Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure — but you’re not in prison. The kinds of people in there are probably receiving smuggled goods or other illicit materials, not pleasant drawings from kids.
Like they can't get both? Who are you to decide that? Are you in prison since that was your qualifier to the GP?
NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions
21–30 of 410 posts
Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions
#22So prisons lost the phone revenue scam, and now moving onto mail scam?
That's not still ongoing?
Still insane, but better than the alternative.
Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions
#23Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hard disagree. If I were in prison, it would make a great difference to me to keep a drawing that my child sent me in my cell, vs. maybe being able to look at a bad scan of it. Plus, when would I actually get to see the scan?
Sure — but you’re not in prison. The kinds of people in there are probably receiving smuggled goods or other illicit materials, not pleasant drawings from kids.
Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hard disagree. If I were in prison, it would make a great difference to me to keep a drawing that my child sent me in my cell, vs. maybe being able to look at a bad scan of it. Plus, when would I actually get to see the scan?
Sure — but you’re not in prison. The kinds of people in there are probably receiving smuggled goods or other illicit materials, not pleasant drawings from kids.
Is there anything resembling evidence that the current system of incarceration selects the "kinds of people" to whom you refer, rather than arbitrarily from the population, weighted by money and melanin?
Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions
#26Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hard disagree. If I were in prison, it would make a great difference to me to keep a drawing that my child sent me in my cell, vs. maybe being able to look at a bad scan of it. Plus, when would I actually get to see the scan?
Sure — but you’re not in prison. The kinds of people in there are probably receiving smuggled goods or other illicit materials, not pleasant drawings from kids.
People in prison are not monsters. They're people.
I won't deny that illicit substances flowing into prisons is a problem. But painting all prisoners as smugglers who are incapable of receiving affection, love, or support is absurd.
Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure — but you’re not in prison. The kinds of people in there are probably receiving smuggled goods or other illicit materials, not pleasant drawings from kids.
What a ridiculous presumption. Is there anything resembling evidence that the current system of incarceration selects the "kinds of people" to whom you refer, rather than arbitrarily from the population, weighted by money and melanin?
Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions
#29I cannot imagine being a software dev for these projects. I'd rather work on a porn-site.
I mean, money, obviously, but if you can get paid to code porn you can get paid to code for a lot of other things too.
Edit: Ah, I didn't realize this was a safe space for perverts who hate women. Cool. Cool cool cool. Very cool.
Why am I even surprised?
Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions
#30Prisons are a racket, but physical mail is also an exploitable loophole for getting drugs into the system by sending paper laced with fentanyl. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/bronx-jail-officer-hosp...
Fentanyl. Does. Not. Work. Like. That.
Cops are having panic attacks, not fentanyl exposures - in most cases the described symptoms don't even match fentanyl's effects.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/13/magazine/police-fentanyl-...
> Last month, a 33-year-old clinical toxicologist and emergency-medicine pharmacist named Ryan Feldman co-published a case study about the time he accidentally spilled a mammoth dose of pure liquid fentanyl all over himself at work; he simply washed it off, with no adverse effects.
https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/fainting-fentanyl-...
> There are many such videos of police officers quickly showing overt symptoms or even collapsing after exposure to minute quantities of fentanyl - or even just possible fentanyl - and these are just not pharmacologically possible. Fentanyl is not absorbed through the skin like this. Yes, there are indeed fentanyl skin patches for hospital pain relief, but these are formulated with other agents to make the skin more permeable under the patch (as are all such skin-patch dosage forms). Think about it: you do not see opioid addicts rubbing small bits of fentanyl on the backs of their hands for a quick hit.