Re:The Number of Youth in Juvenile Detention in California H...
by wahern on Monday September 17, 2018 @04:08PM
(#18009541)
Except now that maximum penalties are reduced, there's less risk of life-destroying consequences unfairly meted out. Teenagers especially may be less responsive to consequentialist preventive measures (i.e. punishment), but they are responsive to some degree. It's not tenable to argue that an environment of zero punitive consequences won't increase the incidence of crime, especially property crime.
Re:The Number of Youth in Juvenile Detention in California H...
by trhway on Monday September 17, 2018 @04:21PM
(#18009664)
if you notice, i'm not arguing against punishment. The punishment is a must. The best punishment would teach the violator instead of just punishing per.se.
>Teenagers especially may be less responsive to consequentialist preventive measures (i.e. punishment), but they are responsive to some degree.
Exactly. The issue is that the more immediate/instant punishment works better for teenager mind than the chance of delayed/procedural/etc punishment. The immediate punishment is what helps the forming brain to develop cause/consequences machinery of behavior.
i'm completely against locking them up and ruining their lives for what in most cases is just a [stupid] fun for them. We do know that the brain of teenager is biologically flawed to correctly estimate risks/consequences of things like that. Yet it is the duty of society to help correct the flaw and teach them a lesson. I think something like allowing store owners to shoot using salt charges (an old USSR method for situations like this, no serious injury, yet supposed to be very painful for a few days) will make these youngsters running much faster and laughing less :)
In more general - while corporal punishment is an unquestionably bad thing on its own, when it comes to the choice of corporal punishment vs. situation of 2nd graders already having a rap sheet, i'm not sure what is better for society long-term.