Let's talk about prison (again)

In the SST forum, users are free to discuss philosophy, music, art, religion, sock colour, whatever. It's a haven from the madness of Bulldrek; alternately intellectual and mundane, this is where the controversy takes place.
Post Reply
User avatar
Eva
Baron of the Crimson Assfro
Posts: 2961
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2002 7:21 am
Location: .nl

Let's talk about prison (again)

Post by Eva »

This article on BoingBoing (have I mentioned how much I love BB lately?) brought back memories of some of the conversations we've had with Paul about life in prison. Well, ok, I suppose it was mostly him talking and us going 'No f'ing way.'

One thing that disturbed me about the article was this:
Sexual abuse [...] makes correctional environments more dangerous for staff as well as prisoners, consumes scarce resources, and undermines rehabilitation. It also carries the potential to devastate the lives of victims.
Am I a commie-loving Euro hippie for thinking that's listing consequences in the wrong order?

Any thoughts on the subject, Paul? Any ideas on what could be done to counter it?
One time I built a matter transporter, but things got screwed up (long story, lol) and I ended up turning into a kind of half-human, half-housefly monstrosity.
User avatar
DV8
Evil Incarnate
Posts: 5986
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 6:49 am
Location: .nl
Contact:

Post by DV8 »

If it's that big of a problem, and it certainly seems like it is, you have to wonder if there isn't a borderline-eugenics type solution to keep inmates docile. Like a temporary chemical castration or something.
User avatar
AtemHutlrt
Bulldrekker
Posts: 327
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 11:27 pm
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Post by AtemHutlrt »

DV8 wrote:If it's that big of a problem, and it certainly seems like it is, you have to wonder if there isn't a borderline-eugenics type solution to keep inmates docile. Like a temporary chemical castration or something.
Oh, we've thought of that, but the commie-loving Euro hippies tend not to like the idea.
The sun shines in my bedroom
when you play;
and the rain it always starts
when you go away
User avatar
3278
No-Life Loser
Posts: 10224
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2002 8:51 pm

Post by 3278 »

DV8 wrote:If it's that big of a problem, and it certainly seems like it is, you have to wonder if there isn't a borderline-eugenics type solution to keep inmates docile. Like a temporary chemical castration or something.
Doesn't work. It's been used from time to time, but much like elsewhere, prison rape is often not sexual at all, but a means to dominance. Plus, most chemical solutions produce womanly characteristics in those taking them, which means the rape that is about sex is more likely to involve them.

This is all just from memory of Paul talking, so take it with a grain of salt until he shows up. Anyway, I completely agree with you that there's got to be some kind of solution to the problem, and I'd be willing to accept one that was morally questionable if only we could find one that was functionally acceptable.
User avatar
Serious Paul
Devil
Posts: 6644
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:38 pm

Post by Serious Paul »

I don't generally discuss work with people online anymore, but fuck it I'll take a chance. Post upcoming.
User avatar
Serious Paul
Devil
Posts: 6644
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:38 pm

Post by Serious Paul »

First keep in mind Prison and Jails are different place.This is important for a few reasons, we'll get to later.

Jails (Commonly refered to in much of the rest of the world as "Gaol"), as short term holding facilities offer far less services, have a higher turn over and in a lot of ways are much more dangerous places than Prisons. Jails are often processing centers, where they discover all sorts of things: whether an offender has had previous contact with the system, drug usage, medical conditions, religious preferences, dietary preferences, sexual preferences and or proclivities, gang involvement, educational levels, and much, much more.

All of this is documented, but not always accurately-some Jails are run by Cities or Counties who are having financial difficulties, others simply aren't prepared to deal with a certain level of offender. Some offenders also lie about a variety of things-from Gang Involvement, to Sexual preferences to Medical Conditions-for a variety of reasons.

Prisons are long term holding facilities. Many cite rehabilitation as a goal, however that's a rather recent development. Most American's forget that Prisons were originally called Penitentiary's. As in "Penitent", or a place to "regret" or "feel regret for sins or offenses". Most of the American Prison system was originally set up by the Quakers. Why do I bring this up? Well what is Rehabilitation? Is it when you never commit another crime? Is it when you function in society like everyone else? Well how do you codify that? What's an accurate measurement or standard?

While we know some of the factors that contribute to a person being incarcerated, the facts are there is no hard rule as to who will end up locked up.

So if Rehabilitation isn't a quantifiable element then you have to, as someone running a prison, figure out what is. What can you control? Staff safety, to a point. Programs, to a point. What resources you have available-most people hate to spend money on Jails and Prisons. In many of the largest states we spend more on Prisons and Jails than we do on schools and roads. Obviously that's not easy for everyone to swallow.

So many Prisons are trying to rehabilitate on a budget. This means many vital programs are vastly underfunded, understaffed, and to top it off many times there's not always enough programs to meet needs. Add in people hustling to get into programs to victimize people (For instance Homosexual Predators will try to get into GED programs with younger, more vulnerable convicts.), People refusing to cooperate with program. (You don't need a GED to sling dope. And McDonalds doesn't pay 3k a week.)

In the American prison system, and I think what I've read about Prison's globally Rape is far less about sex, and way more (Like 3278 mentioned) is about Power. Often Rape is about punishing people, or empowering people. (Mostly the Rapist, but often Gangs will use Predators to collect debts, punish violations, or to humiliate opponents.)

In my honest opinion Prison Homosexuals are a different breed than actual Homosexual in the world. Sex is less about love, and more about building alliances, dominance, buying or selling (Drugs or Store Goods), and power. Prison is a hierarchical society. There is, despite the best efforts of the authorities a "Head" (Leader) Black, White, and Hispanic convict. (In areas where other significant minorities congregate you'll get others as well, but those are the big three.) These convicts run things at their prisons, and report to other convicts who run things at other prisons, and even some who run things state wide. The real mess in this comes as Gangs are formed, and then exit prison and continue their activities. Soon the lines blur.

I suggest anyone who'd like to know more see shows like Gangland, and Lockdown. They do a great job of exploring the ins and outs of this stuff. Feel free to ask me questions if you'd like-this was way more cathartic than I thought it would be.
User avatar
Serious Paul
Devil
Posts: 6644
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:38 pm

Post by Serious Paul »

Oh, most Chemical "Solutions" (Are they really Solutions?) are illegal at best, at worse-like 3278 mentioned-they produce side effects that make the "Patient" (Victim? Offender?) more likely to be victimized. (Which may or may not be ironic, depending on how you feel about it.)

The Constitution, here, generally prohibits this sort of thing.
Crazy Elf
Footman of the Imperium
Posts: 3036
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 4:44 am
Location: Oz
Contact:

Post by Crazy Elf »

Paul, I can't remember if I've asked this before, and probably have, but would the legalisation of drugs keep the prisons much more manageable or not?
User avatar
Serious Paul
Devil
Posts: 6644
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:38 pm

Post by Serious Paul »

The vague and general answer is "overall yes".
User avatar
Serious Paul
Devil
Posts: 6644
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:38 pm

Post by Serious Paul »

I say overall because it's a hard thing to answer with any accuracy. I mean I think legalizing what a lot of people tend to refer to as "soft" drugs wouldn't lead to a lot of problems. (You'll always have a few idiots no matter what, so you don't plan-in my opinion-for the 10% but the other 90.) I even think some of the "harder" drugs could be legalized and regulated "effectively". But then opinions would certainly vary.
Crazy Elf
Footman of the Imperium
Posts: 3036
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 4:44 am
Location: Oz
Contact:

Post by Crazy Elf »

I just get the impression that a lot of people that are in prison are there for rather small crimes such as possession, and then they're thrown in the mix with hardened criminals which makes things pretty bad. Even if they survive they're going to be changed by the time they get out.

Is that true? Are the majority of people in prison there for relatively minor crimes?
User avatar
DV8
Evil Incarnate
Posts: 5986
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 6:49 am
Location: .nl
Contact:

Post by DV8 »

Doesn't Paul work at a supermax facility? I doubt that there are many people in there on a first, small offense.
User avatar
Serious Paul
Devil
Posts: 6644
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:38 pm

Post by Serious Paul »

No, most people (These days) don't make it to prison, regular prison, until they've committed several minor crimes or a few medium ones, or serious ones. So many states are so far in debt that they're doing whatever they can to keep people on the streets. You would be correct if you said most offenders were nonviolent offenders, but keep in mind the statistics only reflect what people actually get caught for. Not actual crime committed in society.

Out of time. More later, after work.
Crazy Elf
Footman of the Imperium
Posts: 3036
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 4:44 am
Location: Oz
Contact:

Post by Crazy Elf »

Okay, so roughly what portion of the prison population that you deal with, Paul, would be non-violent offenders? If you feel that they're people that were violent offenders but were charged for something else instead, say they're violent offenders. Just a rough estimate if you can.
User avatar
AtemHutlrt
Bulldrekker
Posts: 327
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 11:27 pm
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Post by AtemHutlrt »

Crazy Elf wrote:Okay, so roughly what portion of the prison population that you deal with, Paul, would be non-violent offenders?
In the segment of the population Paul deals with, I think a non-violent offender is one who stops stabbing after the first round of tear gas.
The sun shines in my bedroom
when you play;
and the rain it always starts
when you go away
User avatar
Serious Paul
Devil
Posts: 6644
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:38 pm

Post by Serious Paul »

Elf I work in a prison that is designed to house highly assaultive offenders who can not be safely managed elsewhere.

That said, I am currently on a large dosage of painkillers having been injured while breaking one of several fights we had today. So I'll post later okay? I'll be off for the next few days.
User avatar
Serious Paul
Devil
Posts: 6644
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:38 pm

Post by Serious Paul »

It's hard thing to quantify Elf. If by nonviolent we mean never committed a "violent" act, do we then include or disallow things like emotional violence? How about intellectual violence?

If we just stick to the rough definition of violent, I'd say there are more nonviolent offenders than violent ones, but that the number fluctuates. Most violent prisoners mellow out as they age, just like anyone else. Some never do. Others have aggravating circumstances that drive them to violence. (Medical problems, like wrong medications or psychological imbalances.)
User avatar
Eva
Baron of the Crimson Assfro
Posts: 2961
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2002 7:21 am
Location: .nl

Post by Eva »

Some of you may enjoy this blog: http://prisonproxy.blogspot.com/
One time I built a matter transporter, but things got screwed up (long story, lol) and I ended up turning into a kind of half-human, half-housefly monstrosity.
User avatar
Serious Paul
Devil
Posts: 6644
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:38 pm

Post by Serious Paul »

With out knowing a thing about the author I'd guess he was a "Tree Jumper", and after reading several pages of the Blog I can safely say I think he's full of shit, feels little if any remorse about his crime, and is highly likely to commit another offense if released.

I'm not saying everything posted there is wrong, or bullshit-but I can picture the several convicts who mail these letters out to be posted online. (I don't think it's one person.)

I've been wrong before though.
WillyGilligan
Wuffle Trainer
Posts: 1537
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 5:33 pm
Location: Hawai'i
Contact:

Post by WillyGilligan »

From NPR:

"The Obama administration is considering shifting detainees from the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay to locations in the U.S., including the military penitentiary at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., and a soon-to-be closed maximum-security prison in Standish, Mich. Standish City Manager Michael Moran says the response in his community has been overwhelmingly positive."
Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach, become critics. They also misapply overly niggling inerpretations of Logical Fallacies in place of arguing anything at all.
User avatar
Serious Paul
Devil
Posts: 6644
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:38 pm

Post by Serious Paul »

I'll comment on that later, but we've known that they've been discussing this since about April. California also wants that space, so I'm not sure who will win out.
User avatar
Salvation122
Grand Marshall of the Imperium
Posts: 3776
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Memphis, TN

Post by Salvation122 »

That's sort of what Leavenworth is for, isn't it?
Image
User avatar
paladin2019
Bulldrek Pimp
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 10:24 am
Location: Undisclosed locations in Southwest Asia

Post by paladin2019 »

Salvation122 wrote:That's sort of what Leavenworth is for, isn't it?
(Assuming we are referring only to the Disciplinary Barracks) Well, no. It's to billet those military personnel whose lack of discipline rises to the level of felonies. And assuming they still have some measure of loyalty to the USA, and more than a few inmates are there due to their overzealous pursuit of the same, it seems the Disciplinary Barracks would be about as safe a place as gen pop for that guy who killed Dimebag Darrell.

If you want a secure facility, there's always that place in Idaho that built the supermax and has noone to put there. If you escape and the cold doesn't kill you, the bears probably will. And if it's not the bears, there are some "upstanding citizens" who'll be on the lookout for anyone who doesn't look like them.

But the biggest issue is this unlawful combatant nonsense. Either these individuals are criminals or soldiers. You don't get to have it both ways.
-call me Andy, dammit
User avatar
Serious Paul
Devil
Posts: 6644
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:38 pm

Post by Serious Paul »

Salvation122 wrote:That's sort of what Leavenworth is for, isn't it?
Obviously that's debatable. :)
paladin2019 wrote:If you want a secure facility, there's always that place in Idaho that built the supermax and has noone to put there. If you escape and the cold doesn't kill you, the bears probably will. And if it's not the bears, there are some "upstanding citizens" who'll be on the lookout for anyone who doesn't look like them.
You do realize, I humorously point out, that also pretty much describes Standish Max right? They're close enough to the UP to count as Yoopers in my book, and trust me when I say they're pretty tough on any prisoner.

I'm not sure how Idaho stands on this front, but the Michigan Department of Corrections has extensive dealings with Islamic culture, from how to implement and maintain a Ramadan program, to services, to a variety of other issues. Which I imagine sweetens the deal. Given the economic crisis, obviously that's another-admittedly political-selling point. Because closing Standish would pretty much decimate the local economy.
But the biggest issue is this unlawful combatant nonsense. Either these individuals are criminals or soldiers. You don't get to have it both ways.
I'm less concerned about this-it's a classification issue, that will vary from prisoner to prisoner; and much more interested in how the Michigan Court system (Federal and State, District and Regional) compares to say the District Federal Courts in Idaho, or elsewhere. I've always heard we've got a pretty liberal set of Judges around here. I'm not sure what District Standish resides in, but I'd be real interested in that sort of thing.

Physical Plant wise Standish has a decently modern lay out, everything it needs to hold high profile Management risks, and Assaultive offenders. Add in that the staff wouldn't need much, if any retraining and I can see why it's an attractive idea.
User avatar
Marius
Freeman of the Crimson Assfro
Posts: 2345
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 3:35 pm
Location: Upinya

Post by Marius »

Either these individuals are criminals or soldiers. You don't get to have it both ways.
I think, rather, that they're trying to have it neither way.
There is then a need to guard against a temptation to overstate the economic evils of our own age, and to ignore the existence of similar, or worse, evils in earlier ages. Even though some exaggeration may, for the time, stimulate others, as well as ourselves, to a more intense resolve that the present evils should no longer exist, but it is not less wrong and generally it is much more foolish to palter with truth for good than for a selfish cause. The pessimistic descriptions of our own age, combined with the romantic exaggeration of the happiness of past ages must tend to setting aside the methods of progress, the work of which, if slow, is yet solid, and lead to the hasty adoption of others of greater promise, but which resemble the potent medicines of a charlatan, and while quickly effecting a little good sow the seeds of widespread and lasting decay. This impatient insincerity is an evil only less great than the moral torpor which can endure, that we with our modern resources and knowledge should look contentedly at the continued destruction of all that is worth having. There is an evil and an extreme impatience as well as an extreme patience with social ills.
User avatar
Serious Paul
Devil
Posts: 6644
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:38 pm

Post by Serious Paul »

Couldn't it also be both ways? Or am I misunderstanding things? Couldn't you be a soldier who commits criminal acts? Isn't that the purpose of the Uniform Code of Military Justice? To address violations of both civilian and Military law, code and regulations?
User avatar
paladin2019
Bulldrek Pimp
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 10:24 am
Location: Undisclosed locations in Southwest Asia

Post by paladin2019 »

Serious Paul wrote:Couldn't it also be both ways? Or am I misunderstanding things? Couldn't you be a soldier who commits criminal acts? Isn't that the purpose of the Uniform Code of Military Justice? To address violations of both civilian and Military law, code and regulations?
Not the same thing. The point of the various treaties defining the laws of war explicitly state that soldiering itself isn't a criminal act. The unlawful combatant designation (which didn't exist prior to the previous administration) is an attempt to circumvent this.

Of course, the Anglo-American approach to terrorism in general is a bit schizophrenic. Where the rest of the EU's primary CT forces (GSG-9, GIGN, etc) are elements of national polices agencies, the British SAS and US "Delta Force" are military units. While treating terrorist/terrorism as a military matter has definite advantages, the liberties this allows undermines legal proceedings at the very core: If terrorists are pursued as if they are soldiers (ie, they are treated as soldiers thus giving them that de facto status), then their central activity is a military action and thus not a crime.

If other crimes are carried out in pursuit of this, such as drug traficking or violations of other laws of war, then yes, that is criminal activity. But the central activity (bombings, assassinations, even a case for weapons and some medicinal drug trafficking can be made) is legal.

By the same token, if terrorists are effectively soldiers, then no warrants are necessary for searches, wiretaps, arrests, etc, no judicial mandate is needed to kill them (unless they surrender), the gloves basically come off. But you must accept that there is only limited set of their actions that can be prosecuted. The rank and file can likely only be incarcerated "until the end of hostilities" and only because they are the enemy, not because the have committed any criminal act.
-call me Andy, dammit
User avatar
Marius
Freeman of the Crimson Assfro
Posts: 2345
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 3:35 pm
Location: Upinya

Post by Marius »

One might make the assertion, rather defensible I think, that Soldier of Legitimate Military Action and Criminal are not exhaustive categories. I don't think it matters whether one agrees with the (rather vague) practical definition of, or the interesting recent uses of the designation of "unlawful combatant." Either way, I think you'll have a hard time arguing that 'soldier' and 'criminal' are the only possible categories.
There is then a need to guard against a temptation to overstate the economic evils of our own age, and to ignore the existence of similar, or worse, evils in earlier ages. Even though some exaggeration may, for the time, stimulate others, as well as ourselves, to a more intense resolve that the present evils should no longer exist, but it is not less wrong and generally it is much more foolish to palter with truth for good than for a selfish cause. The pessimistic descriptions of our own age, combined with the romantic exaggeration of the happiness of past ages must tend to setting aside the methods of progress, the work of which, if slow, is yet solid, and lead to the hasty adoption of others of greater promise, but which resemble the potent medicines of a charlatan, and while quickly effecting a little good sow the seeds of widespread and lasting decay. This impatient insincerity is an evil only less great than the moral torpor which can endure, that we with our modern resources and knowledge should look contentedly at the continued destruction of all that is worth having. There is an evil and an extreme impatience as well as an extreme patience with social ills.
Post Reply