Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: let freedom sing
Prison officials said the materials fuel a hostile working environment, where inmates
routinely make suggestive comments to the female guards and masturbate in front of them.


My only "jail experience" was to visit Lexington Correctional Institution
just south of Norman, OK as part of a sociology class I was taking (mandatory general elective).

I learned two things...I was going to stay out of jail as I learned that guys
under 175 lbs. usually ended up as someone's "punk".
I also learned that TV privileges were used as an incentive to good behaviour.

How about letting the guards simply have discretion to deny access to these materials to
inmates based on bad behaviour?

OK, maybe I'm being naive and can't relate to the criminal male mind...
but I suspect this will end up at the US Supreme Court eventually.
6 posted on 09/22/2002 1:08:11 PM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: VOA
but I suspect this will end up at the US Supreme Court eventually.

I doubt it will leave lib CA courts.

12 posted on 09/22/2002 1:13:16 PM PDT by let freedom sing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: VOA
My thoughts too. Everything over basic food, shelter, medical care and a modicum of excercise and sushine should be considered a priveledge and doled out on a good behaviour basis.

If a prisoner wants access to porn he should have to meet a set of behaviour requirements to get it. Ditto TV, magazines and books of any sort, use of excercise equipment and all other passtimes and entertainments. Prisoners are not inherently entitled to anything and everything non-prisoners have access to. That's a ridiculous premise from the get-go. Why have people in prison?

They should have access to pornography or any other "perk" on a good behaviour basis. Otherwise, nothing above the rock bottom basics of survival.
20 posted on 09/22/2002 1:32:36 PM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: VOA
"How about letting the guards simply have discretion to deny access to these materials to inmates based on bad behaviour?"

I don't know how it is in other states, but in New York State prisons, officers are not afforded the type of discretion you mention. It's actually a violation of the inmate's rights to arbitrarily discipline an inmate outside of the established disciplinary system in place here. We have a three-tier disciplinary system, that deals with misbehavior by inmates. The officer must document the misbehavior in writing and the report, or ticket as we call it, will be reviewed by the midnight Watch Commander and based on the severity of the offense, the charges will be placed into one of the thee tiers. Each tier is heard by a different uniformed rank in the prison and each has its own set of available dispositions that can be applied.

While as a supervisor, I have no problem with the officer shutting down the TV's because of certain misbehavior, or taking away the microwave because the inmates fail to keep it clean. However, there are other supervisors who run scared and won't allow it. As well, even if the officer attempts to do this, the inmates will immediately grieve it, or grab the first prison official walking around and cry to them. The officer will then be counseled and the inmates once again have won the day. Behavior shaping, or modification isn't used in the prison system here, although it should be.

54 posted on 09/22/2002 4:50:34 PM PDT by mass55th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson