Dude this is great news. Keeping people in prison should never be a for-profit initiative.
California bans private prisons
101–110 of 646 posts
Re: California bans private prisons
#102>Two of Ice’s largest immigrant detention centers in California Can somebody explain to a legal immigrant why The Guardian keeps omitting the illegal part over twelve times throughout the article?
Many immigrants (especially those from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras) in ICE detention facilities presented themselves at the border and legally requested asylum. For more information on "northern triangle" and why these immigrants are fleeing their homeland, read https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/central-americas-violent-no... This is an ongoing and growing challenge for our immigration system. In FY 2017, as…
The article makes no mention of asylum seekers. This is pure speculation on your part.
Re: California bans private prisons
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
1) Because they're not necessarily all illegal immigrants. AFAIU, ICE puts asylum seekers who are otherwise following the letter of the law into these detention centers--show up at the border, request asylum, get put into detention while awaiting disposition of your case. 2) Are you an illegal driver for driving over the speed limit? Illegal usually implies something criminal. Crossing the border illegally is a misde…
I am referring to the terminology used by the department of homeland security [1] and other legal institutions that oversee their cases. If they are predominantly asylum seekers, then why not refer to them as asylum seekers? >Illegal usually implies something criminal. No, illegality does not usually imply something criminal. These are two different concept that have precise definitions in court. Nor does your "usual…
But not all people are using legal terms. Nobody who objects to the phrase "illegal immigration" disputes the fact that illegal immigration and illegal immigrants exist as a technical matter. There's no 8 USC § 1325 truther movement. They're very up front about their reasons for objecting to the use of the phrase, and while perhaps extreme you can draw analogies to colloquial distinctions we've always made regarding terms like "criminal".
If you find the language games obnoxious, so be it. I wouldn't dispute that sentiment because I can understand it, I just don't openly espouse it because I personally also find it a little obnoxious to be rancorous with people who are clearly just trying to be empathetic.
Re: California bans private prisons
#104I would recommend you do some research on this topic. Your giving talking points produced by mainstream talking heads. When in fact, research points to private prisons being better at dropping incarceration rates through the programs offered at them. Therefore increasing ones chance at correct rehabilitation. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249718665_A_Compara...
You have already quoted this research in another thread and someone had already replied to you it was done in 1991 and only had 200 samples in it.
Re: California bans private prisons
#105I'm so happy about this. Private prisons are the scum of the earth. They're totally antithetical to a free society that values human life. They often lobby for minimum occupancy levels in law (effectively requiring by law a certain percentage of citizens to be marked as criminals). Any profit they skim off the top is money that should be spent rehabilitating criminals and making them functional members of society. Ne…
Interesting Wikipedia page. Seems almost 20% of Australian prisoners are in private prisons! And 15-20% in the UK.
Obviously this is not a uniquely US issue another countries are expanding their use.
Re: California bans private prisons
#106I would recommend you do some research on this topic. Your giving talking points produced by mainstream talking heads. When in fact, research points to private prisons being better at dropping incarceration rates through the programs offered at them. Therefore increasing ones chance at correct rehabilitation. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249718665_A_Compara...
I'm sorry does it? that's not what the paper says at all
"Those released from private prisons who reoffended committed less serious subsequent offenses than did their public prison counterparts. The two groups were similar in how long it took for rearrest or for the first recidivism event to occur"
Re: California bans private prisons
#107Good riddance. The whole premise of private, for-profit, prisons has always seemed deeply troubling to me. The focus of a healthy prison system should be to rehabilitate people and help them turn their lives around so that they contribute positively to society. That can take years of hard work by the individual, and require assistance from professionals (therapists, teachers, ...). A for-profit company by definition…
The purpose of imprisonment is to punish criminals by depriving them of their liberty. As a side-effect, society benefits because a criminal has been forcibly removed from visiting further misery on law-abiding people.
Imprisonment is and should be a deterrent punishment - it is not a support group.
One can both be in favor of abolishing for-profit prisons and also in favor of severe deterrent sentences for law-breakers. Profiteering private corporations naturally seek to maximise the number of prisoners in their facilities, because they are paid per inmate - so they have every incentive to ensure future "custom". This motive naturally conflicts with deterrent imprisonment - the whole idea is to forcibly prevent criminals from breaking the law again.
Re: California bans private prisons
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
Has the legality of their immigration been determined at that point? Or is the detention center used to hold them until that has been determined? Regardless, the statement as written is accurate. How many modifiers are necessary?
>Has the legality of their immigration been determined at that point? By that logic, how do you even know they're immigrants to begin with, then? All it takes is flashing your visa or any documentation proving your status which you are required to carry at all times, just like I am. You were not expecting bartenders to give you a free pass in your teenage because you left your ID at home, did you? >Regardless, the st…
>By that logic, how do you even know they're immigrants to begin with, then? All it takes it flashing your visa or any documentation that you are required to carry at all times, just like I am. You were not expecting bartenders to give you a free pass in your teenage because you left your ID at home, did you?
ICE actually has detained citizens in the past - https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/07/23/francisco-e...
I'm a citizen and I don't usually have my passport on me. If someone asked me to show that I was a citizen, I would have no way to prove it to them.
Re: California bans private prisons
#109I think private prisons could work if:
- Convicts could choose whether to be sent to a public or private prison.
- Private prisons had financial incentives for post-incarceration behavior. Eg: If their prisoner recidivism rate after 3 years was 10% lower than the average public prison, they would get a 20% bonus.
Those changes would create enough competition and align incentives such that we could see some real innovation in the criminal justice system. Sadly, I don't think these sorts of experiments will ever be tried. If someone ever proposes such a system, they'll be branded a supporter of "private prisons".
Re: California bans private prisons
#110Great job CA legislators. Prisons for profit were an abomination. Good riddance.