Community payback jackets

[powerboy]

They should have to wear a uniform. It is no different than work uniform.

[DesignFox]

Oh ok Boozy. I'd say that's a bit different of a situation then.

I don't think it's really necessary to humiliate those people by writing OFFENDER in big letters on their jackets, then. I mean, really, the only reason to do that would be to let other people know that those people aren't out there out of the goodness of their hearts; they are being punished.

But for minor offenses, I don't see the point. Let them serve their time and leave them be. Maybe after a certain point, they WILL do the work for the sake of doing something nice.

[Boozy]

Personally, if I were going through an area, I'd prefer to know if it was prison inmates hanging out by the side of the road as opposed to people just being charitable.

But then again, I suppose the prison inmates would have some sort of uniformed officer nearby, so it probably doesn't make much of a difference.

These are not inmates. These are people doing community service. A court has already determined that they are not a danger to society, but they have to repay their debt somehow. These are mostly folks who have been picked up for possession of marijuana, unpaid parking tickets, public drunkenness, etc.

And I have never heard of a uniformed officer being present at community service litter pickups and the like. It's usually just a representative of the court, like a clerk, there to make sure everyone is accounted for and stays the whole time.

[DesignFox]

Besides, a lot of this work is roadside cleanup and the like, and they have to wear bright orange anyway.

Personally, if I were going through an area, I'd prefer to know if it was prison inmates hanging out by the side of the road as opposed to people just being charitable.

But then again, I suppose the prison inmates would have some sort of uniformed officer nearby, so it probably doesn't make much of a difference.

*shrug* I don't know. Humiliation has always been a pretty good deterrent for keeping me out of trouble.

[AdminAssistant]

Besides, a lot of this work is roadside cleanup and the like, and they have to wear bright orange anyway.

[Flyndaran]

...This is a frickin' uniform. You show up, you put on a jacket, you do work, you finish, you turn in the jacket, you leave. If this jacket is humiliation, then any uniform can be humiliation.

I can accept simple functional uniforms. Orange is much safer for workers to wear than street clothes especially when working on roadsides.

Do you agree with sex offenders having their name posted on a website for all to know?

Hell no! Publically funded ostracism and endangerment is abhorent on an ethical as well as functional level. Our justice system is supposedly set up so that it is possible to return to society and live a normal life after finishing your sentence. I don't agree with such life sentences when even murderers can simply go back to their homes.
That's even if everyone didn't screw up the registers so badly.

[daleduke17]

I just don't agree. I don't think judges should be punishing with some form of psychological warfare. It's humliation, pure and simple.

Do you agree with sex offenders having their name posted on a website for all to know?

[BroomJockey]

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."

It's not psychological, any more than prison uniforms for people currently in jail are. Those serve simply as a reminder of where a person is and why.

As for humiliation, even if they're working somewhere not visible to the public? Such as maybe repainting a community centre closed for renovations?

I'm sorry, I don't see how this is humiliation. Being forced to walk up and down the street in a sandwich board that reads "I shoplifted from Wal-Mart" is humiliation. Placing stockades on street corners and allowing people to throw refuse would be humiliation. This is a frickin' uniform. You show up, you put on a jacket, you do work, you finish, you turn in the jacket, you leave. If this jacket is humiliation, then any uniform can be humiliation.

[Flyndaran]

I just don't agree. I don't think judges should be punishing with some form of psychological warfare. It's humliation, pure and simple.

[BroomJockey]

Um, I would imagine that the workers themselves would already know why they were there.

You underestimate the capacity of a person to either ignore a situation, or self-delude in to thinking they've chosen their situation. Someone doing volunteer work and someone doing community service are identical to outward appearances. They show up on a set schedule, they do specifically assigned tasks, etc. Someone who's doing this can quite easily delude themselves in to thinking they've simply chosen to do this, or at least to go along with it, and therefore it isn't a big deal for them. After all, eventually, outward appearance can change how a person views themselves. Even in short term. It's the source of the phrase "dress for success." It's a lot harder to say to yourself "I'm only doing this because I want to" when you've got a nice orange jacket with "Community service" embroidered on the front.

[Greenday]

Wearing the jacket reinforces that society is expecting them to contribute. It's psychology and reform. Nothing to do with punishment.

So, by going through with public humiliation, they'll suddenly love this system that went above and beyond punishing them?

[Flyndaran]

Your brain works in odd ways, making many unwarranted assumptions. Did I mention passersby? No. ...

Um, I would imagine that the workers themselves would already know why they were there. I just assumed that the only people that would need signs to tell them would be the completely ignorant passersby.

Besides, I already know my brain works in odd ways.

[BroomJockey]

It's really important to you what passersby think? What on earth does that have to do with punishment?

Your brain works in odd ways, making many unwarranted assumptions. Did I mention passersby? No. These people need to remember that they fucked up, and that what they're doing is part of the reparations of that act. They are not doing it because they are good people. In fact, they are doing it because society told them they are NOT good people. They need to remember that their actions have consequences, and a visible reminder is often the best way of doing that. Forcing them to acknowledge that they're helping society not through their own choice is fair. With any luck, the smarter ones might take some pride in their accomplishments during their community service, and then become ashamed that they had to do damage to the community before they realized they are a part of that community. Ideally, that's what rehabilitation does - causes someone to realize their past actions were wrong, and not in line with society's expectations. Wearing the jacket reinforces that society is expecting them to contribute. It's psychology and reform. Nothing to do with punishment.

[Flyndaran]

From the article, they only need to wear them while they're doing the work. I think it's appropriate that they're marked as serving punishment, rather than being humanitarian.

It's really important to you what passersby think? What on earth does that have to do with punishment?

[BroomJockey]

From the article, they only need to wear them while they're doing the work. I think it's appropriate that they're marked as serving punishment, rather than being humanitarian.