Oh I like this! See, now we're making some progress. Reasoning in action.
I agree that it would be realistic. But imprisonment would also be realistic, whilst not removing an individual from the game. I recongize that this is, first and foremost, a game and the priority is amusement, thus we don't want to remove anyone from the game-besides, they can't buy nuggets if they aren't playing. It is for this very reason that I want this feature to be implemented-because it would be fun! Just as dueling is fun for the dueler and miserable for the loser. Just as fort fighting is fun for the winners and miserable for the losers!
As I had stated previously: The consequence that you have provided, indefinite removal from the game, is far too extreme considering that the most an individual can acquire from the robbery is a couple thousand bucks.
On another note: I am not denying the feature because I do not like it. What I like or do not like is irrelevant. We are here to reason about this idea and by doing so we shall improve it to the greatest extent of our abilities, and, if deemed necessary, we shall discard it entirely. I have deemed this consequence of yours faulty for it is an extreme and unorthodox form of punishment applied in a medium whose primary purpose is amusement.
By being in prison for two days without the ability to work, one will practically lose the same amount of money that one could have acquired by robbing the town or working for those two days. And if no one removes the prisoner from the confines of the cell, then one will lose a very significant amount of money over the span of the week.