The Largest Prison Strike In American History Goes Ignored By US Media(deathandtaxesmag.com)
deathandtaxesmag.com
The Largest Prison Strike In American History Goes Ignored By US Media
http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/41235/the-largest-prison-strike-in-american-history-goes-ignored-by-us-media/
20 comments
You'll see the "ignored by the MSM!" angle a lot on these kind of political stories. It's on reddit all the time. Look for headlines like "WTF?! Prisoners on strike and Fox News refuses to report on it! FUCK YOU FOX!!"
It's an easy angle to drum up interest in the story and pander to your readers by making them think they're getting the "real" story.
It's an easy angle to drum up interest in the story and pander to your readers by making them think they're getting the "real" story.
Well it was being ignored for the first few days, it only just started to get picked up by NYT etc.
The (fairly short) NY Times article was two days after the initial event. As far as I know, it made it to neither the Times front page nor Google news front page nor did it receive any other wider coverage despite being a fairly significant event (in my opinion, obviously).
Also, what would constitute mentioning this lack of coverage in a fashion "resembling an intellectual way"? News stories have hooks and further reading. The problem is...?
Also, what would constitute mentioning this lack of coverage in a fashion "resembling an intellectual way"? News stories have hooks and further reading. The problem is...?
The problem is that the hook is has nothing to do with the subject matter. The story is about a prison strike, the hook is "this story is being suppressed," which is essentially a lie. It's not a bait and reward, it's a bait and switch. It's like putting boobs in a youtube thumbnail despite there not being so much as a single woman in your video.
The first step to an intellectual approach is to actually approach the issue, which this article doesn't.
You would start with a more accurate description of the actual press coverage received, establishing some empirical expectation and an explanation of why this expectation was not met. The author leaves it to the reader to imagine what coverage actually means. What would have constituted adequate coverage? How does this coverage compare to coverage of other major stories? Many articles will have poor and vague answers to these questions. This article doesn't even attempt them.
The next basic question to address is "why was the coverage expectation not met." The author provides only once sentence in the entire article that is even remotely related to this question ("Perhaps there was..."), and it's merely speculation that encourages the reader to imagine all sorts of nefarious possibilities. One possibility is that people just don't care that much. As I mentioned, the article was submitted to hacker news and ignored until some ridiculous bait was added to the headline.
In intellectual article would have done some sort of investigation of those questions as an absolute minimum.
The first step to an intellectual approach is to actually approach the issue, which this article doesn't.
You would start with a more accurate description of the actual press coverage received, establishing some empirical expectation and an explanation of why this expectation was not met. The author leaves it to the reader to imagine what coverage actually means. What would have constituted adequate coverage? How does this coverage compare to coverage of other major stories? Many articles will have poor and vague answers to these questions. This article doesn't even attempt them.
The next basic question to address is "why was the coverage expectation not met." The author provides only once sentence in the entire article that is even remotely related to this question ("Perhaps there was..."), and it's merely speculation that encourages the reader to imagine all sorts of nefarious possibilities. One possibility is that people just don't care that much. As I mentioned, the article was submitted to hacker news and ignored until some ridiculous bait was added to the headline.
In intellectual article would have done some sort of investigation of those questions as an absolute minimum.
"... prisoners in Georgia are forced to work without pay for their labor--seemingly a violation of the 13th Amendment, which prohibits slavery and involuntary servitude."
I hadn't thought about that before, but that's a very interesting point. The fact that such a high percentage of the prison population is black makes it hit home a little harder.
I hadn't thought about that before, but that's a very interesting point. The fact that such a high percentage of the prison population is black makes it hit home a little harder.
"Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."
There are many ways to interpret that statement. One interpretation would go towards that a judge may specify involuntary servitude (eg. community service) as punishment, and another would say that involuntary servitude is implied by the prison sentence.
I'm sure the prisoners take the former interpretation that involuntary servitude was not specified as punishment and thus is unconstitutional.
Also, the 13th amendment absolutely bans slavery, so if you can construe characteristics of ownership then you could make it unconstitutional. Georgia also has a history of abusing the law to keep slavery in all but name going which would negatively impact the states' case in a non-southern court, and would make a good case as to the intent of Georgian legislation being to revive slavery. I mean when they're trying to put the Confederate flag back on their flag it gives a person pause as to the intent of not paying their labor. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85078,00.html
This is why most states pay their employees in prison a pittance rather than absolutely nothing. It avoids the issue entirely and makes it one of labor law.
Re-education through labor, not just for communists anymore!
I'm sure the prisoners take the former interpretation that involuntary servitude was not specified as punishment and thus is unconstitutional.
Also, the 13th amendment absolutely bans slavery, so if you can construe characteristics of ownership then you could make it unconstitutional. Georgia also has a history of abusing the law to keep slavery in all but name going which would negatively impact the states' case in a non-southern court, and would make a good case as to the intent of Georgian legislation being to revive slavery. I mean when they're trying to put the Confederate flag back on their flag it gives a person pause as to the intent of not paying their labor. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85078,00.html
This is why most states pay their employees in prison a pittance rather than absolutely nothing. It avoids the issue entirely and makes it one of labor law.
Re-education through labor, not just for communists anymore!
Re-education through labor, not just for communists anymore!
It is also for capitalists. Georgia has a number of privately operated, for profit prisons. (It does not appear that any of them were involved in this strike.)
[ http://www.dcor.state.ga.us/Divisions/Corrections/PrivatePri... ] [ http://www.thegeogroupinc.com/ ] [ http://www.correctionscorp.com/ ]
It is also for capitalists. Georgia has a number of privately operated, for profit prisons. (It does not appear that any of them were involved in this strike.)
[ http://www.dcor.state.ga.us/Divisions/Corrections/PrivatePri... ] [ http://www.thegeogroupinc.com/ ] [ http://www.correctionscorp.com/ ]
I agree with your point. The "as" in the term "as a punishment" indicates that it is given explicitly as a punishment, and in lieu of a prison term. Rather than be put in prison, the judge can order you to go work in some capacity without pay, as with community service.
Ouch, I stand corrected. I should know by now not to take quotes from articles at face value, especially when it is so easy to look up the source directly. :-)
[deleted]
Which just shows you a flaw in the US constitution.
This may be the contradiction that Godel was about to blurt out during naturalization, before von Neumann kicked him in the shins.
it's not a flaw - you break the laws, you pay the price. it shouldn't be a vacation.
http://www.amazon.com/New-Jim-Crow-Incarceration-Colorblindn...
"Contrary to the rosy picture of race embodied in Barack Obama's political success and Oprah Winfrey's financial success, legal scholar Alexander argues vigorously and persuasively that [w]e have not ended racial caste in America; we have merely redesigned it. Jim Crow and legal racial segregation has been replaced by mass incarceration as a system of social control (More African Americans are under correctional control today... than were enslaved in 1850). Alexander reviews American racial history from the colonies to the Clinton administration, delineating its transformation into the war on drugs. She offers an acute analysis of the effect of this mass incarceration upon former inmates who will be discriminated against, legally, for the rest of their lives, denied employment, housing, education, and public benefits. Most provocatively, she reveals how both the move toward colorblindness and affirmative action may blur our vision of injustice: most Americans know and don't know the truth about mass incarceration—but her carefully researched, deeply engaging, and thoroughly readable book should change that."
"Contrary to the rosy picture of race embodied in Barack Obama's political success and Oprah Winfrey's financial success, legal scholar Alexander argues vigorously and persuasively that [w]e have not ended racial caste in America; we have merely redesigned it. Jim Crow and legal racial segregation has been replaced by mass incarceration as a system of social control (More African Americans are under correctional control today... than were enslaved in 1850). Alexander reviews American racial history from the colonies to the Clinton administration, delineating its transformation into the war on drugs. She offers an acute analysis of the effect of this mass incarceration upon former inmates who will be discriminated against, legally, for the rest of their lives, denied employment, housing, education, and public benefits. Most provocatively, she reveals how both the move toward colorblindness and affirmative action may blur our vision of injustice: most Americans know and don't know the truth about mass incarceration—but her carefully researched, deeply engaging, and thoroughly readable book should change that."
I agree with that book, however I see that the underlying dynamic behind it is profit mongering by the for-profit prison and for-profit bail bonding industries, both of which spend huge parts of their profits on political lobbying that increases their profits. Racism and fundamentalist religion notions about punishment are the tools they use to advance their agenda. Just pointing out that we have racist outcomes in the justice system won't change the dynamic of what is going on. Prisons are profit centers. For some.
The prisoners are indeed incorrect concerning the 13th Amendment.
If only they'd paid attention in their classes on the constitution... wait, all education for prisoners has been abolished, another thing they're protesting.
If only they'd paid attention in their classes on the constitution... wait, all education for prisoners has been abolished, another thing they're protesting.
Who cares about amendments? Is it moral or not?
Wow, the "except as punishment for a crime" was used to reimplement slavery throughout the south from 1866 to 1941, with widespread arrests of black people on bogus charges, and then selling them to Corporations to be worked to death and beaten as a free labor source that can work 16 hours a day 365 days a year. And all well documented. I had not heard that before and I thank you for linking to a book that documents it.
Slavery wasn't abolished. It was just reinvented.
To be fair they are being fed and housed so it isn't like they are going totally uncompensated.
As has been noted, the 13th amendment prohibit's involuntary servitude except as punishment for a crime.
Involuntary servitude means you have no choice, not that you aren't fed in the process. Indeed, even slaves are usually fed and housed since they constitute an investment on their owners' part (usually not well fed or housed, of course). The camps where you were forced to work without eating were known as death camps, which fortunately would fall under the cruel and unusual punishment clause here.
Involuntary servitude means you have no choice, not that you aren't fed in the process. Indeed, even slaves are usually fed and housed since they constitute an investment on their owners' part (usually not well fed or housed, of course). The camps where you were forced to work without eating were known as death camps, which fortunately would fall under the cruel and unusual punishment clause here.
Yeah, I realize that I'm commenting more on the complaint in the article where they say that getting 25 cents a hour isn't enough but when you don't have to pay for shelter or food 25 cents an hour is likely as good as or perhaps better than minimum wage.
Actually, according to the article as well as an NPR commentator, prisoners in Georgia receive no pay whatsoever for their labor, None, $0.00/hour.
Note all that extreme overcrowding, a lack of nutritious food as well as a lack of heating and cooling were mentioned in the demands. If they are correct, it's hard to imagine worse conditions aside from outright torture.
Note all that extreme overcrowding, a lack of nutritious food as well as a lack of heating and cooling were mentioned in the demands. If they are correct, it's hard to imagine worse conditions aside from outright torture.
Not sure why the parent was down voted - this is a legitimate statement - while they are not compensated, they are given free room and board which is at times more than what low income poverty stricken families can guarantee themselves.
They are incarcerated for a reason (yes there are cases of innocence - but realistically, the majority of offenders are in there for a reason). Whether it was a crime out of necessity, passion or simply because the perpetrator was downright crazy - they committed a crime, and their legal rights should be minimized to a minimum without making it a case of human rights violations.
If a work or education program can be offered to help people possibly correct their lives, excellent - if rehabilitation is possible - great. But they should not have the same rights as regular law abiding citizens.
They are incarcerated for a reason (yes there are cases of innocence - but realistically, the majority of offenders are in there for a reason). Whether it was a crime out of necessity, passion or simply because the perpetrator was downright crazy - they committed a crime, and their legal rights should be minimized to a minimum without making it a case of human rights violations.
If a work or education program can be offered to help people possibly correct their lives, excellent - if rehabilitation is possible - great. But they should not have the same rights as regular law abiding citizens.
One could make the case that they are in fact volunteering for their servitude.
There are strict criteria, which you have to go out of your way to meet, that determine whether you're eligible to get in to a prison. It's easy to make the argument that everybody there is there by choice.
There are strict criteria, which you have to go out of your way to meet, that determine whether you're eligible to get in to a prison. It's easy to make the argument that everybody there is there by choice.
Not true; it is possible to be convicted of a crime of which you are innocent.
Even when guilty, there are many punishments which are unconscionable and amoral to impose for the crimes. For example, stoning a woman to death because she talked to a man who is not a relative. Another is third strike life in prison for smoking pot.
There are a lot of people that are railroaded into prison for simply being in the wrong place, looking like the wrong guy, or simply having a bad attitude. In some states it's extremely arbitrary, where they will brand you an accomplice simply because you picked up a hitch-hiker who happened to have drugs on them.
It's insane.
It's insane.
Just for a single counterexample: anyone who has ever been falsely accused of rape. You can literally spend your entire life sitting at home watching TV, and end up in a prison.
Their demands seem entirely reasonable to me. I'm ashamed to belong to a society in which such demands must be made, more so that they would be ignored.
[deleted]
I'm not inclined to believe things prisoners say about their conditions.
So while I agree the demands are reasonable, I'm not (yet) convinced that they needed to be made or that they are ignored.
(Except for the fruits/vegetables, because realistically while they may ask for it, they aren't going to eat it.)
So while I agree the demands are reasonable, I'm not (yet) convinced that they needed to be made or that they are ignored.
(Except for the fruits/vegetables, because realistically while they may ask for it, they aren't going to eat it.)
I'll make this quick, and monitor to see if interest demands me go into more detail (personal experience).
We do not rehabilitate prisoners. We have a ridiculous recidivism rate (60%+ depending on your data, demographic, etc).
We have the highest amount of citizens in prison then any Western country.
If the Mandatory Minimum Federal laws for drugs were flipped with actual State Violent crimes, we would have a much better society.
I would love to see inmates having the ability to pursue a trade, learn programming, learn a skill which Trumps their felony..which is incredibly difficult. Felon's are obligated by law to note if they have been Charged with a Felony (depending on the wording, for example: "convicted in the last 7 years" you may mark NO if, it has in fact, been 8).
Something that may be of interest.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/talk/2008/02/getting_out_life_after...
We do not rehabilitate prisoners. We have a ridiculous recidivism rate (60%+ depending on your data, demographic, etc).
We have the highest amount of citizens in prison then any Western country.
If the Mandatory Minimum Federal laws for drugs were flipped with actual State Violent crimes, we would have a much better society.
I would love to see inmates having the ability to pursue a trade, learn programming, learn a skill which Trumps their felony..which is incredibly difficult. Felon's are obligated by law to note if they have been Charged with a Felony (depending on the wording, for example: "convicted in the last 7 years" you may mark NO if, it has in fact, been 8).
Something that may be of interest.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/talk/2008/02/getting_out_life_after...
If there were less people in prison, and less reoffenders, who would make all the military equipment, household appliances, license plates etc etc for free?
The US would have no slaves to work with!
edit: Since I'm being downmodded for stating fact:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=82... http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/slavery-in-u-s-prison-sys... http://newworkerfeatures.blogspot.com/2010/02/us-prison-labo... http://www.insideprison.com/prison-industry-labor.asp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwT6CisM0mU
There was also a great wikipedia article listing all the different things that inmates make. If they refuse, they're subjected to solitary confinement.
The US should be thoroughly ashamed. Not that it'll ever be reported by the mainstream media.
The US would have no slaves to work with!
edit: Since I'm being downmodded for stating fact:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=82... http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/slavery-in-u-s-prison-sys... http://newworkerfeatures.blogspot.com/2010/02/us-prison-labo... http://www.insideprison.com/prison-industry-labor.asp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwT6CisM0mU
There was also a great wikipedia article listing all the different things that inmates make. If they refuse, they're subjected to solitary confinement.
The US should be thoroughly ashamed. Not that it'll ever be reported by the mainstream media.
That misses the mark.. prisons are expensive. We'd be better off paying people $8/hr to make that stuff and not paying to house and guard them.
The real reason is because you immediately lose a political argument if you're accused of being soft on crime. So there's absolutely no reasoned debate on the topic, the only time it comes up is when every so often a pol comes up with some dumbass punitive and counter-productive measure to get a headline. Additionally, most prisoners are black, and everyone knows this, while 80% of voters in most districts are white.
So basically, the way we're acting is both short-term stupid (could just pay day laborers and save money) and long-term stupid (creating lifetime criminals by destroying other options for them).
The real reason is because you immediately lose a political argument if you're accused of being soft on crime. So there's absolutely no reasoned debate on the topic, the only time it comes up is when every so often a pol comes up with some dumbass punitive and counter-productive measure to get a headline. Additionally, most prisoners are black, and everyone knows this, while 80% of voters in most districts are white.
So basically, the way we're acting is both short-term stupid (could just pay day laborers and save money) and long-term stupid (creating lifetime criminals by destroying other options for them).
Mod parent up. The United States has NEVER gotten over its plantation/slave owner mentality. It's too deeply embedded in the collective unconscious to be calmly refuted--it's so close to the bone that it has to be vehemently, hysterically denied. It goes together with the inability of the United States' public to comprehend risk pools. And not only workers are enslaved, but you entrepreneurs are also, because the state requires you to administer a social program that the government is in a far better position to administer: health insurance (private insurance could then be purchased for more benefits). But forcing businesses to do this is a huge chunk of the deficit, incredibly economically inefficient and is forcing companies to outsource labor. Your new slave owners are the prisons and the insurance companies.
The US has the highest rate of imprisonment and the largest number of prisoners of any country in the world (including China, which does give us a run for the money...)
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/downloads/worl...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_Sta...
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/downloads/worl...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_Sta...
> I would love to see inmates having the ability to pursue a trade, learn programming
Brings a whole new level to the saying "Always code as if the person who ends up maintaining your code is a violent psychopath who knows where you live."
Brings a whole new level to the saying "Always code as if the person who ends up maintaining your code is a violent psychopath who knows where you live."
There was an interesting article in Time magazine (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1986002,00....) that looked at the prison system in Norway, where the goal really is to rehabilitate people.
Fundamentally it would require a shift in what a lot of the citizenry feels the prison system is. The prison system is currently not a system for rehabilitation, it's a system of punishment.
It would be a breath of fresh air if we actually tried to rehabilitate people in prison to some degree. I don't know how far off that is, since a lot of people I've talked to seem to think that pretty horrible stuff like rape is part of ione's prison sentence.
It would be a breath of fresh air if we actually tried to rehabilitate people in prison to some degree. I don't know how far off that is, since a lot of people I've talked to seem to think that pretty horrible stuff like rape is part of ione's prison sentence.
I'm not inclined to believe things prisoners say about their conditions.
I am. There's evidence that things are far worse than we complacently imagine. For example, a year or so ago there was a shocking multipart series on NPR about what's going on inside California's prisons. Mostly we just don't want to know.
I am. There's evidence that things are far worse than we complacently imagine. For example, a year or so ago there was a shocking multipart series on NPR about what's going on inside California's prisons. Mostly we just don't want to know.
It reminds me of the attitudes in http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1999171 This is a system that a very small portion of our (middle/upper class) population is going to experience. With the chances of interacting with it being that low we ignore the problem and run a numbers game that our lives won't be unduly affected by it (akin to not being too worried about being killed by a falling satellite). So the situation deteriorates because people are under the impression that if you are in prison you deserve it and ignore the damage it causes to some individuals/families who under different circumstances would have been our neighbors or friends.
Do you have a link to that by chance? I'd be interested in reading/listening (whichever the case may be).
Yeah, and this: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9229611...
The piece I remember most (not sure if this is the one) was where the reporter got caught in the middle of a lockdown in a crowded San Quentin gym (former gym, now dormitory because of overcrowding). When the alarms go off, everyone has to get on their hands and knees or the guards shoot them on sight. The reporter was told to keep standing during the whole episode, and everyone in the gym was staring at her. Unbelievable moment. I thought it was in this story but the transcript doesn't contain it. Perhaps it doesn't cover the whole audio or perhaps there are more pieces in the series.
The piece I remember most (not sure if this is the one) was where the reporter got caught in the middle of a lockdown in a crowded San Quentin gym (former gym, now dormitory because of overcrowding). When the alarms go off, everyone has to get on their hands and knees or the guards shoot them on sight. The reporter was told to keep standing during the whole episode, and everyone in the gym was staring at her. Unbelievable moment. I thought it was in this story but the transcript doesn't contain it. Perhaps it doesn't cover the whole audio or perhaps there are more pieces in the series.
Thanks!
We live in a society where its ok to joke approvingly about prisoner's suffering violent rape. Of course our prisons are horrible to be in.
I don't think we should be moderating the parent comment down, just because we disagree with what he or she says. If nothing else, it makes the subsequent conversation difficult to follow.
I think it's important to note that breaking the law isn't necessarily unethical, therefore we should carefully consider our treatment towards "criminals". The US has the highest incarceration rate in the world, with Georgia leading the US. It isn't pretty.
The law being ethical is what lawyers would call a 'legal fiction'.
This is why the first juries established jury nullification.
This is why the first juries established jury nullification.
Unfortunately, it seems recently most of the time juries are not informed of their nullification abilities (and the defense is often prohibited from mentioning it). Sadly this line of reasoning has been upheld in court.
They didn't "establish nullification" - nullification is simply the logical outcome that the jury's decision is final, and can't be questioned.
The reason judges don't want this fact brought up by counsel during court is because it would render the legal system meaningless... in general I think we'd all LIKE the jury focused on the law and the evidence, not their gut feelings.
This always comes up in discussions when we feel the law is unjust and the accused isn't getting a fair trial - but please consider, if counsel were allowed to bring this up in court and instruct the jury that, you know, regardless of what you have heard here, you can vote however you feel like it and, you know, nobody is allowed to give you shit over it afterwards.... that street runs both ways. You'd have people who DO deserve punishment getting off scott free.
The reason judges don't want this fact brought up by counsel during court is because it would render the legal system meaningless... in general I think we'd all LIKE the jury focused on the law and the evidence, not their gut feelings.
This always comes up in discussions when we feel the law is unjust and the accused isn't getting a fair trial - but please consider, if counsel were allowed to bring this up in court and instruct the jury that, you know, regardless of what you have heard here, you can vote however you feel like it and, you know, nobody is allowed to give you shit over it afterwards.... that street runs both ways. You'd have people who DO deserve punishment getting off scott free.
It wouldn't render the legal system meaningless. It would return verdicts according to your 12 peers. Jury Nullification is not about using your gut feelings its used for when the application of the law would return an unjust or immoral result. There is in my estimation, no better judge of the law than 12 of your peers.
[deleted]
The United States government creates a hypocrisy when they do not follow laws put in place by their own institutions.
[deleted]
"We have the Crips and the Bloods, we have the Muslims, we have the head Mexicans, and we have the Aryans all with a peaceful understanding, all on common ground."
Whatever's happening, they must have done something terrible to cause that.
Whatever's happening, they must have done something terrible to cause that.
HN is about interesting new phenomena, and these factions working together seems to qualify. Good call.
Also of interest to Hackers, of course, is the suggestion that Old Media has ignored the strike. Why? It seems like terrific news fodder for the traditional Left and the traditional Right. This is very curious to me.
Everything else about the actual prison conditions and so on... Seems like "politics" to me unless there's an interesting new angle to it.
Also of interest to Hackers, of course, is the suggestion that Old Media has ignored the strike. Why? It seems like terrific news fodder for the traditional Left and the traditional Right. This is very curious to me.
Everything else about the actual prison conditions and so on... Seems like "politics" to me unless there's an interesting new angle to it.
That someone thought and made possible this kind of peaceful protest uniting these specific gangs is in itself incredible!
The story of the people behind this strike must be fascinating.
The story of the people behind this strike must be fascinating.
I found it surprising that the strike was apparently coordinated across many state prisons by use of cell phones. I thought possession of cell phones was generally banned in prisons.
Yes cell phones are considered contraband, and yes they are available.
Many times guards will bring in cell phones and sell them to inmates for upwards of $1000/each.
It helps to supplement the (relatively) poor wages most guards receive.
It helps to supplement the (relatively) poor wages most guards receive.
Based on the accuracy of the headline, I'm not sure how much trust I have in the source. Doesn't seem as if this news is being ignored by the MSM:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/us/12prison.html Prisoners Strike in Georgia
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/us/16prison.html Some Georgia Inmates Return to Work
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/us/12prison.html Prisoners Strike in Georgia
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/us/16prison.html Some Georgia Inmates Return to Work
At the very least, it seems like it'd be a good idea to respond to this positively if only to encourage non-violent, instead of violent, prison protests in the future.
There's also a good interview about the strikes on Democracy Now with prisoner advocate Elaine Brown.
“Repression Breeds Resistance”
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/14/prisoner_advocate_ela...
“Repression Breeds Resistance”
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/14/prisoner_advocate_ela...
Somebody connect this to Hacker News for me. If this is Hacker News, what human rights story isn't?
It's a media issue. It's seemingly an important issue, but it isn't covered much. Admittedly, "media" is on the fringes of programming and business.
Besides, many programmers have a libertarian bent, and locking people up, often for questionable stuff, and treating them like dirt rankles. Not that many of them don't deserve to be worked to pay back societal debt. But don't abuse them and feed them junk.
Besides, many programmers have a libertarian bent, and locking people up, often for questionable stuff, and treating them like dirt rankles. Not that many of them don't deserve to be worked to pay back societal debt. But don't abuse them and feed them junk.
> It's a media issue
Then why are all the comments about the politics?
Then why are all the comments about the politics?
Because the article wasn't about the media at all, that angle was merely a sensational (and false) hook to get people riled up and reading the article.
(Yes, I know I'm answering your rhetorical question).
(Yes, I know I'm answering your rhetorical question).
Sort of what I was going to say too. There's something about the raw truth of people doing good things, uncovered by the media -- that seems correlated with Hacker News. But it's an interesting question.
Easy fix to crowding due to budget cuts: Release all prisoners who are held only on drug charges.
Private prison lobbies won't let that happen
[deleted]
[deleted]
It will be interesting to see how the strike dissipates, or fails to dissipate, based on the effectiveness of prisoner's communication networks.
Non-violent, therefore not newsworthy.
In the 1830s de Tocqueville reported on a reformatory in Massachusetts where the prisoners had a voting system in order to make decisions about mealtimes and exercise etc. The interesting thing was the way in which the voting worked. All prisoners had a vote regardless of disciplinary actions but if you stayed out of trouble you had two votes and this system worked very well according to Alexis. Tocqueville in America was quite a good read, although long, and has many insights into early America.
"Today marks the end of a seven-day strike where tens of thousands of inmates in Georgia refused to work or leave their cells until their demands had been met. The odd thing is, that until today, no one had ever heard about this strike."
FALSE
I posted this NYT article 4 days ago. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1996994
FALSE
I posted this NYT article 4 days ago. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1996994
Seriously.
That death+taxes site set off all kinds of propaganda alarms in my head, and a 5-second google search debunked the initial assertion.
I'm very disappointed with Hacker News.
That death+taxes site set off all kinds of propaganda alarms in my head, and a 5-second google search debunked the initial assertion.
I'm very disappointed with Hacker News.
I believe prisoners do have minimal rights, and to the extent feasible, should get a decent meal and perhaps reading material. Weights and playgrounds? Not so much. They should be busting rocks or chopping wood, or something else that is not fun.
Make prison too cozy and beneficial, and you give an incentive for crime.
Also, an alternative cost-cutter to triple bunking prisoners is to incarcerate fewer people, by decriminalizing victim-less acts (cough cough).
Make prison too cozy and beneficial, and you give an incentive for crime.
Also, an alternative cost-cutter to triple bunking prisoners is to incarcerate fewer people, by decriminalizing victim-less acts (cough cough).
And yet, study after study has shown that harsher punishments do little to deter crime, and that despite the poor state that prisons are in, and the conditions one experiences there, recidivism is still ridiculously high.
I've heard the same argument for homelessness and their support structures - make homelessness too easy, who wants to work? I've always asked people who spout this nonsense to go take a look at a homeless shelter or a soup kitchen line - I regularly volunteer at both - and then come back and tell me with a straight face that anyone sane will deliberately put themselves in that situation.
I'd tell you do so for prison, but that's not really plausible short of actually ending up in the big house. So instead, I'll urge you to go talk to some people who have been in prison, and figure out a little bit of what happens there. It is not "fun", nor is it any place a sane person would willingly and deliberately put themselves.
I've heard the same argument for homelessness and their support structures - make homelessness too easy, who wants to work? I've always asked people who spout this nonsense to go take a look at a homeless shelter or a soup kitchen line - I regularly volunteer at both - and then come back and tell me with a straight face that anyone sane will deliberately put themselves in that situation.
I'd tell you do so for prison, but that's not really plausible short of actually ending up in the big house. So instead, I'll urge you to go talk to some people who have been in prison, and figure out a little bit of what happens there. It is not "fun", nor is it any place a sane person would willingly and deliberately put themselves.
You appear to be using "sane person" to mean "person who shares my values and goals".
But are prisons primarily for rehabilitation or deterrence?
If someone were to hurt or kill someone close to me, I would want him to go to prison for punishment, if we couldn't just kill him and be done with it.
When I think about this hypothetical person getting, say, programming lessons with my tax dollars, that only makes me angry.
I assume prisons are how they are in part because my attitude is fairly common.
None of the above diminishes the problems of wrongful convictions, cruel and unusual punishments, prison rape, victimless crimes, and so on.
If someone were to hurt or kill someone close to me, I would want him to go to prison for punishment, if we couldn't just kill him and be done with it.
When I think about this hypothetical person getting, say, programming lessons with my tax dollars, that only makes me angry.
I assume prisons are how they are in part because my attitude is fairly common.
None of the above diminishes the problems of wrongful convictions, cruel and unusual punishments, prison rape, victimless crimes, and so on.
> When I think about this hypothetical person getting, say, programming lessons with my tax dollars, that only makes me angry.
Option B) Rehabilitation. Show compassion and understanding, maybe make the guy a skilled tradesman. Now he's much less likely to kill again, because he has options aside from crime.
I choose B.
Not to mention, under option B), you have a future taxpayer who'll be creating economic value.
But are prisons primarily for rehabilitation or deterrence?If someone were to hurt or kill someone close to me, I would want him to go to prison for punishment, if we couldn't just kill him and be done with it
And this is why the justice system is about punishing people in regards to what is best for society and the community/public as a whole, not judgments based on the need for personal retribution.
And this is why the justice system is about punishing people in regards to what is best for society and the community/public as a whole, not judgments based on the need for personal retribution.
True -- but don't forget that prisons exist as a replacement for retribution, which was often less accurate and had a tendency to escalate into open feuding between families, ethnic groups, or religious groups.
If prisons aren't an adequate replacement for personal retribution, but a need for personal retribution still exists, the public will either correct the prisons or revert to their previous practices.
I'm all for certain aspects of prison reform, but we mess with their role as punishment at our peril.
As a side note, I suspect that the United States' use of the death penalty and comparatively poor prison conditions is largely due to its relatively recent history of vigilantism, the increased tendency of its people to distrust the government, and the relative predominance of firearms. The punishment aspect of prisons needs to be more pronounced in the United States than, say, Europe, in order to keep its citizenry content.
I suspect there's also regional variations - in states where distrust of governmental authority is more predominant and vigilantism more recent and frequent, prisons are harsher and the death penalty used more.
If prisons aren't an adequate replacement for personal retribution, but a need for personal retribution still exists, the public will either correct the prisons or revert to their previous practices.
I'm all for certain aspects of prison reform, but we mess with their role as punishment at our peril.
As a side note, I suspect that the United States' use of the death penalty and comparatively poor prison conditions is largely due to its relatively recent history of vigilantism, the increased tendency of its people to distrust the government, and the relative predominance of firearms. The punishment aspect of prisons needs to be more pronounced in the United States than, say, Europe, in order to keep its citizenry content.
I suspect there's also regional variations - in states where distrust of governmental authority is more predominant and vigilantism more recent and frequent, prisons are harsher and the death penalty used more.
The justice system is about the raw exercise of power and creating profits for Corrections Corporation of America and the like.
It is supported by the population which enjoys watching people get hurt playing football or smashed up driving fast cars in races, in lieu of gladiator fights to the death.
Speaking of which, in many prisons the guards stage gladiator fights* to the death between prisoners and take bets on who will win.
* http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1999/04/06/60II/main41867.sht... http://www.prisontalk.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-72442.h... http://en.terra.com/latin-in-america/news/brutal_gladiator_s...
It is supported by the population which enjoys watching people get hurt playing football or smashed up driving fast cars in races, in lieu of gladiator fights to the death.
Speaking of which, in many prisons the guards stage gladiator fights* to the death between prisoners and take bets on who will win.
* http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1999/04/06/60II/main41867.sht... http://www.prisontalk.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-72442.h... http://en.terra.com/latin-in-america/news/brutal_gladiator_s...
I think the retribution vs rehabilitation balance is heavily dependent on the crime and is not really reflected in our penal system.
If you committed murder, rape, kidnapping, and really have no chance of ever reentering society, then it should be retribution. Basically how do we house these people for the rest of their lives in a cheap manner? And I really could care less about their wellbeing/condition.
If you commit a property crime (lets say you were stealing from a liquor store) or a drug crime, what is the real thing going on here? Are you desperate because you have no money and the easiest way to get some is to run around with a gun and rob people? In that case, rehabilition is a lot more useful. The person is only going to jail for 3-5 years and is going to have to come back into society and find a job and a way to live.
They get out of jail, are a felon, and now nobody will hire them. What do you think they are going to do? Go back to the only way they know how to make money which is to steal or deal drugs or something illegal to get by.
So to say we have to rehabilate murders is unpalatable to most people, and to say we have to punish people who are only going to jail becuase they are desperate to begin with is ignoring the underlying cause.
If you committed murder, rape, kidnapping, and really have no chance of ever reentering society, then it should be retribution. Basically how do we house these people for the rest of their lives in a cheap manner? And I really could care less about their wellbeing/condition.
If you commit a property crime (lets say you were stealing from a liquor store) or a drug crime, what is the real thing going on here? Are you desperate because you have no money and the easiest way to get some is to run around with a gun and rob people? In that case, rehabilition is a lot more useful. The person is only going to jail for 3-5 years and is going to have to come back into society and find a job and a way to live.
They get out of jail, are a felon, and now nobody will hire them. What do you think they are going to do? Go back to the only way they know how to make money which is to steal or deal drugs or something illegal to get by.
So to say we have to rehabilate murders is unpalatable to most people, and to say we have to punish people who are only going to jail becuase they are desperate to begin with is ignoring the underlying cause.
Most rape convictions are for consensual statutory rape. Most kidnapping convictions are non-custodial parent abductions. Neither of these are violent crimes that threaten society.
They clearly are for both. You want the idea of going to prison to be on someone's mind when they seek out to commit a crime. And once they get there, you need to make sure a) they don't want to come back and b) they won't come back.
When you consider the socio-economic background of most crime (especially physical theft and violent crime) in almost every developed country, you kinda realize that not providing with them the skills to get employed when they get out is outright just daring them get back into the system.
You are right, there are limits. But these limits should not be set up by gut feelings. You gotta study the issue, and make the decision carefully to maximize good. Or else you end up with some hell hole of a system.
When you consider the socio-economic background of most crime (especially physical theft and violent crime) in almost every developed country, you kinda realize that not providing with them the skills to get employed when they get out is outright just daring them get back into the system.
You are right, there are limits. But these limits should not be set up by gut feelings. You gotta study the issue, and make the decision carefully to maximize good. Or else you end up with some hell hole of a system.
I kinda agree with you on the first part, but if they should be allowed to read books, which are presumably fun or at least interesting to read, why not let them do "fun" exercises? It seems terribly inconsistent.
I don't understand the downvotes.
"Also, an alternative cost-cutter to triple bunking prisoners is to incarcerate fewer people, by decriminalizing victim-less acts (cough cough)."
That's what most of the prisoners are guilty of anyway.
"I believe prisoners do have minimal rights, and to the extent feasible, should get a decent meal and perhaps reading material. Weights and playgrounds? Not so much. They should be busting rocks or chopping wood, or something else that is not fun."
The prison system is too much geared toward either punishment or rehabilitation. The prime concern should be restitution toward the victims, to the fullest extent possible. Then, if possible, prisoners should work to offset the cost of their own incarceration (excluding victimless offenders). So, if the prisoner is able to perform valuable work for that purpose, he should be allowed to, if possible from the confines of the prison.
That said, punishment for punishment's sake is pure sadism. It only breeds hardier criminals. While it gives a victim some temporary relief, it creates future problems and future victims.
"Also, an alternative cost-cutter to triple bunking prisoners is to incarcerate fewer people, by decriminalizing victim-less acts (cough cough)."
That's what most of the prisoners are guilty of anyway.
"I believe prisoners do have minimal rights, and to the extent feasible, should get a decent meal and perhaps reading material. Weights and playgrounds? Not so much. They should be busting rocks or chopping wood, or something else that is not fun."
The prison system is too much geared toward either punishment or rehabilitation. The prime concern should be restitution toward the victims, to the fullest extent possible. Then, if possible, prisoners should work to offset the cost of their own incarceration (excluding victimless offenders). So, if the prisoner is able to perform valuable work for that purpose, he should be allowed to, if possible from the confines of the prison.
That said, punishment for punishment's sake is pure sadism. It only breeds hardier criminals. While it gives a victim some temporary relief, it creates future problems and future victims.
This was covered in the NY Times. The articles were published on the same day.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/us/16prison.html
Edit-- Actually, this was covered in the NYT 4 days ago, and the article was submitted to Hacker News and ignored:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1996994
Plus, the issue of it being "ignored by US media" is not covered by the article in anything resembling an intellectual way, and merely serves as a sensational hook to get people reading a story already covered by other sources.
http://www.southernstudies.org/2010/12/georgia-prisoner-stri...
http://www.blackagendareport.com/?q=georgia_prison_strike_in...