Claim: We, In America, Need to rethink the way we define crime and the way we punish it.

"Please explain why filling the blank with "suicide" is different from all the other victimless actions. " I'll elaborate. I'm not against the idea of somebody helping in a suicide per se. What I should have said is that I don't want people being coerced into suicide. I would say that it would have to be done in an official capacity so that people can't use it as a way to get out of a murder they committed. "knowledge does not PERFORM teaching. Knowledge is WHAT is taught. " it was a turn a phrase. Lol, I could turn around and say that pain doesn't teach either. It's wordplay. I'm saying you should fill their heads with knowledge, Not pain. "To me, It seems like it will be virtually impossible to teach them much of anything. " Thank you for demonstrating my point that prisoners are treated like less than human. You're talking about them like they're dogs. What makes you think a criminal can't learn things? What if they lived bad lives because they were never taught by their parents and teaching them right and wrong was all they needed? I was in jail a few times. Do you think I'm too far gone to learn anything? "How can you say that suffering is not a good teacher" Suffering is a good teacher in the scope that if I burn my hand on a candle, It will teach me not to touch the candle. But if my parents show me it's good to punish with suffering, Then I'll punish people with suffering because my parents showed me it's cool and then those people will pass it on, Etc. Suffering begets Suffering. People say that for a reason. It's a vicious circle. Even when suffering is a good teacher, It's not because of the suffering, It's because of the lesson you teach them after. So just teach them the lesson without making them suffer. "But should I be okay with people "getting away with it"? That seems like a recipe for disaster. " I think you misunderstood what I said. I'm not saying that we don't lock up criminals. I'm saying that we don't do it with the intent to punish them. They're not LITERALLY getting away with their crimes. They're locked away from society and that's all that matters. People are safe. Beyond that, There is no reason to treat them like animals. "I would prefer that the criminal provide money to the victim. This is a form of punishment" That's not a punishment, That's restitution. That's a civil matter and I'm not arguing about civil matters because I don't have much of a problem with civil courts except maybe with fallacious lawsuits. But that's a topic for another debate. "Many of the criminals have no money to provide to the victim. This is one place that jail comes from--a form of payment in lieu of money" This is irrational. Putting a person in jail won't get the money back. It makes more sense to leave them alone so they can eventually get a job and get garnished. Or at very least, Put them in some kind of work release program so they can pay it off that way. Putting them in jails GUARANTEES that the victim will not see the money, So I reject this idea for that reason. "Now, You are telling me to happily allow all people (rich and poor) to commit crime with no negative consequences at all. You suggest I send them to school. Should I give lawbreakers a full-ride scholarship to the college of their choice? What message would that send: "crime pays. "" This is a straw man. There are consequences. They go to jail. It's just not the torture chamber that you're accustomed to seeing. I say yes, We should teach criminals as much about ethics as possible and give them all the tools they need to get out of their old lives when they finally get out. If they're in for life. Then they can just sit in humane sized quarters and rot for all I care. Otherwise, If they're eventually gonna be back out on the street, Teaching them would be crime prevention. Your floor.