"Paid His Debt Society"

[CraigSca]

Ugh - sorry for the typo in the subject line.

Philosophical question here and hopefully relevant as it's been used fiarly often here regarding Michael Vick and others. Hopefully someone with a background in Criminal Justice can lend a hand here as well.

When I hear "paid his debt to society", I sometimes wonder if that's altogether true. In our normal monthly ramblings with our family therapist (see the "Joys of Parenting" thread I posted years ago), she mentioned that jail is basically a "you can't 'play nice' in our society, so we have to remove you from it for XX amount of time." After so much time, the person comes back and hopefully will have been rehabilitated to a point where he/she has learned their lesson and won't participate in the activities that put them in jail ever again.

However, what about the actual debt that was put on society for the actions in the first place? Is that figured into the equation of punishment as well? Is that what the community service is about - making reparations of some kind? Do most criminals have to go through that process or is it a select percentage?

[molson]

Ya, that's definitely an overrated phrase.

We don't send criminals to prison to "pay us back". We send them there to punish them, to protect the rest of us (and sometimes dogs) from them, and to hopefully deter others. You're not automatically "all good" with society the second you step out. That's why me maintain criminal records. It's not like that stuff never happened. If you commit more crimes, you'll be punished more harshly because of your past deeds.

[RomaGoth]

Agree with what molson said.

[lungs]

You're not automatically "all good" with society the second you step out. That's why me maintain criminal records. It's not like that stuff never happened. If you commit more crimes, you'll be punished more harshly because of your past deeds.

No arguments with this. My only quibble is that these people should be given opportunities to lead a good and productive life after being punished.

[sterlingice]

I've been wondering about this myself after hearing it abused the last couple of days. Not really sure what it means and I'll have to think about it some more.

SI

[larrymcg421]

No arguments with this. My only quibble is that these people should be given opportunities to lead a good and productive life after being punished.

I think most people who go to prison for a number of years would find themselves hard pressed to get a job at the same level as they had before they went to prison. If I went to jail, no way in hell I get rehired with my current company, or any competitor. You can live a productive life without getting back what exactly you did before.

[Autumn]

I think most people who go to prison for a number of years would find themselves hard pressed to get a job at the same level as they had before they went to prison. If I went to jail, no way in hell I get rehired with my current company, or any competitor. You can live a productive life without getting back what exactly you did before.

And that would vary greatly based on 1) your level of competence and employment before the imprisonment, and 2) the nature of your crime. I see a trend to more and more stigmatizing of various crimes with the purpose or consequence of making it more and more difficult for some offenders to integrate back into society. I think that's a large part of this issue, "paying your debt", how long and in what ways is it appropriate for society to continue "punishing" someone after their sentence is served?

[Chief Rum]

It's just a turn of phrase.

[CraigSca]

It's just a turn of phrase.

I think the problem is - a lot of people use it today as if it were some official statement or endorsement by the government.

[Chief Rum]

I think the problem is - a lot of people use it today as if it were some official statement or endorsement by the government.

I don't see it that way. It's just something people to say. I think you guys are making it out into far more than it ever has been.

[molson]

I don't see it that way. It's just something people to say. I think you guys are making it out into far more than it ever has been.

Sure, but it's a turn of phrase that people to argue that someone shouldn't be judged by their prior acts. That's the context its always used in, and it's now it's reached the point where the phrase itself is used as it's own justification. "Vick should get to play, he's paid his debt to society". That makes no sense.

[kcchief19]

I don't see it that way. It's just something people to say. I think you guys are making it out into far more than it ever has been.
Somewhat, but I think we've misconstrued the meaning of the phrase. It's a metaphor intended to reflect that the person has already been punished and should not be punished further. In essence, the person owed a "debt" to society and has paid it, so we shouldn't continue to collect on that "debt."

[kcchief19]

We don't send criminals to prison to "pay us back". We send them there to punish them, to protect the rest of us (and sometimes dogs) from them, and to hopefully deter others. You're not automatically "all good" with society the second you step out. That's why me maintain criminal records. It's not like that stuff never happened. If you commit more crimes, you'll be punished more harshly because of your past deeds.
If you want any indication of what's wrong with the American approach to crime, this is it. I won't deny that prisons are intended as "punishments" but the fact that all we do is punish and do almost nothing to correct the cause of the person being in prison is a big reason why crime can be such a huge problem in areas of this country.

I'll be very impressed if Michael Vick has been reformed and "softened" by his time in Leavenworth. That is a nasty place. I think the typical experience would be that spending time there would make you more hardened and bitter. Perhaps it will be different for him because he's lost so much and is grateful for a second chance. But the recidivism rate would suggest the odds are against him staying out of trouble.

[molson]

If you want any indication of what's wrong with the American approach to crime, this is it. I won't deny that prisons are intended as "punishments" but the fact that all we do is punish and do almost nothing to correct the cause of the person being in prison is a big reason why crime can be such a huge problem in areas of this country.


We actually spend hundreds of million dollars on rehabilitation. It doesn't work very well.

[kcchief19]

We actually spend hundreds of million dollars on rehabilitation. It doesn't work very well.
No, it works but we don't spend enough. Federal, state and local governments combined spend more than $200 billion a year on enforcement and corrections. Your estimate, which I imagine is low, is less than 1 percent of what we spend. You get what you pay for -- if you spend 99 times more on punishment than you do on rehabilitation, you're bound to get what we have. If you spend time in prison, you have a 2 in 3 chance of being arrested again and a 1 in 2 chance of going to jail again.

[Greyroofoo]

Just throw more money at the problem, that fixes everything!

[Autumn]

Just throw more money at the problem, that fixes everything!

This is a popular turn of phrase, but sometimes you actually need to spend money on things. Government in particular is very good at not funding something enough and then cutting funding drastically since it's not working and we don't want to throw money at it.

In other words, the phrase is meaningless without something to back it up. Kind of like "he's paid his debt to society." ;-)

[cyril]

an article on the cynical nature of "paid the debt" "second chance" and "forgiving"

Michael Vick has paid his legal debt to society, but he still has many payments to make on his social debt to the public and to Philadelphia Eagles fans. - ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=bryant_howard&id=4399188)

[molson]

No, it works but we don't spend enough. Federal, state and local governments combined spend more than $200 billion a year on enforcement and corrections. Your estimate, which I imagine is low, is less than 1 percent of what we spend. You get what you pay for -- if you spend 99 times more on punishment than you do on rehabilitation, you're bound to get what we have. If you spend time in prison, you have a 2 in 3 chance of being arrested again and a 1 in 2 chance of going to jail again.

What exactly would you suggest? From my experiences, the pendulum has gone way to far in the direction of "rehabilitation". You can't spend money to turn a criminal into a good guy. Maybe you can, with an unlimited amount of money and a lobotomy, but it's really not practical.

Substance abuse treatment at the state level really doesn't work that well. Behavior treatment - LOL. It's a total joke. Parole is fairly effective in keeping some people supervised for a while, but they usually crash at some point. The volume of criminals even a small state is cost prohibitive. I guess if we could hire the entire Mayo Clinic and have them work out of the state prison, we'd get better results (but certainly not perfect, certainly not
cost-effective) but that ain't happening.

There's maybe 1 in 500 felons that have a chance at a productive life, and those people are well attended to. They're easy to pick out. But the vast majority are just garbage, and just need to be kept out of society.

[JS19]

Sure, but it's a turn of phrase that people to argue that someone shouldn't be judged by their prior acts. That's the context its always used in, and it's now it's reached the point where the phrase itself is used as it's own justification. "Vick should get to play, he's paid his debt to society". That makes no sense.

I don't think it's used in that sense, that a person shouldn't be judged by their prior acts....judge them all you want, their is just no need to continue to punish them.

[molson]

I don't think it's used in that sense, that a person shouldn't be judged by their prior acts....judge them all you want, their is just no need to continue to punish them.

Well they shouldn't be punished by the government anymore, certainly. But there's no constitutional restriction about societal punishment. We have the freedom to not associate with felons. If there's somebody applying for the same job, with comparable qualifications, who HASN'T been so disruptive to our country, than why not give that guy a chance?

The only way Vick can "repay his debt" is if he can somehow un-torture those dogs.

[JS19]

I agree with you 100% here. However, going back to the saying, "paid his debt to society", he has, according to the government, been punished as they see fit, whether or not you or I agree with it, and is now free to carry on with his life as he sees fit. Now it falls solely on the potential employers to determine whether or not they seek his (or any other criminal) services. Maybe the saying should be changed, rather than "paid his debt to society", as you said, he can't un-torture those dogs, it should be "paid his debt to (insert some type of governmental/criminal law terminology that fits)".

[fantom1979]

What if Vick works for the humane society and ends up (by way of financial support) saving more dogs (that would have been put down) then he killed. Has he then "repaid his debt"?

[ISiddiqui]

However, what about the actual debt that was put on society for the actions in the first place? Is that figured into the equation of punishment as well? Is that what the community service is about - making reparations of some kind? Do most criminals have to go through that process or is it a select percentage?

Yes. One of the theories of punishment (or at any rate one of the theories they mention in Criminal Law classes) is that the criminal is repaying society for breaking its rules and destroying the society order (at least temporarily). So that is one of the things that is considered (or should be) when punishment is doled out.