Does imprisonment make serial killers more psychotic?

claricestarling · Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:42 pm Post subject:

Thats all a load of bull!!
Imprisonment does not make a criminal More Insane; just a breeding ground for a criminal to find support and an excuse for his antisocial behaviour and criminal activity.He/She hears new ideas for more crime inside and other patterns of thought and behaviour.No one forces him/her to continue a life of crime wheteher inside or out of four walls. Prison wont make anyone in a normal sense of mind go insane unless they were otherwise born that way.

FACT:::::
if u have a chance then read, inside the criminal mind Stanton E samenow, PH.D.

claricestarling · Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:54 pm Post subject:

Virgilius,
have you read the story of the REAL lecter and his life story which includes his sister, or are you just engrossed in the lecter films without finding out any of the background or reality?

claricestarling.

claricestarling · Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:55 pm Post subject:

Hannibal was NEVER crazy!

Rommel · Posted: Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:17 am Post subject:

I suppose it depends on the prison. For example, French and Italian prisons have a very high "return rate", so to speak. If a prison has horrible conditions, with oppresive and ill-tempered staff, bad food, sub-average living conditions(for a prison), then I suppose those would be more likely to churn out repeat offenders.

Edit: Of course, if a prison has better conditions than a criminal is used to, he may commit more crimes, as he has not been punished. Just a thought.

Annibal · Posted: Tue Sep 12, 2006 9:57 pm Post subject:

throsso · Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 6:53 pm Post subject: Jail/prison/solitary and insanity

I have just encountered this string and was sorely disappointed in it - sorely. It seems that none of the posters have any experience of the subjects they have chosen to address. So, like virgins writing a sex manual they simply pontificate upon suppositions without foundation and fantasy reigns supreme. I have been in prison and in prolonged solitary confinement. Each person - and we do remain persons - responds differently to these conditions.
Or, as the Good Doctor would have it:

"I have other resources"

Might I suggest that prison,etc., is a projection of the religious archetypal system of the dominate structure? Just a thought.

OCTOPUSSY · Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:14 pm Post subject: The Mist of our Confusion

Dear Ardelia

I have always been disappointed that the penal system spends more time trying to stow away what it calls "undesirable" people and less or practically no time trying to rectify some of the causes of errant behavior. This not is to say I am a behaviorist, I do actually believe in Evil (yes, I capitalized the "E"). I can't say that I have actually stood in its presence, but I believe that some people who have been incarcerated have had the misfortune to come into contact with some truly awful people.

What puzzles me about prison is that it does nothing for those who are placed within its walls. There is no emphasis on education and why do they not employ the best therapists available? If ever there was a time to hire a true professional to handle the hard cases, I would think the penal system would know that they are in need.

How puzzling is it that some of the most horrific violence occurs IN prison? What are guards for? What's a warden for? Does anyone seem to notice that men and women who are HIV negative going in come out HIV positive? I am disappointed that we fail millions of human beings. Sometimes I think that those in prison have true gifts that have been grossly mis-applied.

The kid that strips cars should be in reverse engineering. The con artist ought to be a therapist or a chess player or , whatever. The truly violent, I sometimes wonder how they would have faired in Rome in the Colisseum. Maybe they should have been gladiators. I really don't know. I will never excuse the committing of a crime, but I believe we have to find better ways of dealing with the madness of crime and punishment. What we have now is humiliating and inadequate.

Sincerely,

Dear Ardelia

OCTOPUSSY

throsso

Are we actually interested in these subjects? Do we really care about them and those who are forced to "enjoy" them? If so ,...well, we'll soon see.
The first question (first principles you know, hmmm?) , the first question is :
By what right does anyone determine the behaviour(s) of another are correct/require sanction?
Next, of course, comes :
Shall these determinations be made individually or collectively?
Next:
Shall there be sanctions...or other forms of correction?
We could go on and on in this fashion - but I don't think that this is what the post is about...do you?
Perhaps we could discuss the nature of "modern" forms of solitary confinement? The SHU,i.e., it's two versions. One is solitary and the other is merely more confining (one half hour a day ,5 days a week, of recreation) cell mate and the sharing of an 8x10 cell with toilet and shower included. Some, the true SHU cell, are air-tight and compress the internal atmosphere when the door is closed. In some there is no external stimuli( books, papers,etc) permitted and, needless to say, no window. Without internal resources and a strong will true solitary can "break" a person/shatter their psyche' and leave a thing whose mind is now right.
Does incarceration make "criminals" more "criminal"? What is a "criminal"? One who breaks a law,hmmm? Of course they are and as such should be shunned by all right thinking persons. Of course - No! Laws are so prolific and charging descetion so fully vested in the State Attorney, i.e., D.A., Prosecutor, that - if it were so decided - anyone could be charged with and convicted of criminal acts. Believe it or not, like it or not - 'tis so.
I submit for your consideration: The case of Martha Stewart, convicted not of the charges on which she was indicted but for lying to a Federal Agent. During the investigation she didn't tell the "whole truth" as far as they were concerned. Result? Felony conviction and reduction to the status of non-person. Dangerous "criminal" this "house-keeping maven", hmmm?
But, lest we forget - one must be charged , tried and convicted - thusly do Geo. Bush, R, Cheney, et alia, escape the designation as "criminal". They have, by their own admission(s) violated all sorts of laws - domestic and international - and yet, with the exception of Mr. Yu's current difficulties, have escaped sanction.
Do those incarcerated become more criminal? Depends. Some do others don't. Individuals are like that.
Has anyone an interest in or knowledge of Foucalt's "Punish and Discipline"? Lad did a decent job of discussing some of these areas.
Has it occurred to us that the modern court descends from the medieval court and that it was staffed and run by and in concurrence with religious forms,doctrine, practices and personnel?
An un-asked , but question of considerable (paramount I would submit) importance is:
What do we expect from a "Justice" system "criminal "or otherwise ?
How should one be constructed and entrance into it be construed?
Ah, the questions and discussion could go on and on...and probably will so long as we don't ask of ourselves:
"How would I wish myself or a loved one to be treated by this sort of system?"
Too much to ask, I imagine...so: "Let's just lock'em up and throw away the key! Civil commitment instead of release. No telling what evil that Stewart woman has gotten up to,eh?"
I beg your foregiveness but, you see, I have some ...small experience of prison (10 years ) and that gives me strange knowledges that interpret it to me in odd ways.

OCTOPUSSY · Last edited by OCTOPUSSY on Sat Mar 06, 2010 10:43 pm; edited 1 time in total

Dearest Throsso,

Unfortunately, I only have more questions to offer, not answers. Aristotle once declared, "The rule of law is better than the rule of any individual”. Do I think it to be always fair and true? Definitely Not. “Civilization” is not that civil, or even human. Violation of human rights is more likely to occur within the prison walls and other “institutions” than anywhere else, and abusive neglect happens time and again. As you have suggested, anyone, whether “a big fish” such as the rich and famous or someone completely innocent that ends up in the death chamber (ever watched The Green Mile?), can be entrapped by an administrative snowball that will destroy their lives. Those in power may have political agendas and personal motives as well as conflict of interests to prosecute someone, and sometimes it’s all about a clash of beliefs and abuse of power. People are forgotten and the world moves on. What about the ones left behind, the ones who have no family at all to care for them when they are in prison? Who speaks for them? Did anyone visit Dr Lecter? I think not. Perhaps a psychology/social work student, but not out of loving reasons. So what’s the best way to go about it, then? Never get caught, move to a lawless country or play by the rules and be screwed? I share some of your appeal for anarchy and self justice but that will not always make things right as revenge cannot turn the dead alive. But an “eye for an eye”-what would you make of that? “M for Mischa” so to speak…Perhaps we should all strive to be more of feral children and noble savages though William Golding might have objected. I think the gist of it may be summarized by the differences between Hobbs and Locke saw in people: the former fought for strong dictatorship-like governments while the latter encouraged liberalism. It all sums up to how you view people: are most of them “good” or “bad”? And as Dr. Lecter rhetorically asked Clarice, are storms “evil”? And what if you had a sister or a daughter who was cannibalized like Mischa and there was nothing you could do yourself about it (say you were physically unable, sick, etc.) except for hoping and having faith that your country and its laws would protect the honor of the victim and do the villain(s) justice so they get their “just deserts”? Would you forgive, hug and kiss someone who, say, murdered your children, as some do? Indeed, we can philosophize all day, and night. All that said, I wish to thank you for your “strange knowledge”. As for your “odd ways”, we all know G-D moves in mysterious ways. It’s always a delight and a pleasure to have your contributions and learn from them. Please allow me to suggest one more thought: it’s easy to change opinions depending on whose side one is. Someone can be “tough on crime” and yet make exceptions in particular cases when one is involved emotionally etc., and then someone can be very easygoing and forgiving yet seek the outmost retributions when someone dear to him or her was hurt. And could you compare a “crime of passion” to a coldly, undetached planned crime? Even Lady Murasaki seems to accept that. At any rate, I hope you won’t forget, “revenge is a dish best served cold”.

Posted Image, might have been reduced in size. Click Image to view fullscreen.

A triangular love scene of Paolo and Francesca da Rimini in The Divine Comedy.

throsso · Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 10:43 pm Post subject:

Ah, I see I was correct - decided lack of interest. Ah well, there you have it, hmmm?
May I be permitted one , final , question?

Have you ever read Huxley's work: " Ends and Means" ? Deals with the "first principles" of this matter rather well. Yet, it doesn't speak, at all, to the seeming subject of the thread. I found it ,,,entertaining that this , the underlying first principle, was completely ignored. Ah, ends...and the means used to achieve them. Yes, Huxley spoke quite succinctly to the inverse relationships involved in most such situations.
Shame, don't you think, that of all his works this one remains "out-of-print"?
Ta Ta now.

OCTOPUSSY

"The only effective methods for carrying out large-scale social reforms are nonviolent methods. Violence produces the results of violence. The attempt to impose reforms by violent methods is doomed to failure". Does the end justify the means? I very much sympathize with Huxley's pessimism. Possible to find his work at: http://www.alibris.com/search/books/qwork/2044683/used/Ends%20and%20Means

throsso · Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 12:28 am Post subject:

Delightful. But, have you read it? Have you applied it to such areas as were under discussion? Or,...is it just a quote that is useful in such a setting as this, hmmmm? Tell me ,truly, because it does matter.

OCTOPUSSY · Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 1:14 am Post subject: THX1138

No, I have not read it, but it is not "just" a quote either. While I am not a pacifist (I believe you are?), I do fear for the future of the human race, and I take the ideas of dystopian societies very seriously. The lust for control of other people as objects is the root of the problem, not only on international and national levels, but personal as well. Live and let live is just not popular anymore. The idea of people functioning as remote controlled robots/ slaves is fearsome, and governments might use the excuse of war and crime to achieve their goals of new world order. Prison might be the “perfect” place to run obedience experiment on people who more than all need some form of positive rehabilitation. A lot of people who have been through the nightmare of “work” camps remain scarred for life. I do agree with Huxley that violence does not lead to good places. We see that with other animals too, not just man. Violence is the “easy”, self gratifying way of reaction but like Huxley suggested, not alien to human beings. Even when a human aspires for “good”, the “beast” in him is often uncontrollable. "C'est la guerre". From Live and let Die: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaqcGat1WUI

Does imprisonment make serial killers more psychotic?	Goto page All, Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

The Hannibal Lecter Studiolo Forum Index -> The Silence of the Lambs

The Hannibal Lecter Studiolo Forum Index -> The Silence of the Lambs

Page 2 of 3	Goto page All, Previous 1, 2, 3 Next