Posted on 09/28/2007 7:56:15 AM PDT by Politics4Fun
Actually, I have a different perspective having done engineering projects in a number of correctional facilities.
My perspective is that litigation and fear of litigation have driven up the price of "supervising" inmates and protecting correction officers.
Color TV's, Internet, good food, etc. are ways to entertain the inmates and reduce stress on the Corrections officers. Personally the "crap" (literally) that Corrections officers have to put up with is beyond belief and has to wear on their mental health. The stress and danger they put up with when inmates are unhappy, is just not worth the money in my opinion. It is no surprise to me that Corrections officers push for more officers and for more pay.
On the the same side of the coin is the fear of lawsuits by Corrections officers if they are injured. Let's face it the kinds of injuries that can be sustained were just not envisioned when State workers compensation insurance programs were set up.
Speaking of litigation, the inmates have been given all kinds of rights and the ACLU is working hard to make it impossible to "restrain" or monitor an inmate. In Washington State we have had a convicted murder inmate who were too fat to be hanged as it would have been cruel and unusual punishment. In the Northwest, we have had inmates in for life get an organ medical transplant at the taxpayers expense. With Meth addition one of the side effects is loss of teeth. You wouldn't believe the dental expenses our correctional system is paying. And don't forget that if an inmate is "raped" he may be able to file a lawsuit claiming that there weren't enough correction officers to supervise him and protect him.
I am not surprised that to house an inmate and guard and monitor him 24/7 plus provide for all his needs costs as much as providing room, board and tuition at Harvard. We could change that if we backed off on the rights of prisoners and allowed for their harsher treatment, until then it will be very expensive, but worth it to society for all the other damage it prevents.
You DO need to address differing levels of criminality.
The prisons are full - so ignore the non-violent potheads who have no other offense - kick ‘em out. Don’t re-arrest for minor drug offenses. Don’t waste time with ‘em in courts either.
Non-violent, non “sexual-predator” offenders still have some hope. Keep ‘em away from the the scum and give ‘em real work to do. Let ‘em build stuff, farm stuff and otherwise get some work experience. Let ‘em live the prison with the TVs and ACs.
The people I’d put in desert camps behind the wire are violent offenders and sexual predators. No weights. Crummy (high-carb) diet. Just enough water. Porta-potties. Lots of picks and shovels. Towers with machine guns and water cannon. Guards with shotguns and truncheons and permission to use them. The cons get to build and maintain their camp.
Violent three-time losers don’t need prison - they need a bullet in the head before they kill somebody.
Remove all the students from Harvard and MIT and replace them with inmates put a wall around them. Force the professors to spend eight hours a day instructing them. See how long they remain liberal.
Thanks also to the flooding of the border. Unlimited immigration always leads to lawlessness. and gang violence. The “Know-Nothings of the 1850s have got a bad rap. because they were witnessing some bad stuff as the Irish poured off the ships and into the shantie districts. In term of cost, the problem is building prisons when POW-like camps would be better.
Crap. Guess I won't be sending my kid to Folsom.
So what do you think about the “non-violent, non ‘sexual predator’ offenders” who are multiple repeat offenders? Keep the three strikes law and lock them up for good or let them just keep moving in and out of prison indefinitely?
“So what do you think about the “non-violent, non ‘sexual predator’ offenders” who are multiple repeat offenders? “
Can you give an example of such a crime?
Also they should NOT separate the violent criminals from the others. One way to really deter repeat crime is for the hoods to know they are going to be thrown in with the gangbangers and serial rapists if they get caught doing that little house burglary. If criminals once again fear prison there will be a lot less crime.
A habitual burglar, for instance. Or a professional car thief.
Can you give an example of such a crime?
Sure. Grand Theft Auto.
From what I understand, a pretty large number of inmates caught by the three-strikes law are serial robbers, stealing stuff mostly to pay for drugs. These are the stupid street criminals who are most likely to be caught busting car windows to grab cameras, going into homes that were left unlocked, etc. They are criminals, for sure, but when you start throwing these guys into prison for life you fill up the prisons really fast.
In a liberal state like the People’s Republic of Kalifornia, what else would you expect?
I saw a special on Alcatraz (actually on Discovery, I believe) and the reason they shut it down was that it cost so much to operate. Since it is an island, every single thing needed for day to day operations (food, laundry, etc.) had to be shipped in and out, which apparently cost a not-so-small fortune.
I really don’t know. I was kinda hoping that work experience in prison would fix that problem. If they know what regular folks do for a living, maybe they’ll be less inclined to rob them.
Failing that, maybe they need a camp, too. Not for permanent residence, but just to know that their next stay will be very, very upleasant.
Best solution, of course, would be a penal colony, where they would have to work or starve, but we’ve sort run outta room for those...
Problem with that is that you really just end up making them worse criminals. Part the goal should be to keep criminals from teaching their trades to each other.
They don’t call prisons “Criminal U” for nothing...
Pretty soon going to Harvard will make as much economic sense as running for President.
The tragic part is that most everyone is released from Harvard back into society.
They would have had to “earthquake proof” it had they not shut it down.
“A habitual burglar, for instance. Or a professional car thief.
“
Hang horse thieves. Anyone who is a predator on society who think breaking into homes or stealing expensive vehicles is not a petty criminal and deserves to be removed from society forever. If you cannot feel safe in your home from invasion, then something is wrong.
P.S. Remember that there is all the difference in the world between petty crimes such as shoplifting an apple and stealing a car. Theft of property is theft of someone’s life as they spent their life earning that property.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.