Is there such a thing as a rehabilated ARSONIST ?

[JerryMather]

My guess is NO and if that's correct ... What should we do with them when they're caught?

 

Unfortunately, my local Mt's have been reduced from one of the nations scenic byways to what people now call an ashen moonscape by one of these follows.

Along with creating a situation where two fire fighters lost there lives trying to fight it.

 

Could you ever really trust them to roam freely in public knowing that they did something like this in their past?

[Francois_Dumas]

Nope.

 

And it seems to be an increasing fashion thing too..... Greece, France, Spain, Portugal......

[Dave McReynolds]

I don't know how likely it would be that an arsonist could be rehabilitated, but the statistics aren't good for rehabilitating most criminals, as a group, although there are individual exceptions.

 

There are several things that separate this crime from others:

 

1. No objective motive, such as wanting to kill someone for a particular reason or wanting money. Sometimes, people may start fires for political reasons, such as terrorism, which would qualify as a classic motive, but most people seem to commit this crime because of a mental disorder, I would guess.

 

2. Ease of commission. While some arsonists are caught after the act, anyone can drive into an isolated section of the forrest with some gas cans and start a fire.

 

Because it is predictible that fires will continue, both from natural and manmade causes, and possibly get worse as climate conditions change, and because we aren't going to be able to prevent the causes, regardless of how long we lock up the offenders, we have to do more to limit the consequences when they happen.

 

For example, even though I am an environmentalist, I think it was ridiculous that environmentalists were able to block most prescribed burns that would have limited the damage done by the recent fires. Money to cut and maintain fire roads has been depleted. Fire towers, that could spot fires when they are small enough to be contained, have been eliminated. Logging could be used to create even wider firebreaks at no cost to the government, but most logging has also been eliminated.

[ESokoloff]

There are several things that separate this crime from others:

 

1. No objective motive, such as wanting to kill someone for a particular reason or wanting money. Sometimes, people may start fires for political reasons, such as terrorism, which would qualify as a classic motive, but most people seem to commit this crime because of a mental disorder, I would guess.

 

I don't think that you can totally rule out for profit.

Tho rare it does occur.

..... Fire towers, that could spot fires when they are small enough to be contained, have been eliminated....

Fire detecting satellites are in use but I wonder how effective they (now) are as compared to a set of human eyes?

[Twisties]

1. No objective motive, such as wanting to kill someone for a particular reason or wanting money.

 

I don't agree with this statement. Starting fires is all about motive.

 

I think it was ridiculous that environmentalists were able to block most prescribed burns that would have limited the damage done by the recent fires.

 

Don't be ridiculous. Environmentalists have fought suppression for decades.

 

 

 

[Couchrocket]

. No objective motive

 

Sorry, this is just wrong.

 

Four classic motives for fire setters:

 

1. Revenge - can be from very targeted to very broad.

2. Profit of some sort / cover a crime, "sell" their failing business to the insurance company, cover other fraudulent activity.

3. Ego based. Power, notoriety, "the hero" who rescues people from the fire they started, the one who discovers and report the fire, etc. They derive satisfaction out of knowing that "they" are the reason for all the drama, activity, etc.

4. Sexual gratification. Quite literally.

 

Those are the classics that you'd learn in any good class on arson investigation.

There are endless variations on the theme.

 

The 1's and 2's are not necessarily habitual. 3's and 4's seem to be and it is they who have high recidivism rates.

 

The difficulty with arson is that often the motive, means, etc. is completely destroyed in the fire -- making investigation, evidence, prosecution, etc. very hard, if not impossible.

 

I'm someone who believes that there are some crimes that terminate one's living privileges. For intentional mass destruction and death in set fires, I say that society should kindly and gently terminate those individuals. No revenge, no "suffering" no intent to "punish." Merely put them down kindly as you would a pet. Problem solved.

[Dave McReynolds]

I guess everyone has a motive for everthing they do. When I said "no objective motive," what I meant was no motive that would lead an investigator to a particular suspect who might have committed the crime. For example, if a husband is discovered cheating on a wife, and he is later found with five bullet holes in him and his equipment is missing, some suspicion would fall on the wife.

 

Certainly in your motive #2, there would be enough of an objective trail of circumstances to lead an investigator to a suspect, and perhaps in your motive #1, if the revenge was targeted enough that someone could make the connection.

 

I suppose investigators are also aware of your motive #3, and routinely investigate "heros?" I wasn't aware of this myself, but if I ever feel like being a "hero" and rescuing someone from a fire, I'll try to make sure I have witnesses and can account for my whereabouts. Do you suppose that's why the guard came under suspicion several years ago in the Olympic bombing in (as I recall) Atlanta? I remember it almost ruined him, but he was eventually cleared.

 

As for your motive #4, that would seem like a difficult one for an investigator to use to identify a suspect.

 

I have no problem with the death penalty for any number of crimes; I just wish we had a better batting average in making sure the ones we sentence to death are actually guilty.

[Matts_12GS]

capital punishment ends recidivism...

[JerryMather]

capital punishment ends recidivism...

 

Capital Punishment may be to easy on them.

 

Me thinks, Caning them until they pass out and starting it all over again when they wake up, doing this for a few days would be a better idea.

We could send them to their maker afterwards.

[elkroeger]

Sure. Anyone can wake up. Although I never spent time in jail or juvie.... I was a dipshit as a kid. I didn't burn stuff, nor was I a perv., but I quit being a dipshit. On the other hand, I have at several good friends, model students, now spending their lives inside a bottle.

 

We have two other issues that eclipse your question though: #1 global warming. #2 controlled burns.

[tallman]

Of course there is, the psychotryagainists have told us so.

 

They are criminals who killed people as a direct and foreseeable result of their actions.

Swift, immediate, capital punishment.

[Matts_12GS]

capital punishment ends recidivism...

 

Capital Punishment may be to easy on them.

 

Me thinks, Caning them until they pass out and starting it all over again when they wake up, doing this for a few days would be a better idea.

We could send them to their maker afterwards.

 

 

A friend of mine used to vow just such type of treatment had any ever hurt a member of his family.

 

We should open a franchise!