Good thing for those tight gun laws

In reply to Xceler8x:

"We currently have the largest percentage of our population incarcerated in the World. That includes the godless commies living in China"

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/mar/29/death-penalty-countries-world#zoomed-picture

That's probably because they don't incarcerate, they execute. Kind of hard to compare apples to a running buzz-saw.

Yes, that was partially a joke. China currently is the #2 country on the list of incarcerated persons with a little over 1.5M compared to the US's 2.1M.

Bobzilla wrote: Which legalizing and then taxing the ever loving crap out of recreational drugs would likely make plenty of room in the prisons for the violent offenders committing the violent crimes.

I agree with you!! We should mark it on the calendar. :-)

PHeller wrote: ....We need to find some way of putting people to work, even if its less efficient.

They way I see it, you don't just put people to work, or build roads. What you need to do is build things that FACILITATE business / work.

As an example, in the past, if you built a railroad somewhere useful you get an instant town. In the not so distant past, you could build a road and power lines somewhere and facilitate growth there. Build a port etc.

A modern example (politically a dead chicken) the government could fund and build multiple nuclear reactors. They could then slowly sell those sites to companies. This would not only provide low cost power (always very good) it could spur various businesses (e.g. electric cars) AND provide many support jobs, including some well paid nuclear engineers.

You might say "well, let the businesses decide when that is viable and let them do it". Yes, that can work, but the idea is to kickstart it and get over the slow buildup that would normally be needed. (The whole stimulus thing was a HUGE wasted opportunity).

What else could be done besides nuke plants? Solar plants? (not sure we are there yet). Maybe the sad truth is there really is nothing right now?...

...."He wept, for there were no new worlds to conquer"

If the problem with our prisons is that they don't work as a deterrent. Shouldn't we make them tougher or more unpleasant in some way? Currently they serve as a "time out" for naughty grown ups and as a training ground for churning out better criminals who had plenty of time to work out and chat with their equally anti societal neighbors. Pay is low for the guards thereby ensuring corruption. Overcrowding makes everything worse.

What to do then?

My modest proposal: have all the garbage trucks deliver their payloads to the prisons. Prisoners spend 12 hours a day in front of a conveyor belt breaking all the garbage down into it's recycleable parts.

After a couple of years of this I know that I would have no desire to come back for more.

So the system as I envision it:

1: shorter sentences, lower recitavism.

2: less waste. Less abuse of our diminishing natural resources.

3: prisons become profitable easing the burden on taxpayers. They can then pay the guards so much that they will resist corruption (caught violating this and they join the convicts on the line)

Ah but you say: Mr Allroad, won't the prisoners hurt one another with things they find in the trash? They might but I have an elegant solution for this as well. High tech industry can develope the Tazer Collar (my idea, I want royalties). When two collars get within say 7 feet of each other the give an audible signal and at 6 feet both wearers get tazed thereby eliminating their ability to do one another harm. My dogs figured this out pretty quickly on the invisible fence, I like to think the average inmate is as clever as a beagle.

Heck, with the collar in place our prisons don't even need walls anymore.

And if you say that's cruel and unusual, think for a moment. Prison shankings and rape go away completely. Inmates are actually safer wearing the collar than not.

So 4: we have a new high tech device for Apple to manufacture. More win for my plan.

KyAllroad 2016

KyAllroad wrote: Ah but you say: Mr Allroad, won't the prisoners hurt one another with things they find in the trash? They might but I have an elegant solution for this as well. High tech industry can develope the Tazer Collar (my idea, I want royalties). When two collars get within say 7 feet of each other the give an audible signal and at 6 feet both wearers get tazed thereby eliminating their ability to do one another harm. My dogs figured this out pretty quickly on the invisible fence, I like to think the average inmate is as clever as a beagle. Heck, with the collar in place our prisons don't even need walls anymore. And if you say that's cruel and unusual, think for a moment. Prison shankings and rape go away completely. Inmates are actually safer wearing the collar than not. So 4: we have a new high tech device for Apple to manufacture. More win for my plan.

They could be a little more... uh.... dangerous...

I vote we remove cable TV and require EVERY berkeleying one of them to work for their "rent"

Great, bring back the chain gangs and work camps. That went so well in the past. There's no way that will go wrong.

Too bad they didn't have more guns. More guns makes everything better....

dculberson wrote: Great, bring back the chain gangs and work camps. That went so well in the past. There's no way that will go wrong.

So the alternative is to offer them every convienence they didn't have outside the prisons?

dculberson wrote: Great, bring back the chain gangs and work camps. That went so well in the past. There's no way that will go wrong.

If your worry is that the "slave labor" will be taken advantage of for profit you might want to look and see if anyone is making any money off the current prison system.

No mater what system you setup, some a-hole(s) will figure out how to exploit it.

Bobzilla wrote:

dculberson wrote: Great, bring back the chain gangs and work camps. That went so well in the past. There's no way that will go wrong.

So the alternative is to offer them every convienence they didn't have outside the prisons?

Did I even remotely imply that? Is it any wonder I don't like having conversations with you?

dculberson wrote:

Bobzilla wrote:

dculberson wrote: Great, bring back the chain gangs and work camps. That went so well in the past. There's no way that will go wrong.

So the alternative is to offer them every convienence they didn't have outside the prisons?

Did I even remotely imply that? Is it any wonder I don't like having conversations with you?

You didn't imply ANYTHING, that's the problem. It's easier to just throw out one liners mocking whatever idea is set out there than it is to discuss WHY it's aproblem or if there are better options. THAT is why I don't like having "conversations" with you. You don't actually CONVERSE.

In reply to Bobzilla:

Indeed

In reply to dculberson:

I worked in DOC for awhile, those bastards had A/C, cable, 3 good meals(we're talking fried chicken, cake, spaghetti, not gruel), didn't have to work a single day, got heavily subsidized education, "State Pay", and got 2-3 recreation periods a day. A bunch of the shiny happy people were from Gary/Indianapolis gangs and most enjoyed every minute of it.

DOC facilities shouldn't be seen as a berkeleying Motel 6, they should be seen as berkeleying prisons.

In reply to yamaha:

Exactly. That's the state prison. Club Fed in Terre Haute was/is even nicer. I agree with whats-his-face out in AZ (crazy sherriff dude) that prison should be uncomfortable as hell. Tent, inside razor wire topped chain-link, latrines and the bare essentials for nutrition is what prison should be.

In reply to Bobzilla:

I took an shiny happy person to club fed.....the place made me think there was a gentleman in the bathroom to dry your hands for you. Their SHU(secured housing unit) was impressive though, and the one chance before they shoot you policy would have been nice during the AZ inmates riot at my facility.

Bobzilla wrote: In reply to yamaha: Exactly. That's the state prison. Club Fed in Terre Haute was/is even nicer. I agree with whats-his-face out in AZ (crazy sherriff dude) that prison should be uncomfortable as hell. Tent, inside razor wire topped chain-link, latrines and the bare essentials for nutrition is what prison should be.

It would be interesting to see if his methods reduce recidivism.

While I understand you guys thirst for a punishing prison...some factors indicate that this type of treatment is bad for everyone.

Here's an article on a very cushy prisons in Nordic countries. Their recidivism rate is very, very low. We're talking close to single digits low.

Contrast this with US prisons. I understand you guys don't like feeding inmates 3 meals a day, letting them watch TV, etc. Just the same, US prisons are not walks in the park. 10% of inmates in US prisons suffer sexual abuse.

Violence is rampant and there doesn't seem to be much administrations can do or want to do about it.

Also this for a recidivism rate of 60%. That means these guys got out. Then committed another crime that landed them back in prison. So not only did they victimize someone(s) at least once, they did it again once they were out. Personally, I think stopping that second crime is worth maybe making prison a bit more about making them better people than making prison harder just because.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be punished. I feel that taking someone's liberty can be punishment enough. I'm saying it would be in our, the law abiding public's, best interest if we had people coming out of prison who wouldn't commit a crime again. I don't think making prisons more harsh would achieve that goal.

z31maniac wrote:

Bobzilla wrote: In reply to yamaha: Exactly. That's the state prison. Club Fed in Terre Haute was/is even nicer. I agree with whats-his-face out in AZ (crazy sherriff dude) that prison should be uncomfortable as hell. Tent, inside razor wire topped chain-link, latrines and the bare essentials for nutrition is what prison should be.

It would be interesting to see if his methods reduce recidivism.

It doesn't according to this:

"In 1998, Arpaio commissioned a study, by Arizona State University criminal justice professor Marie L. Griffin, to examine recidivism rates based on conditions of confinement. Comparing recidivism rates under Arpaio to those under his predecessor, the study found "there was no significant difference in recidivism observed between those offenders released in 1989–1990 and those released in 1994–1995." Link.

Bobzilla wrote:

dculberson wrote:

Bobzilla wrote:

dculberson wrote: Great, bring back the chain gangs and work camps. That went so well in the past. There's no way that will go wrong.

So the alternative is to offer them every convienence they didn't have outside the prisons?

Did I even remotely imply that? Is it any wonder I don't like having conversations with you?

You didn't imply ANYTHING, that's the problem. It's easier to just throw out one liners mocking whatever idea is set out there than it is to discuss WHY it's aproblem or if there are better options. THAT is why I don't like having "conversations" with you. You don't actually CONVERSE.

Honestly, I was merely mocking the idea of forcing prisoners to work. If you really think that's a workable idea that could in any way be put into place without rampant abuse and potentially horrible effects on our society as a whole then you haven't learned anything from history. There is no way to force someone to work if they don't want to, and attempts to have and will lead to nothing but torture. I do not think it's okay to torture someone for any reason and anyone doing so should be locked up in prison. Even if they're told to torture by someone in power over them.

You want to call it a one liner, I call it pointing out the problem with what was suggested. The details seemed so obvious to me that it wasn't necessary to fill them in.

In reply to Xceler8x:

But they're not. 77% of all felons released are re-arrested within 3 years of release. So if it makes no difference how they're treated, then why are we coddling them? They are the ones that chose to ignore the rules of society, they should have to pay the price.

Bobzilla wrote: In reply to yamaha: Exactly. That's the state prison. Club Fed in Terre Haute was/is even nicer. I agree with whats-his-face out in AZ (crazy sherriff dude) that prison should be uncomfortable as hell. Tent, inside razor wire topped chain-link, latrines and the bare essentials for nutrition is what prison should be.

Using Arpaio as an example of someone doing something right is not a good idea. We're talking someone that has no respect for our constitutional rights, and has even ordered deputies to seize paperwork off the table in a courtroom from in front of a lawyer and judge. Ignores the proven rape of a 13 year old girl. Wastes time and money being a loose nut birther. He is not in any way someone that should be in power in the USA. Maybe Somalia.

dculberson wrote:

Bobzilla wrote:

dculberson wrote:

Bobzilla wrote:

dculberson wrote: Great, bring back the chain gangs and work camps. That went so well in the past. There's no way that will go wrong.

So the alternative is to offer them every convienence they didn't have outside the prisons?

Did I even remotely imply that? Is it any wonder I don't like having conversations with you?

You didn't imply ANYTHING, that's the problem. It's easier to just throw out one liners mocking whatever idea is set out there than it is to discuss WHY it's aproblem or if there are better options. THAT is why I don't like having "conversations" with you. You don't actually CONVERSE.

Honestly, I was merely mocking the idea of forcing prisoners to work. If you really think that's a workable idea that could in any way be put into place without rampant abuse and potentially horrible effects on our society as a whole then you haven't learned anything from history. There is no way to force someone to work if they don't want to, and attempts to have and will lead to nothing but torture. I do not think it's okay to torture someone for any reason and anyone doing so should be locked up in prison. Even if they're told to torture by someone in power over them. You want to call it a one liner, I call it pointing out the problem with what was suggested. The details seemed so obvious to me that it wasn't necessary to fill them in.

THAT is a workable response. Your previous was not. This is something we can discuss and work out ideas/issues. The other was not.

In response, prisoners are already paid for each day they are imprisoned by the state. Since we're already doing that, you make it an incentive to spend 5 days a week working (they get $2/day instead of one to spend on stupid E36 M3 like cigs and magazines).

Bobzilla wrote: In reply to Xceler8x: But they're not. 77% of all felons released are re-arrested within 3 years of release. So if it makes no difference how they're treated, then why are we coddling them? They are the ones that chose to ignore the rules of society, they should have to pay the price.

Xceler8x had a reasoned thoughtful post with sources about why our recidivism rate is so high: we are not coddling them. Then you respond with this. Pay attention! We're not coddling them! We're "punishing" them and getting nothing for it!

In reply to Xceler8x:

While our DOC system has definitely been molded to encourage recidivism(oddly this started about the time of the 3 squares & Cable idea), the recidivism rate is actually pretty low for non-gang, non-drug, non-alcohol, non-sexual related crimes. To compound that, we have a massive gang problem here in the US that isn't going away anytime soon without taking steps to combat it.

There are two things that need to happen for this to work.

First, prisons need to be less enjoyable and honestly force a strong work ethic.

Find something that inmates can be kept busy working on while being able to pay the expenses of the facility, and anything on top of that can be distributed to those inmates working as a fund for when they leave prison. $50 and a bus ticket is definitely not a good model for when they are released.

Second, communities actually need to do something about gangs within them.

The spending of cubic dollars on public works, education, & extracurriculars obviously haven't worked in quelling any of that. It just gives gangs nicer places to do their business in and attract new members. The community actually needs to force them out physically and out of business.

dculberson wrote:

Bobzilla wrote: In reply to Xceler8x: But they're not. 77% of all felons released are re-arrested within 3 years of release. So if it makes no difference how they're treated, then why are we coddling them? They are the ones that chose to ignore the rules of society, they should have to pay the price.

Xceler8x had a reasoned thoughtful post with sources about why our recidivism rate is so high: we are not coddling them. Then you respond with this. Pay attention! We're not coddling them! We're "punishing" them and getting nothing for it!

We're far from "punishing them". cable TV, state assisted degrees, libraries and internet access along with full dental and health care? That's coddling them. That is not punishing them. You want to punish them you take away the TV, you take away the full dental/health and provide life saving medicine only, you take away the AC and the education. That's punishment. Once they prove that they are going to be a model prisoner, THEN you can start to offer education etc. They need to earn those extras, not be granted them from the beginning. start a prison fight? Lose them for a year and add time to the sentence.

We need to make this a place they don't want to be. E36 M3, my father was a CO back in the late 70's. They would have the same drunks/wino's show up every November when it started to get cold. They'd commit some misdemeanor that would get them a 6 month sentence (3 served with good behavior) for the winter and be out for spring. Same thing every year.