Some people speak about it as an either/or situation - either incarceration is for deterrence, OR it's for retribution, OR it's for rehabilitation, etc. In school, my criminal law professor, who was an active federal prosecutor, taught us that incarceration's purpose was all of these, with a few more thrown in.
In a sense, no two convicts are 'in there' for exactly the same reasons, nor will they be affected by the experience in exactly the same way. All the rehabilitative opportunities in the world will be wasted on some, while the most draconian punishments and deprivation imaginable will be similarly wasted on others.
My own take on the state of prisons in America is that control of the asylum has, to a large extent, been ceded to the inmates. It's far easier to avoid 'stressing out' the convicts, by pretty much permitting them to run the place, rape and beat one another at will, use illegal drugs, in some cases wear civilian clothes, etc., than it would be to bring back the striped prison outfits, leg irons, iron discipline, and constant lack of privacy and loss of individual identity that would make prison the last place to which anybody, regardless of their criminal propensities or lack of mental acuity, would wish to return.
|