated" is far easier to answer than it is in modern-day society.

As I said before, you can be a well-functioning member of society with reasonable restrictions. No constraints need be placed on Maxwell, save that he cannot have command of his own again.

Maxwell would have gone through rigorous psych evals before entering Starfleet and before being given a command. A few of those evals would've been conducted by telepaths. Yet, he turned out to be a maniac didn't he? With the slightest push, normally good and honest people can break. No amount of telepathic scanning can reduce that possibility. And if you're talking about someone who actually has snapped once, you don't want him to ever have the chance to do it again.

If our goal is to prevent future crimes, which I would hope would be the goal as opposed to hurting those that have already committed them, this stuff won't get you there. Having even someone that committed a crime on Maxwell's level have the opportunity to eventually conceivably reintegrate into society, even if it's a vanishingly small chance that's no easy road to follow, does. I mean, look at Lenore Karidian in Foul Deeds Will Rise.

The goal is to prevent future crimes. That includes credible deterrents. No paradise penal colonies after which you are fully integrated back into society with no other consequences to you on your crimes.

A captain who goes against orders and acts on his own can not be trusted with a command.

Unless their name is Kirk, Picard, or possibly Janeway.

Who, of course, were on the right side of morality, unlike Maxwell.

 

[Christopher]

There's a problem with the rehabilitative system. You're assuming people can't game it. If Mr.X wanted to kill someone out of passion in the moment, he would do so knowing fully well that in 5 years in a paradise penal colony he would be out and fully integrated back into society. You're talking about a breakdown in the criminal justice system, where disincentives and deterrents for criminals are removed. No society or civilization can function this way, and I think this would lead to more crimes not less.

And you're assuming that the system wouldn't be fully aware that people would try to game it and be equipped to react to that. People have been trying to game redemptive systems for millennia, from religious confession to psychotherapy, but the professionals in those fields are not morons. They've seen every ploy. Probably everyone they've ever treated has initially tried to game the system and take the easy way out, but the system would be specifically designed to prevent such tactics from working, to negate all the well-known cheats and tricks and leave the inmates/patients/confessors with no alternatives except sincere self-examination and hard work to earn genuine penance.

After all, humans are predictable. It's not like anyone's going to be able to invent a completely new method of psychological trickery that nobody's ever tried before. An inmate like Maxwell is going to be dealing with the situation of imprisonment for the first time, whereas the professionals managing his rehabilitation will have dealt with hundreds of earlier patients, many or most of whom would've tried to game the system. They're better at the game than he is. They were trained extensively in how to play the game before they were even allowed into a position of responsibility in the system. Anything that Maxwell or whoever might try as a ruse against them, they will immediately recognize as a ruse.

I am not advocating for a fully punishment oriented system, but if you are rehabilitating someone there have to be real consequences for their actions. Long-lasting consequences.

Consequences aren't meant for rehabilitation, they're meant for deterrence. The idea is that you make people afraid to commit misdeeds for fear of what will happen to them as a result. But if they go ahead and commit the crimes anyway, then they're not afraid of consequences. Either they're pathological enough that they don't care, or they sincerely believed it was worth paying the price.

On the whole, I don't think negative reinforcement works all that well. Positive reinforcement -- giving rewards for doing good rather than just penalties for doing bad -- tends to be more effective at modifying behavior, whether in people or in animals. It's not enough to say "Don't do that or else" and leave the rest blank -- you need to guide people toward a better alternative. It's never enough to knock one thing down unless you have something better to offer in its place.

You may argue that rehabilitation is such a sure-shot that it will be a 100% guarantee every time.

That's a straw man -- obviously he's arguing nothing of the kind, because nobody ever would. No system works perfectly in every single case, but that doesn't mean it isn't a successful system. Occasionally a plane will crash, but that doesn't mean that planes on the whole aren't safe. Occasionally a surgeon will make a mistake, but that doesn't mean the practice of surgery never saves a single life. Occasionally a Starfleet captain will go rogue, but that doesn't mean Starfleet is an evil organization.

 

[Idran]

Right. This isn't a thought experiment: it's been shown that rehabilitative criminal justice systems result in lower crime rates and lower rates of recidivism than punishment-oriented criminal justice systems. Again, I'll point you towards the Norwegian system, where even Breivik was sentenced to 21 years with five-year extensions should he be judged unable to re-enter society, the "maximum indeterminate" sentence under Norwegian law. He with near-certainty will never be allowed back into society. But only near-certainty, not actual certainty. He's even been allowed distance entry into the University of Oslo's Political Science program while being held. And there was almost no outrage whatsoever within the nation, even among families of his victims.

For further comparison, this sentence is only given for those who are a danger to society as a whole, mass murders or other severe violent offenders that have been judged otherwise sane and for which rehabilitation is unlikely. For all other crimes, the maximum determinate sentence under Norwegian law is a strict 21 years, with unsupervised weekend parole after a third of the sentence has been completed and potential for early release after two-thirds has been completed. Most prisons are open-air facilities without containment, without deprivation of resources, with open interaction between guards and inmates, with open unrestricted vocational training available for all inmates. They don't even remove knives from the open inmate kitchens. Look into conditions in Halden or Bastoy Prisons, two of the major ones in that country.

And it works. The rate of recidivism in Norway is only 20%, compared to over 50% here in the US, and the crime rate itself, especially violent crime, is significantly lower as compared to the US.

The evidence is solid: strict incarceration increases recidivism, rehabilitation with a goal towards eventual re-integration reduces it.

 

[Christopher]

The evidence is solid: strict incarceration increases recidivism, rehabilitation with a goal towards eventual re-integration reduces it.

Which makes perfect sense to me. Humans are a social species. It's healthy for us to interact as part of a community, and the responsibilities, examples, and pressures that come with membership in that community are regulating influences on our behavior. Isolating people from that community would tend to be unhealthy and have a negative impact on their behavior.

It's even been shown, according to something I read recently (I don't remember just where), that sex offenders who are integrated into a community are less likely to repeat their offenses than ones who are shunned and isolated, because if they're part of a community, they're more likely to develop a sense of responsibility and empathy for the others in that community rather than being purely self-directed -- and also because their behavior is more closely supervised and regulated when they spend more time around other people. Nobody wants to engage with sex offenders because we're so disgusted by their actions, but isolating them does more harm than good. So it's a question of whether we want to choose what makes us feel comfortable or what actually works.