In my opinion some of the punishments used in antiquity were far more rational than those of today. Prison as a punishment did not exist, because anyone would have considered it stupid to pay money for housing & feeding a felon.
For theft and other forms of damage that are not irreversible, the deterrence was achieved not by threatening with prison, but by forcing the guilty person to pay a multiple of the value of the stolen goods or of the damages.
The multiplying factor varied from country to country. Where laws were less severe, a thief had to pay double or maybe quadruple, but where laws were more severe a thief had to pay ten times the value of what he had stolen.
So even today this would be a better punishment. Nobody has any advantage if someone who has stolen 10 million goes to jail, but if he had to pay back at least 20 million, then that would be real deterrence.
In antiquity, those who could not pay back the required amounts risked to become slaves, a method which would not be applicable today. Nevertheless, in the present society where it is almost impossible to hide, it should be easier to enforce payment without such extremes.
Potential criminals may be terrified, but that's because they're thinking straight. Some stupid kid about to commit the crime that sends him to prison and ruins his entire life, is thinking about $200 for some more meth. As a deterrent, it just doesn't work.
Well, maybe it works, but nobody hears about crimes that were not done because people were scared of the consequences.
Just to be clear - I ma not a fan of how democracy like US manages their prisons, prisoners, and folks after prison - yes its kind of a death sentence for any serious job, it doesn't matter much if you would be a stellar citizen and employee afterwards for rest of your life. Clearly pure punishment and no correction, 3rd world medieval style. But that's another topic.
Kids that do stupid things for meth should get a) treatment for addiction and b) be removed from society until deemed worthy of coming back. In some place, like, dunno, lighter prison err correction facility (depending on the crime committed)
For theft and other forms of damage that are not irreversible, the deterrence was achieved not by threatening with prison, but by forcing the guilty person to pay a multiple of the value of the stolen goods or of the damages.
The multiplying factor varied from country to country. Where laws were less severe, a thief had to pay double or maybe quadruple, but where laws were more severe a thief had to pay ten times the value of what he had stolen.
So even today this would be a better punishment. Nobody has any advantage if someone who has stolen 10 million goes to jail, but if he had to pay back at least 20 million, then that would be real deterrence.
In antiquity, those who could not pay back the required amounts risked to become slaves, a method which would not be applicable today. Nevertheless, in the present society where it is almost impossible to hide, it should be easier to enforce payment without such extremes.