IN an ideal world, we want people to WANT to do whats right

but in the real world , people WANT what makes them feel good in the moment, and do what they feel is necessary to 'survive' with basics


I am an old fashioned type who believes stigma serves a purpose, though it is extremely unpopular to stigmatize anything or anyone instead of just embracing that we are all 'different'.


That being said, I know no one likes the idea of being 'watched' by Big Brother, or Uncle Sam or whatever. But what if we brought back stigma and watched each other? Might that work better than prison?

I mean people feel they can hide things and get away with things and perhaps that makes people more willing to risk the things they know aren't exactly 'right'.


My proposal, in a Brave New World, what if people wore an actual Scarlet Letter. What if there was a needle, or stamp, medically applied to a finger with a scarlet letter indicating ones offense, if the offense harmed another, so others will know the potential precautions to take?

A for Adulterer
T for thief
C for Cannibalism
D for deadbeat
E for embezzler
R for rapist


what do you think? do you think being permanently stigmatized may be more of a deterrent than prison?

Sounds like an episode of Twilight Zone.

As it is now. You break the law, pay the penalty and return to society.
You can not be charged with a crime twice (double jeopardy).
You are asking to label people according to the crimes they have been found guilty of, for the rest of their lives! What would be the point of rehabilitation and incarceration? Why not just keep them locked up and never give them another chance at living with society?

Pretty harsh don`cha think?



Why stop there? Why not label everyone? Everyone except you and those that fit into your idea of worthy.

M for murder
BN for Bad Neighbor
PP for Poor Parenting
DA for Disagreeable

Sanctimonious
making a show of being morally superior to other people.
synonyms: self-righteous, holier-than-thou, pious, pietistic, churchy, moralizing, preachy, smug, superior, priggish, hypocritical, insincere

I don't think anything is as harsh as jail

if the offense if of such a nature that we already feel it deserves a fine or prison,,,(being a bad neighbor is still not specifically illegal)


why is the letter any less/more 'harsh'?


I also don't know if being locked away gives anyone anymore of a chance at truly 'living with society' again,,,than merely stigmatizing their actions would

Cannibalism??.. you see that a lot where your live?

Anyway, so your saying instead of giving a murderer prison time, we should just tattoo his finger instead. Maybe a "M"..in red paint.. right?

And that is somehow going to protect the public more then these people actually being off the street.

Is that the game plan?

What if people would just be honest with their self and with others and would always strive for peace harmonic bliss

Good Idea! LOL

When it's really bad and you're a Rapist AND a Cannibal, you get a face tattoo!

I guess some of the hard core criminals would have all their fingers tattooed.. maybe the overflow would be to his toes.

And if he hit 21 crimes.. well then the pants come down

In ideal world, People charged with drug crimes or rape or anything else would want the help. Until someone wants help it is a waste of money trying. Plain and simple...a crime is a crime. There are consequences for actions.

The poor me, help me mentality is legit until they use the system for a lighter sentence and prey upon people I love

Stigma only works if people see it as a stigma.
Stigma's only work when they make someone stick out from the accepted norm.

With people tattooing and piercing their bodies, striving for individuality, following mantras like "express yourself," and, "be yourself, don't care what anyone else thinks!" a "stigma" isn't very effective.

Permanently stigmatized and therefore ostracized only really works to great effect in isolated communities where everyone shares the same values and beliefs, the stigmatized are rare, and have nowhere else to go.

In today's globalization, diversity first, affirmative action, follow the herd by appearing to not follow the herd, peace love and acceptance, migratory cultures, permanent stigmatizing isn't going to be that effective as anything more than saving the government the cost of incarceration.

I don't believe stigmas would be more effective than prison, or the threat of prison, as a deterrent against crime.
It might even increase crime as gangs used stigma markings to denote rank, or acceptance, or people with stigmas started "looking out for their own" creating their own groups.

Other than that, you are simply advocating reinforcement and continuance of shallow judgment and discriminatory practices.


There's always capital punishment.
Public torture, like whippings.
Cutting off a hand if you're a thief, cutting off genitals if you're a rapist, cutting out eyes and tongue if you're a traitor, killing your family if you're a terrorist, stuff like that.

Most of the serious crime such as rape, many murders and certainly distributing drugs are premeditated crimes. Meaning the person had ample time to think of the ramifications of their actions.

They still committed the crime and in my book, that voids your "cry" for help. And you go to jail.. cause that is where you belong.

But hey.. maybe they get one of those cool prison tattoo's.. the one color tattoo.

He should just get the lip plate and call it complete

another thread was about a man released who had killed and eaten someone on the grounds that psych professionals feel he is well enough to live on his own (with medication)

so, no, I don't see it a lot, but it happens obviously


and no, I'm not saying marks INSTEAD of prison, I'm saying a combination of marks AND prison

obviously, someone who has murdered is too much of a risk to be in society

but instead of lengthy sentences for crimes where no life is lost, and immersion into an environment with others who HAVE taken lives,, some other deterrent along with a short sentence would work better to keep society informed and able to take precautions,,,

when and if that were to happen, we would not need or want jails and prisons

I gave this idea a few days thought, and I concluded it's not a good one.

Mainly because the kinds of crimes you would want to use the "stigma" on, are the lesser ones. The kind that we DON'T want people to have to carry around with them for their whole life.

Now. MAYBE I could go with thus labeling child molesters, because I have NEVER heard of a reformed one, but even with that, it would be a worry that someone would be stigmatized for the wrong reasons. We've had people forever labeled as sex offenders, because they were caught taking a leak in desperation, in a technically public place.

In addition, IF we were to go with some sort of permanent punishment, it would only make sense if we took over responsibility for the criminals entire life.

I understand the thinking, which is that with obvious labels, the entire society could treat with the dangerous and disgusting people more safely. But I think there are better ways to get that result.

By the way, last I heard, adultery is NOT a crime in most places. It's just a good way to lose in divorce court.

in some states, adultery is illegal,, but may be one of those many crimes on the books that is rarely if ever enforced


I appreciate you actually giving it thought though

Now that was funny. Thank you!

Well, I'm glad cannibalism is not a problem in your town.

Many serious crimes do not take a life, but destroy it non the less. A rapist many times destroys the women they rape. emotionally destroys them. Distributers of drugs such as heroin, crystal meth, and a host of other drugs destroy the lives of the people who they deal it to. Many die of reasons directly affiliated with the drug or they are reduced to a shell of a person.

And if people like this end up room mates with murderers.. well, so be it. They may not have pulled a trigger.. but they did kill.

to me that is far fetched

if the intent is not to kill, some indirect deaths does not make it logical to house someone with a person who has the capacity to DIRECTLY take a life


someone obliging a person that wishes to take the RISK OF DEATH, is quite different than someone intentionally taking the life of someone who had no such intention to take the risk,,,


humans are resilient,, if an event like rape or using drugs 'destroys' their lives, it is sadly that they chose to let it,,,,either consciously or subconsciously


life goes on,, unless one literally dies

I do not see it as far fetched at all. And while some may think of a crime such as rape as something that some women " chose" to let destroy their live I think you would get quite a different perspective if you ask 10 victims of that type crime... not 1 perspective.. multiple perspectives. As a rape councilor about the long term effect.. sometimes life long it has on the women... but they " chose" this... right?

And as for the drugs.. your kidding, right? ask a drug councilor or doctor. just how difficult it is to get off Heroin or crystal meth. Ask them if their clients enjoy being on drugs. And ask them what the success rate is... and what death rate is as well. But they " chose" this.. right?

So yes, MSH. rape and drug dealing is high in my book ( clearly not yours) as crimes that are life changing to the victim.. and in many cases.. life ending.

But that is all fine and good, some have a soft spot for the folks in prison.. some don't

I don't