How for-profit prisons have become the biggest lobby no one is talking about(washingtonpost.com)
washingtonpost.com
How for-profit prisons have become the biggest lobby no one is talking about
http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/28/how-for-profit-prisons-have-become-the-biggest-lobby-no-one-is-talking-about/
20 comments
It's actually worse than that. Most states and the federal system impose periods of supervision after release - often lasting for years. During this time, they aren't just expected to not break the law. They must find a job that their probation officer approves of, with an employer that is willing to give reports to the PO, and must disclose their conviction to all potential employers. They often cannot travel outside the county in which they reside, even for work. They cannot drink alcohol (even socially) in most cases. Their constitutional rights against illegal search and seizure are null and void, and must submit to searches any time and at any place they are. Those that were accused of financial crimes often are not allowed to possess checking accounts or credit/debit cards. They often must attend expensive classes & counseling sessions, and pay supervision fees, along with making any applicable restitution or payments on fines. These are just the basics that apply to everyone....there is an infinite list of conditions that can be imposed based upon the specific crime(s) they committed.
If they violate any of these conditions, they are subject to immediate arrest and imprisonment, usually without any judicial review. This is one reason reincarceration rates are so high - it's incredibly easy for these people to be sent back to jail without even thinking of committing a new crime.
If they violate any of these conditions, they are subject to immediate arrest and imprisonment, usually without any judicial review. This is one reason reincarceration rates are so high - it's incredibly easy for these people to be sent back to jail without even thinking of committing a new crime.
You are 100% right. Parole and probation violations are a common misstep in our system, and account for an enormous amount of our prison population. I can speak from experience. I had a one-year probation sentence, on the very last day with only a few hours until my probation was set to expire (I even had a preliminary release letter from my probation officer with the date and time of expiration and had completed my final assessments), I was packing a moving truck preparing to move out of the state. I did not intend, nor was there any possible way I could have finished packing and had everything wrapped up in that time, to leave prior to my probation being expired. Instead an off-duty sheriff deputy who knew I was on probation just happened to see me packing decided he was going to stop and arrest me for on a violation for attempting to violate by moving. Although when I went before the judge 24 hours later he dropped it, the fact of the matter is that I was still violated, spent 24 hours in a holding cell waiting to see the judge, all because someone was a little overzealous in their job and had a zero-tolerance attitude.
Now I see and hear the stories every day of individuals who are violated for the dumbest reasons (i.e. bus crash in front of probation office, witnessed by probation officer, individual taken to hospital, violated for missing probation appointment by same officer that witnessed the accident in the first place. Given a 90-day sentence for violating their probation. And those were the facts as provided by the officer, not the individual. The officer essentially was laughing at how much control they have over someone's life in these incidents.).
Now I see and hear the stories every day of individuals who are violated for the dumbest reasons (i.e. bus crash in front of probation office, witnessed by probation officer, individual taken to hospital, violated for missing probation appointment by same officer that witnessed the accident in the first place. Given a 90-day sentence for violating their probation. And those were the facts as provided by the officer, not the individual. The officer essentially was laughing at how much control they have over someone's life in these incidents.).
I call this the police-judicial complex; they have a "problem" in that between the end of the demographic Baby Boom and the partial reversion of the soft on crime '60s and '70s, there is much less real crime. Per the thesis of Arrest-Proof Yourself (http://www.amazon.com/Arrest-Proof-Yourself-Dale-C-Carson/dp...) that means in much of the country they'd have to downsize if they didn't "feed" upon a steady stream of what the authors refer to as "the clueless", most especially the sorts of people who can't realistically follow all their probation restrictions.
Obviously much, much better than them suffering layoffs. And I'l criticize the media again with their "if it bleeds, it leads" bias, how many in the US realize crime is down so much from that old peak?
Obviously much, much better than them suffering layoffs. And I'l criticize the media again with their "if it bleeds, it leads" bias, how many in the US realize crime is down so much from that old peak?
I've always wondered if I would take parole, or complete my sentence? If it was just a few extra years, and I was in decent health; I think, I would say no to parole?
The rules they put on paroles are beyond unfair. They might have made sense in the 50's, but so much has changed. We don't have jobs. We don't have any housing. The few guys I knew who got out of San Quentin were given $180, and dropped off at the bus station in San Rafael. (The ones with caring family did a little better than the single guys, but all of them went back eventually because of parole violations.)
Whenever I hear a state administrator explain our current parole system; I know he's lying to the public.
The rules they put on paroles are beyond unfair. They might have made sense in the 50's, but so much has changed. We don't have jobs. We don't have any housing. The few guys I knew who got out of San Quentin were given $180, and dropped off at the bus station in San Rafael. (The ones with caring family did a little better than the single guys, but all of them went back eventually because of parole violations.)
Whenever I hear a state administrator explain our current parole system; I know he's lying to the public.
A Stanford Mathematics grad student spent twenty-five years unsuccessfully struggling to obtain his PhD then beat his advisor to death with a hammer.
After serving quite a long time in prison, he was offered parole, with the only condition - at least as reported in the press - being that he not set foot on the Stanford campus ever again.
He refused parole, served out the remainder of his sentence then was released. I don't know what became of him after that but his plan was to work as an electronics technician in Silicon Valley.
While he did wrong to murder his advisor, I regard his refusal of parole as one of my inspirations for being so bluntly outspoken myself. There is no doubt whatsoever that what I blast all over the Internet makes me damn near unemployable but I work to benefit others that are unable to speak for themselves.
As bad as things do get for me sometime, there are billions of people alive today that have it far worse.
After serving quite a long time in prison, he was offered parole, with the only condition - at least as reported in the press - being that he not set foot on the Stanford campus ever again.
He refused parole, served out the remainder of his sentence then was released. I don't know what became of him after that but his plan was to work as an electronics technician in Silicon Valley.
While he did wrong to murder his advisor, I regard his refusal of parole as one of my inspirations for being so bluntly outspoken myself. There is no doubt whatsoever that what I blast all over the Internet makes me damn near unemployable but I work to benefit others that are unable to speak for themselves.
As bad as things do get for me sometime, there are billions of people alive today that have it far worse.
In Colorado, misdemeanor probation has been "privatized" and is managed by a for-profit entity (Intervention, Inc. & Rocky Mountain Offender Management Services [RMOMS]).
I've been through their "system". I'm convinced it's a money making scheme. Their "case managers" (you don't even get a probation officer) are paid $12/hour and are implicitly instructed to find ways to charge you more money. I've had one lie to my face about a state statute (that I had memorized, word for word) to try to get me to pay them more money.
A first-offense, low BAC DWAI in Colorado set me back >$20,000 over 2.5 years and 3 lawyers.
I've been through their "system". I'm convinced it's a money making scheme. Their "case managers" (you don't even get a probation officer) are paid $12/hour and are implicitly instructed to find ways to charge you more money. I've had one lie to my face about a state statute (that I had memorized, word for word) to try to get me to pay them more money.
A first-offense, low BAC DWAI in Colorado set me back >$20,000 over 2.5 years and 3 lawyers.
Holy shit. Do you mind saying more about that amount? Fines vs. lawyers fees, vs probationary costs?
Lawyer 1 Retainer: $4000
DMV License Revocation Hearing: $50
MADD Panel: $30
Court Fines: $2000
County Probation Intake Fee: $100
Private Probation Intake Fee: $100
Probation Supervision: $1000
Community Service Fees: $250
Urinalysis: $1000
Bus for urinalysis: $750
The single urinalysis during a trip to NYC: $300
Alcohol Education Classes (teacher ripped me off, had to repeat): $1500
Alcohol Education Classes Round 2: $1500
Lawyer #2 to Fight Class #1: $4000
Lawyer #3 to Fight Class #1: $2000
Alcohol Therapy: $2400
Probation Discharge Fee: $100
License Reinstatement Application: $95
Driving Permit Application: $50
Driver License Application: $50
Ignition Interlock Installation: $100
Ignition Interlock Lease: $2400
Job opportunity lost: VP of Engineering at mid size software startup. Required short notice international travel. Denied by probation. Would've been a 500% boost in salary for me.
You are required to present a pay stub each month to your probation officer. You can not black out the payment amounts (I tried). In effect, these case managers know exactly how much money you make and what your expenses are (intake questionnaire). They knew I had a good amount of disposable income and used that to their advantage.
The money isn't even the worst of it. A buddy of mine is currently on probation for the same charge (low BAC DWAI) in Colorado. He's 24 and has been diagnosed with 2 distinct cancers. Probation denied medical marijuana use but allows him to take prescribed opiates. Well, the prescriptions ran out and heroin is cheaper than Vicodin. Guess what? He buys heroin now and has the prescription on file to ignore the results of opiate metabolites in his urine.
My girlfriend is also currently on probation for the same charge (low BAC DWAI). She's supposed to start University in September (Vet. Tech. program at a great school). The case managers are intentionally making it very difficult for her to be able to attend. She's seriously considering postponing her education for 24 months. That's the real crime.
Do you see a pattern here? Mid 20-somethings being targeted.
DWAI in Colorado = BAC 0.02
DUI per-se in Colorado = BAC 0.04
DUI in Colorado = BAC 0.08
Even 1 drink and they can arrest you. DWAI carries virtually the same penalties as a DUI ($500-$1000 difference in fine).
DMV License Revocation Hearing: $50
MADD Panel: $30
Court Fines: $2000
County Probation Intake Fee: $100
Private Probation Intake Fee: $100
Probation Supervision: $1000
Community Service Fees: $250
Urinalysis: $1000
Bus for urinalysis: $750
The single urinalysis during a trip to NYC: $300
Alcohol Education Classes (teacher ripped me off, had to repeat): $1500
Alcohol Education Classes Round 2: $1500
Lawyer #2 to Fight Class #1: $4000
Lawyer #3 to Fight Class #1: $2000
Alcohol Therapy: $2400
Probation Discharge Fee: $100
License Reinstatement Application: $95
Driving Permit Application: $50
Driver License Application: $50
Ignition Interlock Installation: $100
Ignition Interlock Lease: $2400
Job opportunity lost: VP of Engineering at mid size software startup. Required short notice international travel. Denied by probation. Would've been a 500% boost in salary for me.
You are required to present a pay stub each month to your probation officer. You can not black out the payment amounts (I tried). In effect, these case managers know exactly how much money you make and what your expenses are (intake questionnaire). They knew I had a good amount of disposable income and used that to their advantage.
The money isn't even the worst of it. A buddy of mine is currently on probation for the same charge (low BAC DWAI) in Colorado. He's 24 and has been diagnosed with 2 distinct cancers. Probation denied medical marijuana use but allows him to take prescribed opiates. Well, the prescriptions ran out and heroin is cheaper than Vicodin. Guess what? He buys heroin now and has the prescription on file to ignore the results of opiate metabolites in his urine.
My girlfriend is also currently on probation for the same charge (low BAC DWAI). She's supposed to start University in September (Vet. Tech. program at a great school). The case managers are intentionally making it very difficult for her to be able to attend. She's seriously considering postponing her education for 24 months. That's the real crime.
Do you see a pattern here? Mid 20-somethings being targeted.
DWAI in Colorado = BAC 0.02
DUI per-se in Colorado = BAC 0.04
DUI in Colorado = BAC 0.08
Even 1 drink and they can arrest you. DWAI carries virtually the same penalties as a DUI ($500-$1000 difference in fine).
Ugh! I hated to upvote for all those expenses, but that was a great documentation of the actual costs involved. The real eye-opener for everyone should be that sadly the majority of those costs are collateral consequences that are added on so that various for-profit companies can all get a little piece of the pie.
Ignition interlock is the biggest scam of a for-profit company I have ever seen. My ex-fiance had to get one in Florida. The place to have it installed was about 50 miles from our house. They told her she had to drive the car there herself and present her valid driver's license to get it installed. Not really thinking about it, I drove her over there. They were about to turn her away because she wasn't driving, yet her probation condition says she can't drive without one installed. They did overlook it after some pleading, but then asked for her driver's license. All she had was a state ID card because she couldn't get a valid driver's license until she had the interlock installed. She ended up never getting it installed. Funny story though, we moved to a different state a few months later and the court order for the interlock didn't follow her. She was able to get a driver's license free and clear. Ironically, when we broke up she moved back to Florida and because she had a valid driver's license from another state she walked right in and got a Florida driver's license.
But I would say the worse part for you was the job loss. While the expenses are high, losing a job is a much greater loss in my opinion. I don't understand the travel portion for some non-violent felonies. I had a similar clause, ended up costing me a couple thousand in attorney fees to get them to let me travel to a different county in the same state for an overnight work meeting. It is completely out of hand in my opinion.
Ignition interlock is the biggest scam of a for-profit company I have ever seen. My ex-fiance had to get one in Florida. The place to have it installed was about 50 miles from our house. They told her she had to drive the car there herself and present her valid driver's license to get it installed. Not really thinking about it, I drove her over there. They were about to turn her away because she wasn't driving, yet her probation condition says she can't drive without one installed. They did overlook it after some pleading, but then asked for her driver's license. All she had was a state ID card because she couldn't get a valid driver's license until she had the interlock installed. She ended up never getting it installed. Funny story though, we moved to a different state a few months later and the court order for the interlock didn't follow her. She was able to get a driver's license free and clear. Ironically, when we broke up she moved back to Florida and because she had a valid driver's license from another state she walked right in and got a Florida driver's license.
But I would say the worse part for you was the job loss. While the expenses are high, losing a job is a much greater loss in my opinion. I don't understand the travel portion for some non-violent felonies. I had a similar clause, ended up costing me a couple thousand in attorney fees to get them to let me travel to a different county in the same state for an overnight work meeting. It is completely out of hand in my opinion.
Two things strike me here. First is that the effective cost to you was over ten times the amount that the judge (or whoever) thought was sufficient to serve "justice". That's fucking insane.
Second is that the people in charge treated you like a hard core alcoholic. Without knowing anything else about you I'm going to guess that's not the case. Regardless of motivation -- although profit is a safe bet -- it's stupid in the truest self-destructive sense for society to automatically treat you like this for [edit: a drink or two].
Edit: I'm getting my BAC numbers mixed up, but it doesn't really matter. I see that in our state 0.02 is DWAI for <21 years of age. It's like we're looking for ways to fuck up peoples lives.
Second is that the people in charge treated you like a hard core alcoholic. Without knowing anything else about you I'm going to guess that's not the case. Regardless of motivation -- although profit is a safe bet -- it's stupid in the truest self-destructive sense for society to automatically treat you like this for [edit: a drink or two].
Edit: I'm getting my BAC numbers mixed up, but it doesn't really matter. I see that in our state 0.02 is DWAI for <21 years of age. It's like we're looking for ways to fuck up peoples lives.
Not a US citizen, I just looked up "BAC DWAI": blood alcohol content, driving while alcohol impaired:
http://dui.drivinglaws.org/colorado.php
http://dui.drivinglaws.org/drink-table.php
You were either not treated according to law, there's something you're forgetting to say, or the above info is incorrect: * no "alcohol lock" for a first time "BAC DWAI" * no license suspension for a first time "BAC DWAI".
You were either not treated according to law, there's something you're forgetting to say, or the above info is incorrect: * no "alcohol lock" for a first time "BAC DWAI" * no license suspension for a first time "BAC DWAI".
The laws were recently changed in January. They've removed the loss of license but replaced it with a lenghty ignition interlock requirement.
Yep this is becoming a big move too. The privatization of parole/probation offices. It's unreal the expenses they charge and most are uneducated or misinformed about the actual laws of each state.
Yep. It's gotten bad enough that people will actually take a longer period of incarceration if it doesn't involve probation afterward. And good luck finding an employer who will hire a felon. Hell, good luck finding a landlord who will rent to you.
Landlord here. I won't rent to violent felons (murder, sexual assault, etc.) strictly as a liability issue. But I consider it an ethical and moral obligation to not discriminate against people convicted of crimes that don't reasonably make them a threat to the neighbors of my properties.
I firmly believe that one of big drivers of recidivism is housing discrimination based on the mere presence of a criminal record.
EDIT: cleaned up a bad sentence
I firmly believe that one of big drivers of recidivism is housing discrimination based on the mere presence of a criminal record.
EDIT: cleaned up a bad sentence
It really is that bad. I would've gladly taken 90 days in county jail vs. years of probation for a first offense misdemeanor.
On the flip side, my county's jail offers yoga and fresh fruit daily.
On the flip side, my county's jail offers yoga and fresh fruit daily.
Private prisons are profit making enterprises. Keeping that in mind, how convenient that America's penal system is for many offenders a revolving door that keeps them locked away for decades if not life. Oh! And the prison industry has an influential lobby advocating on its behalf. Do you not see the problem here? Who owns and operates prisons is a very real issue indeed.
I really wonder about this country and its dysfunctional and, frankly, dehumanizing institutions. We deny a significant minority of our citizens the most basic benefits of living in the world's most advanced society. And I'm not talking about the small minority of dangerous offenders that are justifiably kept in prison for life. We also have a difficult time admitting that the profit motive almost certainly guarantees a corrupt and unjust prison system.
I really wonder about this country and its dysfunctional and, frankly, dehumanizing institutions. We deny a significant minority of our citizens the most basic benefits of living in the world's most advanced society. And I'm not talking about the small minority of dangerous offenders that are justifiably kept in prison for life. We also have a difficult time admitting that the profit motive almost certainly guarantees a corrupt and unjust prison system.
We, as a nation, elected "tough on crime" politicians. As you already pointed out, the private prisons lobby. They lobby the politicians we as a nation elected. We have a democracy, we vote for tough on crime politicians. As a result, we imprison lots of people.
This is propaganda designed to legitimize the actions of the individuals who are effectively using coercion and violence to enslave large parts of the population.
If "We", as a "nation", elected pro slavery politicians, it wouldn't justify the owners of land and capital to enslave people.
This would be the moral equivalent to a belief that some religious groups hold: that "We" are all born sinners, we all deserve to go to hell, but by the grace of god (the state), we can repent (vote) and accept the next savior (presidential candidate).
Democracy, as you call it, is a religion based on the belief that elected groups of individuals have legitimate authority to totally violate basic human rights. In this case, an individual right not to be enslaved.
But, in reality, nobody has a legitimate authority to enslave another person. Voting is participating in the delusion that the state has legitimate moral authority to imbue unrighteous people with righteousness in the first place. They don't.
It doesn't matter if "well, we voted for it": the politicians, executives, as well as the employees and shareholders of these "sanctified" corporations are still morally responsible for their actions, and should be held accountable for their actions.
If "We", as a "nation", elected pro slavery politicians, it wouldn't justify the owners of land and capital to enslave people.
This would be the moral equivalent to a belief that some religious groups hold: that "We" are all born sinners, we all deserve to go to hell, but by the grace of god (the state), we can repent (vote) and accept the next savior (presidential candidate).
Democracy, as you call it, is a religion based on the belief that elected groups of individuals have legitimate authority to totally violate basic human rights. In this case, an individual right not to be enslaved.
But, in reality, nobody has a legitimate authority to enslave another person. Voting is participating in the delusion that the state has legitimate moral authority to imbue unrighteous people with righteousness in the first place. They don't.
It doesn't matter if "well, we voted for it": the politicians, executives, as well as the employees and shareholders of these "sanctified" corporations are still morally responsible for their actions, and should be held accountable for their actions.
I partially agree that we do elect "tough on crime politicians" and we get what we elect. But part of the problem is that we also live in a reactive society instead of a proactive one. We react to incidents with tough laws that sound good when emotions are high and in the moment. Yet we fail to consider the long-term consequences of those laws, so 5-10 years down the road we face the real results of the law. We also live in a society where it is easy to be lazy with laws and take a zero-tolerance approach. I would characterize it more as we have "tough on crime politicians" who don't start that way, but over time become that way because of lobbying efforts and reelection campaigns.
>"private prisons are profit making enterprises"
Tautology surely
Tautology surely
I agree with your point about how the law drops the ball when it comes to rehabilitation.
A real issue IS who owns or manages the prisons. If the profit motive is what drives prison expansion, then society will experience a form of regulatory capture in hyperacceleration.
Many of those programs and processes are being taken over by private entities. You are no long just paying out to your municipality, county, state or country. You're paying out to them and the private company who demands your payment or you go to back to prison for non-payment. They still profit and your debt racks up.
You are paying out fees to the private company for your detention, your lodging, your processing and probation on top of what the state is paying them to hold you. If you cannot pay them back, you are free to spend a day in jail for each $10-$40 of your debt owed to your captors. They get to collect from the state as well.
Then, with the money they've been collecting, the private entities go and lobby to make sure there is a steady stream of constant offenders to keep profits increasing every quarter.
Sometimes it makes sense to bribe judges to send innocent children to your private juvenile detention center to collect those fat state grants, a la Cash for Kids.
The profit motive perverts justice and seeks to turn everyone into customers of the private justice system.
A real issue IS who owns or manages the prisons. If the profit motive is what drives prison expansion, then society will experience a form of regulatory capture in hyperacceleration.
Many of those programs and processes are being taken over by private entities. You are no long just paying out to your municipality, county, state or country. You're paying out to them and the private company who demands your payment or you go to back to prison for non-payment. They still profit and your debt racks up.
You are paying out fees to the private company for your detention, your lodging, your processing and probation on top of what the state is paying them to hold you. If you cannot pay them back, you are free to spend a day in jail for each $10-$40 of your debt owed to your captors. They get to collect from the state as well.
Then, with the money they've been collecting, the private entities go and lobby to make sure there is a steady stream of constant offenders to keep profits increasing every quarter.
Sometimes it makes sense to bribe judges to send innocent children to your private juvenile detention center to collect those fat state grants, a la Cash for Kids.
The profit motive perverts justice and seeks to turn everyone into customers of the private justice system.
> A real issue IS who owns or manages the prisons. If the profit motive is what drives prison expansion, then society will experience a form of regulatory capture in hyperacceleration.
The thing is, profit motive is there regardless of whether you call the prisons "private" or "public," because the people constructing, supplying, and running the prisons are (presumably) getting paid, and those people don't suddenly stop having personal incentives if you start calling them government employees.
The thing is, profit motive is there regardless of whether you call the prisons "private" or "public," because the people constructing, supplying, and running the prisons are (presumably) getting paid, and those people don't suddenly stop having personal incentives if you start calling them government employees.
The people constructing the prisons also construct schools, hospitals and buildings that society needs. There isn't a lobby of people solely benefiting from the construction of prisons other than the owners that the prison is built for.
Prison unions are a big problem, as well. They bring many of the same problems to the table. California's is a great example of just how easily these groups can manipulate the system for their benefit.
The state at least can be swayed by representatives and public initiative. As an entity, it doesn't exist only to turn a profit.
It isn't perfect, but handing the entire system over to people who only care about the bottom line will accelerate the problem.
Prison unions are a big problem, as well. They bring many of the same problems to the table. California's is a great example of just how easily these groups can manipulate the system for their benefit.
The state at least can be swayed by representatives and public initiative. As an entity, it doesn't exist only to turn a profit.
It isn't perfect, but handing the entire system over to people who only care about the bottom line will accelerate the problem.
The majority of US states eventually restore the right to vote:
http://felonvoting.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=0...
Vermont and Maine allow prisoners to vote, 13 other states allow voting on release, and then some more restore the right after parole/probation.
Many of the remaining states allow petitioning of the governor to restore the right to vote.
(That felon voting is not particularly problematic in the states where it is allowed can be used as an argument against disenfranchisement, so I think it is good to try to accurately characterize the situation)
http://felonvoting.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=0...
Vermont and Maine allow prisoners to vote, 13 other states allow voting on release, and then some more restore the right after parole/probation.
Many of the remaining states allow petitioning of the governor to restore the right to vote.
(That felon voting is not particularly problematic in the states where it is allowed can be used as an argument against disenfranchisement, so I think it is good to try to accurately characterize the situation)
Yes, you are right in that most states do have a path to restoring voting rights.
But the fact that it is an issue at all is the problem. A non-violent ex-offender should not have to go through a process of petitioning, or even have to worry about having their voting rights restored at all, when their sentence is completed. Even automatic restoration is not always "sure thing". Florida for example used to have "automatic restoration" but it actually entailed filing with the clemency board and getting approved (although approval was pretty much a guarantee). Since then though, Florida, like some of the other states that have automatic restoration, has changed to add a waiting period and additional approvals. For non-violent felons that complete their sentence there should not be a wait. Using the Florida example, an 18 year old arrested for selling drugs on the street corner. Serves a year in jail. Gets out free/clear (meaning no parole or probation). Has to wait 5 years to have his right to vote restored. That is wrong in my opinion and only makes the situation worse. Disenfranchisement is a much bigger problem than people realize when it comes to elections. There are over 6 million adults in the US that are disenfranchised. Making the number worse is the hodgepodge of state laws across the country that lead to confusion. There are countless numbers above the 6 million that have no clue if they can vote at all, if their rights have been restored, or what is even required to get them restored. Yes, they can get lawyers to figure it out for them, but who is going to pay for that?
But the fact that it is an issue at all is the problem. A non-violent ex-offender should not have to go through a process of petitioning, or even have to worry about having their voting rights restored at all, when their sentence is completed. Even automatic restoration is not always "sure thing". Florida for example used to have "automatic restoration" but it actually entailed filing with the clemency board and getting approved (although approval was pretty much a guarantee). Since then though, Florida, like some of the other states that have automatic restoration, has changed to add a waiting period and additional approvals. For non-violent felons that complete their sentence there should not be a wait. Using the Florida example, an 18 year old arrested for selling drugs on the street corner. Serves a year in jail. Gets out free/clear (meaning no parole or probation). Has to wait 5 years to have his right to vote restored. That is wrong in my opinion and only makes the situation worse. Disenfranchisement is a much bigger problem than people realize when it comes to elections. There are over 6 million adults in the US that are disenfranchised. Making the number worse is the hodgepodge of state laws across the country that lead to confusion. There are countless numbers above the 6 million that have no clue if they can vote at all, if their rights have been restored, or what is even required to get them restored. Yes, they can get lawyers to figure it out for them, but who is going to pay for that?
The page I linked has resources for each state. Maybe not always sufficiently detailed, but I think ex prisoners in Alaska probably understand what unconditional discharge means.
The point of my reply is that you said and then we tell them they can't vote in elections, which does exactly what it complains about. Hearing that they probably can vote is going to get more people to look into it than overstatements of the disenfranchisement.
The point of my reply is that you said and then we tell them they can't vote in elections, which does exactly what it complains about. Hearing that they probably can vote is going to get more people to look into it than overstatements of the disenfranchisement.
I am aware of the link and the laws, I actually run an advocacy group for ex-offenders nationwide, so pretty familiar with this topic.
With Alaska I would beg to differ to some extent. The term "unconditional discharge" simply means no parole or probation. Alaska still has other restrictions though based on the type of felony that was actually committed. So while it may sound simple on the website it becomes convoluted in the actual law.
As for my reply regarding saying they can't vote, I stated that here more as a generalization in the context of this discussion. You are right if you make that statement to an ex-offender it is going to have a negative context, whereas if you tell them they may be able to vote they are more apt to find out how.
The fact remains though that the laws work against, and not for, the ex-offender upon release. My point was simply that we continue to punish through the laws of collateral consequences. If you want to see just how in-depth and convoluted collateral consequences can be, take a look at this site by the American Bar Association:
http://www.abacollateralconsequences.org/
With Alaska I would beg to differ to some extent. The term "unconditional discharge" simply means no parole or probation. Alaska still has other restrictions though based on the type of felony that was actually committed. So while it may sound simple on the website it becomes convoluted in the actual law.
As for my reply regarding saying they can't vote, I stated that here more as a generalization in the context of this discussion. You are right if you make that statement to an ex-offender it is going to have a negative context, whereas if you tell them they may be able to vote they are more apt to find out how.
The fact remains though that the laws work against, and not for, the ex-offender upon release. My point was simply that we continue to punish through the laws of collateral consequences. If you want to see just how in-depth and convoluted collateral consequences can be, take a look at this site by the American Bar Association:
http://www.abacollateralconsequences.org/
> we expect an ex-offender to get out of jail, get a job, have a stable housing environment, pay taxes, and not break any more laws
We expect an ex offender to be reformed, but that is not the role of prisons.
'Prison is a recruitment center for the army of crime. That is what it achieves. For 200 years everybody has been saying, "Prisons are failing; all they do is produce new criminals." I would say on the other hand, "They are a success, since that is what has been asked of them." '
https://www.nytimes.com/books/00/12/17/specials/foucault-pri...
We expect an ex offender to be reformed, but that is not the role of prisons.
'Prison is a recruitment center for the army of crime. That is what it achieves. For 200 years everybody has been saying, "Prisons are failing; all they do is produce new criminals." I would say on the other hand, "They are a success, since that is what has been asked of them." '
https://www.nytimes.com/books/00/12/17/specials/foucault-pri...
In the education/upbringing of children, it is a long known fact, that you will get what you expect.
Tell a child, that it will fail over and over again, you will most likely get a failure. Tell a similar child from its birth over and over again that it will be a winner, you will get a person that is much more likely a winner than the other person.
The US society today trains failures. It starts by being born in the wrong district of a city or belonging to the wrong race. When in such a case, you have no good family (eg. single mother), you have all odds against you. It goes on, by visiting the wrong school ...
Tell a child, that it will fail over and over again, you will most likely get a failure. Tell a similar child from its birth over and over again that it will be a winner, you will get a person that is much more likely a winner than the other person.
The US society today trains failures. It starts by being born in the wrong district of a city or belonging to the wrong race. When in such a case, you have no good family (eg. single mother), you have all odds against you. It goes on, by visiting the wrong school ...
While I was at Western State Hospital in Lakewood, Washington I puzzled over why so many of my fellow patients acted so childlike. For example when we waited in line for our meals, it was just like schoolchildren waiting in line, asking each other to hold their places while they stepped out, or saying "No cuts!"
This was even the case among aged grandmothers.
I very quickly realized that it was largely due to the way we were treated by the staff. For example if one refused to take one's medicine in the morning, one would not be permitted to smoke cigarettes in the exercise yard that day. If one refused in the evening, one would not be permitted a root beer float.
At no point did any of the hospital staff explain to any of use WHY we were taking that medicine.
It is far, far more important for the mentally ill to know why we take medicine, than it is for us to actually take it at all.
If you treat someone like a child they will act like a child.
This was even the case among aged grandmothers.
I very quickly realized that it was largely due to the way we were treated by the staff. For example if one refused to take one's medicine in the morning, one would not be permitted to smoke cigarettes in the exercise yard that day. If one refused in the evening, one would not be permitted a root beer float.
At no point did any of the hospital staff explain to any of use WHY we were taking that medicine.
It is far, far more important for the mentally ill to know why we take medicine, than it is for us to actually take it at all.
If you treat someone like a child they will act like a child.
The real issue is that we put too many people in jail for two long. And that's a legacy of laws passed in the crime waves of the 80s and 90s, back when for-profit prisons were almost non-existent. E.g. three strikes laws passed in the early 1990s.
It's a group who is lobbying for inefficiency in the recovery and rehabilitation of our citizens. That is not great. It goes against the long terms interests of society. I'm not against privatization of services, but this sort of service lends itself to lobbying for inefficiency which is what you are trying to squeeze out of the system by engaging the private sector.
This keeps coming up, and the answer is still the same. People with profit motives that are not aligned with society tend make for bad actors. The same article can be written about the prison unions in California and many other states. It is also a major lobby affecting legislation and not many people talk about it. Their advocacy of jail time is just as bad as private companies. Both have a profit motive in the number of people that are in prison. Both benefit from laws that DO NOT allow alternate treatment. This is very predictable since both groups profit from the number of people in jail.
Unfortunately, I don't really see legislators changing the conditions so the profit motive for both groups will be something other than number of people currently in jail. So, both groups: unions and private companies, will continue to lobby for laws that are not fair.
My own suggestion is to pay based on capacity and not occupancy with a penalty (stick) or bonus payment (carrot) for individuals released from jail that do / do not commit another offense for at least 5 years.
On a second note, all these debtors >> prison schemes should be illegal.
Unfortunately, I don't really see legislators changing the conditions so the profit motive for both groups will be something other than number of people currently in jail. So, both groups: unions and private companies, will continue to lobby for laws that are not fair.
My own suggestion is to pay based on capacity and not occupancy with a penalty (stick) or bonus payment (carrot) for individuals released from jail that do / do not commit another offense for at least 5 years.
On a second note, all these debtors >> prison schemes should be illegal.
Notably absent is a comparison showing how large for-profit prison lobbying actually is. Glancing at Opensecret's top 20 lists doesn't actually suggest it's very large:
https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=i&showYe...
https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=s&showYe...
https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=u&showYe...
https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indus.php?id=W&year=2015
For the last one (by industry), note that the breakdown of subcategories is weird. The "Other" category includes "Education", "Civil Servants" and "Non-Profit", all of which would be large enough independently to show up in the top category.
https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=i&showYe...
https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=s&showYe...
https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=u&showYe...
https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indus.php?id=W&year=2015
For the last one (by industry), note that the breakdown of subcategories is weird. The "Other" category includes "Education", "Civil Servants" and "Non-Profit", all of which would be large enough independently to show up in the top category.
Indeed. While I think this is a problem (see my comment on the Cash for Kids atrocity), I've never ever seen any sign it's a big problem, as in there being all that many private prisons. Between the political power issues noted by others that push for government prisons, and people's instinctive realization that this is dangerous, I see this at worst being a self-limiting problem. Especially after the first scandal like the Cash for Kids atrocity surfaces with Republican politicians to blame.
CCA has had a few big years:
https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D00002194...
https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D00002194...
I find it amazing that there is a guarantee of 90% occupancy or higher for these prisons, and if it falls below the taxpayers foot the bill. Of course, I find it amazing that "private prisons" are a thing at all.
If they were paid based on lowering recidivism rates, for-profit prisons could potentially work very well.
The likely outcome of such a system would be for the for-profit prisons to hire lawyers to get their past "clients" off on technicalities.
How about creating a system where we help people who have been to prison to avoid going there again - say training them for good jobs and treating them like human beings when in jail so they treat others the same way when they get out?
How about creating a system where we help people who have been to prison to avoid going there again - say training them for good jobs and treating them like human beings when in jail so they treat others the same way when they get out?
I once had a good friend who told me he was unemployable because he was a felon. I don't know what he did but it must have been bad.
I suggested that he learn to write code then hang out his shingle as a self-employed consultant.
It turned out that he was already quite a good computer programmer as he was taught how while in prison. But even so he refused to consider self-employment because he was so down on himself.
While there are many reasons to pursue self-employment, among them is that one cannot find paying work any other way.
The reason prisons are commonly called "Penitentiaries" or "Correctional Institutes" is that they are not intended for punishment but to set their inmates onto a righteous path.
At least that was the stated intention at one time.
I suggested that he learn to write code then hang out his shingle as a self-employed consultant.
It turned out that he was already quite a good computer programmer as he was taught how while in prison. But even so he refused to consider self-employment because he was so down on himself.
While there are many reasons to pursue self-employment, among them is that one cannot find paying work any other way.
The reason prisons are commonly called "Penitentiaries" or "Correctional Institutes" is that they are not intended for punishment but to set their inmates onto a righteous path.
At least that was the stated intention at one time.
You don't have to something super bad to be labelled a felon. Simple drug possession, not selling but being caught with certain drugs or a certain amount, will result in felony charges. In fact, a majority of felons in Federal prisons are drug related, though that percentage is much lower in State prisons, where there are more violent offenders.
http://felonvoting.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=0...
http://felonvoting.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=0...
Unfortunately prisons (and society in general) seem to not be too interested in helping prisoners avoid repeating their past errors. Leaving aside morals, vengeance is not an intelligent way of running prisons if you are going to let people out.
What I don't understand is why the for profit prisons are even in the US at all? Why not put them in Vietnam, Mexico or the Philippines where all costs are cheaper. I'd halve their sentences or give them beach access for doing call center work or sewing laptop bags.
It would be interesting to see the unionization rates in the for profit prisons. I am sure the FPP would love to lower their staffing costs and influence while having a more opaque regime overseas.
It would be interesting to see the unionization rates in the for profit prisons. I am sure the FPP would love to lower their staffing costs and influence while having a more opaque regime overseas.
What I don't understand is why the for profit prisons are even in the US at all? Why not put them in Vietnam, Mexico or the Philippines where all costs are cheaper.
Because cutting off family support for these prisoners would make a bad situation worse?
Because cutting off family support for these prisoners would make a bad situation worse?
And what right does a nation with poor track record of human rights have, to just assume that other countries should be okay with this nation shipping people it considers undesirable, to that place?
Oh, I don't like this in my house, let me just toss it into the neighbour's place since I am powerful and the neighbour can't complain...
Oh, I don't like this in my house, let me just toss it into the neighbour's place since I am powerful and the neighbour can't complain...
This is already done interstate. Yuma (which is hot even by Arizona standards) gets prisoners from Alaska.
Maybe the family could pay for premium incarceration to be housed in the US. I am sure there are lots of inmates who are never visited during their entire stay.
Maybe the family could pay for premium incarceration to be housed in the US. I am sure there are lots of inmates who are never visited during their entire stay.
And the wealthy don't get enough preferential treatment in the criminal justice system now?
The current system does a great job draining additional money from poor inmates and their families. Just look at the price of phone calls, one of the most basic means to keep people connected.
The wealthy are already less likely to be investigated (living in a non-poor neighborhood), less likely to be charged with a crime (better lawyers), and less likely to be convicted (ditto).
And the wealthy don't get enough preferential treatment in the criminal justice system now?
The current system does a great job draining additional money from poor inmates and their families. Just look at the price of phone calls, one of the most basic means to keep people connected.
The wealthy are already less likely to be investigated (living in a non-poor neighborhood), less likely to be charged with a crime (better lawyers), and less likely to be convicted (ditto).
I think there is a huge untapped market in privatizing prosecutorial duties, with the full cost of a trial born on a 3rd party to go after (for instance) environmental and white collar crime, while that 3rd party would see at least half of the money from fines as well as court costs. It would be a corporation that eats the rich.
I find it amazing that people are amazed that what is essentially a lease of a venue is priced based on the capacity of the venue.
Suppose you have a private prison that is designed to reasonably hold up to 450 prisoners, and could be pushed up to 500. There is no real difference between the following two contracts:
1. The state pays $10.8m/year, plus $24k/year for each prisoner over 450.
2. The state pays $24k/year per prisoner, with a minimum payment based on 90% occupancy.
In both cases the state pays $10.8m/year if it puts 0-450 prisoners in the prison, and in both cases it pays ($10.8m + $24k (N-450))/year if it puts N prisoners, where N > 450, in the prison.
Suppose you have a private prison that is designed to reasonably hold up to 450 prisoners, and could be pushed up to 500. There is no real difference between the following two contracts:
1. The state pays $10.8m/year, plus $24k/year for each prisoner over 450.
2. The state pays $24k/year per prisoner, with a minimum payment based on 90% occupancy.
In both cases the state pays $10.8m/year if it puts 0-450 prisoners in the prison, and in both cases it pays ($10.8m + $24k (N-450))/year if it puts N prisoners, where N > 450, in the prison.
I am not a supporter of private prisons, but in the public system little of the cost base is variable. If you did not have such guarantees in place then the state would use the private prisons as the provider of swing capacity and hence make it non-viable since private prisons have the same fixed cost structure.
So don't have private prisons.
Even Ayn Rand said that government should only be in the military and judicial business, how did we end up to the right of her?
Even Ayn Rand said that government should only be in the military and judicial business, how did we end up to the right of her?
I am in total agreement on the undesirability of private prisons. Even if they were more efficient they are not an area that anyone should ever aspire to run a business in. Prisons maybe unavoidable, but profiting from locking people in cages is morally disgusting.
>Even Ayn Rand said that government should only be in the military and judicial business, how did we end up to the right of her?
You didn't overall. The idea of left and right politics is a false dichotomy and false mechanistic analogy, but I get what you are saying.
I take issue with even calling these prison co's "private". Corporatist is more accurate. To be truly private there would also not be monopolies on lawmaking... police and judges should all be privatized. Government should be abolished and politician should no longer be a job option.
Those companies who lobbied along with politicians for unjust laws, like punishment for putting any substance in my body so long as I harm none, all ought to be branded criminal and punished themselves. This is the position[0] of consistent, anarchist libertarianism, and those such as myself who hold these positions are not fans of Ayn Rand BTW[1].
[0] http://www.walterblock.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/b...
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIk5C2qsRH8
You didn't overall. The idea of left and right politics is a false dichotomy and false mechanistic analogy, but I get what you are saying.
I take issue with even calling these prison co's "private". Corporatist is more accurate. To be truly private there would also not be monopolies on lawmaking... police and judges should all be privatized. Government should be abolished and politician should no longer be a job option.
Those companies who lobbied along with politicians for unjust laws, like punishment for putting any substance in my body so long as I harm none, all ought to be branded criminal and punished themselves. This is the position[0] of consistent, anarchist libertarianism, and those such as myself who hold these positions are not fans of Ayn Rand BTW[1].
[0] http://www.walterblock.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/b...
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIk5C2qsRH8
Is it any different than private hospitals or electric companies?
Yes. In none of those businesses you are allowed to restrict the fundamental rights of human beings. In private prisons that's the core business model.
The real problem here is government and not "private" (corporatist) prisons who would only exist as they are because gov't enabling.
Were we to abolish gov't and it's geographic monopolies on law and policing, then truly private prisons would both be way less common and nothing at all like what's talked about in the article.
Some of the statistics on crime are outdated but Benson's The Enterprise of Law is a great book to look at understanding the problem here.
Conditions were so terrible before the move for privatization in federal prisons (sometime in the 70's). With a move back toward that system (which would never happen because more politicians' and bureaucrats' pockets are being lined) you might not have quotas and the push for continued prohibition from this one little angle, but gov't is not a business[0], so the comparison to private hospitals or electric companies is faulty.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqoBZLSm1WA
Were we to abolish gov't and it's geographic monopolies on law and policing, then truly private prisons would both be way less common and nothing at all like what's talked about in the article.
Some of the statistics on crime are outdated but Benson's The Enterprise of Law is a great book to look at understanding the problem here.
Conditions were so terrible before the move for privatization in federal prisons (sometime in the 70's). With a move back toward that system (which would never happen because more politicians' and bureaucrats' pockets are being lined) you might not have quotas and the push for continued prohibition from this one little angle, but gov't is not a business[0], so the comparison to private hospitals or electric companies is faulty.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqoBZLSm1WA
While strictly speaking there are many laws as well as court precedents that protect the rights of mental hospital patients, quite commonly the hospital staff are not only unaware of those laws, but regard me as delusional for claiming that I have any rights at all.
I was on an involuntary ten day hold in Reno, Nevada because I told a shrink I planned to go camping in the desert. Not being from Reno myself, I was unaware that "camping in the desert" is a local euphemism for "committing suicide". It was of no use to point out that I had gone camping in the desert just the night before, nor that I have the Boy Scout Wilderness Survival Merit Badge.
I was handcuffed then taken by a deputy to a hospital emergency room, where I refused to wear a hospital gown because "As a mental hospital patient, I have the right to wear my own clothes".
In reality I don't particularly care, I only say that to determine whether the staff knows that the laws are.
Some very, very angry man shouted "YOU'RE ON A HOLD! YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS!"
When I bluntly pointed out that the United States Supreme Court disagreed, they injected me with a massive dose of Haldol. That's widely considered one of the most-powerful antipsychotics. While I was not in any way symptomatic all the time, it is also powerfully sedating.
I don't know why but for some reason Haldol is largely ineffective on me. That really freaked them all out when I continued going on about my right to wear my own clothes, so they injected me again with a far higher dose.
I was on an involuntary ten day hold in Reno, Nevada because I told a shrink I planned to go camping in the desert. Not being from Reno myself, I was unaware that "camping in the desert" is a local euphemism for "committing suicide". It was of no use to point out that I had gone camping in the desert just the night before, nor that I have the Boy Scout Wilderness Survival Merit Badge.
I was handcuffed then taken by a deputy to a hospital emergency room, where I refused to wear a hospital gown because "As a mental hospital patient, I have the right to wear my own clothes".
In reality I don't particularly care, I only say that to determine whether the staff knows that the laws are.
Some very, very angry man shouted "YOU'RE ON A HOLD! YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS!"
When I bluntly pointed out that the United States Supreme Court disagreed, they injected me with a massive dose of Haldol. That's widely considered one of the most-powerful antipsychotics. While I was not in any way symptomatic all the time, it is also powerfully sedating.
I don't know why but for some reason Haldol is largely ineffective on me. That really freaked them all out when I continued going on about my right to wear my own clothes, so they injected me again with a far higher dose.
> no one is talking about
Is there some way to actually determine what is in the public consciousness? Because I definitely see this brought up pretty frequently. I'm also pretty sure that folks know and talk about the internment of the Japanese as well as the prevalence of domestic violence.
Is there some way to actually determine what is in the public consciousness? Because I definitely see this brought up pretty frequently. I'm also pretty sure that folks know and talk about the internment of the Japanese as well as the prevalence of domestic violence.
Yep. Especially since Kanye West released New Slaves 2 years ago:
See they'll confuse us with some bullshit Like the New World Order Meanwhile the DEA Teamed up with the CCA They tryna lock niggas up They tryna make new slaves See that's that privately owned prison Get your piece today They prolly all in the Hamptons Bragging 'bout what they made
The ACLU signed up on Genius to annotate this and sparked lots of conversations. I also see it regularly mentioned every time something such as Ferguson happens.
See they'll confuse us with some bullshit Like the New World Order Meanwhile the DEA Teamed up with the CCA They tryna lock niggas up They tryna make new slaves See that's that privately owned prison Get your piece today They prolly all in the Hamptons Bragging 'bout what they made
The ACLU signed up on Genius to annotate this and sparked lots of conversations. I also see it regularly mentioned every time something such as Ferguson happens.
I love how piece could also be peace in that line.
I am reading The New Jim Crow and it is fascinating. The author talks about how prisons were utilized as a means to get free labor after slavery ended and how laws in this country were/are designed to keep black people in jail. Good read so far
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1595586431/?tag=googhydr-20&hvadid=...
I am reading The New Jim Crow and it is fascinating. The author talks about how prisons were utilized as a means to get free labor after slavery ended and how laws in this country were/are designed to keep black people in jail. Good read so far
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1595586431/?tag=googhydr-20&hvadid=...
And piece can be piece of the investment, or piece as in "gun". Love that verse.
Here's one example where partisanship in the US media does the country a gross disservice. Unless we venture into Nazi level abuses, it's hard to top the Cash for Kids scandal mentioned in the article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal). One judge arranged for a private juvenile prison to replace a state one (he claims the company bribed him, the official story goes with their claim he shook them down), another judge sent a lot of kids there, for "crimes" as trivial as saying bad things about a teacher (yeah, protected or at least not criminal speech), there was at least one suicide implicated, etc. There aren't many contemporary US injustices I've read about that made me this angry.
Then a Federal judge said to the prosecutors that, no, I'm not going to accept nothingburger tax evasion as I recall 7 years in prison plea bargain, eventually judge sending the children to the prison was convicted and sentenced to 28 years (Federal, so no parole), the other plea bargained for a more just 17.5 years.
Now, see that above Wikipedia link? You won't find out from it what political party these judges belonged to. Which tells you which one, if they'd been Republicans this would have been reported in screaming worldwide headlines, used in the 2010 and on elections, etc. But very few know about it, it's not much more than a local story.
ADDED: just really looked at the linked Washington Post article and it's clear this is part of the current effort to trash Rubio, who competes for the same local political campaign donor pool as Jeb Bush, whom you'll not be surprised is not well regarded by a large fraction of the Republican party.
Then a Federal judge said to the prosecutors that, no, I'm not going to accept nothingburger tax evasion as I recall 7 years in prison plea bargain, eventually judge sending the children to the prison was convicted and sentenced to 28 years (Federal, so no parole), the other plea bargained for a more just 17.5 years.
Now, see that above Wikipedia link? You won't find out from it what political party these judges belonged to. Which tells you which one, if they'd been Republicans this would have been reported in screaming worldwide headlines, used in the 2010 and on elections, etc. But very few know about it, it's not much more than a local story.
ADDED: just really looked at the linked Washington Post article and it's clear this is part of the current effort to trash Rubio, who competes for the same local political campaign donor pool as Jeb Bush, whom you'll not be surprised is not well regarded by a large fraction of the Republican party.
among the reasons I use my hosts file to blackhole the web bugs from analytics services, is that one of the more-common applications of web and mobile analytics is to determine what is in the public consciousness.
Most webmasters and mobile developers regard analytics as a way to find out how people are using their sites and apps. While strictly speaking that's true, most analytics SDKs are provided free of charge.
The ones who actually pay for the analytics are commonly politicians and large companies.
During the last presidential campaign I discovered that each major candidate's website contained dozens of web bugs from several distinctly different analytics companies.
Most webmasters and mobile developers regard analytics as a way to find out how people are using their sites and apps. While strictly speaking that's true, most analytics SDKs are provided free of charge.
The ones who actually pay for the analytics are commonly politicians and large companies.
During the last presidential campaign I discovered that each major candidate's website contained dozens of web bugs from several distinctly different analytics companies.
Wrong thread?
Sorry, I should have been more clear. The OP asked whether there was a way to determine what is in the public consciousness.
There are many ways. Among the most popular these days are web and mobile analytics.
I did some consulting on a data visualization tool that was employed by one of the world's largest corporations to determine what the public had to say about its products. In that individual, specific case while I felt uncomfortable accepting the work I don't regard it as outright evil.
However I do regard it as evil for a political party to do the exact same thing.
What I learned about the way analytics are used led to my ardent effort to convince others to blackhole analytics servers. It's also the reason I don't list any of my favorite books or movies in my Facebook profile.
There are many ways. Among the most popular these days are web and mobile analytics.
I did some consulting on a data visualization tool that was employed by one of the world's largest corporations to determine what the public had to say about its products. In that individual, specific case while I felt uncomfortable accepting the work I don't regard it as outright evil.
However I do regard it as evil for a political party to do the exact same thing.
What I learned about the way analytics are used led to my ardent effort to convince others to blackhole analytics servers. It's also the reason I don't list any of my favorite books or movies in my Facebook profile.
There should not be a profit motive involved with incarcerating people. That's just plain immoral.
USA: 25% of the worlds prison population with 4.5% of worlds total population.
Fortunately it has begun to decline.
The end of the war on drugs will see the prison population in the US cut in half in 20 years. Colorado has already seen a radical reduction in arrests for drug offenses.
The end of the war on drugs will see the prison population in the US cut in half in 20 years. Colorado has already seen a radical reduction in arrests for drug offenses.
Yet they've seen a large increase in marijuana related DUI arrests [0].
They're just shifting the crime around, not eliminating it.
[0] http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2014/06/26/col...
They're just shifting the crime around, not eliminating it.
[0] http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2014/06/26/col...
Unfortunately some negative aspects are so heavily ingrained in US culture and politics (incarceration and bondage being examples) it will take a long time for things to change. I have been reading about American history recently (mainly 1800's, gold rush etc) and some of it is very disturbing, almost dystopian. It has been very interesting to look at contemporary American culture with this in the back of my mind.
There's an interesting political Rorschach test with articles like this. The article is unambiguously about prison companies lobbying the government but, invariably, people start ranting about the prison guard's union and their lobbying efforts.
I assume this is a flag for conservatism or libertarianism (or just a measure of the effectiveness of their rhetoric?) rather than a simple inability to stay on topic or to distinguish between a company and its workers' union. It is interesting because of how utterly consistent it is between conversations. It always seems to happen when this subject comes up.
I assume this is a flag for conservatism or libertarianism (or just a measure of the effectiveness of their rhetoric?) rather than a simple inability to stay on topic or to distinguish between a company and its workers' union. It is interesting because of how utterly consistent it is between conversations. It always seems to happen when this subject comes up.
This article is very poorly balanced and reads like an attack on a politician rather than an honest investigation into what is clearly a very complicated issue.
I'd love to see some historical comparisons between the prison industry prior and the rise of their lobby. Does anyone know of a more in depth analysis?
I'd love to see some historical comparisons between the prison industry prior and the rise of their lobby. Does anyone know of a more in depth analysis?
We should just call lobbying the same way it is called in other countries: corruption. The problem with legalizing corruption that corporations gain way to much power.
If it's corruption, its Constitutionally protected, in the First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law [respecting/or abridging] the right of the people ... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Congress shall make no law [respecting/or abridging] the right of the people ... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
In general, the Supreme Court regards commercial speech as far, far less protected than those of the press or of individuals.
I don't see that as being at all relevant, since free speech is in the earlier part of the whole amendment, and "petitioning" people in your Government, while obviously a form of speech, is specifically and additionally protected here.
We should recognize that the constitution still allows slavery as a punishment for crime. This is as much about slave labor, as it is about the prison industry receiving money from the public purse.
13th amendment "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."
Good general overview of prison labor: http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2013/04/04/prison-labor...
More detailed account of prison labor in Nevada regarding casinos and construction. http://vltp.net/casinos-prison-labor-strange-bedfellows/
The slave market: http://www.unicor.gov/
You can even get slave labor to operate your call center: http://www.unicor.gov/services/contact_helpdesk/
13th amendment "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."
Good general overview of prison labor: http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2013/04/04/prison-labor...
More detailed account of prison labor in Nevada regarding casinos and construction. http://vltp.net/casinos-prison-labor-strange-bedfellows/
The slave market: http://www.unicor.gov/
You can even get slave labor to operate your call center: http://www.unicor.gov/services/contact_helpdesk/
It's more like slave siphoning. Once someone is tagged as a criminal, there are seemingly endless ways to suck money from them, their families, the state, and the federal government. Each American indoctrinated into the criminal justice system in essence becomes that famous Duracell from the Matrix movie.
If a prisoner is raped, the prison should incur liability, civil and criminal for allowing it to happen. When guards initiate violence against prisoners they should be liable as well. This should be the case for both private and "public" prisons.
If you have a legal system that actually enforces the law everywhere, rather than giving violent criminals running prisons free reign to brutalize their charges, you would find that private prisons are more efficient at operating successful prisons than government ones-- just as private entities are more efficient (and humane) everywhere else in the economy.
The problem is that we don't have the rule of law in this country. Cops are not indicted let alone prosecuted when they murder people or steal their life's savings. Politicians are held even less accountable.
Until this is resolved, fighting over lobbying and who runs the prisons is like debating who left the barn doors open after the cattle have left.
Prisons should be punishment, humanely, and rehabilitation. So long as they aren't they are corrupt. And they will continue to drive corruption-- whether it's a private entity or the warden of prisons building his own fiefdom, the incentive is to keep more people imprisoned longer for personal profit.
Hence the drug war and all the other corruption that brings.
Frankly, this alone proves that government cannot be trusted with the business of distributing justice. Which is why I'm an anarchist.
but all you government lovers-- where is the reform? why do you support the violent brutalization via anal rape and regular beatings that 22 year old kids whose only "Crime" was being caught with a dime bag of weed are getting?
If you have a legal system that actually enforces the law everywhere, rather than giving violent criminals running prisons free reign to brutalize their charges, you would find that private prisons are more efficient at operating successful prisons than government ones-- just as private entities are more efficient (and humane) everywhere else in the economy.
The problem is that we don't have the rule of law in this country. Cops are not indicted let alone prosecuted when they murder people or steal their life's savings. Politicians are held even less accountable.
Until this is resolved, fighting over lobbying and who runs the prisons is like debating who left the barn doors open after the cattle have left.
Prisons should be punishment, humanely, and rehabilitation. So long as they aren't they are corrupt. And they will continue to drive corruption-- whether it's a private entity or the warden of prisons building his own fiefdom, the incentive is to keep more people imprisoned longer for personal profit.
Hence the drug war and all the other corruption that brings.
Frankly, this alone proves that government cannot be trusted with the business of distributing justice. Which is why I'm an anarchist.
but all you government lovers-- where is the reform? why do you support the violent brutalization via anal rape and regular beatings that 22 year old kids whose only "Crime" was being caught with a dime bag of weed are getting?
> If a prisoner is raped, the prison should incur liability, civil and criminal for allowing it to happen. When guards initiate violence against prisoners they should be liable as well. This should be the case for both private and "public" prisons.
Here's the problem - you can have safe, large-scale, and cheap incarceration. Pick two.
You can have safe, large-scale incarceration by sticking everyone in solitary and never letting them out of their cells, after all, but I doubt many people would consider that to be acceptable.
If you want to treat prisoners with dignity and respect, you have to pay for it. The current model is the result of budget cuts upon budget cuts upon budget cuts coupled with vastly increased "demand" created by the War on Drugs. When you're incarcerating everyone for having a dime bag of weed, you're running a Walmart-style prison instead of a focused rehabilitation facility. If we, at the very least, decriminalized possession and only went after dealers, prisons would immediately improve. Fewer prisoners means safer conditions.
> Frankly, this alone proves that government cannot be trusted with the business of distributing justice. Which is why I'm an anarchist.
I see this as misguided. Yes, the government sucks at distributing justice. But I don't see the absence of government doing any better. You'd effectively end up with mob rule, which is typically governed by the biggest asshole. At least with democracy, the asshole has to keep the electorate somewhat happy. The very first thing that people did after settling the American frontier was to set up government to deal with justice. It beat forming a posse to kill your enemies whenever they pissed you off.
Here's the problem - you can have safe, large-scale, and cheap incarceration. Pick two.
You can have safe, large-scale incarceration by sticking everyone in solitary and never letting them out of their cells, after all, but I doubt many people would consider that to be acceptable.
If you want to treat prisoners with dignity and respect, you have to pay for it. The current model is the result of budget cuts upon budget cuts upon budget cuts coupled with vastly increased "demand" created by the War on Drugs. When you're incarcerating everyone for having a dime bag of weed, you're running a Walmart-style prison instead of a focused rehabilitation facility. If we, at the very least, decriminalized possession and only went after dealers, prisons would immediately improve. Fewer prisoners means safer conditions.
> Frankly, this alone proves that government cannot be trusted with the business of distributing justice. Which is why I'm an anarchist.
I see this as misguided. Yes, the government sucks at distributing justice. But I don't see the absence of government doing any better. You'd effectively end up with mob rule, which is typically governed by the biggest asshole. At least with democracy, the asshole has to keep the electorate somewhat happy. The very first thing that people did after settling the American frontier was to set up government to deal with justice. It beat forming a posse to kill your enemies whenever they pissed you off.
I've always found the anarchist ideology confusing. There was a reason the early Americans (who were leaving tyrannical governments) formed a judicial system run by a government.
The people of today forgot how the people of yesterday lived and never learned why they made the choices that they did.
Unfortunately, I believe that history will continue to repeat itself until we learn from our ancestors in more meaningful ways.
The people of today forgot how the people of yesterday lived and never learned why they made the choices that they did.
Unfortunately, I believe that history will continue to repeat itself until we learn from our ancestors in more meaningful ways.
> I've always found the anarchist ideology confusing.
As far as I can tell, the most coherent philosophy of anarchy is "participatory democracy." Basically, if you want to be part of a society, you can take part. If you don't like it, you can leave.
The problem with this is that people are selfish. If I think that plunder and rape is okay, and the other people in my area don't want me plundering, then all I have to do is say, "Well, I'm not participating in your democracy! I can do as I please!"
In response, they have two options - let me be, (which is undesirable, as they're right next to me, and I'm going to attack them) or stop me by force. If they do the latter, guess what - they're a government! A crude, ad hoc, mob-driven, vigilante justice-condoning government, but a government nonetheless. And now we're right back to where we started, with the typical abuse of power, injustice, and so on. Probably with a lot more than what we started with, as infant governments tend to be messy when dealing with problems.
So, the only way that anarchy can work is if everyone is benevolent. If that existed, then the government would be awesome and we wouldn't be trying to get rid of it.
As far as I can tell, the most coherent philosophy of anarchy is "participatory democracy." Basically, if you want to be part of a society, you can take part. If you don't like it, you can leave.
The problem with this is that people are selfish. If I think that plunder and rape is okay, and the other people in my area don't want me plundering, then all I have to do is say, "Well, I'm not participating in your democracy! I can do as I please!"
In response, they have two options - let me be, (which is undesirable, as they're right next to me, and I'm going to attack them) or stop me by force. If they do the latter, guess what - they're a government! A crude, ad hoc, mob-driven, vigilante justice-condoning government, but a government nonetheless. And now we're right back to where we started, with the typical abuse of power, injustice, and so on. Probably with a lot more than what we started with, as infant governments tend to be messy when dealing with problems.
So, the only way that anarchy can work is if everyone is benevolent. If that existed, then the government would be awesome and we wouldn't be trying to get rid of it.
I would like to know how our society expects people to follow laws that are incomprehensible to the average joe.
I (and most HNers, I'd presume) have the reading comprehension skills to navigate through legislature. Most do not.
When attempting to show people the actual legislation that is behind what they heard was a "law", they tend to get glossy eyed and shut down entirely.
IMHO, this is a problem worth solving.
I (and most HNers, I'd presume) have the reading comprehension skills to navigate through legislature. Most do not.
When attempting to show people the actual legislation that is behind what they heard was a "law", they tend to get glossy eyed and shut down entirely.
IMHO, this is a problem worth solving.
You are 200% right! We are actually working on something remotely like this. There are so many collateral consequences associated with various laws. For example, some states require a waiting period of 1-5 years before you can even apply to get a barber license if you have certain misdemeanor or felony convictions. While the judge and society feels it is fair to say hey we caught you with an pound of marijuana, here's a fine and a year probation to serve. The true consequence is that you are now a convicted felon and lose many rights, including some job opportunities or at minimum the ability to obtain an occupational license as is the case for a barber.
In short, on top of several other services, we are building an overlay to job search for ex-offenders that will allow them to easily see if they qualify for a job/occupational license based on their offense. If they don't it will tell them the criteria if and when they can. It is a tedious process because sorting through laws and various legislation is not exactly the most exciting startup concept at 3am and can be open to a wide array of interpretation by design (criminal lawyers gotta make their money somehow). We don't intend for it to be the holy grail for information, but at least it will provide a guideline for job seekers with criminal records to be able to easily sort through and identify opportunities.
In short, on top of several other services, we are building an overlay to job search for ex-offenders that will allow them to easily see if they qualify for a job/occupational license based on their offense. If they don't it will tell them the criteria if and when they can. It is a tedious process because sorting through laws and various legislation is not exactly the most exciting startup concept at 3am and can be open to a wide array of interpretation by design (criminal lawyers gotta make their money somehow). We don't intend for it to be the holy grail for information, but at least it will provide a guideline for job seekers with criminal records to be able to easily sort through and identify opportunities.
21-st century slavery. Humanity never changes.
the earliest form of justice was "eye for an eye" --> From there, it was noticed that the first person who lost that eye gained nothing when the criminal's eye was taken.
From there on it progressed to some variation of "pay for the eye or for the opportunity cost", in which the criminal had to barter his resources ( existing property, strength, time, etc ) to compensate the victim. This is the justice described in those voluminous biblical or other laws.
From there on, those criminals who were unable to compensate ( too poor, or cost too high ) were deprived of something till they were able to or forced to compensate. This started the concept of 'debtors prisons'
Now, when the concept of compensating the victim ( individual / society / government ) has been removed, this very act of putting a criminal in prison is itself a crime.
From there on it progressed to some variation of "pay for the eye or for the opportunity cost", in which the criminal had to barter his resources ( existing property, strength, time, etc ) to compensate the victim. This is the justice described in those voluminous biblical or other laws.
From there on, those criminals who were unable to compensate ( too poor, or cost too high ) were deprived of something till they were able to or forced to compensate. This started the concept of 'debtors prisons'
Now, when the concept of compensating the victim ( individual / society / government ) has been removed, this very act of putting a criminal in prison is itself a crime.
Linked from a related EFF link recently:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/06/facebook-reforms-inmat...
Prisoners denied access to social networking, in a state law & through Facebook's prisoner profile takedown forms (!)
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/06/facebook-reforms-inmat...
Prisoners denied access to social networking, in a state law & through Facebook's prisoner profile takedown forms (!)
California Correctional Peace Officers Association and Correction Officers Benevolent Association are playing the same game and are not exactly private organizations and exert far more influence over individual politicians than either private corporation does. The first makes political donations across the country.
We also by no means blame the prison industry; public or private; for this outcome. Its a government industry through and through, from police, to prosecutors, public defenders, judges, and even the supply chain benefits.
* besides this is nothing but a Rubio hit piece which tells you it basically is pushed by operatives in the Democrat party, a party which basically does even more in most states to keep people in jail. They even fought Republicans in NY over a law to make it not criminal for a certain amount of pot
We also by no means blame the prison industry; public or private; for this outcome. Its a government industry through and through, from police, to prosecutors, public defenders, judges, and even the supply chain benefits.
* besides this is nothing but a Rubio hit piece which tells you it basically is pushed by operatives in the Democrat party, a party which basically does even more in most states to keep people in jail. They even fought Republicans in NY over a law to make it not criminal for a certain amount of pot
By "lobby" they mean.. bribe?
In the State of California, the very highest-paying job that can is within reach of most people who do not have college degrees is to be a State prison guard.
That can be unpleasant and dangerous work so I readily agree it should pay well however it has resulted in their union being one of the most-powerful political lobbies in the state. Dozens of new prisons have been built in the last few decades but only one new University of California campus.
Several years ago a Federal judge ordered the state to reduce prison overcrowding. It hasn't made much progress.
That can be unpleasant and dangerous work so I readily agree it should pay well however it has resulted in their union being one of the most-powerful political lobbies in the state. Dozens of new prisons have been built in the last few decades but only one new University of California campus.
Several years ago a Federal judge ordered the state to reduce prison overcrowding. It hasn't made much progress.
Bingo. For-profit prisons exist, but they are a tiny minority. But even the state prisons come with a financial motive attached. And, because people are conditioned to see unions as good guys, this obvious lobbying bias is never checked.
Actually about 15% of all state/federal prisons are owned or managed by for-profit corporations. There are really two classifications of "for-profit" prisons. One is where the company owns/operates the entire facility. These are the ones that receive the most attention even though they are the minority comparatively. The big for-profit companies usually try to buy first before moving to option 2.
The second option is where the state/county builds a prison or jail, owns the facility, possibly supplements some staffing, but contracts out the day-to-day operations to a for-profit company. This is what is more common as many states won't sell the actual facility and/or land. They just want someone to takeover the day-to-day operations so they don't have to worry about it.
Both are just as bad and both have occupancy based contracts.
The second option is where the state/county builds a prison or jail, owns the facility, possibly supplements some staffing, but contracts out the day-to-day operations to a for-profit company. This is what is more common as many states won't sell the actual facility and/or land. They just want someone to takeover the day-to-day operations so they don't have to worry about it.
Both are just as bad and both have occupancy based contracts.
The incompetent medical and mental health care in the Clark County Jail in Vancouver, Washington is largely due to a contractor trying to save a few pennies by ordering prescription drugs from a pharmacy in Maryland.
This has the result that lots of mentally ill inmates - including myself - land in Western State Hospital at a cost to the taxpayer of $550.00 per day.
I've been taking psychiatric medicine since 1985; the very most I have ever paid for my happy pills was $1000.00 per month.
Because the contractor wants to save perhaps ten dollars per month, every mentally ill inmate goes cold turkey on their medicine when they are detained. Every prescriber I have ever met adamantly urged me never to stop my medicine suddenly. There are all kinds of ways that could lead to death but in my particular case I find myself in a very expensive nuthouse rather than an inexpensive slammer.
This has the result that lots of mentally ill inmates - including myself - land in Western State Hospital at a cost to the taxpayer of $550.00 per day.
I've been taking psychiatric medicine since 1985; the very most I have ever paid for my happy pills was $1000.00 per month.
Because the contractor wants to save perhaps ten dollars per month, every mentally ill inmate goes cold turkey on their medicine when they are detained. Every prescriber I have ever met adamantly urged me never to stop my medicine suddenly. There are all kinds of ways that could lead to death but in my particular case I find myself in a very expensive nuthouse rather than an inexpensive slammer.
Unions are in general a force for good for their members - the problem is there is no countervailing unions to oppose the interests of the prison guard union. If we had more union members in other industries then the interest of these other union members would act as a check on the power of the guards.
The whole point of a union is to benefit its members contra the interests of their employer. The problem with public sector unions is that they benefit government employees contra the interests of the public.
And yet in some countries the union is able to work together with the employer so that everyone wins. (By wins I mean the employer makes money and stays in business and the employees earn a living wage.) This of course requires mature sensible people who see beyond the next financial quarter or the next paycheck.
For private sector unions this is true, because employers have a vested interest in the success (or at least survival) of their employer. In the public sector, prison guards don't have a vested interest in reducing the prison population (quite the opposite), police officers don't have a vested interest in keeping themselves accountable for use of force (quite the opposite), and so forth.
Yes because the vast majority of the public is not in a union. If they were then their union would be fighting for their interest and prevent the public sector unions capturing all the benefits at their expense.
I find it ironic that you call for free-market principles (competition between unions) to be the mechanism by which union-power is kept in check.
Nothing ironic about it. Unions, if not enforced on workers by laws, are perfectly valid market mechanisms.
Like economists such as Zingales say, pro-market is not necessarily pro-business, and unions are a good way to gage what people actually support.
Like economists such as Zingales say, pro-market is not necessarily pro-business, and unions are a good way to gage what people actually support.
Kuro5hin's Orion Blastar is completely convinced that I am anti-business, despite that I own two different corporations and get all my consulting gigs from businesses.
However it is hard for me to find work at all because I will not work for companies that I regard as unethical. Orion claims this implies that I regard ALL companies as unethical, but no, only certain specific ones.
However it is hard for me to find work at all because I will not work for companies that I regard as unethical. Orion claims this implies that I regard ALL companies as unethical, but no, only certain specific ones.
Why is this ironic? I am a not anti-free markets. If a solution exists for a problem that can be solved by the market then I am of the opinion that the market should solve it.
The nurses' union are one of the only few political forces opposing the TPP:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUKlBejOlTU
That's in the public interest.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUKlBejOlTU
That's in the public interest.
I know many union members who work very hard to promote the interests of their employers.
My father and grandfather were union carpenters. They took pride in doing a good job.
My father and grandfather were union carpenters. They took pride in doing a good job.
> In the State of California, the very highest-paying job that can is within reach of most people who do not have college degrees is to be a State prison guard.
This is very interesting, this means there's a big business behind it. I don't know which are the requirements to be hired as prison guard, for sure is, as you said, an unpleasant and dangerous work, but I don't get why a prison guard should be paid higher than a cop, that is always facing criminals, but in more dangerous situations.
> Several years ago a Federal judge ordered the state to reduce prison overcrowding. It hasn't made much progress.
This would definitely cost a lot, prison overcrowding, in some countries, is a big issue. There's no real solution other than build new prisons, hire new people and transfer prisoners. I read in the past an article stating that the future of prisons will be mostly private, turned into a real business. I honestly laughed in a first instance, then reading a lot about the topic, I figured out that maybe that article wasn't so much wrong after all...
This is very interesting, this means there's a big business behind it. I don't know which are the requirements to be hired as prison guard, for sure is, as you said, an unpleasant and dangerous work, but I don't get why a prison guard should be paid higher than a cop, that is always facing criminals, but in more dangerous situations.
> Several years ago a Federal judge ordered the state to reduce prison overcrowding. It hasn't made much progress.
This would definitely cost a lot, prison overcrowding, in some countries, is a big issue. There's no real solution other than build new prisons, hire new people and transfer prisoners. I read in the past an article stating that the future of prisons will be mostly private, turned into a real business. I honestly laughed in a first instance, then reading a lot about the topic, I figured out that maybe that article wasn't so much wrong after all...
"There's no real solution other than build new prisons, hire new people and transfer prisoners."
Changing idiotic laws that land harmless people in jail would help a lot.
Changing idiotic laws that land harmless people in jail would help a lot.
There's no real solution other than build new prisons, hire new people and transfer prisoners.
There's a lot more solutions than that.
Decriminalizing drug use, and treating it like a public health issue (which it is) would drastically reduce incarceration rates. It would save the nation a lot of money too. Just tax and regulate it.
Spending time and money to help people not re-offend (and go back to jail) would also be cost-effective.
Unfortunately, there are big interests that want to keep the status quo.
There's a lot more solutions than that.
Decriminalizing drug use, and treating it like a public health issue (which it is) would drastically reduce incarceration rates. It would save the nation a lot of money too. Just tax and regulate it.
Spending time and money to help people not re-offend (and go back to jail) would also be cost-effective.
Unfortunately, there are big interests that want to keep the status quo.
After legalizing the recreational use of marijuana, Colorado has seen a 50% increase in Marijuana related DUI arrests [0].
The state/counties already tax the hell out of the plant (roughly 23% in my county). The state always finds ways to make money off their citizenry. This created a market for a less expensive product that's also conveniently illegal.
The dispensaries can't open bank accounts and are forced to maintain multi-million dollar cash stockpiles. They are so afraid of being robbed, they hire ex-military to travel around town with them armed with semi-automatic rifles [1]. Isn't this asking for more violent crime?
[0] http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2014/06/26/col...
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/business/marijuana-industr...
The state/counties already tax the hell out of the plant (roughly 23% in my county). The state always finds ways to make money off their citizenry. This created a market for a less expensive product that's also conveniently illegal.
The dispensaries can't open bank accounts and are forced to maintain multi-million dollar cash stockpiles. They are so afraid of being robbed, they hire ex-military to travel around town with them armed with semi-automatic rifles [1]. Isn't this asking for more violent crime?
[0] http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2014/06/26/col...
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/business/marijuana-industr...
The dispensaries can't open bank accounts and are forced to maintain multi-million dollar cash stockpiles. They are so afraid of being robbed, they hire ex-military to travel around town with them armed with semi-automatic rifles [1]. Isn't this asking for more violent crime?
Well, if Marijuana was legal at the federal level too, then maybe the dispensaries could do business like everybody else. I don't see that as a valid argument to stop decriminalization.
I didn't say drug use wasn't a problem, just that it should be treated like a public health issue, instead of a criminal justice one.
Well, if Marijuana was legal at the federal level too, then maybe the dispensaries could do business like everybody else. I don't see that as a valid argument to stop decriminalization.
I didn't say drug use wasn't a problem, just that it should be treated like a public health issue, instead of a criminal justice one.
> I don't get why a prison guard should be paid higher than a cop
A quick web search shows cops making $100k, while guards make $70k.
I'd imagine the police are more selective though. It might not be "within reach" of a lot of people (low turnover, and higher requirements).
A quick web search shows cops making $100k, while guards make $70k.
I'd imagine the police are more selective though. It might not be "within reach" of a lot of people (low turnover, and higher requirements).
One thing to keep in mind is that guards put in a lot of overtime. Example: Prisoner gets hurt and has to go to the hospital? A guard has to go with him, and he gets paid for all of it.
It's a pretty shitty job, mostly due to the work-life balance, but it pays pretty well for a job that doesn't require a college degree. A guard who puts in enough overtime can make 100k+ pretty easily, and that's in areas that aren't very expensive. After all, many prisons are in the middle of nowhere. For every San Quentin, there are a lot more Vacavilles.
Source: Girlfriend worked as a corrections nurse for a few years at the state prison and county jail levels. That's another shitty but well-paying job.
It's a pretty shitty job, mostly due to the work-life balance, but it pays pretty well for a job that doesn't require a college degree. A guard who puts in enough overtime can make 100k+ pretty easily, and that's in areas that aren't very expensive. After all, many prisons are in the middle of nowhere. For every San Quentin, there are a lot more Vacavilles.
Source: Girlfriend worked as a corrections nurse for a few years at the state prison and county jail levels. That's another shitty but well-paying job.
Cops making 100k? That's like saying programmers make 200k. Average for cops is 56k.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/06/news/economy/police-pay/
Sorry, should have specified that it's for California (both cops and guards). And it might be a highball figure (I didn't search too much).
From your article:
> There's also a lot of range between salaries in different parts of the country. In San Francisco, one of the least affordable cities in the country, cops get paid the most to reflect the cost of living, with an annual mean wage of $99,000. Meanwhile, cops in rural Mississippi earn the least: $29,870.
Similarly, prison guards also get paid more in California.
Whatever the case, I think cops do get paid a bit more, but I think it's much harder to get the job. Police might be penalised a bit for being in a glamour profession though (there's more people who want to be cops than prison guards - not many movies have a prison guard as the hero).
From your article:
> There's also a lot of range between salaries in different parts of the country. In San Francisco, one of the least affordable cities in the country, cops get paid the most to reflect the cost of living, with an annual mean wage of $99,000. Meanwhile, cops in rural Mississippi earn the least: $29,870.
Similarly, prison guards also get paid more in California.
Whatever the case, I think cops do get paid a bit more, but I think it's much harder to get the job. Police might be penalised a bit for being in a glamour profession though (there's more people who want to be cops than prison guards - not many movies have a prison guard as the hero).
Then you should specify San Francisco, not California. There's a big difference, you know, between SF and, say, Bakersfield.
[deleted]
Most police officers have college degrees.
I don't know that a degree is specifically regard to get a job as a police officer but I do know that most cops have degrees.
I don't know that a degree is specifically regard to get a job as a police officer but I do know that most cops have degrees.
My quick search shows 30-57k for a police officer's average salary.
One real good way to reduce prison overcrowding would be to abide by court precedent.
Oregon Advocacy Center v. Mink, 9th Circuit, 1993 (IIRC) ruled that when a judge orders a defendant to a mental hospital, the state has seven days to get the defendant actually admitted to the hospital.
The 9th Circuit governs the Western United States, including California, but even so despite that the ruling was made in 1993, it is quite uncommon for the state to obey the law by getting inmates into psych hospitals despite being specifically ordered to do so by a judge.
I personally fault the defense attorneys for this. Every defense attorney should move for dismissal on day 8, but I myself am the only defendant that I am aware of that has had his case dismissed this way.
My attorney was completely unaware of the 9th circuit's ruling until I brought it to his attention. I learned it from a jailhouse lawyer who found it in the jail's law library.
Oregon Advocacy Center v. Mink, 9th Circuit, 1993 (IIRC) ruled that when a judge orders a defendant to a mental hospital, the state has seven days to get the defendant actually admitted to the hospital.
The 9th Circuit governs the Western United States, including California, but even so despite that the ruling was made in 1993, it is quite uncommon for the state to obey the law by getting inmates into psych hospitals despite being specifically ordered to do so by a judge.
I personally fault the defense attorneys for this. Every defense attorney should move for dismissal on day 8, but I myself am the only defendant that I am aware of that has had his case dismissed this way.
My attorney was completely unaware of the 9th circuit's ruling until I brought it to his attention. I learned it from a jailhouse lawyer who found it in the jail's law library.
Among the reasons that I get arrested a lot, is that I learned in High School American History that the Supreme Court does not write "advisory opinions" as do the high courts of some other nations.
That is, one cannot simply request that a law be struck down as unconstitutional. Loosely speaking one must actually violate the law then face all the consequences in hopes that one's appeal will be heard in the Supreme Court.
It happens all the time that one loses over really petty things, such as that one's case could have been settled by a state court. While SCOTUS regards its job as deciding Constitutional issues it is also reluctant to make any decision that it does not really have to make.
That is, one cannot simply request that a law be struck down as unconstitutional. Loosely speaking one must actually violate the law then face all the consequences in hopes that one's appeal will be heard in the Supreme Court.
It happens all the time that one loses over really petty things, such as that one's case could have been settled by a state court. While SCOTUS regards its job as deciding Constitutional issues it is also reluctant to make any decision that it does not really have to make.
I don't have any statistics readily at hand but I have reason to believe that it is more dangerous to be a guard than a police officer.
Consider the Attica prison riot in which roughly 250 died.
Guards generally do not carry firearms because they could be snatched by an inmate. They do carry Tazers these days but they have a very short range and are limited to two shots. If a bunch of inmates all gang up on a guard there's not a whole lot he can do to defend himself.
Consider the Attica prison riot in which roughly 250 died.
Guards generally do not carry firearms because they could be snatched by an inmate. They do carry Tazers these days but they have a very short range and are limited to two shots. If a bunch of inmates all gang up on a guard there's not a whole lot he can do to defend himself.
There's a group that did a short film highlighting these issues: https://vimeo.com/121718382
Ok, rant over :)