Prison reform

Fairness is dependent upon individual perception, which makes it entirely subjective. If someone murders my loved one, its only fair to bring my loved one back to life, which means true justice is simply not an option. Whether the murderer serves 20 years or 50 doesnt resolve the situation at all. The closest we can get is either kill them or 'fix' them so at least society is protected from recurrance. That is what I think 'justice' actually means instead of fairness.

I also am opposed to the state having the authority to kill people who are not an immediate threat to others, which includes the incarcerated. While I recognize that some are not 'fixable', I oppose the death penalty on this principle.

I agree that we would be better served by addressing the causes of violence than trying to prevent it with threats of punishment (vindictive violence), but thatsa whole other discussion. What Im focussing on here is what to do with those who are already violent, given that there will always be some regardless what we do.

 

What you say is true; some people were raised in manipulative environments and became so good at it that even the best psychologists are often fooled.
Generally, the core character of people changes little in a person unless they have an event in life that destroys everything they have ever believed and forces them to rebuild it. Even if they survive the event, that does not always do the job. However, masking the core with a more sociable identity is a skill most of such people have and can do very well. They can pass for normal people, and revert to the core spontqaneously when the right trigger comes along.

Generally, once I read a person's character- which is a skill not many are good at- I expect them to behave accordingly. That skill has helped me bypass numerous disasters in life.

 

Yep.
We have only to look at the results of the things we have done to see the probability of future failures in such efforts. Very, very hard to change people's core identity, but relatively easy for them to present an image that makes us think it has changed. Many of these people appear to be totally normal in all conventional situations. Serial killer BTK killed 10 people over 15 years, taunted the police, was married with children and a church deacon- and nobody had a clue.

 

Well, your thread is titled, Prison Reform, so the best way to reform prison is to prevent people from winding up in the system, to begin with.

But you seem fixated on violent crime. You do realize that as of the latest Federal Bureau of Prisons report, only 3.3% of the inmate population is in there for Homicide, Aggravated Assault, and Kidnapping? Well over 46% are still in there for drug offenses. (source: https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_offenses.jsp)

So I'm not clear what it is you're trying to reform for such a statically small portion of the inmate population, at a time when violent crime in society is actually down.

 

I already stated drug offenses should not be in prison. But thats not prison reform either. Im specifically addressing violent crime because thats what I view as the priority for preserving/protecting society.

 

Agreed. But dont you think you'd be able to tell that your being fooled when you have a file in front of you that lists that person's criminal history? Do you think trained psychologists are going to be fooled by a smooth manipulator that they know killed 3 people because they reminded him of his abusive parents, as an example?

 

Comes down to the ability of the person doing the evaluation. We have women who write murderers in prison and arrange to marry them, people right now paying the bail for serious felons they don't even know. Common sense seems to be getting less common everyday. Like everyone else, trained psychologists like to think their profession results in successes, they want to see that. They are just people too. I've known some very good ones, and some really incompetent ones from the classes I taught.

 

Again, we are only talking about 3.3% of the inmate population. So where is it currently broken that you want to fix?

 

Thats why there would panels. I figure 3 each with a best 2/3 being the decision.

Like I said before, it won't be 100% accurate at keeping the violent locked up, but neither is just assigning a term to each violation.

 

Or they get pardoned by UNO who...

 

Except that sometimes those government employee psychologists and psychiatrists are the same quacks and incompetent morons, who put innocent people behind bars in the first place. I get what you mean, but in practice, we'd have a bunch of self important quacks and bureaucrats, who don't care about you as a prisoner, and may never let you out, just cuz

 

I think the shifting panel make-up would counter that possibility in the long run.

 

You seem to be making the assumption that experts can make the decisions

Because if you make the punishment too severe, there will be nothing really to prevent criminals from completely abandoning the laws altogether.


I think there's been a few threads about this topic
severity of punishment does little to deter common criminals
instead of long prison sentences, send criminals off to an island
Do you think an armed robber should spend the rest of their life in prison?

 

I disagree, from the sixties on we've become a permissive society and crime, particularly violent crime has risen. This stems from liberal policies over lenient sentencing and rehabilitation opposed to punishment.

 

No human system is ever perfect. I doubt that we will ever be able to identify every sociopathic felon before they do a great deal of harm. If it was possible to do that we would probably find that system even more repulsive than the current one.

 

Lenient sentencing?

Are you not informed about minimum mandatory sentences? That they have been the policy in this country for 30 years or more?

 

Trump should create a commission of interested articulate incarcerated lifers and task it with crafting a plan for comprehensive criminal justice reform with the aim of reducing crime and incarceration. IMO, they would prefer some form of corporal punishment and release for almost all first and second offenders.

That approach would probably empty most of our prisons, but to achieve even better results all laws that inhibit the creation of productive jobs with a good wages would have to be eliminated.

 

That is something that arose out of slap their wrist policies and ridiculous disregard for victims and their families. The families of criminals are treated better than victims and are often the recipients are large cash settlements in civil suits. Victims receive nothing. I think the attitude toward punishment is commensurate with the political identity of a given state. California once had one of the most effective penal systems in the country but liberal politics changed all of that and now California, the most populous state, has violent crime that is disproportionately high. The state is home to about 12% of the U.S. population but is also the site of about 14% of all violent crimes. Despite a greater concentration of serious crimes, the state has a lower incarceration rate than most states. Lower incarceration equals more crime particularly violent crime. Long sentences and punishment are the only things that truly rehabilitate, they break the individual and pacify them. If that succeeds then you can try to steer them toward a more productive life.

 

That’s because you’re trying to rehabilitate them instead of punish them. These cats go into a prison, they get to watch tv, some get video game systems, they get to hang out with their criminal buddies and share war stories and talk about what they’re going to do when they get out. MOST of the violent criminals don’t care about going to prison because they don’t have to work, they’re treated with kid gloves and they know they’ll get out relatively soon with good behavior.

I suggest a better, more effective deterrent system. Make prison into prison again. When you go to prison you will work 10-12 hours a day of hard labor. To start you will do hard manual labor such as break rocks, farm, build roads etc and once you have proven yourself you can move into easier work building houses, doing laundry, cooking, making furniture, etc and have a little more “freedom” for your job and an increase in wages.

When you go back to the cells you do not get to talk and communicate in open or secluded areas unless there is an officer present. You can read educational books and attempt to get an education during your time off working. No television, radios or video games.

You will be paid a minuscule wage for the hours which you work, most of which will be appropriated by the state until you have paid off your monetary debt to the victims of your crime and to society. An amount to be determined at sentencing. the rest of your wages you can keep.

Solitary confinement will only be used for those who refuse to work. All other punishment for rule violations will be an increase in work hours and a decrease in pay. You will work until you have paid off your debt to society, at which point you will be released.

 

Wow. What you have described is the perfect recipe for slave labor. You would be a fan of the laogai camps in China.

- Chinese Government

 

Don’t want to work. Don’t be a violent criminal. By the way... this is the text of the 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.

 

Besides it's not slavery, they are compensated plus get three squares and a roof over their heads.

 

Imagine: Ultra Low Security Prisons

for non violent offenders.


Cost savings.
Fewer bars.
Fewer guards / prisoner.
But they must never be in urban nor suburban properties.
Prisoners who commit violations, sent to higher security facilities.

Prison is about "loss of FREEDOM".
Not Bars & Guards

Moi

Ship Them To ​

 

Yep. Good old 13th amendment, still endorsing slavery. A reminder that just because something is a legal, doesn't make it right. We would not have legislative bodies if that were the case.

Your faith in the almighty state to benevolently dole out involuntary servitude only on the specific cast of citizenry you deem deserving of it does not diminish its potential for abuse on those you would not see as deserving of that fate. Moreover, the market incentives for those reaping the benefits of forced servitude is directly aligned with the demand for more prisoners and longer sentences. Your system does not reduce violent crime so much as enshrines it at a state level.

 

Recommended reading: Laogai camps in China. Here is an expert:

Sounds very similar to the proposed system above: