Prisoners with perks?

[waverunner234]

Originally Posted by London Rayne

I would be interested to hear more of your thoughts Hush. TV is a given in keeping them occupied, so I don't have a problem with that. I do however feel there should be more thought that goes into programs dealing with personal healing, restitution for what they have done, and how to operate in society again once they are released. I am aware that you can in fact get a college degree whilst in prison, but how many of these people are actually hired in their degreed field? Don't most employers just toss those applicants in the trash once they see "Served time?"

I know a guy who was part of an armed robbery of a 7/11 when he was 18 years old. He was caught, got 10 years of which he served 5 years and got released for good behavior. Ever since he has been the most humble, honest and likable person you can imagine.
Now he is almost 50 years old and he couldn't even get a job in a mailroom because of his conviction 32 years ago.
That is the crazyness that has to be dealt with. After 32 years his record should be totally clean if there are no repeat issues. Even after 10 years it should have been removed

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by London Rayne

I would be interested to hear more of your thoughts Hush. TV is a given in keeping them occupied, so I don't have a problem with that. I do however feel there should be more thought that goes into programs dealing with personal healing, restitution for what they have done, and how to operate in society again once they are released. I am aware that you can in fact get a college degree whilst in prison, but how many of these people are actually hired in their degreed field? Don't most employers just toss those applicants in the trash once they see "Served time?"

If that's the case, what can we do to avoid that type of discrimination in the work force? Would it not be better to have them working and progressing in a field that makes them feel accomplished, rather than having them sit at home and live off the govt.? Idle hands you know.

I'm running late at the moment and don't have time to fully draft a response. But rehabilitation takes money. And as this tread points out, folks are reluctant to spend money on prisons because 1) it's an easy issue for a demagogue to use to take pot shots at those spending the money; 2) the return on the investment comes years down the road and is very difficult to measure; and 3) while it is often successful in significant numbers of cases, you know going in that it is not going to work in the majority of cases -- these people are criminals for a reason.

So you combine those three factors, and you have seen a huge decline in the amount of attempted rehabilitation that goes on behind bars.

Then, from around somewhere between the mid 1960's and the mid 1980's, the U.S. attitude toward crime began to shift. The idea of allowing petty criminals to be placed on probation became unpopular. So we had huge increases in our incarceration rates (not just numbers of people behind bars, but the percentage of our population behind bars). This "get tough on crime" attitude had a number of bad consequences. Prisons cost more, so less money went to rehabilitation services. You had petty criminals locked up with hardened criminals. So when they were released, the previously petty criminals came out more often as not more attached to criminal attitudes and life-styles than when they went in. Finally, because it was unfashionable to be seen as "soft on crime," alternatives to incarceration were not explored.

In short, its a very complex problem, but at the root of it is the underlying attitudes of the public and the manner in which they are subject to manipulation by political advertising. That holds up prison reform more than any other single factor, in my judgment.

[charlestudor2005]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

However, it’s still irksome to know that judges have entitled convicted inmates more “personal space” than that allowed shipboard sailors.

I somewhat suspect that a prison's total square footage is much higher than a ship, and therefore it is easier to allow more for a prison than aboard a ship.

Now, if you're talking just the cot and storage area allowed a sailor, well, it will probably always be smaller than a cell.

And there are different ships: subs, cruisers, aircraft carriers, etc. All would have a different amount of square footage.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

I somewhat suspect that a prison's total square footage is much higher than a ship, and therefore it is easier to allow more for a prison than aboard a ship.

Now, if you're talking just the cot and storage area allowed a sailor, well, it will probably always be smaller than a cell.

And there are different ships: subs, cruisers, aircraft carriers, etc. All would have a different amount of square footage.

Point of fact. Sailors have smaller living spaces than inmates.

[London Rayne]

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

@London

I think I said this elsewhere.

Years ago (about as old as you are) when I studied this stuff more diligently, the best successes were those inmates who became licensed barbers behind the walls. When they were released, they had a marketable skill. Also, the way a lot of barbershops work, they weren't on salary, but rather, kept what they cut, paying the owner rental for the chair. Made them "entrepreneurs."
Income and success seems to be the trick. Plus a barbershop is a very social place. They can make customer/friends.

I can see this, and think that most any trade would be a way for them to be their own boss and escape much of the blackballing that happens. The reason I suddenly wondered about this is because one of the workers on my house just got out of jail. He is pretty much limited to hard labor positions because no one will hire him. It was not even a really serious charge, but he is having trouble finding work. Perhaps instead of working for these other people, he could start his own construction or landscaping company.

As for larger accommodations...well that's how they designed it I guess. Ships were designed the way they wanted, and so were prisons. Not much can be done about that after the fact.

[Sensia]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Why don't you take a gander at the actual opinion that Judge Justice wrote after the actual trial in the Ruiz case and see if you still think that the case is about "goodies."

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...3010845862856&

If you're too lazy to read the entire 120+ pages, which incidentally summarizes a 179 day trial, here's the short version, which admits that

It is impossible to capture in this brief summary the full scope of . . . horror; but many of his specific findings are so shockingly barbarous that they chill to the bone.

http://www.november.org/razorwire/rzold/13/1320.html

As for TV, the reason that they give TV to inmates is that it makes them much more docile and easy to control because it gives them something to do to pass the time. It's not for the inmates so much, it's for the guards and their safety quite frankly. Imagine one guard to about 80 inmates. Would you rather watch and be responsible for those inmates with them having nothing to do? Or with at least half of them sitting around and watching the boob tube? Sounds like a pretty easy question to me. If you think that idle hands are the devil's workshop when you're talking about kids, try 50 - 100 hardened criminals, many of whom have nothing to loose when it comes to trouble making.

Thanks for posting this. The thing is we as a society are still ruled by our emotions and still believe in good old revenge. So when someone kills someone, or steals, or does something like drugs, prostitutes themselves we stick them in jails and prisons as a way of punishment or revenge. We want to exact revenge, especially the families of victims who have been harmed by someone. Most people feel they deserve to be treated inhumane in the jails and prisons and these places shouldn't be comfortable. However as time and history has shown abusing people in jails, prisons and treating them less than human (regardless of their crimes) only makes them mentally /emotionally unstable (even more so if they weren't already) and far more dangerous if they ever are released back into society. If you treat people like criminals they will act like criminals is the old expression. If you treat people like animals they will act like animals..etc.

There is no such thing as rehabilitating anyone in our current jail / prison system.

In my opinion, we should be looking to truly rehabilitate when we incarcerate. Give them education in jails and prisons, give them something to do instead of "wasting away" and going literally mad in a small cell with no real human interaction. Give proper medication for the ones who are suffering from mental illness and intensive psychiatric care/counseling.

For those that are not capable of being rehabilitated or are criminally insane or severely mentally ill to the point that they are a clear danger to others we need to keep them locked up (but be human about it).

In addition there is no excuse for not keeping jails and prisons clean. The Houston jail has been known to be one of the worst hygienic wise and people literally got sick in the Houston jail.

In the long run this really is for the good of society as a whole.

[Sensia]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Point of fact. Sailors have smaller living spaces than inmates.

My son is currently in the Navy and an ex who was in the Navy for over 10 years. They have a shit ton of stuff to do, TV's on subs and ships, and games, and interaction with others..

Not anything like being confined in prison to a very small space indefinitely for years with absolutely nothing to do but stare at a brick wall only getting 30 minutes a day outside.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Guilty Pleasures

My son is currently in the Navy and an ex who was in the Navy for over 10 years. They have a shit ton of stuff to do, TV's on subs and ships, and games, and interaction with others..

Not anything like being confined in prison to a very small space indefinitely for years with absolutely nothing to do but stare at a brick wall only getting 30 minutes a day outside.

The fact is, your son didn't break any laws and was not convicted of any crimes against the community at large: the same cannot be said for inmates. So why are they entitled to more space than your son? Inmates in solitary confinement are locked down for 22.5 hours per day. The rest of the inmate population enjoys library privileges, TV and day room privileges, etc., just like your son who committed no crimes.

[Sensia]

Here are some interesting articles on why Prisons / jails do not work. As we all know they really don't deter crime. So the question really ought to be "What can we do as a society to reduce the number of people in prison?"

Prison for punishment is not rehabilitation

BBC News Prison don't work

I think as a society we need to get away from the old barbaric revenge seeking thinking, and try to be more problem solving with regard to the incarceration and imprisonment of people who commit crimes. Most of these people will eventually get out of jail and or prison even those who have committed rape and murder. Do you want someone like that to be far worse when they come out? I certainly don't. I want real rehabilitation. As far as people not hiring people with criminal records in the long run we do our society an injustice because we put these people in failing situations only to go back to what they know "a life of crime" because they cannot get real work with real substantial sustainable income to give them a life with dignity after having paid for their crimes.

[Sensia]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

The fact is, your son didn't break any laws and was not convicted of any crimes against the community at large: the same cannot be said for inmates. So why are they entitled to more space than your son? Inmates in solitary confinement are locked down for 22.5 hours per day. The rest of the inmate population enjoys library privileges, TV and day room privileges, etc., just like your son who committed no crimes.

It isn't just about the space. It is about having human interaction and having something to do, because mentally a human being will go mad and become even more unstable over time without something to keep the mind active. I don't want someone in a prison to be worse off mentally once they get out of prison because we didn't give them things to do, and give them "real rehabilitaion" and even psychiatric care and counseling needed to keep them stable and productive once they do get out of prison/jail. My son can leave his little cubby hole anytime he wants and get the space he needs, an inmate cannot.

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Point of fact. Sailors have smaller living spaces than inmates.

I have no idea whether this is true or not, but I am skeptical that "judges" have set standards for space for prisoners. My guess is that is done by a jail standards commission, which would be typically a part of the executive branch of government, and judges have simply said that those standards must be obeyed. But do you have a source for this claim that specifically says which judge set a standard independently?

[Sensia]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

I have no idea whether this is true or not, but I am skeptical that "judges" have set standards for space for prisoners. My guess is that is done by a jail standards commission, which would be typically a part of the executive branch of government, and judges have simply said that those standards must be obeyed. But do you have a source for this claim that specifically says which judge set a standard independently?

On U.S. Navy submarines, living quarters are called "berthing areas" that provide no more than 15 square feet of space per man for sleep and personal belongings. On most submarines, each crewman's bed (called a bunk, berth or rack) has a reading light, a ventilation duct, an earphone jack for the ship's audio entertainment system, and a curtain to provide a small (but welcome) measure of privacy. The crewmen store their clothing and personal belongings in a sturdy pan-like locker beneath their mattress. When a U.S. Navy submarine is at sea, lights in the berthing areas are normally dimmed. About one third of the crew is asleep at a time because submarines operate 24 hours a day. The crew works in shifts, normally six hours on, 12 hours off. Only the captain and executive officer of the submarine have private rooms, called staterooms, in which to work and sleep. Sometimes, there are more people onboard than there are regular bunks. When this happens, a few of the crewmen have to sleep in makeshift bunks in the torpedo room. These temporary bunks are fitted on storage racks where torpedoes and missiles are normally kept. Space is always very limited on submarines, and there are very few large or open spaces where people can make a bed.

Usmilitary/Navyfactssubs

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

I have no idea whether this is true or not, but I am skeptical that "judges" have set standards for space for prisoners. My guess is that is done by a jail standards commission, which would be typically a part of the executive branch of government, and judges have simply said that those standards must be obeyed. But do you have a source for this claim that specifically says which judge set a standard independently?

Small v. Hunt 1996

"One provision required the state to provide 50 square feet of living space per inmate in each dormitory by July 1, 1994."

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-4th-circuit/1361901.html

With subsequent rulings, the area required for prisoners by judicial mandate is somewhere between 35 to 50 square feet. (The "standard operating capacity" (SOC) didn't change, but prisons are now permitted to operate at a maximum 130% capacity).

Meanwhile, sailors on some smaller vessels have only about 15 square feet.

[I B Hankering]

Adding to what Guilty Pleasures posted, the crew assignments are primarily peacetime configurations. A full wartime crew on almost every navy vessle would require sailors to "hot bunk": meaning while one crew member was on duty, another crew member has rack time. Then they'd swap. Full, wartime crew complements have not been required since WWII.

[CuteOldGuy]

TTH and Guilty, we agree on the need for prison reform. It's insane. And Guilty, God bless your son for his service to our country.