tough on crime

[Christ_empowered]

I read something interesting the other day. The US has more people locked up or on probation, parole than just about any other country, save Russia and occasionally some African dictatorships.

BUT further analysis shows the we don't really put that many people in prison. Surpirse, surprise; the problem is, we keep people in prison. Forever. And I think lengthy probation, parole is fairly common, too.

What do you all think of this? I think we could save money if we brought back The War on Poverty, scaled back The War on Drugs, and revisited our sentencing structure, especially at the federal level, where we have minimums and the judges get very little leeway.

 

[Milk-Drops]

The biggest hurtle would be getting public acceptance of such scale backs. Also scaling back the drug war wouldn't do much unless we start treating drug abuse like a medical problem instead of a crime, and also improve economical situations where drug dealing is a more economical means of surviving. Also, a major reason why sentences are so long is political. Politicians that want to look like they are actually doing something on crime will push for harsher sentences and longer sentences. It give the impression of actually doing something. However, more nuanced approaches take longer to notice or cause large impacts, so the current news media and politics use these methods to make a politician to look week. It might take some time for a group of people to start changing how we handle punishment in this country. Especially when it comes to sentence lengths, felony status, economic issues, and the drug war.

Though the Scandanavian methods do show promise. Where there are shorter sentences, but also great stakes put in to actually rehabilitate, council, and train their prisoners to actually be functioning members of society.

 

[jasonc]

milk drops, have you visited any state, federal correctional facility? I have, they have aa, na in them. they also have this

http://www.pride-enterprises.org/

the tire side of that was the cheapest and the best in the area for retreading semi tires, but we cant keep that forever if we rehabbed them all. that would work to put that out of business, which well wouldn't be a bad thing, but honeslty even we did do that, it wouldn't reduce their service, they used thieves, drug users and so forth as trustees whom left the facitliy and went without a guard to the areas to pickup and load tires. they did stop briefly and now are doing it again.

 

[Lewis]

The United States does not know what it's doing as far as the penal system goes. From the very first penal system prison in the world built right here in Philadelphia up to now' they still got it wrong. Secular man does not know what he is doing. That is why recidivism is so high, and they will and do pay over 100.000 bucks a year to house non violent inmates. Prisons now are business, and to make my point check out the article below, there are millions like him who are just wasting up the tax payers money. The man in this article should be let go today.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/26/justice/sentencing-clemency/index.html?iref=allsearch
Sentenced to life in prison, man hopes new clemency rules will get him out

 

[jasonc]

ok so once we have them that long we realease them. no more paying for their health issues? housing? I know what your saying but really most prisons in my state are over 50 years old. so where is that money going? its not the correctional officer wages for sure as here I make as much as they do starting. most cops start in corrections and work to the county jails. and or go to law enforcement.

 

[Lewis]

That is over $ 100,000 bucks per inmate a year in the United States.

 

[jasonc]

That is over $ 100,000 bucks per inmate a year in the United States.

I know that the government manipulates things. I bet some of that is supposedly for new buildings which aren't being built or repairs that aren't done. seldom are budgets cut, just manipulated. seen it when they started cutting back my city. people moved and others retire.

my town has one such rehab facitly, out of the 13 there, 6 are kicked out as they didn't quit using. they are that strict. so what do we do, just let them use and legalise theft? gotta pay for the habit somehow, most jobs have drug testing. I doubt you would push for not allowing a job to screen out users.

 

[Milk-Drops]

milk drops, have you visited any state, federal correctional facility? I have, they have aa, na in them. they also have this

http://www.pride-enterprises.org/

the tire side of that was the cheapest and the best in the area for retreading semi tires, but we cant keep that forever if we rehabbed them all. that would work to put that out of business, which well wouldn't be a bad thing, but honeslty even we did do that, it wouldn't reduce their service, they used thieves, drug users and so forth as trustees whom left the facility and went without a guard to the areas to pickup and load tires. they did stop briefly and now are doing it again.

This doesn't address a major problem however. Felony status. That alone keeps most ex cons from ever having stable work. Also AA doesn't cover any medical aspects to help people. Its mostly just counseling. We need the medical aspect as well. As in real doctors helping these people. This also doesn't address sentence length nor rehabilitation. I can tell you none of the prisons in my area even have manufacturing.

 

[Milk-Drops]

my town has one such rehab facitly, out of the 13 there, 6 are kicked out as they didn't quit using. they are that strict. so what do we do, just let them use and legalise theft? gotta pay for the habit somehow, most jobs have drug testing. I doubt you would push for not allowing a job to screen out users.

There is no reason why theft would be legalized, and no drug advocacy group supports any such nonsense. The arguments I've seen is either decriminalization or lessening the punishments, and gearing more towards treatments. AA is not the only type of treatment, and studies have shown that AA is only 50% or less effective in the long run anyway. There are medical trials in Europe and Canada that have shown promise, but due to the US not treating Drug issues as medical issues, there is a also a ban on such trials.

Many advocates actually support the notion that if a drug user still does something illegal while under the influence, then the individual will be charged with the crime.

Cigarettes are more addicting then Cocaine, Heroin, and Meth. However due to cigarettes being widely available there aren't that many people running around stealing for cigarettes.

Personally I don't support the wide distribution of Cocaine, Heroin, and Meth. Nor its outright legalization. I just role my eyes when see argumentation that suggests that crime would become more rampant when we already have an equally addicting substance legal and don't have those types of problems associated with cigarettes.

 

[Claudya]

Personally I don't support the wide distribution of Cocaine, Heroin, and Meth. Nor its outright legalization. I just role my eyes when see argumentation that suggests that crime would become more rampant when we already have an equally addicting substance legal and don't have those types of problems associated with cigarettes.

This isn't an argumentation against Milk-Drops, just something that came to my mind reading his post.
Lots of people in America argue in favour of unrestricted private gun ownership and while I am happy I live in a place where guns are way less common than in the USA I understand why people would advocate their right to have firearms. It's personal liberty, and if the people owning the gun behave responsibly the danger of harming innocents is low.
But wouldn't the same apply to drugs? If used responsibly certain drugs can be used for the purpose of recreation or experience or fun without harming anyone else; if used in a truly responsible way you might not even harm yourself).
I'm pretty much for legalising drugs. Most of the money criminals make from drugs they make only because it is illegal and obtaining drugs requires certain forms of secretive organisation. And the reason drug addicts drop out of society is because drugs will turn you into a legal outcast, making their situation a lot worse and eventually forcing them into doing real criminal things like stealing.

 

[for_his_glory]

Here in my area most that are in county jail could be on house arrest instead of the tax payer paying for their housing especially when they are sent to State Prison. Many are handed a bill of expense while in jail when they are released, but many never pay it as it is never enforced for them to pay it off. I can see long term sentencing for drug dealers, thieves and murders, but I would think that a drug user and someone sentenced on spousal or child abuse would be better off on house arrest and mandatory rehab to be paid of themselves instead of being in jail. In many cases rehab does not work and they end up back in jail again. OK, then back on house arrest and mandatory rehab. I've seen many that were on house arrest that would rather be in jail as they were more miserable having no freedom to leave their own property and the temptation to leave was worse then being in jail. Here in Pennsylvania the victim might drop all charges, but the state picks them up.

 

[jasonc]

This doesn't address a major problem however. Felony status. That alone keeps most ex cons from ever having stable work. Also AA doesn't cover any medical aspects to help people. Its mostly just counseling. We need the medical aspect as well. As in real doctors helping these people. This also doesn't address sentence length nor rehabilitation. I can tell you none of the prisons in my area even have manufacturing.

avon park where the tire place is are run by felons, felons are allowed to leave the prison. the brief reason it was stopped was two fold , murders were allowed to go out and also a brief security issue with a truck that broke down and the issue where to house him.

next theres not much tolerance for petty theft. 50 bucks or more its a felony. good luck with getting that changed. so its like this, I shoplift cds cause I want and I don't test for drugs slam me, but I steal 50 bucks for drugs don't slam me?

 

[jasonc]

This doesn't address a major problem however. Felony status. That alone keeps most ex cons from ever having stable work. Also AA doesn't cover any medical aspects to help people. Its mostly just counseling. We need the medical aspect as well. As in real doctors helping these people. This also doesn't address sentence length nor rehabilitation. I can tell you none of the prisons in my area even have manufacturing.

avon park where the tire place is are run by felons, felons are allowed to leave the prison. the brief reason it was stopped was two fold , murders were allowed to go out and also a brief security issue with a truck that broke down and the issue where to house him.

next theres not much tolerance for petty theft. 50 bucks or more its a felony. good luck with getting that changed. so its like this, I shoplift cds cause I want and I don't test for drugs slam me, but I steal 50 bucks for drugs don't slam me?

This isn't an argumentation against Milk-Drops, just something that came to my mind reading his post.


then I should have the right to deny employement and insurance to drug users. wont you want a pilot getting high on drugs. a truck driver? a mechanic. been there. responsible drug use seldom is.
Lots of people in America argue in favour of unrestricted private gun ownership and while I am happy I live in a place where guns are way less common than in the USA I understand why people would advocate their right to have firearms. It's personal liberty, and if the people owning the gun behave responsibly the danger of harming innocents is low.
But wouldn't the same apply to drugs? If used responsibly certain drugs can be used for the purpose of recreation or experience or fun without harming anyone else; if used in a truly responsible way you might not even harm yourself).
I'm pretty much for legalising drugs. Most of the money criminals make from drugs they make only because it is illegal and obtaining drugs requires certain forms of secretive organisation. And the reason drug addicts drop out of society is because drugs will turn you into a legal outcast, making their situation a lot worse and eventually forcing them into doing real criminal things like stealing.

you are arguing for allowing minors to drink, and use drugs. they do steal and lie to get them.

 

[Claudya]

you are arguing for allowing minors to drink, and use drugs. they do steal and lie to get them.

Nope. I was only speaking about adults. Much like alcohol is only legal at a certain age - 16, 18, 21 depending where you live but there's an age treshold from which point on people are thought to be capable to use sound judgement and responsibility in regards to their drinking. Same would be true for any other drug.

And people also steal or lie to get alcohol. Or guns. Both of those are legal to get - at a certain age - in America.

 

[jasonc]

Nope. I was only speaking about adults. Much like alcohol is only legal at a certain age - 16, 18, 21 depending where you live but there's an age treshold from which point on people are thought to be capable to use sound judgement and responsibility in regards to their drinking. Same would be true for any other drug.

And people also steal or lie to get alcohol. Or guns. Both of those are legal to get - at a certain age - in America.

how many adults just start drugs at 18 very few, they get it from their parents age. its hard to argue that about guns since well my wife and her dad were hunting and eating off that ere 10. I have pics of my fil age 10 skipping school and having a gun in hand with turtle aged 8. food for the evening and left overs for tomorrow. legal then and legal in my state to shoot. I know parents whom take their sons hunting at that age. they may not buy a gun but they can shoot. flying is legal for a kid at age 11.

 

[jasonc]

how many can actually use hard drugs and work? think about that outside the extreme wealthy few would be able to have a home and hold any place to stay. should insurance be allowed not to insure drug users? I know the nhk is denying health care to smokers in some hospitals. how many should be tested for work and how many after failing to quit should be hiredd? I wouldn't hire any drug user after failing once. its a job not a ministry. sorry that is how I feel about it. I know a man who opened his home to a drunk and when the man didn't quit. he told im your are on the street, the condition was that you sober up and get a job, you failed to do that.

next, whom will pay for the babies born to those women? the government? what about the laws being passed calling it a felony to smoke and be pregnant? ah yes so the pharmeuticals should then be allowed to sell these on the streets? prescribed heroine aka oxycotin and zanax the anti-depressant. these lead the drugs of choice. work while high on oxycotin? right sure.

 

[reba]

We tax payers pay for it now Jasonc ...

 

[jasonc]

We tax payers pay for it now Jasonc ...

I know, but in texas, abortion is basically banned.