I have to say I am appalled by the majority of comments and the tone of this thread.
Too many political viewpoints and absolutely nonsensical analogies like the one above.
You do know that nowadays (and then) you could rundown anyone you wanted in your car, drink a bottle of whiskey after and be very unlikely to face jail time. So the good old days are alive and well. Or you can steal millions from your employer, shove the money under your mattress and claim you are bipolar and blew it all on gambling whilst drunk and depressed and maybe if you are unlucky cop a year or two on a prison farm then go home to collect your cash.

There is no point in arguing such puerile and selective examples.

This is a very polar argument. To punish and to hold to account or to educate and forgive, leaving a very large grey area in between.
Most importantly not all criminal and indeed people in general are the same or respond the same to any situation.


Sure some prisoners are able to be rehabilitated. Some are not.

The simple answer is that the reason for imprisoning law breakers is ostensibly 2 fold.
1. Remove the offenders right to be part of regular society.
2. Protect the other members of said society

If you cannot live by the rules the rest of society does then you lose your right to function in that society
Sure rehabilitation is a noble and ideal target but punishment for your actions must come first.

We have seen the gradual decline of personal responsibility for too long to the point now where every action you make is blamed on someone or something in your past.
This is very much to blame for the lack of respect of law and order in society.
The masses generally have no respect for judiciary in giving fair sentences and the criminals see loopholes and Get out of Jail free cards everywhere.

Bad behaviour must be suitably punished.
There is a plethora of history on this and I am reluctant to say too much because I cannot be arsed to point you at the relevant info and it would seriously consume a few months of my life to do it properly.

Similarly citing stats with no background info is a very weak way to make a point so I will refrain.

I will however say that just because a country has high incarceration % does not mean the system of incarceration is at fault.

Take a look at some of the Eastern European countries for example who simply release offenders on parole and do not monitor them. They even allow them to leave their country and go on to commit crimes elsewhere. This was rife in the UK around 15 yrs ago and was a large factor in the EU denying some countries membership.

I think I have said enough otherwise I will start doing what I am complaining about others doing.

In summation.
Crime has to be punished and yes with incarceration/exclusion
Personal responsibility has to be acknowledged
Rehabilitation can be done during that period.
Not all people are redeemable.