The Prisoner Slavery debate

[Dragoon Fighter]

IMPORTANT NOTE: I am playing devils advocate though out this debate I strongly disagree with slavery and I do not support it. Thank you for your understanding.

Alright, I am going to argue that slavery is in certain contexts is not wrong and even beneficial to the community as a whole.

POINT ONE: Slavery has been practiced in many shapes and forms from the beginning of human history to even modern times. In the great roman empire one in every three citizens were slaves. (I used history channel as the source but can not find the exact video.) So many cultures do not view slavery as badly as we do today.

POINT TWO: Slavery can be legalized as a alternate punishment to imprisonment. If one commits a crime it is only fair that they repay there debt to society. Also considering that we already spend money on prisoners, we should at least get hard labor out of them. This will also increase how unpleasant prison is and possibly discourage future criminals.

POINT THREE: One counter point I am expecting is the volition of human right that slavery will inherently cause.Well let me define what I mean by slavery. I am talking about definition #3 in particular. Work can be harsh with out interfering with human rights as the word harsh is a relative term, and varies based on the the person using it. For an example a rich spoiled person might find any thing that requires effort to be harsh. While a hard working person might find simple task to not be harsh in any sense of the word.

POINT FOUR: In the current state of the american government we are doing things like selling our roads to other nations. Source. If america used prisoners as salves to help fix the roads there would be no need to let go of the roads as they need not pay the slaves to do the work allowing them to keep the roads with a lot cheaper cost. Other countries aside from america can also benefit from having prisoner slaves as certain things the government pays people to do that are something that does not require special training can help any nation save money, and get the job done in the processes.

 

[gm jack]

So what you are suggesting is that prisoners can be forced to do work inside prison?

Considering things such as community service are already forced work as part of a sentence, I'm not seeing any huge human rights problems. The problems would be supervising large groups of prisoners working who are quite likely to make a run for it if they see a break for freedom.

 

[Dragoon Fighter]

So what you are suggesting is that prisoners can be forced to do work inside prison?

That and other things.

Considering things such as community service are already forced work as part of a sentence, I'm not seeing any huge human rights problems. The problems would be supervising large groups of prisoners working who are quite likely to make a run for it if they see a break for freedom.

You heard of chain gangs, right? Similar to that, not picking up garbage off the side of the road I mean WORK.

 

[rvkevin]

Regarding point four, have you considered the safety issues of inmates operating heavy machinery?

 

[KrazyGlue]

IMPORTANT NOTE: I am playing devils advocate though out this debate I strongly disagree with slavery and I do not support it. Thank you for your understanding.

Ok.

POINT ONE: Slavery has been practiced in many shapes and forms from the beginning of human history to even modern times. In the great roman empire one in every three citizens were slaves. (I used history channel as the source but can not find the exact video.) So many cultures do not view slavery as badly as we do today.

Yes, slavery has been practiced in history. But that doesn't mean it's still relevant to today's society. I don't know what "cultures" you're talking about. Perhaps you could enlighten me? And perhaps you could also explain why, just because some cultures do not view it as "wrong", slavery is right?

POINT TWO: Slavery can be legalized as a alternate punishment to imprisonment. If one commits a crime it is only fair that they repay there debt to society. Also considering that we already spend money on prisoners, we should at least get hard labor out of them. This will also increase how unpleasant prison is and possibly discourage future criminals.

Slavery is much more harsh than prison, yes. But consider the rights of prisoners. Prisoners do have rights. Slaves do not. Prisoners should not be subjected to slave-like treatment because it is a gross violation of inalienable human rights. Consider a person who is placed in jail for, say, shoplifting. Does this person deserve to be tortured and whipped on a daily basis? Does anyone deserve such treatment?

POINT THREE: One counter point I am expecting is the volition of human right that slavery will inherently cause.Well let me define what I mean by slavery. I am talking about definition #3 in particular. Work can be harsh with out interfering with human rights as the word harsh is a relative term, and varies based on the the person using it. For an example a rich spoiled person might find any thing that requires effort to be harsh. While a hard working person might find simple task to not be harsh in any sense of the word.

You're now saying slavery means "harsh work", and "harsh" is up to the owner to define. So basically, the owner can do whatever the hell they want. That's where the human rights violations come in. The slave essentially has no rights since the owner can control whatever they do.

Also, you're not considering the law. For example, in some of the colonies, there were actually laws against slaves learning to read or write. Would these be in place?

POINT FOUR: In the current state of the american government we are doing things like selling our roads to other nations. Source. If america used prisoners as salves to help fix the roads there would be no need to let go of the roads as they need not pay the slaves to do the work allowing them to keep the roads with a lot cheaper cost. Other countries aside from america can also benefit from having prisoner slaves as certain things the government pays people to do that are something that does not require special training can help any nation save money, and get the job done in the processes.

If the government needs money, just go violate some people's rights! Woohoo! Why don't we just capture the 5 richest people in america and take their money? Then we'll have roughly 100 billion dollars to spend on not only roads, but also health care and other issues. Do you see why this logic doesn't work? If the government just robs people of their freedom in order to solve their monetary issues, you're really just advocating authoritarianism.

 

[Deleted member]

POINT ONE: Slavery has been practiced in many shapes and forms from the beginning of human history to even modern times. In the great roman empire one in every three citizens were slaves. (I used history channel as the source but can not find the exact video.) So many cultures do not view slavery as badly as we do today.

The "many shapes and forms" is very important here. for example, the Egyptian "slaves" as you probably have seen images or video from, where not actually slaves but employed people.
The Romans had 2 different eras of slaves. The first era was your classic type of slave with few rights, although Romans did threat them like fellow human beings.
The second era, the "slaves" were not anything less than an employed worker, although he was bound to one employer (his master). he earned money and when he had enough he could actually buy himself free. the slaves that worked in the households of the rich also slept in the mansion.
Besides slaves not actually being your classical whipped half naked boulder porters, there is also no place for them in our current society.
we aren't building huge temples or erecting massive armies. Nor do we have conquered lands to capture slaves from, as we aren't at war r barbarians.

POINT TWO: Slavery can be legalized as a alternate punishment to imprisonment. If one commits a crime it is only fair that they repay there debt to society. Also considering that we already spend money on prisoners, we should at least get hard labor out of them. This will also increase how unpleasant prison is and possibly discourage future criminals.

"we should at least get hard labour from them."
Why?
You also don't show that this will make prison (there wouldn't be a prison as such to speak of, but that's beside the point) life harder. There are plenty of documentaries on the gang wars in prisons. I think half of them would love it to not have their life threatened every day and instead work.

I would also like to bring up life sentenced prisoners. Surely they wouldn't work if there would be no end to it.

POINT THREE: One counter point I am expecting is the volition of human right that slavery will inherently cause.Well let me define what I mean by slavery. I am talking about definition #3 in particular. Work can be harsh with out interfering with human rights as the word harsh is a relative term, and varies based on the the person using it. For an example a rich spoiled person might find any thing that requires effort to be harsh. While a hard working person might find simple task to not be harsh in any sense of the word.

"the word harsh is a relative term."
Indeed it is, but do you really think that the child workers in third world countries do not find their work "harsh"?
How harsh would the work the prison slaves would do be?

And I believe there is a human rights notion about slavery itself, not so much what the slaves would have to do. But I'll have to get back to that later as I now don't have a source.

POINT FOUR: In the current state of the american government we are doing things like selling our roads to other nations. Source. If america used prisoners as salves to help fix the roads there would be no need to let go of the roads as they need not pay the slaves to do the work allowing them to keep the roads with a lot cheaper cost. Other countries aside from america can also benefit from having prisoner slaves as certain things the government pays people to do that are something that does not require special training can help any nation save money, and get the job done in the processes.

KrazyGlue answered this point better than I ever could.

I like that you are trying to be devil's advocate here by the way.

My main concerns:
-Old tradition does not justify it as current tradition.
-How would long/life/death sentenced prisoners fit in this?
-Slavery itself being in violation with human rights.
-what work would the prisoners do?


EDIT:
link to the human rights:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Univer...ights#Human_rights_set_out_in_the_Declaration

Article 4 states:
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

 

[Dragoon Fighter]

Slavery is much more harsh than prison, yes.

1) But consider the rights of prisoners. Prisoners do have rights. Slaves do not.

2) Prisoners should not be subjected to slave-like treatment because it is a gross violation of inalienable human rights.

3) Consider a person who is placed in jail for, say, shoplifting. Does this person deserve to be tortured and whipped on a daily basis? Does anyone deserve such treatment?

1) True but why do prisoners that are guilty (I am of course thinking of only the guilty ones.) deserve respect when they can not respect us?

2) Why must human rights be inalienable?

3)Then they should not shop lift.

You're now saying slavery means "harsh work", and "harsh" is up to the owner to define. So basically, the owner can do whatever the hell they want. That's where the human rights violations come in. The slave essentially has no rights since the owner can control whatever they do.

Yes. (I think it would be easier for me to argue that the extreme crimes should be punished by slavery, but I am not sure if it is ok to argue that as I am trying to advocate slavery as the Devils advocate.)

Also, you're not considering the law. For example, in some of the colonies, there were actually laws against slaves learning to read or write. Would these be in place?

No, because it would be a mute point. Prisoner slaves would be (in most cases anyway) already capable of reading.

1) If the government needs money, just go violate some people's rights! Woohoo! Why don't we just capture the 5 richest people in america and take their money?

2)Then we'll have roughly 100 billion dollars to spend on not only roads, but also health care and other issues. Do you see why this logic doesn't work?

3)If the government just robs people of their freedom in order to solve their monetary issues, you're really just advocating authoritarianism.

1) Only if they comment a crime.

2) No, I can see why it does not work for health care as that is a very specialized field. Now for the example I used road maintenance I see no reason why it could not work.

3) I guess I am.

Note the following is not part of the debate: I really came across as an insesitive jerk there . Sorry, Mr. KazyGlue I actually agree with what you typed.

@The Paprika Killer I will respond to your post latter I do not think I could take two people on at once while playing devils advocate. Now I will respond in the future to your post just not right now.

 

[gm jack]

You heard of chain gangs, right? Similar to that, not picking up garbage off the side of the road I mean WORK.

What is the difference in practical terms? You are still making people work as part of a sentence. There is no reason the work couldn't/shouldn't be made tougher if, and only if, it is more beneficial to society as a whole.

For some very unfit people, litter picking may feel very harsh, while for others it may be very easy. Harsh is entirely subjective.

 

[KrazyGlue]

1) True but why do prisoners that are guilty (I am of course thinking of only the guilty ones.) deserve respect when they can not respect us?

Several reasons:

1) Most humans have some sort of compassion for each other and believe every human has some basic rights that should not be taken away.

2) "Eye for an eye" logic is bad. What if I said "why not take away the right to not be sliced into pieces in the middle of town when the criminal did that to the victim?"

3) Unfairness. We don't know if everyone in jail is guilty.

2) Why must human rights be inalienable?

Most civilized humans have some basic compassion for each other and believe that nobody should be subject to daily torture. Human compassion is the only reason we have any rights. The answer to this question is the same as the answer to "why do we have any rights at all?"

3)Then they should not shop lift.

Sound kind of brutal to me. Maybe I should use a better example like jaywalking. So if someone is caught crossing an intersection when the light isn't green, should they be enslaved and put through daily torture?

Yes. (I think it would be easier for me to argue that the extreme crimes should be punished by slavery, but I am not sure if it is ok to argue that as I am trying to advocate slavery as the Devils advocate.)

That's fine. But you'd have to define what "extreme crimes" are. I'm guessing murder, voluntary manslaughter, ****, attempted murder, and armed robbery? What about assault and battery?

No, because it would be a mute point. Prisoner slaves would be (in most cases anyway) already capable of reading.

Sometimes true. Actually about 2 million adults in America are illiterate. (I can give you some sources if you want but you'd have to do the math yourself. Or you could just take my word for it. ) And I'd wager that the illiterate adults are more likely to commit crimes than the literate ones.

1) Only if they comment a crime.

I see. So if a man commits a crime, you'd take away the money he's been providing for his family and leave his wife and children to starve.

2) No, I can see why it does not work for health care as that is a very specialized field. Now for the example I used road maintenance I see no reason why it could not work.

Well, yes, the slaves would accomplish work, but that does not mean it's right. If you think it's right to sacrifice people's individual rights to benefit public good, you're essentially advocating communism.

3) I guess I am.

Well, in that case, you're arguing that we should violate everyone's rights. In an authoritarian society, the ruler can do absolutely anything they want, even if it comes at the expense of the people. So you're advocating that we compromise everyone's rights and change our government from a democracy to a dictatorship for the sole reason that we can have slaves in this society.

Note the following is not part of the debate: I really came across as an insesitive jerk there . Sorry, Mr. KazyGlue I actually agree with what you typed.

No problem; the only way to argue in favor of slavery is to sound like an insensitive jerk. You've made it very clear you're playing DA, so don't worry about it.

 

[Deleted member]

I was under the impression that prisoners already do lots of hard labour outside of the actual prison. I don't think "slavery" is the right work, but having them do work outside the prison is something I think both the prisoners and society would welcome, as long as they aren't stealing jobs from other people, and they are shackled to each other or something so there's no possible way they can escape.

The way you're using the word "slave" I think is what makes the idea unpopular. What you're describing isn't actually slavery, just hard labour, which is already in place.

 

[Sucumbio]

^ I'm with puu, but I'll play along anyway...

And Dragoon, where have you been, son?

POINT ONE: Slavery has been practiced in many shapes and forms from the beginning of human history to even modern times. In the great roman empire one in every three citizens were slaves. (I used history channel as the source but can not find the exact video.) So many cultures do not view slavery as badly as we do today.

The Atlantic Slave Trade is particularly gruesome, albeit much closer to our current time period than say, the Hebrew slaves of Egypt or Roman slaves (meaning simply that as a world culture our sensitivity to such indiscretions are at a higher point than in previous eras). That said, the 13th Amendment clearly states:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

As you can see, what you propose is already in effect. Where I live you can see people in green/white striped pants and D.O.C. smocks (Department of Corrections) with a Sheriff looking over them as they toil on road work. He's usually holding a shotgun. They aren't chained or anything, but they're also only there because they're "good" inmates. It's a PRIVILEGE to work outside of prison.

To address rvkevin's point, these guys actually do run some equipment. It's not heavy machinery, like the large riding lawn mowers, but they'll handle industrial strength weed wackers, which are heavy gas-powered versions of the smaller electric ones. They'll also typically have the bags over their shoulders and a vice-arm-grip for picking up litter. This IS a valuable contribution to state road beautification, which is one of several things the state budgets for each year. Technically speaking, however, most of this work is carried out by people doing community service sentences, not hardened criminals. That's what prison work camps are for (the work farm).

Some do hard labor! They dig ditches which will later be used to sink pipes for housing wire or natural gas mains. It's back breaking, 100 degree heat a lot of the time, and it pays ****, like 30 cents a day kinda ****, but it's pay, and many inmates use this to purchase things like shampoo, and other goods sold through the prison inventory. The idea is to ... create an environment that mirrors the real world in terms of economics. Though many inmates may use this money to buy contraband (cigarettes, drugs, weapons) the inmates who make the most money legitimately, do not use this money for bad things, but for good things.

POINT TWO: Slavery can be legalized as a alternate punishment to imprisonment. If one commits a crime it is only fair that they repay there debt to society. Also considering that we already spend money on prisoners, we should at least get hard labor out of them. This will also increase how unpleasant prison is and possibly discourage future criminals.

See above. Again, we already do this, and it's definitely a privaledge. Anything is better than being cooped up in a cell all day and night. At least with the prison work program, you have a chance to stretch your legs, get exercise, and contribute in a meaningful way to the community.

POINT THREE: One counter point I am expecting is the volition of human right that slavery will inherently cause.Well let me define what I mean by slavery. I am talking about definition #3 in particular. Work can be harsh with out interfering with human rights as the word harsh is a relative term, and varies based on the the person using it. For an example a rich spoiled person might find any thing that requires effort to be harsh. While a hard working person might find simple task to not be harsh in any sense of the word.

Well, again there is a provision in the 13th amendment which allows for the forced labor of prisoners. However, doing so cannot simultaneously allow for the violation of basic human rights. You still have to feed and clothe them. You still have to provide medical treatment when needed. You still have to provide a means for them to maintain proper hygiene. Not doing these basic things reduces the Correctional System to a substandard entity which would receive the harshest scrutiny on an international (and local) level. This is where a problem already exists, unfortunately, as many of our prisons are underfunded and overpopulated, leading to issues in these areas. Many prisoners get sick, are malnourished, are filthy, etc. But that's a different debate.

POINT FOUR: In the current state of the american government we are doing things like selling our roads to other nations. Source. If america used prisoners as salves to help fix the roads there would be no need to let go of the roads as they need not pay the slaves to do the work allowing them to keep the roads with a lot cheaper cost. Other countries aside from america can also benefit from having prisoner slaves as certain things the government pays people to do that are something that does not require special training can help any nation save money, and get the job done in the processes.

Once again, prisoners already do this. But... to bring rvkevin's point back in, most prisoners would be unable to perform a lot of the more complex aspects of road work. Labor intensive jobs are already often staffed by prisoners. But specialized work such as operating heavy machinery (something that requires a specific class license, for instance) is ill advised for obvious safety reasons. Other parts of the job would open up security risks... such as driving a dump truck. Though a CDL (commercial driver's license) is required, and could possibly be attained through classes in prison, you have the flight risk and logistics of trying to provide adequate means of security. Short of having an armed person riding "shotgun" (with a shotgun, lol) it wouldn't work, and even that's ... well a dangerous situation you're really just better off avoiding altogether.

 

[Dragoon Fighter]

^ I'm with puu, but I'll play along anyway...

And Dragoon, where have you been, son?

Sorry, my computer access has been limited as of late .

The Atlantic Slave Trade is particularly gruesome, albeit much closer to our current time period than say, the Hebrew slaves of Egypt or Roman slaves (meaning simply that as a world culture our sensitivity to such indiscretions are at a higher point than in previous eras). That said, the 13th Amendment clearly states:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

In the united states yes that is the law however I argue that while the law is a good frame work that must be respected to a degree that it does not ultimately dictate morality and that this form of justice is indeed moral.

As you can see, what you propose is already in effect. Where I live you can see people in green/white striped pants and D.O.C. smocks (Department of Corrections) with a Sheriff looking over them as they toil on road work. He's usually holding a shotgun. They aren't chained or anything, but they're also only there because they're "good" inmates. It's a PRIVILEGE to work outside of prison.

I did not know this I will have to think this point over before I can give a proper response.

To address rvkevin's point, these guys actually do run some equipment. It's not heavy machinery, like the large riding lawn mowers, but they'll handle industrial strength weed wackers, which are heavy gas-powered versions of the smaller electric ones. They'll also typically have the bags over their shoulders and a vice-arm-grip for picking up litter. This IS a valuable contribution to state road beautification, which is one of several things the state budgets for each year. Technically speaking, however, most of this work is carried out by people doing community service sentences, not hardened criminals. That's what prison work camps are for (the work farm).

Some do hard labor! They dig ditches which will later be used to sink pipes for housing wire or natural gas mains. It's back breaking, 100 degree heat a lot of the time, and it pays ****, like 30 cents a day kinda ****, but it's pay, and many inmates use this to purchase things like shampoo, and other goods sold through the prison inventory. The idea is to ... create an environment that mirrors the real world in terms of economics. Though many inmates may use this money to buy contraband (cigarettes, drugs, weapons) the inmates who make the most money legitimately, do not use this money for bad things, but for good things.

Why should we pay them at all and are they getting really payed if they do not have complete control of there own money?

Once again, prisoners already do this. But... to bring rvkevin's point back in, most prisoners would be unable to perform a lot of the more complex aspects of road work. Labor intensive jobs are already often staffed by prisoners. But specialized work such as operating heavy machinery (something that requires a specific class license, for instance) is ill advised for obvious safety reasons. Other parts of the job would open up security risks... such as driving a dump truck. Though a CDL (commercial driver's license) is required, and could possibly be attained through classes in prison, you have the flight risk and logistics of trying to provide adequate means of security. Short of having an armed person riding "shotgun" (with a shotgun, lol) it wouldn't work, and even that's ... well a dangerous situation you're really just better off avoiding altogether.

I see your point. Maybe the jobs should be limited to ones that can be "Safe". Not for the prisoners but for everyone else.

Edit: Sorry KazyGlue I can not think of a good response at this time please forgive me.

 

[Sucumbio]

Sorry, my computer access has been limited as of late .

oh, well it's ok. love your avatar btw.

In the united states yes that is the law however I argue that while the law is a good frame work that must be respected to a degree that it does not ultimately dictate morality and that this form of justice is indeed moral.

This was a bit unclear, I'm not sure what you're trying to say? The law is a US law, yes. And it is a good one, we agree... but you say it does not ultimately dictate morality and this form of justice is moral (I assume you mean the idea you're proposing?), this is where I get confused. Can you elaborate a bit?

I did not know this I will have to think this point over before I can give a proper response.

Fair enough.

Why should we pay them at all and are they getting really payed if they do not have complete control of there own money?

Oh sure, they have control over their money. They just can't spend it on "anything" ... it's like ... like when you're young and mommy gives you a piggy bank to hold change in, but puts it waaay up out of reach, so you can see it, and add to it (if she gets it down) but you can't ever open it (unless she says it's ok). Why this, mockery? Well, it's because again prison is meant as a reformatory instituion. Many if not all people in prison are there because they for one reason or another cannot perform functionally in society. This ... structure allows a method of reform for the inmates. They sleep regular schedules. They eat 3 meals a day. They work. They get paid. They can spend their money within reason. This trains them to be "productive" members of society, which is the reason for prison. I understand your premise is that the purpose of prison should be to provide America with a free labor pool, but ... maintaining the necessary conditions for housing inmates, providing security to keep them in (and us out), and providing programs like work programs, education programs, etc. this all costs money. So even though you have your "free labor" it's not really free, nor could it ever be.

I see your point. Maybe the jobs should be limited to ones that can be "Safe". Not for the prisoners but for everyone else.

Well, usually civilians are not close to where prisoners are at work, mainly because there is an inherent danger in that situation. Consider a convicted rapist for instance. Allowing them to be within X feet of a passerby may be problematic to put it mildly. The safety concern IS actually more for the prisoner's sake. If prison became a death sentence automatically because you'd be expected to work machinery that you were no where near qualified to operate, you'd quickly land on the wrong side of "cruel and unusual" which is another part of the Constitution. Also injured or dead workers can't work! So it behooves a work camp organizer to ensure that their workers are capable of working without hurting themselves, so that they can keep working. This means dumbing down the work involved to a point that the inmates are capable of doing.

 

[KrazyGlue]

I was under the impression that prisoners already do lots of hard labour outside of the actual prison. I don't think "slavery" is the right work, but having them do work outside the prison is something I think both the prisoners and society would welcome, as long as they aren't stealing jobs from other people, and they are shackled to each other or something so there's no possible way they can escape.

The way you're using the word "slave" I think is what makes the idea unpopular. What you're describing isn't actually slavery, just hard labour, which is already in place.

This is in response to the OP, right?

Edit: Sorry KazyGlue I can not think of a good response at this time please forgive me.

No problem.