Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California bans private prisons and immigration detention centers (2019)

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 130 posts

Re: California bans private prisons and immigration detention centers (2019)

#51

Post by openasocket »

bruceb wrote: post #31
avs733 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the solution is the people who wish to temporarily detain people should create systems that do so humanely...i.e., * without intentionally separating families as punishment * without freezing/starving/killing/forgetting people * without detaining the wrong people because of their skin color The fact that people want/feel a need to do this does not create a requirement for them to allow anyone to do in in as slapshod…

Its more complicated than one might think. People presenting themselves as families doesn't actual mean they are families. Do you house men and older boys with women and girls?

> People presenting themselves as families doesn't actual mean they are families.

While that does happen, it's not as common as people think it is. A common statistic cited (and you might be alluding to) that ICE has released is that 30% of asylum seekers are faking family relationships. But that's blatantly false. This statistic comes from a pilot program of running DNA tests on migrants that ICE conducted. What they leave out is it was a pilot program for suspected human traffickers. So it's not 30% of migrants that are human traffickers, it's 30% of suspected human traffickers are actually human traffickers.

Re: California bans private prisons and immigration detention centers (2019)

#52

Post by dragonwriter »

fennecfoxen wrote: post #16

I guess this is nice, but I think the question of "private prisons" can become a bit of a distraction. Maybe they make things worse, but they're not the root of our problems. Consider that California state prisons were trying to save money by illegally sterilizing inmates as recently as 2010. Here's a great headline to consider: "California Bans Sterilization of Female Inmates Without Consent". 2013. In the United St…

> I guess this is nice, but I think the question of "private prisons" can become a bit of a distraction.

Sure, it's neither the main problem nor the main area of recent reform, either in corrections specifically or law enforcement more generally, in California.

Re: California bans private prisons and immigration detention centers (2019)

#53

Post by flatline »

thebean11 wrote: post #20
fennecfoxen wrote: post #16

I guess this is nice, but I think the question of "private prisons" can become a bit of a distraction. Maybe they make things worse, but they're not the root of our problems. Consider that California state prisons were trying to save money by illegally sterilizing inmates as recently as 2010. Here's a great headline to consider: "California Bans Sterilization of Female Inmates Without Consent". 2013. In the United St…

I disagree, private prisons are a moral hazard by nature. Pointing out a separate failure by state prisons is a straw man I think.

The operator of the first private prison in the US came to speak at a class of mine back in the 90s. They provided a minimum-security facility in an old hotel in Denver. The owner was very sincere, they honestly believed that they could provide a better experience for the prisoners, and they did. The focus was actually on rehabilitation, they were able to relax a lot of the rules for good prisoners that state and federal facilities were not. Some inmates could go to school during the day or hold down a job. The owners could make $50-70/night per room operating as a hotel or $140/night as a prison. They made money and were able to provide better care than most government facilities. She was absolutely appalled at what the industry then developed into.

I don't think they are necessarily a moral hazard by nature - like charter schools, there is the possibility of having something good come from private industry, as well as things not so good. I don't know what the systemic obstacles are that need to be overcome, however. State and federal prisons did not used to be as much the over-crowded, brutal institutions they have become in the last 50 years, perhaps the problem is not so much with private prisons per se.

Re: California bans private prisons and immigration detention centers (2019)

#54

Post by enlyth »

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #22
dumbfounder wrote: post #3

@dang can you add 2019 to the title so people know this is an old article?

Emailing them at hn@ycombinator.com is a better way to get this done, as they see it faster and it avoids meta-conversations like this one lowering the signal-to-noise ratio of the comments.

But this way people know that this has already been requested and don't need to keep on spamming emails

Re: California bans private prisons and immigration detention centers (2019)

#55

Post by catalogia »

sdenton4 wrote: post #27
tathougies wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should also have standards like the European Union. And one of those standards should be that any country participating should not be run by warlords.

At risk of godwinning, by this logic the US should never have taken in all those Jewish scientists fleeing Nazi Germany... Or any of the many, many incredible Iranians I've known and worked with in my life. Often the best people are fleeing intolerable conditions. btw, the Open Borders graphic novel is fantastic: https://www.smbc-comics.com/openborders/

One could surmise that provisions for refugees would be an exception case augmenting a more general border policy. As is the case in the EU, I believe?

Re: California bans private prisons and immigration detention centers (2019)

#56

Post by dahfizz »

newacct583 wrote: post #49
eagsalazar2 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a straw man, it is fact. Parent post wasn't saying this was no big deal, just pointing out correctly that there are more fundamental issues in play - like qualified immunity and the cultural racist cancers we suffer from that demonize poor and brown people and fetishize the military and police. Private prisons are awful . Any sane ethical person must agree with that. But calling out that it isn't the root of…

A strawman argument can be true, but still be a strawman. The essential point is that it's a distraction. Saying "we have to fix state prisons too!" is not an argument against "private prisons are a moral hazard". We should do both!

NIT: I think you mean red herring. A red herring fallacy is misdirection with irrelevant information. A straw man is a type of red herring which specifically involves misrepresenting the original argument.

https://socratic.org/questions/what-is-the-difference-betwee...

Re: California bans private prisons and immigration detention centers (2019)

#57

Post by aj7 »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #46
ogre_codes wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Private prisons have a financial incentive to detain inmates for as long as possible. The prison has some input into when a detainee is released (good behavior, etc) and private prisons have been observed abusing this power. Private prisons also have incentives to find ways to cut costs and often do so in ways which harm detainees. Private prisons also have incentive to lobby for longer mandatory prison terms regardl…

It doesnt have to be. Why don't they do something like pay private prisons the bare minimum per diem but then offer a trailing commission for every year an ex-con is out of jail past a certain date. Do the statistics for average time to return to prison, and pay them a bonus every year a prisoner is over that average date for 10 years type thing. So jails make little money for the incarceration but earn profits from…

Because profits are maximized by the current practices.

Re: California bans private prisons and immigration detention centers (2019)

#58

Post by bluntfang »

adventured wrote: post #47
noworriesnate wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow that is awful. I didn't realize this was happening. Here's a link: https://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/california-bans... Also, to your point, private prisons only account for 8.41% of the prison population in the U.S. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_prison#United_States

During the 30-35 years of the rapid prison population expansion, private prisons represented an even smaller portion of the US prison population, closer to 2-3% averaged. Their expansion in market share has occurred at a time when the US prison population has been shrinking, but that's a wildly inconvenient fact. It was government prisons nearly all of those people were put into during the prime years of the massive…

>Their expansion in market share has occurred at a time when the US prison population has been shrinking, but that's a wildly inconvenient fact.

Are you making the claim that private prisons reduce total inmates? If not, this claim, truth or not, is irrelevant.

Re: California bans private prisons and immigration detention centers (2019)

#59

Post by undersuit »

dahfizz wrote: post #43
Shivetya wrote: post #30

This isn't about protecting prisoners or their rights, this is about protecting the jobs that the California Correctional Peace Officers Association controls and insuring no one else performs this task. Private prisons were forced into accepting CCPOA members but he union set forth in campaign after campaign to rid the state of private prisons. Back in May Newsom announced he was trying to reduce some of the in exces…

> The measure, which passed the California legislature last month, does not apply to privately owned prisons operated and staffed by the state corrections agency. It does seeem suspicious...

Is a "privately owned prison operated and staffed by the state corrections agency" just a rented building?

Re: California bans private prisons and immigration detention centers (2019)

#60

Post by jungletime »

Seems to me like increasing the use of house arrest is so much preferable to prison, for everyone involved. Just have it monitored properly. Maybe ankle bracelet, an GPS monitoring. With meal delivery, and health checkups, it could be cheaper too than housing someone in a prison. Have them take online classes and possibly let them work online to offset the costs of the monitoring. Or some sort of program to trade time served for working in nursing homes taking care of the elderly.
Post reply on HN