Should criminals serve in the military instead of prison - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

Military instead of jail

Yes
4
17%
No
17
74%
Other
2
9%
#15114911
Living a violent life doesn’t itself naturally translate to being a soldier. I worked in a level 3 correctional facility and the inmates who had done years in the military are a very different sort to a gangbanger.
They don’t seem like they’d got naturally as they often have a lot of personal problems.
#15114926
Forcing criminals to serve in the military had been practiced in ancient China for many, many years. A drawback of it was that, people viewed military service very lowly, in part causing China being conquered at least twice.

I also think penal military services means if these people are victorious they would be very brutal to whoever the come across with, meaning that war atrocities would significantly increase.

Therefore my answer is a definite NO.
#15114949
Any sort of anti-social crime is going to have a deleterious effect on the military. I suppose you could make tax cheats or frauds serve, but they probably need to be segregated from the general military.
#15115051
I was going to say YES, but then I was quickly swayed by some very simple arguments.

No.

blackjack21 wrote:Any sort of anti-social crime is going to have a deleterious effect on the military.
I don't often agree with blackjack21, but in this case, I do.

You'd have to be very careful of what kind of criminal ended up getting military training, and they have a tough enough time making sure police can do their jobs right.
#15126574
We're not saying they should qualify for high positions unless they actually prove their competence, loyalty, etc, but little in the military has to do with "grotesque acts", unless you are referring to war, the most grotesque act imaginable.
#15126576
I watched a documentary and if I remember correctly, the foreign legion don't take criminals now or if they do, they are not convicted of serious offenses. However, the foreign legion does offer to wipe the past by giving them a new identity of a soldier who successfully and honorable serves a term of 4 years if I remember correctly. Or they can go back to being who they were before joining the legion.
#15126603
Godstud wrote: I don't often agree with blackjack21, but in this case, I do.

Well I'm going to agree with the both of you.

I believe there's a whole number of terms in our lexicon that we owe to the First World War. one of them is the way at least in Britain politicians are always talking about prioritising front line services. They are always saying they want to get more staff out of support roles and on to the front line. :lol: Of course if politicians stopped for five minutes to actually investigate the past they would realise that this was the exact opposite of what happened in WWI. 1914 was a high point for front line mobilisation. It was the high point for maximising your cannon fodder and throwing them at the enemy.

Throughout World War I and continuing to the present day the whole tendency has been to reduce the number of soldiers on the front line, but to increase the force multipliers that lie behind the front line. This has meant that the armed forces are not really looking for dumb, expendable, psychopathic cannon fodder, to mindlessly charge over the top and overwhelm the enemy.
#15126605
I don't know how much of this question is a genuine interest into something re-habilitative for prisoners vs an attitude of "they are disposable anyways, better a prisoner dies in war than a young non-criminal soldier". Hopefully it is not the latter, which manages not only to be demeaning for prisoners ("aka their lives don't matter, are disposable") but also to the military ("Their job is better done by disposable people") Either way it seems not only cruel but also insulting and I am not (never been, nor planning on ever being) a member of any of those two groups.
As for the rehabilitation part... well I am sure that through history you might have parallel ideas that have "somewhat" worked, for instance "Penal military units". I am sure there are probably plenty of examples from hollywood that romanticizes the idea. We also have the somewhat similar parallel of "freeing slaves to fight for your cause" that were seen in my countries through history (The US for instance, and my home country of Cuba). And no... im not suggesting that slaves are criminals but the parallel does exist as both populations are deprived of their freedoms (albeit for different reasons).
Finally, there is the logic of the whole situation. Somehow you want to take those people that were unable to follow society's rule, give them armament and make them follow the military's rule? To me, that seems like a recipe for disaster.
#15126623
Hi dad. I'm thinking of joining the army. The recruiter says that because I am not a criminal I will be promoted really quickly and that they are really good at keeping the criminals away from the female soldiers. He said we have locks on the barracks doors anyway. I asked him "what about when we are overseas or in the field". He said that there were enough good guys to protect me that I really didn't have to worry. Besides. They don't give them real ammunition until the enemy is around.

On Edit:

Here is what the US Army thinks:

If you are on probation form ANY offense or subject to any court restraint or reporting at all, you can't join the army. If you have been convicted of one misdemeanor (except minor traffic and non-traffic offenses) you require a waiver to join. This waiver requires references. If you have two possession of tobacco by a minor (for example) tickets you require a waiver. Felony waivers, especially drug offenses, are rarely approved. So the opinion of the US military is a resounding Ah hell NO.
#15126704
@Drlee

As long as it wouldn't cause the potential to run afoul of U.S. law, after doing a stint in the U.S. Army (I would want to give a few years to my native country first), I wouldn't have mind joining the French Foreign Legion and doing a stint with them as well. However, I also know that you can get into legal trouble free lancing yourself out to foreign countries like that, so that would be a big deterrent for me to join the French Foreign Legion.

I know Americans have joined the French Foreign Legion and serve in it, but, I could see the potential where you could find yourself in legal trouble with your native country in certain situations for doing so. I guess you can't serve two masters. You have to pick one or the other and stick with that one master. In such case, it would be my native government, the U.S. government.

Still, I think the French Foreign Legion is pretty cool. It seems they take some guys with certain criminal offenses (though not all criminal offenses) and give them a clean slate and a new identity. Teach them things like honor, how to be a soldier, follow the rules and selfless service. A chance to redeem themselves. I eat that shit up. :D A second chance at life in return for service to the French government.

He is still under checks and balances while other[…]

So the evidence shows that it was almost certainly[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

The claim is a conditional statement. This is one[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

I don't know who are you are referring to, but th[…]