101–110 of 410 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Corrections officers are sworn officers in many (all?) states. Typically under an elected sheriff at the county level.
There is a pretty huge difference between corrections officers working for the department of corrections and police officers working for the police department.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Corrections officers are sworn officers in many (all?) states. Typically under an elected sheriff at the county level.
There is a pretty huge difference between corrections officers working for the department of corrections and police officers working for the police department.
Instead of visiting those people, they harass a child and parents for something that's legal. The child has nightmare of police shooting them.
This isn't because of misunderstanding, but because the nature of these systems and the sick sm cultures involved. Not talking about it persists it.
Trying to keep conversations strictly on-topic is a form of putting on blinders. It's also a neurotypical conversation style.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article is about prison mail. It has nothing to do with police officers and does not mention the "government monopoly on violence."
The OP is talking about why these kinds of things exist.
No they are not:
>jails are powerful in all the wrong ways. . . . This is what corrupted power looks like. . . . Police departments are often the same.
The article talks about prisons scanning mail. The OP then says that prisons are corrupt, then throws in that by the way, police departments are too.
OP's opinion about police department corruption has nothing to do with the article about prison mail.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why work for either? 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?
What's wrong with pornography?
Hmmm, this one seems Ok / good idea? The bad part is jails that try to replace in person visits with paid video calls. Besides obvious humanitarian part, preserving inmates ties to family and community is obviously important for eventual reintegration and for reducing offense rates of inmate's children. But here? A letter is a letter and free individuals don't get much physical mail anymore. There are obvious angles…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel sad after reading this comment. People in prison are still people. Many of them have committed crimes against society; some are imprisoned unjustly; all are deserving of human dignity and love. People in prison have families, children, loved ones, and it's an undeniable fact that strong social support networks reduce recidivism. People in prison are not monsters. They're people. I won't deny that illicit subst…
> Many of them have committed crimes against society […] all are deserving of human dignity and love If someone deprived another of dignity via a crime (say, via sexual assault or murder), why should that person be deserving of any dignity themselves?
Earlier 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.
At some point, they are human, and if you've ever spent any time even volunteering around the "system" you would begin to understand exactly how wrong, and how utterly heartless this kind of thinking is. How we treat the helpless defines our humanity.
It’s too bad about the privatization corruption potential, because banning physical mail seems like a good idea overall in this case.
I feel like the prison system is the victim of perverse incentives. The goal given to them is "house this person securely for a specific length of time at the lowest cost possible ". They are rewarded for cutting costs. But the total cost we pay is the cost to imprison this person the second and third time when they re-offend. It's the policing costs when they're homeless because they can't find housing or get a job.…
"The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution abolished slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime. "
My brother in law was released recently from 12+ years of incarceration in the federal system. His crime was armed robbery, first offense, no one was injured, and he profited a grand total of $35,000.
He spent 12 years doing slave labor for a $1.25 while being charged absorbent fees to make phone calls, send emails (something like $5 for 10 minutes), and purchase the daily necessities like deodorant and medicine. After 12 years, he still owes reparation where even if he was paid a bare minimum wage he could have easily repaid his debt to society.
The US has the largest number of incarnated adults in the developed world because our government and capitalism demands it be so. We are a society whose engine has always been driven by slave labor. Until I was exposed to it in this manner, I would have been a "who cares do the crime pay the price" but that price extends so far, impacts everyone in a prisoners family even if they did no crime, and sets them up for failure when reentering the world.
None of it is accidental, all the way down to stubborn insistence on impeding criminal reform around drugs and petty crime to the prison industrial complex being the single biggest contributor to anti-pot reform pacs and advertising.
Companies make billions over charging and exploiting convicts in every conceivable way right down to sheriffs feeding them trash and keeping the delta in the food budget to buy themselves homes and luxuries.