Unless they were direct accomplishes in crimes - nothing. This thought pattern you posted is literally medieval when they often wiped out entire families and generations as punishment.

good question it all depends on whether they are responsible for their child's actions or not

That's a pretty basic, no-details statement.

I'd like for you to get very, very specific and go into great detail about backing up your point.

Otherwise, on the surface this looks like nothing more than some brainwashed copaganda or something.

You imply as if the exact same scenario exists for any criminal.. what type of criminal?

Guy selling coke in a bar who works for a federal agency (your hero law abiding boys in blue BTW - true story)... that type?
DUI?
Stealing some shoes or food?

Yeah, lock em all up. Lock up the kids also when you mass incarcerate people.

It's ok to be a criminal, as long as you're rich, powerful, a cop, or all 3, etc.

They should've locked up Amber Guyger's parents for popping her out in the first place.

What have they done to deserve incarceration? I have seen outstanding parents have children that end up in prison. I have also seen parents in name only have children that go to earn college degrees, and become pillars of their community.

You cannot hold someone responsible for someone else's actions.

Some countries have laws that hold parents of delinquent children civilly liable, but should parents be eternally responsible for grown up adults and receive prison sentences that coincide with their son or daughter? Because they didn't commit the crime, but perhaps you are more prepared than I to go to prison for a crime you didn't commit.

The only thing you can really do is sterilize them so they can't produce any more criminals, assuming they're still young enough to reproduce, but at that point you're getting in to eugenics.

And incarcerating them because of it will generally only make the problem worse. They ♥♥♥♥♥♥ up raising their own children but if you throw them in prison while they're raising other children then you have to put those children in to foster and supposedly that also leads to high rates of criminality (I don't know, I have never looked it up).

I would say do nothing to the parents, but take the criminal out of circulation permanently. That will also, if the parents care about their children, incentivise them to raise the children properly.

By OP's logic the whole of society should be imprisoned for failing the perp

They should have to go to parenting classes

Going back for solutions of more barbaric time in history is not the answer, it`s devolving.
Sadly Trump and his followers are big fans of it.

I think they've suffered enough, given all the heartache these children cause their parents. What's really needed is for social services to focus more on helping disadvantaged and low-income families.

Prison.

Diposting pertama kali oleh Cinnamoon_dragon:

I think they've suffered enough, given all the heartache these children cause their parents. What's really needed is for social services to focus more on helping disadvantaged and low-income families.

Their idea of 'help' could use an overhaul as well.....

Sure. Why not throw out the principle of criminal responsibility. Bad parenting is not a crime but why not start punishing people for the things other people did. What could possibly go wrong with that?

Diposting pertama kali oleh Gracey Face:

The only thing you can really do is sterilize them so they can't produce any more criminals, assuming they're still young enough to reproduce, but at that point you're getting in to eugenics.

It might not be a bad idea though!

Good question. In eg ancient China if a father committed some crime where he was castrated in punishment, all of his children would be castrated as well. However while you could do the same thing in reverse, its effec tis diminished if parents are beyond childbearing age.