Prison reform

[otto_kretschmer]

Originally Posted by wdfifteen

That's a worthless standard. You are safe until you aren't.
With criminals being returned to the population the same criminals they were when they went in, we are filling not only prisons but the general population with bad guys.

On the other hand, with 5 year recidivism rate of about 75% most of them are only a threat for another five years before they go back under government control. So you have that going for you.

when you lose deterrence you get war

if you want to lower that 75% recidivism rate you need to deter criminals

so how do you do that?

the poor countries never forgot how to do that but we "enlightened" 1st world nations have

Originally Posted by Tobra

This guy could be at the top of the list

We did have a lot of baddies in the past. But good people were not as reluctant to say anything about it in the past. We have removed the stigma from behavior that has been unacceptable in the past. When you remove the deterrents for adverse acts, you get more of them. Look at Seattle. Would it have even been possible for it to get as bad 50 years ago, even 20 years ago?

It is simply beyond me that anyone could think that the permissive atmosphere secondary to moral decay is not a major driver for this stuff.

Except the facts don't bear this out. It's convenient to claim that Seattle's problems are attributable to a single factor, but, like most simple explanations, it is inaccurate. The homeless problem has grown in recent years for lots of disparate reasons:
1. Unchecked growth into an area that is geographically incapable of handling it
2. Massive wage growth that drives up real estate values and pushes people out of their homes
3. Stupid, ideologically-driven decisions by people who are prisoners to their own personal dogmas, e.g., environmentalists' resistance to expanding roads, and conservatives' opposition to light rail and public transit
4. Externalities from companies like Boeing and Amazon, which abuse and overload the infrastructure without paying for it
5. Refusal to address root causes like poverty and drug addiction in anything other than a punitive way
6. Neglect of mental health services, and continued stigma related thereto.

Those are just a few reasons. I'm sure there are more.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by madcorgi

I agree that this is an age old problem, but I disagree that we are using kid gloves on criminals. We have moved away from more barbaric methods used in the past (public hangings, floggings, stocks, etc) because (a) they don't work; and (b) they are morally unacceptable in a civilized society. I think we will eventually move away from capital punishment for the same reason--the deterrent effect is minimal, and the costs associated with a state-sponsored system of human extermination are extremely high. As I said earlier, people tend not to consider consequences of their actions when they act out of anger or fear, which is how most violent crimes occur.

But the notion that we use kid gloves on criminals is, I think, incorrect. The criminal justice system is a bear trap--once in, it is almost impossible to get out--and it's a horrible place to be. Too many enter at an early age, get branded as career criminals, and come to consider themselves as such. Small crimes become bigger crimes, and the downward spiral continues, not because we make "the life" too attractive, but because our system pretty much guarantees failure.

Other countries see to have figured this out better than we have. What can we learn from them?

I'll defer to your experience in the criminal justice world, having actually worked within it while I have never been more than a spectator. And, as I outlined above regarding my observations with this young man, I could not agree more about the "bear trap" analogy.

That said, I've attempted to present a bit different perspective as a part of my argument. That of the citizen who would like "the system" to protect me from these guys. Most of the focus seems to be on them, their "rights", their "rehabilitation", exploring the root causes of their behavior, etc. That is all well and good, and I support those efforts. We must also keep in mind, however, the rights of the citizenry to be protected.

Severity of punishment is no deterrent to these guys. Agreed. At some point however, we have to understand that deterrence is only a part of the equation. Our sentencing is far, far too light on very serious crime and the perpetrators live very much in a "catch and release" system. Plea bargaining often reduces the punishment for some pretty serious stuff down to a slap on the wrist. In the end, the citizenry suffers. To be honest, I am far more interested in reforms that address public safety over felons' rights. Right now, our system is failing spectacularly in that regard.

When a violent felon achieves what I believe to be the criteria necessary for execution, I am no longer interested in any sort of a deterrent affect that may have on the rest of the criminal world, because I know it won't have one. Mine is a purely pragmatic position - if he is never going to get out, I see no reason to feed and house him anymore. It sure would free up a lot of space, and budget, to simply exterminate those who have attained the status of a "lifer".

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

I'll defer to your experience in the criminal justice world, having actually worked within it while I have never been more than a spectator. And, as I outlined above regarding my observations with this young man, I could not agree more about the "bear trap" analogy.

That said, I've attempted to present a bit different perspective as a part of my argument. That of the citizen who would like "the system" to protect me from these guys. Most of the focus seems to be on them, their "rights", their "rehabilitation", exploring the root causes of their behavior, etc. That is all well and good, and I support those efforts. We must also keep in mind, however, the rights of the citizenry to be protected.

As an aside, I could make the exact same argument about limiting the sale of guns. One person's pragmatism is another person's loss of rights. As ever, it depends on whose sacred cow is being gored.

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Severity of punishment is no deterrent to these guys. Agreed. At some point however, we have to understand that deterrence is only a part of the equation. Our sentencing is far, far too light on very serious crime and the perpetrators live very much in a "catch and release" system. Plea bargaining often reduces the punishment for some pretty serious stuff down to a slap on the wrist. In the end, the citizenry suffers. To be honest, I am far more interested in reforms that address public safety over felons' rights. Right now, our system is failing spectacularly in that regard.

I'm not ready to accept the premise that sentencing is far too light in general. If we accept the premise that prison is simply a finishing school for criminals, why would sending someone there long enough to get a masters and then a PhD in crime be a good idea?

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

When a violent felon achieves what I believe to be the criteria necessary for execution, I am no longer interested in any sort of a deterrent affect that may have on the rest of the criminal world, because I know it won't have one. Mine is a purely pragmatic position - if he is never going to get out, I see no reason to feed and house him anymore. It sure would free up a lot of space, and budget, to simply exterminate those who have attained the status of a "lifer".

So: Three strikes and you're dead. Not sure we have the selection process perfected enough for that strategy.

[rfuerst911sc]

We have laws that were written to help guide our society . Assuming you were taught right from wrong if the decisions you make send you down the illegal path you go to jail or prison . A normal sane person in that situation should say I never want to do that again .

The individual that decides once they get out I am going to better myself and never go back . Or they make the decision that jail/prison is no big deal and I will continue to be a negative influence to society. In either scenario the choice is made by the individual . And there are consequences of your actions .

So I have no problem with guilty people being in prison , a jury of their peers made that decision based on the evidence . Do we have a perfect system ? Nope but nobody does . And yes I understand that some people have the deck stacked against them but life can be hard for anybody . It's the decisions you make that decides your path in life. Yes this is a simplistic view but sometimes the simple view is the closest to the truth .

[Tobra]

When they designed our government, they had no idea there would be such a thing as a career politician. The idea was that the best and the brightest would step up, serve their country for a period of time, then go back to their life. No longer, and things have sort of fallen apart.

In our criminal justice system, the presumption was that people would have certain values instilled in them by their parents. We don't get that so much anymore, so there are problems. The drug addiction thing mentioned above complicates matters greatly. I expect things to become worse as the use of drugs increases as time passes.

[Superman]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

I simply (and politely) asked you if you could please stick to the topics at hand. .. Do you have anything to contribute?

I have to agree. Here, in PPOT, we seem to be remarkably able to have VERY interesting exchanges of observations and perspectives. We welcome those of Choc or anyone. Personal attacks....not so much. PARF is an excellent place for that.

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Oh, no, I'm sorry Tobra, I probably wasn't all that clear about what I was trying to say. Yes, absolutely, I agree with everything you say.

I read through this thread which I have not seen since last night. You guys have been busy. I am glad I read though each post. When I saw Tobra's post on Page 4, I thought somebody should validate that guy's observations. Thank you for doing that, Jeff.

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

So, yes, indeed - we can "fix" some of this by addressing the societal factors contributing to it. ... But ... we cannot "fix" all of it in this manner.

I think Tobra is onto something. If families were set up right and social mores were enforced (like they were when you and I were riding bikes), then I wonder how much of this problem would NOT get fixed. Little, I think.

And yet, I don't have the answers. And BTW Jeff, opioids are a completely different ballgame where upbringing is irrelevant.

[Tobra]

I am saying things are different than they were in the past. Mr Higgins feels this is not a modern problem. It has not been so very long ago that these kids would be getting their asses beat by their parents when they stepped out of line. We created a system with a disincentive to act in a responsible fashion in the sixties.

I think you messed up your double negative Supes.

You don't think I am in favor of keeping our penal system the way it is now do you? We are totally doing it wrong. We should do it more like you would do a recycling plant. Separate the ones guilty of violent crimes from property crimes.

Send the junkie ones someplace else, but a certain percentage of them are irredeemable, need a plan for them, gotta go

[Superman]

I really love these discussions. Substantive. Differing perspectives. Respectful and articulate.

I don't think I did, Kinky. Using the double-positive mode: Going to the root of the problem, societal and family stuff, might just nearly eliminate the problem. I don't always agree with groucho Marxists but when I do, it's on PPOT.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by Tobra

Mr Higgins feels this is not a modern problem.

Really? Did you completely miss this?:

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Yes, absolutely, I agree with everything you say. I was merely trying to say that we had no shortage of very bad people before this level of societal decay we are now experiencing. So, yes, while agree it's a huge contributing factor, all I was trying to say is that it is not the only contributing factor.

[Superman]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Really? Did you completely miss this?:

You guys should put a case of beer on ice, fire up a BBQ and fire pit, and get this figured out. Invite me please. I promise to behave.

Originally Posted by Superman

You guys should put a case of beer on ice, fire up a BBQ and fire pit, and get this figured out. Invite me please. I promise to behave.

That promise is not worth the Zig Zag it's written on.
Sativa or indica tonight, Supe?

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

That is the crux of the problem - the recidivism rate speaks volumes about how "successful" our current system is... not. And yet, after decades of this level of "success" we still have our "empathists" blaming society and telling us we just need to try harder.

Call me an "empathist" but I think preparing inmates for life on the outside will reduce the danger to society at large. Giving them the tools to avoid the lifestyle that got them into prison will reduce recidivism. This isn't necessarily for them. It's better and safer for the rest of us if the criminals are prepared for existence in a law-abiding world when they get out.
Some inmates were mentally ill when they went in. How is warehousing a borderline schizophrenic for 4 years and then dumping into society with no mental health follow up going to keep us safe? Yeah, I do blame society for not taking sensible steps to protect itself.

[rfuerst911sc]

Like any difficult problem there is rarely a simple solution and prison reform falls into that category . When someone is found guilty of a crime against society the sentence is supposed to create justice for society and the victim . That justice generally comes with the attitude " let the bastard rot in jail " . I get that as the victims or their families are dealing with emotions that are racing and close to the heart . Is it societies fault the criminal acted the way they did ? Probably not . Is it the parents fault the criminal acted the way they did ? In some cases yes but not always . Is it just a freak of nature that the criminals act the way they do ? Maybe .

I do believe that the state has some responsibility to extract some net worth out of the criminals while they are incarcerated . Cleaning up trash on the side of the road is one example , in my opinion there shouldn't be one speck of litter anywhere we have plenty of prisoners to eliminate that problem . But I also believe that some form of rehabilitation needs to take place before a prisoner is released back into society . What that looks like I have no idea . Teach them a trade ? Mandatory military service ? Make them volunteer at a soup kitchen or pet shelter ?

Or as a society do we just say the career criminal is " defective " and we just " let the bastard rot in jail " ? In some cases this is the right answer , does anyone really think Charles Manson as an example could have been released back to society with good results ? So we ask the prison system to make the decision on who is nuts/bad/etc. and has to stay behind bars vs. let out to society .......... parole board . A whole other hot topic as what are the credentials of these folks making the decisions ? And these are not easy decisions to make , I'm sure in their hearts they don't want to release a criminal that will go right back and commit more crimes . So if they have to waiver on the decision they have to say stay in prison .

I don't have the answers but do agree it is a problem but I'm not 100 % convinced the prison system is at fault . They are the recipients of the court system and the court system is fed by the police . The police are fed by the bad guys on the street . The problem in my opinion is at the street level and earlier , if the parents/grandparents/close family/schools/mentors can't or don't make an impression early on of instilling right from wrong then the individual loses and may make a bad decision to turn to crime . But ultimately it is the individual that makes that decision and will pay the price if caught .

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by Superman

You guys should put a case of beer on ice, fire up a BBQ and fire pit, and get this figured out. Invite me please. I promise to behave.

Doc is in charge of the Q (that comes off a GRILL or smoker), Higgy...the beer (one case....sheesh ), ....I'm crashing the party without an invite....do ya need a ride?

My dad and peers kept me in line....like a friendly dawg pack.

Playground rules....pick-up football, b-ball, etc.

You just learn how to "act right"....

Hard to do watching on a screen.....YMMV.

[DavidI]

As most of you know, I have been a cop for more than 30 years in Los Angeles. I come from a home of criminals and gangsters and have first-hand knowledge of "the life." With that said, most criminals will not change until they make a serious commitment to change. There are no programs, midnight basketball (why would a kid be out at midnight?), incentives, or anything else external to force change. The individual has to decide to change. It is that simple.

Let's not forget that the criminal victimized many people before he or she was caught and imprisoned. What do we do for those victimized, robbed, raped, shot, or ripped off by the criminal? Nothing. However, we throw a lot of money and resources at the bad guy who committed the crimes. Prisons remove a dangerous person from society to protect community members.

If you have not directly spoken to these individuals, go out and do so. Most of them will open up about their beliefs and lifestyles. You will be surprised about how "street smart" and cunning many of them are.

I grew up in foster homes and on welfare. My sister was murdered. I speak from the heart and want to protect and help society. People deserve second chances and many succeed through their own hard work and willingness to change. Others prey on society and see them as "marks."

I believe the answer is men teaching young boys how to be men. We are the problem. We get young women pregnant, then abandon them and their young boys to figure things out on their own. They seek a role model in their community who may not be the best. We, as men, need to influence these young boys to become the men we know they can become to become productive and contributing members of society. Not everyone needs to go to college and get an education. Some need a trade skill. It amazes me how skilled some of the "uneducated" people truly are. I am an eternal optimist and always look for the best in people. Let's rock and make our community the best that we can!!!

[Crowbob]

With respect, 'we' are not the problem, sir. 'We' do not get young women pregnant, abandon them and our young boys.

Many do, as you say. I am not one of them and I suspect you aren't either.

[GH85Carrera]

Originally Posted by Crowbob

With respect, 'we' are not the problem, sir. 'We' do not get young women pregnant, abandon them and our young boys.

Many do, as you say. I am not one of them and I suspect you aren't either.

Same here.

[Superman]

Originally Posted by KC911

My dad and peers kept me in line....like a friendly dawg pack.

Playground rules....pick-up football, b-ball, etc.

That's how I was raised. Jeff too.

Originally Posted by DavidI

I believe the answer is men teaching young boys how to be men. !!

Bingo. The rest of you missed his point.

David, thank you for your story, perspective, and thank you for your service. You are what they would call an 'expert' on this. And a role model.

[Superman]

I'd be interested in hearing more about your observations, David.

I've been a young man and watched them for decades. Long ago I noticed the most reckless bucking broncos become the best bridle horses if/when their efforts are finally focused. I've got stories to tell about my friend Hal. I got into a fair number of fistfights around him. Never against him, mercifully. It was sort of a pastime for him. It was fun. He wound up doing very well in telecommunications. If not, he would have followed the prison route.

We need these people. Everyone who stops costing taxpayer money and goes from a cost center to a profit center...is worth something like a half million dollars, net.