The cold-blooded convicted killer of the frontrunner in the Dutch elections in 2002 was released after 12 years, something which is unthinkable in other countries.
As a Dutch guy, I agree with this in general. However, what the system does not take into account is that some people are just broken beyond any hope of ever being fixed. For example, there was a news story a while back about some petty criminal who stole some iPhones from a locker room and got caught. It was the 163rd time he got arrested. How do you deal with someone like that in a civilised manner ?
Of course, if your point is that certain people are beyond help, then I guess you can always find examples where this is true and then maybe you can set certain rules specific for those extreme cases.
But I think that doesn't invalidate the GP's point. In most cases helping the person recover is actually possible so it's worth giving that road a try.
No, there aren't. You can't force someone into psychiatric care unless they are a danger to themselves or others and even then it's a difficult process.
> But I think that doesn't invalidate the GP's point. In most cases helping the person recover is actually possible so it's worth giving that road a try.
I agree. But the system needs to acknowledge that it simply is not possible for some people. I don't think we should wait for someone to get arrested 100+ times to try a different approach.
My point was that someone that gets arrested not 100+ times, but even 5+ or 10+ is probably someone having serious issues participating in society (assuming we are not talking about North Korea or some other dictatorship regime with absurd incarceration laws).
Sometimes the culprit is going to be a medical reason for which we can try a medical treatment, but if not, there might be other possible treatments like those used with gang members (watch "La Vida Loca" documentary).
When all this fails, then we can maybe argue that we are dealing with one of those people for which there is no possible help, but it's not until now (hopefully) that we consider some potentially uncivilized way of dealing with these extremes.
That's how I would like to (broadly) deal with these people anyway. Not saying it's what happens, unfortunately.
That's why there also is involuntary commitment (TBS), where many people are in so-called "long stay" for decades, often until death, but that has been ruled against the declaration of human rights, so there is a possibility of getting released (which, afaik, has never been granted yet)
are you suggesting he should be locked up for a very long time for committing a lot of petty crimes?
You might call them "petty" crimes as if they are nothing, but to the person involved they are a very big deal.
for how long, indefinitely?
Yes. 144 crimes? He's not going to stop, so yes, indefinitely.
This isn't about punishing him, it's about keeping him away from everyone else.
For child molesters and murder, the goal is punishment, and then it's a specific amount of years which are determined as an appropriate punishment.
But here the goal is prevention.
The two categories can not be compared to each other because they are not the same. They have different goals, target different people, and have different time frames.
They just both happen to be implemented via jail which leads you to compare them, but it doesn't have to be that way - for example punishment can be corporal, and prevention can theoretically be done other ways (none practical at the moment, but things like an AI that watches behavior and stops the person or sounds an alarm may be possible in the future).
Well there's your problem, those are usually the goals of justice systems in places like the US. The entire point of this artical that those aren't the goals for the dutch
The example at hand was an example of a clear failure of rehabilitation. And when that happened the Dutch had no legal ability (or perhaps desire) to deal with it.
What sort of bank do prison owning CEOs make?
And I think folks should be. I'm American, the land of petty imprisonments and punishments lasting long after prison time is served. The system here seems to produce much better outcomes for both the people imprisoned and the community around them.
I agree there is a balance to be struck, the American system seems to be the other extreme.
Why do the families of victims matter the most? Does not every person matter equally?
Second, 14 (or 21) years for murder, really? A life isn't worth a lot anymore these days..
Prisons cost money.
As far as I'm concerned, there is indeed a punishment/revenge factor also in our current justice system, besides rehabilitation and keeping the streets safe from wrongdoers. That could lead to minimum sentences, especially for murder and even more so when it's premeditated. In general, I find that judges (in the Netherlands) strike an okay balance.
In addition, convicts may be involuntarily committed when their sentence is over (and often before). This is aimed at rehabilitation, but can be extended indefinitely.
[1] https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_tot_levenslang_veroo... (in Dutch)
How much people live in Dutch? If Russians will send one killer for every key men in country, country will be their in just 12 years, while they lose nothing, because Dutch prison is much much more comfortable than a flat in Rostov. I see that in Ukraine right now.
Also, 14/21 years is about 20-25% of one's life. I think that's quite a lot, really.
Seems you're the one who isn't giving much value to the prisoner's life here.
If rehabilitation can't be accomplished in 14 years, it won't be accomplished in 20 or 30 either so what's the point of keeping them inside an arbitrary number of years after that?
edit: I just noticed you referred to imprisonment as punishment on another thread; that's where we differ in belief.
I'm not talking about accidents (e.g. a car crash), but premeditated murder? I personally think the length of that punishment is not in line with the crime. But hey, I'm getting downvoted to hell, so I guess most people think it is.
Prison isn't meant as a punishment in Norway, it is for rehabilitation of the person. People would rather they helped even the worst of people become members of society than let them rot in a cell for "punishment".
Did being sent to the naughty step when you were a kid solve your behavior or was it becoming a better person that solved it?
You can't really compare that though. In 99% of the cases, I agree with what you say and with that line of thought. I just don't when it comes to murder. To me, that seems like the worst of all possible crimes.
You're getting downvoted because you treat imprisonment as vengeance, as paying back a debt that is owed to the victim's family.
The more reasonable approach is to use imprisonment as a tool which prevents future crimes by the perpetrator and other potential criminals (through rehabilitation and deterrence). This yields better results and higher benefits to society as a whole, even if it might not be as emotionally satisfying to the victim's family.
Would you be comfortable spending time with someone you know who has cold-bloodedly killed another human being? I know I wouldn't. And I'm generally a person who is pretty open about most things.
We pay people to go murder other people and are fine with it. We call them soldiers and sometimes policemen too. Turns out that most people who kill someone else are able to come back more often than not well enough to be able to live in society, although PTSD is a well-known consequence for it.
Does that matter at all? I mean - no matter the punishment, the victim is dead, and nothing will bring them back.
So yes, lock them up: as minor deterrent (penal codes aren't very effective in that regard, if not even the death penalty prevents murder); to protect society; to give some standardized environment to hopefully correct the perpetrator so that they'll rediscover their humanity; and maybe for some sort of punishment (but that's really an afterthought, because as said, what does it matter?).
But (I hope) I'd refuse to let them also take my humanity (in addition to the life they took).