Good point- my thought was poorly worded. I meant that if people with lots of money are making more money by putting people in prison, then they will find ways to ensure people keep being put into prison.
Imprisoning people shouldn’t in and of itself be profitable since then imprisoning people is incentivized.
Your friend’s work goes towards making prisons more humane, I’m in favour of him and you can tell him so :)
By that “logic”, states also shouldn’t be allowed to imprison people.
One you can reverse, mate, you know that.
Woah, now we’re moving goalposts.
I thought the argument was, “the state says it’s not okay to do this, and then they go and do it.”
You thought wrong.
So the original argument was pointless.
Got it.
Imprisonment is theoretically less permanent than execution.
But people definitely shouldn’t be profiting from imprisonment, and the conditions should be humane.
I have a friend who is a plumber and most of his work is from jails.
Good point- my thought was poorly worded. I meant that if people with lots of money are making more money by putting people in prison, then they will find ways to ensure people keep being put into prison.
Imprisoning people shouldn’t in and of itself be profitable since then imprisoning people is incentivized.
Your friend’s work goes towards making prisons more humane, I’m in favour of him and you can tell him so :)
So what’s the point of the rhetorical argument: “the state says it’s not okay to do this, and then they go and do it”?
Oh, please don’t misunderstand. I think the death penalty is barbaric. That wasn’t my argument at all.