How can prisoners be more useful

[wwjd_kilden]

and what about the money spent taking the prisoners organs?

 

[Sharp]

I wouldn't bill the prisoner for that. The recipient can cover the cost of the operation, or the state, depending on how the country's medical insurance system is structured.

 

[buckeyegirl700]

Most people who are in prison do not want to be there. Most of the prisoners are drug addicts who were not offered the chance to go to a drug treatment center. There are alot of different people incarcerated for different things, but drug addicts make up a big percentage where I live. Prisoners do not have an easy life. I know because I have been incarcerated before. You have people tell you what to do, your crowded in a cell with other prisoners, you have to eat horrible food and they do not give you a lot to eat. You are away from your family, and you have correction officers cussing you for no reason except for because they can. Females get sexually harrased daily by the guards and corrections officers. Prison is not nice either. You can not go to the closet and pick an outfit to wear you have to wear an uncomfortable uniform. Prisoners have to work while they are incarcerated. You have to serve food, clean, do other prisoners laundry.

 

[Matthew]

1. They should all be working 18 hour days, either manual labour, or in call centres. Governments should sell the prisoners' cheap labour to private industry, and this way local businesses can compete with cheap foreign labour, also reducing the cost of goods and services.

I agree this should be done, but 18 hour days is too much, doing manual labour many would quickly suffer exhaustion and other problems requiring medical treatment, wiping away some of the benefit, but in general I say take away the playstation and hand these people a shovel.

2. They should be forced to donate blood. Screening methods would need to be tough, as these are high risk people. There would be enough blood for everyone if blood was taken from prisoners regularly.

Not a bad idea to have them donate blood, but I don't think we should start forcing medical procedures on prisoners, if blood drives aren't done at criminal institutions then they should start, but it should be voluntary like everone else, I would think a high number would do it because it would be considered 'good behaviour' the reward for that should be a lot smaller than it is right now as sometimes 'good behaviour' cuts sentences in half, but it would at least provide them with an insentive to participate.

3. For the murderers, rapists, serial killers, etc., their organs should be harvested, and given to people who need them. This would cut organ donation lists dramatically. I only mean non-vital organs (kidney, lung, bone marrow, etc.). I think once you kill or rape someone, you give up your right to live freely in society and have the same rights as everyone else. Society gets no recompense from that person being in jail, society only gets the bill, and assurance of no additional crimes from that person for a limited time. People who commit serious crimes should have to repay their debt to society in very real ways.

I don't agree with this at all, firstly I sincerely hope no surgeon worth their salt would agree to do a procedure in that circumstance knowing the patient did not consent. In the UK organ donors remain anonymous and so patients have to trust the service is ensuring the organs being used are obtained ethically, I wouldn't be too thrilled if I found out an organ came from someone who had been forced, criminal or otherwise. Like the blood donation I think it is an option that should offered to long term inmates knowing it will reflect better on them when it comes time to consider their release.

4. Again, for serious criminals only, all of their assets should be stripped from them, sold, and the proceeds used for charitible purposes. For prisoners who do their time and get out, they should be given a bill at the end of their sentence for the cost of their stay in jail, and be required to pay the government back over the course of their lifetime. No more freeriding.

In practive I think this would lead to an embittered society and even more crime, it would compound the suffering of family members, who might lose their home under this practice, and if we put criminals in large debt upon their release we would be encouraging them to remain a criminal, not re-enter society as a hard working person willing to pay their way legitimately.

In general prison should be a place of no comforts to make criminals realise how much they gain by being civillised in society, sadly human rights groups and others have led us to a point where some people in society who do actually work and obey the law enjoy a similar or lower standard of living than those in prison and that is an absolute disgrace, we don't need to betray our principles in order to adeqautely punish criminals, just be willing to impose on them the bare minimun required for human survival, I'd gladly bear the cost of running a prison service if it were effective, but nowadays our social conscience has undermined the punishment of criminals to such an extent that many do not differentiate between being out of jail and being in.

 

[buckeyegirl700]

I realy dont think anyone would benefit from prisoners donating blood, or organs. A majority of people in prison have abused their bodies, and have diseases such as AID's, hepatitis, and many other's.

 

[Matthew]

I realy dont think anyone would benefit from prisoners donating blood, or organs. A majority of people in prison have abused their bodies, and have diseases such as AID's, hepatitis, and many other's.

I have no idea what the ratio is for prisoners with substance abuse problems and ill health, but even if it is a majority the offer to donate blood and organs should still be made to the healthy prisoners, if those few donations might help improve or save even a few people then it's worth doing.
Across an entire nation, especially one as large as the USA there would probably enough healthy prisoners to make it worth the effort.

 

[biggentleben]

I have no idea what the ratio is for prisoners with substance abuse problems and ill health, but even if it is a majority the offer to donate blood and organs should still be made to the healthy prisoners, if those few donations might help improve or save even a few people then it's worth doing.
Across an entire nation, especially one as large as the USA there would probably enough healthy prisoners to make it worth the effort.

that's completely different from what was proposed initially....what is being discussed is a forced, required donation of blood and organs....i don't think anyone would have issue with a program for prisoners to voluntary donate....it's forced donation that others are responding to....

 

[Matthew]

that's completely different from what was proposed initially....what is being discussed is a forced, required donation of blood and organs....i don't think anyone would have issue with a program for prisoners to voluntary donate....it's forced donation that others are responding to....

That is what I was responding too in my first post on the subject, I said rather than forced participation in blood/organ donation programs it should be voluntary as I don't agree with forcing criminals to donate.

 

[Sharp]

Not a bad idea to have them donate blood, but I don't think we should start forcing medical procedures on prisoners, if blood drives aren't done at criminal institutions then they should start, but it should be voluntary like everone else, I would think a high number would do it because it would be considered 'good behaviour' the reward for that should be a lot smaller than it is right now as sometimes 'good behaviour' cuts sentences in half, but it would at least provide them with an insentive to participate.

I find it interesting that you wouldn't find it acceptable to force them to donate blood, but you would condone using their blood donations as a way of rewarding them. If forcing them to donate is unethical then surely offering incentives to them to donate is also unethical. Their choice to donate will hardly be voluntary if they are offered rewards. Also, some people have AIDS, and would not be able to benefit from a reward-based scheme. That's why I think all the healthy ones should be forced to hand over their blood.

In practive I think this would lead to an embittered society and even more crime, it would compound the suffering of family members, who might lose their home under this practice, and if we put criminals in large debt upon their release we would be encouraging them to remain a criminal, not re-enter society as a hard working person willing to pay their way legitimately.

I agree that hitting them with a lump sum might put people off working, but what I would do is deduct very minimal amounts along with their tax, over a long period of time.

but nowadays our social conscience has undermined the punishment of criminals to such an extent that many do not differentiate between being out of jail and being in.

Agreed.

 

[Matthew]

I find it interesting that you wouldn't find it acceptable to force them to donate blood, but you would condone using their blood donations as a way of rewarding them. If forcing them to donate is unethical then surely offering incentives to them to donate is also unethical. Their choice to donate will hardly be voluntary if they are offered rewards. Also, some people have AIDS, and would not be able to benefit from a reward-based scheme. That's why I think all the healthy ones should be forced to hand over their blood.

It wouldn't be a reward scheme at all, just normal blood donation, but in this context it's just one more thing an inmate can do over the course of their stay in prison to demonstrate to the authorities that determine their release date they have changed and have behaved in a positive way during their incarceration.
I suppose that is an incentive but no more so than abiding by every rule they have in prison and generally making an effort to show a good attitude, I don't see anything unethical about affording them one more way to show they are trying to become a decent human being while in prison.

I agree that hitting them with a lump sum might put people off working, but what I would do is deduct very minimal amounts along with their tax, over a long period of time.

Well as long as the method for collecting this money didn't financially cripple the person or act as a disincentive then I've got no problem with it.

 

[easygoing]

was just reading through some of the comments here and was just curious as to what plans would we have in mind for bringing these people out of their sins and leading them to christ?

Are we condemning evil with evil here? Remember that jesus, while on the cross, looked to the person next to him who was being sentenced to death for his crimes and told him that surely this day he will be in paradise with him. Of course that was after he had repented to the lord.

I feel that why some of these people are just pure evil in there and must be incarcerated for the safety of society, that others may be in there from having a moment of weakness and have accepted what punishment they have recieved but do not want to live the rest of their life as an evil person.

After all we are fighting for souls here and even a person who has lived an entire life in sin can come to the lord and be saved.

 

[mercyswolf]

Does anyone remember or know about how prisoners are useful in the state of California? That's right. Wild land firefighting. They train year round in the event of such and have been part of the key to success in wild land firefighting for years. So in my personal opinion I think that all prisoners should be trained in an area where they are best suited for a particular field.