The Deadly Consequences of Solitary with a Cellmate • Hacker News Board

Re: The Deadly Consequences of Solitary with a Cellmate

#101

Post by tyingq » Sat, Mar 26, 2016, 3:10 PM UTC

brownbat wrote: post #39

mirimir wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This! It's plainly the Drug War that's filled prisons. Sorry about your friend :(

Well, prison populations are actually really complicated. There's a good piece at The Marshall Project discussing this, with an interesting interactive that illustrates how difficult it would be to dramatically reduce the prison population by only focusing on nonviolent drug offenders: https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/03/04/how-to-cut-the... The drug war was a massive overreach. It's not 100% of the overcrowde…

A fair amount of the overcrowding is also driven by sentence length. Things like "three strikes" and "enhanced charges" drive sentence lengths in the US that don't match up with any other civilized nation.

Re: The Deadly Consequences of Solitary with a Cellmate

#102

Post by tyingq » Sat, Mar 26, 2016, 3:12 PM UTC

oh_sigh wrote: post #88

aristidb wrote: post #82

One quote stuck with me: “But it’s a tough place to do time. People that say cons have it easy, they ain’t never been in Menard.” Not an American, but between saying that cons have it easy and the fact of mass incarceration in the first place, it seems that there's a certain mercilessness in American culture.

Who exactly says cons have it easy? I've never heard that one before.

Google for something like: why do we treat prisoners better than

Lots of results, most highly misinformed. People imagine that most/all prisoners get 3 meals a day, television, etc. Not true.

Re: The Deadly Consequences of Solitary with a Cellmate

#103

Post by Rapzid » Sat, Mar 26, 2016, 3:14 PM UTC

justin_vanw wrote: post #81

I don't buy the thesis here that 'solitary confinement' is the reason this happened. These guys were both murderers before (including when they were free in the world and totally unconfined) and seemed unbothered by the thought of killing each other. These guys are exceptionally aggressive and with major psychological issues on top. They are going to kill over and over unless they change (not likely) or we simply nev…

I don't like the title much either. They weren't actually in solitary confinement anyway. It was just a small cell.

Re: The Deadly Consequences of Solitary with a Cellmate

#104

Post by MajorLOL » Sat, Mar 26, 2016, 3:31 PM UTC

lkbm wrote: post #89

rtpg wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that we should have less people in prison. In order to be lucid about the situation though, it's important to realise that a very large part of the prison population is in there for violent offences. Even knowing this, I still believe we should be reducing sentences (I have a hard time justifying putting anyone in a cage for 15 years as a punishment...) but there probably needs to be some alternative things g…

To put some numbers on the part of the prison population there for violent offenses: * Bureau of Justice Statistics says 53% of state prsionsers and 7% (what?!) of federal prisoners (2014): http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p14_Summary.pdf * Federal Bureau of Prisons says 46.5% drug offences (no specification on violent v. non-violent) and 9.2% immigration as the third largest group. Second largest is more violent s…

Heres something to consider;

Drawing such a sharp distinction between violent and non violent crimes omits many real-world factors.

What kind of criminal is this person is different from what was this criminal convicted of. I can be a part time drug dealer, shooting rival gang members, robbing houses and pimping whores. But land myself in prison for 10 years due to my 6th possession charge. If you draw a hard distinction statistically, I fall into the 'I can't believe we imprison people for having a little pot'

Additionally, what is a non-violent crime? Looks like good chunk of prison inmates are property crimes, larceny, burglars, thief. What percentage do you suspect of these non-violent offenders were armed during the commission of their crimes? What percentage would have turned violent if confronted during their crime? I suspect that these people who steal your car, break into your home and business and steal your things are effectively violent offenders.

Re: The Deadly Consequences of Solitary with a Cellmate

#105

Post by Dylan16807 » Sat, Mar 26, 2016, 3:33 PM UTC

brianwawok wrote: post #97

Dylan16807 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thousands of them? And they'd all have to get longer sentences than you? Not going to work.

How about shifts? Prison holds 1000? Make a gang of 4000. You can each serve a week a month to criminalize with impunity.

Fines, community service, probation, a possible rule for minimum months served, the off chance that the system isn't run by idiots and they spread out the load with other prisons, the other off chance of judges not being idiots and giving a non-minimal sentence to someone that has no remorse.

Also 'Make a gang of 4000', sure...

Re: The Deadly Consequences of Solitary with a Cellmate

#106

Post by joesmo » Sat, Mar 26, 2016, 3:35 PM UTC

llamataboot wrote: post #17

joesmo wrote: post #14

I don't understand why our society thinks its ok to treat people this way just because they've been convicted of a crime. Being removed from society and put in jail IS the punishment. Why does society suddenly see these people as no longer human, trash that can be dealt with any way, packed like sardines, left helpless to be raped and murdered? Yes, some of these people have done unspeakable things, but they are bein…

I agree with this, but arguably jail itself is an unreasonable punishment for many/most crimes, especially under the guise of rehabilitation, which it absolutely isn't designed for. Many countries have figured out how to balance public safety, restitution/punishment, and rehabilitation in ways that are empirically more effective on all fronts than the US good-ole-boy culture of "lock em up and let God sort em out". T…

Of course. Putting non-violent offenders in jail doesn't even make sense when you have options like house arrest, especially jailing them before trial. I agree though, the US has an extremely cruel culture that's always, since before its creation, been based on oppression and enslavement, and it really shows up in the way it treats its citizens and others throughout the world.

Re: The Deadly Consequences of Solitary with a Cellmate

#107

Post by nommm-nommm » Sat, Mar 26, 2016, 3:39 PM UTC

trhway wrote: post #59

justicezyx wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm, I guess I am too much a CS people. When I say "animal", I mean human as a kind of "animal". In terms of people killing people, that is a reflection of the "animal" side of human. Thus I use "animal". If you think I mean they are "animal", and I am not "animal"; and I am better then them. Sorry, I do not possess that prejudice. My question simply is: How we treat the "animal", which are people showing high-degree…

i wonder why "animal" surfaced here at all. Animals kill for food or self-defense, it isn't a voluntary act, it is what they have to do. Killing for other reasons, voluntary killings, murders - it is all almost exclusively human trait. In particular, animals don't do murders, it is human invention.

Cats kill for fun.

Re: The Deadly Consequences of Solitary with a Cellmate

#108

Post by anexprogrammer » Sat, Mar 26, 2016, 3:44 PM UTC

justicezyx wrote: post #30

whiddershins wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All humans are capable of horrific acts. It is a part of our humanity, we are apex predators who organize socially. The evolved algorithm in our brain that manages that dissonance is extremely complex and will necessarily fail at times. We can't tolerate or condone antisocial behavior, but it is a mistake to feel safe in the thought "we" are better than "them." We are they, they are we.

Hmm, I guess I am too much a CS people. When I say "animal", I mean human as a kind of "animal". In terms of people killing people, that is a reflection of the "animal" side of human. Thus I use "animal". If you think I mean they are "animal", and I am not "animal"; and I am better then them. Sorry, I do not possess that prejudice. My question simply is: How we treat the "animal", which are people showing high-degree…

Everyone has a breaking point. I repeat, everyone.

Most murders are unplanned and unrepeatable - the wife who snaps after years of neglect or emotional abuse. The husband who kills his 90 year old wife, of 70 years, in the old people's home. The argument between lifelong friends and an unlucky punch. (All cases I recall hearing in the news in the last few months).

Apart from anything else it's very unlikely they'll ever kill again. It's probable few, if any, of them expected to ever kill... Until they did.

They need rehabilitation, perhaps anger management or support, before they become unemployed, unemployable and institutionalised in a brutal prison system.

The pre-mediated murder or mass shooting are somewhat different as they required thought, perhaps much planning.

Of course they need imprisonment, but equally need rehabilitation, perhaps education, perhaps mental health issues, perhaps anger management.

The simple fact is prison, in and of itself, does not work. Other than as training at being a better criminal. In the US prison system I suspect it trains you to solve far more of your problems with violence - not fewer.

It might not be fashionable to suggest therapy, treatment, rehabilitation and education. It costs money after all. To not offer those, as a matter of course, is helping create lifelong criminals.

Of course there will be recidivism after rehabilitation. Mistakes too. How many people who leave prison now go on to commit more crimes? Most of them.

Re: The Deadly Consequences of Solitary with a Cellmate

#109

Post by Retra » Sat, Mar 26, 2016, 3:53 PM UTC

justicezyx wrote: post #32

rbobby wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably start by not calling them an animal? Dehumanizing someone is probably step 1 on the road mistreating them.

No, by "animal" I mean human as "animal". Not they are animal and I am not. We are animal. And some of us has more "animal" side of behavior. That's it. Please do not misrepresent my statement...

If you mean "human as animal", then _all_ human behavior is animal behavior. Saying "some of us have more animal behavior" is really more of an indicator that you think they are more animal than you, despite both being human.

Your statement is dehumanizing. If you don't want it to be interpreted as such, then make better statements.

Re: The Deadly Consequences of Solitary with a Cellmate

#110

Post by gnaritas » Sat, Mar 26, 2016, 4:31 PM UTC

omegaham wrote: post #98

gnaritas wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a simple solution to that, set people free. We don't need to build more prisons, we already imprison more of our population than any other country in the world, we have too many prisons and too many people in them. We need to imprison less people. Release all inmates who committed victim-less crimes, if more room is needed, release all inmates who committed non violent crimes-there are better ways to deal wit…

According to this site[1], felons incarcerated for drugs comprise 16% of the total prison population. 64.8% are incarcerated for violent offenses and property crimes, both of which have victims. The most interesting part, to me, is the "public-order" criminals. When my girlfriend worked corrections, she noted that at the state level, the vast majority of prisoners were in for violent crimes - rape, robbery, murder, a…

> "Is this state of affairs, where a large portion of the population is incarcerated for vice, preferable to a state of affairs where vice is openly permitted?"

That's a good question, but it's still the wrong question. The right question is who owns my body, me or the government? Drugs should be legal not because it results in a better society, but because it in results a free society where a person can't be jailed for what he does to himself.