Former Inmates of reddit - how are rapists/pedophiles REALLY treated once in prison (self.AskReddit)

{AskReddit}

1726 ups - 496 downs = 1230 votes

You always hear that most are brutally bullied/beat in prison. Wondering if some of it is exaggerated, or under stated. Also how do other inmates feel about rapists and pedophiles regardless of action being taken or not. (Possibly NSFW) [SERIOUS!]

1138 comments submitted at 19:39:42 on Dec 4, 2013 by bluesboarder

  • [-]
  • zap2
  • 44 Points
  • 20:49:49, 4 December

That's revenge. Our prison system shouldn't be based on revenge.

I'm very sorry for what happened to you. But revenge isn't acceptable.

  • [-]
  • cassycas
  • 32 Points
  • 21:08:30, 4 December

Revenge may not be acceptable, but you'd be a liar if you said that it doesn't feel damn good.

  • [-]
  • critical_mess
  • 1 Points
  • 22:04:06, 4 December

What is this.. A Tarantino movie?

  • [-]
  • Eezyville
  • 1 Points
  • 22:04:49, 4 December

And people doing things because it feels good is why we have such a problem to begin with. Think about it. You condone certain people to be raped in prison. Well the ones who are raping them will eventually leave prison, would you like that person to live next door to you? You've already encouraged them to be judge and jury in prison so what makes you think it will change on the outside. Justice is not about revenge its about balance.

  • [-]
  • Dekanuva
  • 1 Points
  • 22:07:48, 4 December

It kills you inside. You lower yourself to their level. You go against everything you claim to represent when you seek revenge. It is a two-edged sword.

  • [-]
  • jfsdaonfasodf
  • 44 Points
  • 20:55:14, 4 December

You'd be singing a different song if it were you.

  • [-]
  • OsmoZ
  • 106 Points
  • 20:57:44, 4 December

Maybe he would. It wouldn't make the process righter though.

  • [-]
  • Da_Lulz
  • 1 Points
  • 21:52:17, 4 December

It would give the guy what he deserves.

  • [-]
  • OsmoZ
  • 1 Points
  • 22:05:58, 4 December

> what he deserves

So, some people deserve to be raped and killed. That's a nice society we live in. I'm very proud of you again, humans.

  • [-]
  • McKing
  • 1 Points
  • 22:02:52, 4 December

So you have the authority to decide what he deserves? I don't think so.

  • [-]
  • Samonuh
  • 1 Points
  • 21:40:02, 4 December

That's exactly why his point is important. People lose proper judgment in fits of rage, hence our legal system being void of vengeance-inspired punishment.

  • [-]
  • Selmer_Sax
  • 1 Points
  • 21:41:32, 4 December

But the ideal justice system is impartial and not subject to those feelings. It would give the exact same result for identical cases. If you are suggesting that we take the victim's revenge as correct then what is the point of a criminal justice system?

  • [-]
  • jfsdaonfasodf
  • 1 Points
  • 21:47:18, 4 December

We don't have an ideal justice system so what's your point?

  • [-]
  • Selmer_Sax
  • 1 Points
  • 21:49:37, 4 December

Our justice system is supposed to strive towards being the ideal justice system.

  • [-]
  • ewat85
  • 1 Points
  • 21:52:54, 4 December

This is exactly why I don't think victims statements at trials are appropriate. Our justice system is State of ______ vs Accused, or People vs. Accused; it is not Victim A vs Accused.

There are numerous theories of punishment but the reality of the situation is that we have created a system that seeks to remove revenge from the equation. Yet, at the moment immediately prior to determining a sentence we allow revenge to be placed front and center in front of the jury.

  • [-]
  • jfsdaonfasodf
  • 1 Points
  • 22:03:58, 4 December

Punishment isn't worth it unless they know how they've hurt someone. The victim's story almost never makes the accused feel any regret and prisons make them worse people.

I agree, take victims out of the courtroom but put the convicted in counselling programs. They need to know what they did wrong.

  • [-]
  • usingpond
  • 1 Points
  • 21:55:39, 4 December

So what? The justice system is based on objectivity, not personal emotions. Also, you don't even know that.

  • [-]
  • jfsdaonfasodf
  • 1 Points
  • 22:05:02, 4 December

>The justice system is based on objectivity, not personal emotions.

On paper. It never actually is, though.

  • [-]
  • zap2
  • 12 Points
  • 20:56:55, 4 December

Please don't tell me what I'd feel if I was in this situation.

I know where I stand on this issue.

  • [-]
  • dremic
  • 20 Points
  • 21:07:16, 4 December

i think its pretty easy to say where youd stand without actually going through the adversity of what this person went through.

edit: some of you dislike my post. I see where some of you are coming from. Let me clarify because some of you may be confused by what I mean.

It is super easy to say you would do or feel or think a certain way when you are discussing an experience that is foreign to you.

When you look at a situation from the outside and say "oh well I know where I'd stand and it wouldn't be where you're standing"

thats not a fair thing to say, because you HAVENT stood there. you dont have the experience.

Im not saying his way of thinking is right or wrong. Im just saying that those experiences will change ANYBODY and its impossible for you to say youd feel one way without actually having those experiences.

  • [-]
  • BSL-4
  • 1 Points
  • 21:25:12, 4 December

It is easy because your decision isn't based on irrational emotions. I don't see how that is a bad thing. You might punch someone in the face for insulting you in the heat of the moment, but in a more level-headed state you would see that as unreasonable. I'm sorry to the OP, but we don't let the victims set the terms for the punishment for exactly this reason.

The whole "you wouldn't understand unless you've been through it yourself" mentality is really counter-productive to a rational debate. When your main point is that the other person's argument isn't irrational enough, you're not in much of a position to argue.

2ยข

  • [-]
  • dremic
  • 1 Points
  • 21:30:38, 4 December

interesting point

  • [-]
  • x755x
  • 1 Points
  • 21:53:33, 4 December

I don't think you need to experience rape to have a stance on how criminals should be treated. In fact, I think it would be detrimental. You can't make a decision logically when you're so emotionally invested in the situation, as a rape victim would be.

  • [-]
  • TJ5897
  • 1 Points
  • 21:19:14, 4 December

If he got raped he would not be thinking critically. He may want vengeance, but that doesn't make it any more okay.

  • [-]
  • unender
  • 1 Points
  • 21:27:22, 4 December

Take note I'm not the person you directed that towards, that being said... Let's not make those types of assumptions.

  • [-]
  • tryify
  • 1 Points
  • 21:45:29, 4 December

No, I wouldn't, and don't. Vengeance heals no one.

  • [-]
  • DrSmeve
  • 1 Points
  • 22:00:42, 4 December

Not everyone has your/the other poster's mentality. So no, you can't say that.

  • [-]
  • midwestwatcher
  • 1 Points
  • 22:04:55, 4 December

There's a reason we don't let the victim of a crime sit on the jury, genius.

  • [-]
  • jfsdaonfasodf
  • 1 Points
  • 22:06:33, 4 December

There is a reason, but that's not it. The jury doesn't decide punishment, genius.

  • [-]
  • wingnut0000
  • 11 Points
  • 21:06:48, 4 December

This ain't Batman dude.

  • [-]
  • Broke_stupid_lonely
  • 1 Points
  • 21:30:48, 4 December

Punisher or Rorshak would be better examples.

  • [-]
  • c0horst
  • 2 Points
  • 20:52:53, 4 December

Your right. Revenge isn't acceptable. its about making sure it doesnt happens again. So he should be put down like a rabid dog.

  • [-]
  • OneHandsomeSheep
  • 1 Points
  • 21:17:54, 4 December

Getting real stupid up in here.

  • [-]
  • Samonuh
  • 1 Points
  • 21:41:27, 4 December

It's typical reddit. Just keep in mind that you're surrounded by a bunch of blood-thirsty, subtly racist, middle-class white boys who were bullied in middle school. Whenever I start getting angry at a ridiculous post here, I remind myself of this.

  • [-]
  • jmalbo35
  • 1 Points
  • 22:02:57, 4 December

Yeah, ad hominem against anyone with different opinions than you is a great habit to be in, it really makes you open minded. I'm not white (not seeing how that's relevant here in any way though, considering this isn't a race/privilege related issue), nor racist, and wasn't bullied, but I don't see why someone who commits violent rape deserves the right to live.

Assuming there's concrete evidence to convict someone (clear video footage, caught in the act, etc.), why should they be allowed to live? They've infringed deeply on someone else's rights and have clearly demonstrated an inability to live by rules of society and respect human rights at that point, so why should taxpayers fund the rest of their lives being lived out without having to contribute anything back to society?

  • [-]
  • Patrik333
  • 1 Points
  • 22:00:21, 4 December

You keep a mirror next to your computer, then?

  • [-]
  • OsmoZ
  • 1 Points
  • 21:59:54, 4 December

I'm just gonna save your comment.

  • [-]
  • BrofessorDumbelldore
  • 1 Points
  • 22:00:10, 4 December

Reddit spends most of it's time arguing about the government and policies. Then look at the comments on here. People have no idea of the implications of what they're suggesting. Yeah, let criminals be raped. I'm sure that would solve some problems, and i'm sure when these raped criminals get out of jail, they wouldn't be more likely to commit sexual offences. /s

  • [-]
  • x755x
  • 1 Points
  • 21:56:13, 4 December

It's not a stupid point by any means. A little extreme, but not stupid.

  • [-]
  • OneHandsomeSheep
  • 1 Points
  • 22:02:39, 4 December

Eh, you and I seem to have different definitions for the phrase "a little extreme."

  • [-]
  • michaelisnotginger
  • 1 Points
  • 22:00:01, 4 December

don't forget Reddit is full of geniuses who were too smart for school!

  • [-]
  • Marsdreamer
  • 1 Points
  • 21:36:45, 4 December

The justice system is about rehabilitation and reintegration into normal society. Every other modern country gets this, Americans are still behind, however.

And while I sympathize with the OP here this is exactly why we have laws. If people just went around enacting the justice they deem fit for a wrong, we'd have literal anarchy.

Stricter punishments do not protect the people and they do not deter crime. Here we have one of the strictest and ruthless justice systems in the world and yet we also have the highest crime rate of any industrialized nation.

As odd as it may seem, many criminals themselves are in fact victims as well.

  • [-]
  • zap2
  • 15 Points
  • 20:55:22, 4 December

Jail for life serves the same purpose.

And you're assuming he/she can't be rehabilitated. I think that's a faulty assumption.

  • [-]
  • x755x
  • 1 Points
  • 21:55:10, 4 December

It also costs more.

Who cares if they can be rehabilitated if they're going to spend their life in prison anyway?

  • [-]
  • Iblivion
  • 1 Points
  • 21:41:16, 4 December

Why should we have to pay taxes for a sex offender that "might" be able to be rehabilitated?

  • [-]
  • zap2
  • 1 Points
  • 21:46:29, 4 December

It's cheaper to keep someone in prison for life then execute the death penalty in the US, so if it's just dollars you're concerned about, the death penalty shouldn't be your answer in the US today.

My issue is more theoretical, in that I don't think the state should have the ability to kill a human. Sex offenders did something terrible, but they are still people and I think we have a duty to reform them.

(Not to mention the risk of killing someone who is innocent. Which is an outcome I see as so bad the risk of doing this warrants a complete reconsideration of the death penalty)

  • [-]
  • Iblivion
  • 1 Points
  • 21:54:23, 4 December

Of course there needs to be proof that they're guilty. Where's your source that keeping a person alive for a lifetime is cheaper than executing them?

  • [-]
  • zap2
  • 1 Points
  • 21:59:20, 4 December

Specific to one state

http://www.law.du.edu/documents/criminal-law-review/issues/v03-1/Cost-of-Death-Penalty.pdf

Then here is more general info

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

The issue with evidence is that it is not flawless. One mistake with the (expensive) death penalty, we've just killed an innocent man or woman. And there is no way to undo that.

  • [-]
  • jmalbo35
  • 1 Points
  • 22:06:02, 4 December

It's cheaper currently, but I'm fairly certain most people advocating for the death of a rapist/murderer would support reform to current capital punishment laws to make it far cheaper.

Personally, I don't see the problem with it assuming concrete evidence. I don't advocate it for cases where there's any doubt, but if someone was caught in the act or there's clear footage and DNA evidence (which is rare, but certainly not unheard of) then I have no problem with capital punishment.

  • [-]
  • c0horst
  • -10 Points
  • 20:57:15, 4 December

Fine, maybe rehabilitation if possible.

Second offense mandatory euthenasia, then, because they've proven they can't be rehabilitated.

  • [-]
  • zap2
  • 9 Points
  • 21:00:45, 4 December

I'm glad you're open to rehabilitation.

But a second offense doesn't prove that. It just proves the rehabilitation didn't work the first time.

Of course, we need to be more diligent in the release of a 2nd time offender, if it happens at all.

But blanket limits are foolish. Cases are unique and broad "2nd offense and death" requirements ignore the specifics of a case.

  • [-]
  • HoldmysunnyD
  • 6 Points
  • 21:13:46, 4 December

From a utilitarian perspective, allowing employers to discriminate unilaterally on the basis of criminal history destroys nearly all prospects for rehabilitation. Obviously, someone convicted of molesting children shouldn't work at schools, violent crimes shouldn't work in security/law enforcement, and embezzlement/fraud shouldn't work in the financial sector, but convicts should be able to get decent jobs if they qualify for them.

  • [-]
  • zap2
  • 1 Points
  • 21:15:41, 4 December

I couldn't agree. After prison, former convicts are up against a system that makes living a legal life very difficult.

  • [-]
  • StarbossTechnology
  • 1 Points
  • 21:27:31, 4 December

From an employment perspective that's changing though.

  • [-]
  • ThisIsReLLiK
  • 1 Points
  • 21:39:02, 4 December

And if it doesn't work the second time, just need to be more diligent the third, and the fourth, and so on. When do you draw the line before accepting that some people are shit and the world would be a better place without them?

  • [-]
  • zap2
  • 1 Points
  • 21:41:00, 4 December

It's a case to case basis.

This is all theoretical. We don't have any real facts, and we aren't a judge and jury.

  • [-]
  • ThisIsReLLiK
  • 1 Points
  • 22:04:39, 4 December

It's all theoretical for them too. Most of the time only one or two people know what actually went down.

  • [-]
  • Beevee3030
  • -7 Points
  • 21:14:05, 4 December

People like you are the cause of failure. As much as you dont like it, if we were to kill people that commit extremely violent crimes 1 hour after conviction the world would be a better place. I personally feel that if someone in my family got killed, or raped i have the right to personally kill him. But you want children to go to school with this guy on the streets? What happens when the rehabilitation fails? The next person that gets killed or raped should be on you ....

  • [-]
  • OsmoZ
  • 1 Points
  • 21:32:28, 4 December

Back to the middle ages, that's good progress... Why would you use such simple rules when it comes to dealing with situations that are that complex, knowing that some people's lives depend on it? You can't. We have to use our brains to find solutions for these kinds of issues that keep everyone alive and happy. Killing someone for revenge or getting him/her raped is not okay, no matter who that person is.

  • [-]
  • theorem604
  • 1 Points
  • 21:35:24, 4 December

First off, I don't believe that the world would be a safer place if people were murdered "1 hour after conviction" as you stated. What if they were falsely accused? Do you have that much faith in the justice system?

Secondly, you seem so eager to take someone's life. You feel like you have the right to "personally kill someone" but have you thought about what that might do to your psyche? Killing someone changes a person, why would you wish that evil upon yourself for something as petty as retribution? The feeling that you "have the right to kill" is a dangerous mindset, and something that I feel makes you no better than a common thug or murderer.

Lastly, to wish rape or murder on someone who disagrees with your views is a pretty fucked up stance to take and shows a lot about who you are as a person. Hate will do nothing positive for you, and I hope that you can let go of this before it consumes you...

  • [-]
  • TJ5897
  • 1 Points
  • 21:20:03, 4 December

That's good for you. I don't care about your emotion driven revenge. We should run the country with logic, not passion.

  • [-]
  • mekke10
  • 1 Points
  • 21:32:36, 4 December

Sure, logic. Eliminate crime by eliminating criminals. Simple logic.

  • [-]
  • TJ5897
  • 1 Points
  • 21:36:29, 4 December

They used to kill murders and dehand thieves. It didn't stop murder and thievery.

You're not very wise on history if you think that notion works.

  • [-]
  • mekke10
  • 1 Points
  • 21:42:34, 4 December

History applies partly here. We have way more possibilities now in catching criminals. In history serial killer were able to get away more.

Also crimes of passion will always happen as it could be anyone doing it. Crime wouldn't stop but it would lower.

  • [-]
  • thefuckdude
  • 1 Points
  • 21:30:44, 4 December

And that's why people like you should keep your opinions to yourselves.

  • [-]
  • dezmd
  • 1 Points
  • 21:27:20, 4 December

Let me guess, at the very least, you consider yourself an agnostic Christian, too.

  • [-]
  • jennyroo
  • 1 Points
  • 21:51:37, 4 December

I think anyone with a passing knowledge on the subject understands that pedophiles are not rehabilitatable. These people are severely messed up neurologically.

  • [-]
  • zap2
  • 1 Points
  • 21:54:29, 4 December

Please, give me your sources for that.

The scientific, peer reviewed evidence that it is not possible.

  • [-]
  • Succession
  • 1 Points
  • 21:30:37, 4 December

There is never a reason to take someone's life. That just makes the victim into a murderer, and taxpayers into accomplices.

  • [-]
  • theswerto
  • 1 Points
  • 21:55:43, 4 December

No, instead our prison system is based on making a few rich people more money and wasting billions of tax dollars. Let's keep putting people in prison for minor offenses and victimless crimes and putting them in with the same population as the violent offenders and sexual offenders, and create repeat offenders by turning formerly nonviolent offenders into future violent offenders.

Let's be honest here, the prison system isn't about reform, or we'd put violent offenders (as in murderers, rapists, etc.) in on a hole and forget about them, and put everyone else in a rehabilitation program and care more about ensuring they never repeat an offense instead of forgetting about them once their parole ends.

  • [-]
  • oldie101
  • 1 Points
  • 22:05:28, 4 December

You call it revenge, why is it not justice?

Often times we hear victims or victims family's say that all they ask for is justice.

Sometimes that justice comes in the form of a long prison sentence. Sometimes it comes in the form of death. Is it not possible that justice could be brought to a victim by having the attacker/perpetrator feel what it is that the victim felt?

You might argue that the victim would be better off by accepting their faith and moving on from it without holding negative feelings (easier said then done).

However I believe the victim has every right to their opinion of what will bring them justice.

Isn't it possible that putting someone in jail for life can be considered "revenge" ? And we shouldn't base our prison system on "revenge", right?

Or is it only considered "revenge" if the same act that was done to the victim is done to the perpetrator?

I think we should allow the victims to decide what justice means for them, and the rest of us can agree/disagree with how our court systems work.

  • [-]
  • patshurmur
  • 1 Points
  • 22:09:35, 4 December

So rapist fucks should just be allowed to get away with their crimes? I call bullshit.

Whatever you think is acceptable to do to someone else, you should have no problem with it being done to you. Prison shouldn't be about rehab when it comes to rapists and murderers, it should be about punishment. If you ruin or end someone's life, you deserve the same to you. Put your feeeeeelingssssss away and use logic.

  • [-]
  • only_uses_expletives
  • 1 Points
  • 21:23:36, 4 December

Bullshit, revenge is sometimes exactly what a person needs. Still don't think it should have a place in our justice system.

  • [-]
  • x755x
  • 1 Points
  • 21:57:07, 4 December

Pretty sure that's what he said.

  • [-]
  • xiic
  • 1 Points
  • 21:20:29, 4 December

Too late. It's called the penal system for a reason.

  • [-]
  • zap2
  • 1 Points
  • 21:25:54, 4 December

That's a weak argument for something.

You're basically saying "This is the way it is, can't change it"

We can change it. We, as a society, can change almost any socially/politically created institution.

  • [-]
  • xiic
  • 1 Points
  • 21:42:10, 4 December

You're right, we can change it and we should, I'm just drawing attention to the fact that it is currently a system designed to punish, not rehabilitate.

  • [-]
  • labudweekly
  • 1 Points
  • 22:06:52, 4 December

I'ts eye for an eye homie. Not revenge, just fair justice.

  • [-]
  • porn_flakes
  • 1 Points
  • 22:08:31, 4 December

10-20 years of free meals and cable TV doesn't seem acceptable either.

  • [-]
  • Da_Lulz
  • 1 Points
  • 21:52:25, 4 December

Don't be a pussy.