There are more than two million inmates crowding the prisons in the United States. The number of assaults have also increased an astonishing 60% over the past decade. Many psychologists do not hesitate to agree that a nonviolent person is likely to become violent after spending time in prison. And during the time spent in prison, many prisoners have accomplished nothing more than learning of more contacts for gangs and drug deals. When they are released, many are poor, have no work-skills, and are addicted to drugs. It is hardly surprising that 2/3 of prisoners released this year are predicted to be incarcerated again within only three years.
This all seems extremely backwards to me. The main purpose of our penitentiary system should be to protect law-abiding citizens, not to produce violent criminals. I think the best way to address this problem would be to implement more programs centered on educating and teaching work-skills to prisoners. This would cost money in the short term, but I believe if done well, this could dramatically reduce the number of returning offenders
Our Screwed Up Prisons
By R08 - Posted on November 29th, 2007
Tagged: prison reform education America
• Better future
Yes, let's focus on the criminals instead of the victims.
Then we can send the repeat offenders back into society and create more victims.
I see what you are saying, but I disagree with the whole pity-for-the-prisoners party.
My point was that the way to PREVENT the repeat offenders being sent back into society ready to cause violence would be to rehabilitate them...otherwise they'll do just the same thing after their sentence is up...
In some cases they need stricter treatment, and in some they need to be made beter able to survive without criminal trades. Either way we need to stop them from repeating their crimes.
Over half of the total population are non-violent drug offenders. We have created plenty of criminal industry jobs with drug prohibition.
I did a blog on the same subject.
http://www.progressiveu.org/154555-punishment-is-a-flawed-concept
Rehabilitation was all the rage during the 1970s. It was a dismal failure. We spent a lot of money and got no measurable results.
A lot of people who are criminals have extremely low IQs. They really are not capable of much but crime. The ones who are smarter but chose to be criminals anyway are just plain evil.
We should make far more liberal use of the death penalty. That does wonders for recidivism. We need to bring some sanity to the appeals process so that justice is swift and sure.
Initially I was appalled by your comment, but I really have no reason to feel that way because I have absolutely no idea how 'liberal' a use you would encourage...
I think three strikes laws are a pretty fair way to go about it. I figure anybody convicted of three violent felonies is a mad dog that should be put down. In my mind at that point they pretty much cease to be human or deserving of human considerations.
Of course there is a long list of crimes that should only require one strike to earn the death penalty. Rapists, child molestors, all first degree murderers, slavers and of course horse thieves all jump immediately to mind. Who needs them?
Right now, our justice system is hopelessly screwed up and it costs less to keep somebody in prison for their entire life then it does to execute them. That is just crazy and perverse. I can buy a box of 50 .22 cartridges for about $3.00 and that would be 49 more than would be required. We need to streamline the appeals process. There should be due process but it should also be swift justice. Under our current system criminals and their lawyers make a mockery of justice and the victims wait decades for closure.
I am at a loss for words. I've never communicated with someone who wanted so many people dead.
That is a little like the way the people he wants executed think.
There are people that will never be changed, certainly not by the current methods. I find myself agreeing with his list more than maybe I should. Swift and sure justice is a deterent, thinking that the DA will make a deal if you give him someone else, or that your slick lawyer will find a way to get it dropped is a long way from justice. The OJ trial left America disillusioned about the state of the courts. A poor black man would be on death row if they had half that evidence.
Ten years of apeals? I would rather see flogging.
The ideas in this blog have been tried before. It seems to be a cyclical thing where people fail to learn from history.
Our prisons used to be tough and America was a fairly law abiding place. America of the 1950's was completely different and far more civil then today's society. People respected the law.
And then we got on the rehabilitation kick. We started blaiming society for a criminals behavior instead of blaming the criminal for criminal behavior. And it failed miserably. Our prisons were revolving doors and recidivism went through the roof and crime became a major problem and people were plenty angry about it.
And for the last 20 years we have been locking up criminals and generally keeping them locked up for a long time. It has worked and crime rates have dropped steadily. Of course it has led to larger prison populations.
And now you want to take us back in time to a policy that has been tested and proven a failure.
I think we should learn from history. Being tough on criminals works. If locking up criminals for long periods works well, I think executing criminal scumbags would work even better. I don't want to breathe the same air as a rapist or a child molestor
I don't think that prisoners should experience luxury by any means. Yes, the inmates are inmates for a reason. Yes, they need punishment. Do they deserve death? Personally, I believe this is untrue, but that's a little off topic. More to the point, prisons have a higher purpose-to protect law-abiding citizens. We throw people into an environment that breeds violence and danger, and expect them to come out smarter on the other end. This is no more successful than any of the failed attempts at rehabilitation programs. So we have three choices-
1.) Let things stay as they are, and let the situation decrease
2.) Try better programs, using the new information we have learned since the previous failures
3.) Slaughter thousands-MILLIONS-of people as a means of 'law enforcement'.
I would rather not live in a society that is perfectly comfortable with option number 3.
Yes- let's put the criminals before their victims. That's a great idea. How do you think the raped feels when her rapist is out of prison and back on the streets? Let me tell you, it does not feel good to know that somebody who raped you is free to do it again, especially if they are a "rehabilitated" repeat offender.
These people, they do not deserve our mercy. They are cold hearted, inhuman monsters. The sooner you understand that and stop sympathizing with those who would hurt you and not blink an eye for the feelings of yourself, your family and friends, the better.
I choose Number 2. We should learn from our past failures.
What we have learned is that most crimes are committed by criminals. Our system of justice usually gives people numerous chances to reform their ways and most people who end up in prison have been convicted of lots of crimes and received sentences short of prison for past crimes. And that is not to mention the crimes they commit that they where they are never caught and prosecuted. There are victims of all these crimes who are deprived of justice.
What we have learned is that efforts at reform fail. It is an expensive waste of taxpayer money. When the criminals are released most of them return to crime. That is because they are criminals. They are either to stupid to make an honest living or inherently evil.
We have learned that we can dramatically reduce crime rates by keeping the criminals who commit the crimes out of society.
We have learned that incarcerating criminals is extremely expensive. As a taxpayer I resent buying these evil people so much as a bag of beans.
All of this leads us to Number 3. So I choose 3. But your use of the word "Slaughter" is an emotionally loaded word. Execute is a more appropriate word which implies the application of Justice after Due Process.
This concept is enshrined in our Constitution:
While the Founders did not want people to be deprived of life or liberty without due process they were obviously OK with the state depriving a person of life with due process.
The Mafia was thriving during the 1950's...
The mafia was one of those perks that comes along with mass immigration. We imported the mafia from Italy.
More recently we have gotten the Russian and Ukrainian Mafias and the Latin American gangs like MS13.
Oh joy!
It takes a few generations to teach immigrants about respect for the law and in the mean time we all suffer from their activities. They would probably learn respect faster if we liberally applied the death penalty.
Because many prisoners that leave have no work skills, they should have jobs for prisoners to earn some money.
Read my blog!
http://www.progressiveu.org/090204-dont-miss-this-chance
My question is, how do they come out of jail still addicted to drugs? I don't think its possible to smuggle drugs in, and if it is then how?
DISCLAIMER: I am not being rude. I'm stating my opinion. No personal attacks are meant. Please give some leniency on how you take my words. imagine me saying them with a smile. ^__^
I've actually heard it stated that it's actually just the opposite of that. It's almost impossible to keep drugs out. Drugs are smuggled in to prisoners by visitors with the drugs hidden in their anus, powdered drugs are attached to the glue on the back of stamps in letters, post cards are stripped, filled with a tiny amount, and then resealed, and many other ways that we know and obviously many ways that have not been revealed yet. Sometimes even the prison guards are involved in the trade.
MANY times prison guards are involved.
You are entirely correct.
----
this is war. every line is about who i don't wanna write about anymore. [Brand New]
http://progressiveu.org/143541-how-to-survive-the-2008-elections
There are definitely drugs in jail.
http://www.marijuanalibrary.org/junk_in_the_joint.html
I read a book by Jack Gantos called Hole in my Life... he was arrested for smuggling Marijuana, and ended up being a medical aid in the prison's "hospital". Most of the people he treated were being treated for drug abuse. In jail. Where they had smuggled it in. One guy even used a pen-tip (like from a ball point pen) and a tennis ball to shoot up. Imagine how that went.
----
this is war. every line is about who i don't wanna write about anymore. [Brand New]
http://progressiveu.org/143541-how-to-survive-the-2008-elections
I agree with the o.p. (R08} but I would add that a lot of that rehabilitation should be that criminals are, from the first offense, held accountable for their actions inside prison. They should have NO perks until they are earned, and they should be nothing like what they have now.
I`ve met people who`ve gone to prison and said `Hey, it`s alright in there. I get good food and get to play video games and basketball .` Of course, they have no qualms about doing the same crimes a hundred more times and then bumping them up to something more serious as they continue.
I`ve never met anyone in that position who had grown up with responsible adults, so the prison system should teach them right from wrong rather than just warehouse them.
I would say, for example, if someone is caught breaking into a car, don`t just fine him a few dollars and send him home, and don`t send him for a week in jail to play fun games and then go do it again 500 more times so he can come back to the `Criminal`s Hilton.`
Send him to jail for three months, starting with a simple cell with nothing but a bed, a toilet and some slop, along with some counseling from someone who will explain that he will have to maintain perfect behavior to get something slightly better tomorrow, but nothing fancy, ever. No new tattoos, no weight rooms to get big and buff, no `right` not to be searched for drugs, no satellite TV showing the Sopranos, no video games.
After three months of learning to associate consequences with actions and realizing that he doesn`t want to lose his freedom again, he might think twice before ever breaking into a car again. And something more serious or violent might not ever have to be dealt with from this guy.
I strongly disagree with the death penalty. It is only practiced in The United States and some of the world`s most repressive regimes, and I don`t think it`s entirely a coincidence that the United States is the most violent country in the developed world.
Maybe we should make a person earn their way out of prison with advances in behavior rather than just a set time period. I definitely think they should be kept productive and busy. Teaching work habits is as easy as conditioning. Teaching laziness is also. The present system teaches laziness, and violence while forcing gang membership on many.
I think option number one of leaving things as they are is the only one nobody wants.
America does not have significantly more crime than other developed countries. The United Kingdom and even tranquil New Zealand outrank us. And the slight differences between us and many other Western European countries with slightly lower crime rates is statistically trivial:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_percap-crime-total-crimes-...
We do have a higher murder rate than most other first world countries:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capit...
But look where the majority of the crimes are occurring. It seems that the five most violent states are also the five states that are the 5 top destinations for illegal immigrants. We are apparently importing criminals and the violence that comes with them.
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri_mur_and_non_man-crime-murder-and-no...
But interestingly when one looks at murder rates on a per capita basis, the states that actively practive the death penalty like Texas, Virginia, Oklahoma Missouri and Florida being the top 5 are well down the list for murders per capita with none being in the top ten for murders per capita.
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri_mur_and_non_man_percap-murder-nonne...
I don't think there is much evidence that the death penalty causes the murder rate to rise. I think there is considerable evidence that importation of poverty stricken people from third world countries with murder rates far higher than that of the USA causes our murder rate to rise.
Somehow I don't think all your "actions have consequences" social engineering and reconditioning training is going to work on this guy:
http://www.npr.org/programs/atc/features/2005/mar/salvador_gangs/main_lg...
Thanks for all those links, they were very helpful.
Although, I felt dirty just looking at the last photo and now I have to go wash my brain. Where's the vodka?
The tears tattooed at the corners of his eyes are like merit badges and are symbolic of the murders he has committed.
A real winner!
``America does not have significantly more crime than other developed countries. The United Kingdom and even tranquil New Zealand outrank us.``
I didn`t refer to `crime rates.` I referred to `violence.` There are problems with referencing `crime rates` between different jurisdictions which makes a comparison really completely meaningless.
One very important reason is that there are far different rates of reporting crimes between one place and another. When I was in Singapore, there was a breaking news flash on TV that a woman`s wallet had been stolen and the police were on nationwide alert to find it. A few minutes later, an announcement was made that the criminal had been apprehended and the wallet returned.
Where all crimes are taken so seriously and the police can be expected to react AND citizens are not too intimidated to report, a very high rate of the recording of crimes tends to occur.
The crime rate is FAR higher where I live than recorded numbers suggest. I was in Seven Eleven the other day and saw someone running out with stolen merchandise. The clerk looked at me and shrugged and said, `What can we do. We don`t report anything because the police don`t do anything.`
So a region with a `crime rate` that shows higher on these graphs often has lower crime and the numbers can be the result of more effective policing.
Another very important reason is that what is classed as a `crime` in one place is completely legal in another and what is determined as a `priority` type of crime by police in one jurisdiction is ignored in another. In Japan it is a serious crime to be in possession of one bullet, but patronizing a brothel is no big deal. In Texas it`s the opposite.
In Kansas, a 12 year old girl with her parents` permission can legally marry a 40 year old man. In California, he`s a criminal. Cops walk right past the smell of marijuana without being concerned or even saying anything in one city, while in another, it`s a major reason to arrest.
So `crime rates` that may include everything from stealing some chewing gum to murder to even the woman who was just sent to prison in Somalia for the crime of naming her teddy bear Mohammed , mean nothing when compared across cultures or states, other than the numbers being reported and subsequently recorded by police. It says nothing about how safe that society is.
Murder is a crime that is difficult for police or civilians to overlook and is recorded virtually 100% of the time. That`s why it is more accurate to look at violent crimes, especially murder rates per capita, for better comparison.
The murder rates per capita on the website you reference show the US to be, by far, the most dangerous major developed country in the world. The rates for rape per capita show the same thing.
``But look where the majority of the crimes are occurring. It seems that the five most violent states are also the five states that are the 5 top destinations for illegal immigrants.``
Well, that`s because you`re looking at the wrong table if you want a good comparison. Those are the raw numbers, so naturally, the order of states` raw numbers of crimes of any sort is almost identical to what would be the order of states` total populations. You`d have a similar (maybe exactly the same) ranking of states if you compared the raw number of law abiding citizens.
If you switch to the `per capita` table on the same website, it`s a totally different story.
The tables on the website can be very useful, but you just have to recognize what the numbers are really saying.
Our prison system has many problems with it other than overcrowding and people coming out still violent with crimes in mind. Prisoners are subject to rape too and most guards and wardens don't do anything about it and just brush it off as a lovers quarrel. Also another backwards thing is that prisoners who get let out early for behacing good, are often let out on parole, so they are somewhat monitered on a regular basis for a little while. Whereas other prisoners with attitude problems who caused fights and were violent in prison had to serve their entire sentence and then are released back into society without any supervision. We are letting the most dangerous criminal back onto the streets and they are completely free. Is it jsut me or is there something srong with this?
You're right but in a capitalist society, the notion of profit must always be taken into account. Hence, the prison-industrial complex which in turn yields such a ridiculous number of prisoners. So while you're right about the purpose of prisons, don't forget that those running and creating the prisons don't really care and thus the number will continue to rapidly increase.