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

NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 410 posts

Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions

#381

Post by dsfyu404ed »

indymike wrote: post #370
dsfyu404ed wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WellYesButActuallyNo.jpeg The majority of jails in the US are run by county sheriffs or local law enforcement. The majority of prisons are run by the states.

That's like saying software is written in C vs Java. It's still software.

Jails are for very short sentences and short term pre-trial incarceration. This can lead to some really dumb "X% of people in jail Y" type states that sound outrageous until you realize that X is drawn from a very specific subset of the incarcerated population.

Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions

#382

Post by concordDance »

ok_dad wrote: post #316
concordDance wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has the effect of discouraging people from working. So the question becomes how many are left who would be willing to work? And would we need a 80% tax rate on all transactions between people to fund it? And would that be a really bad idea?

> This has the effect of discouraging people from working. Does it? I don't know that we can say it will, for sure. You're just assuming people are lazy, probably. Maybe it will discourage people from doing bullshit jobs and working on shitty advertising crapola, and instead we will have another human renaissance period of amazing things. Everyone I know, even those who aren't college educated and on the track to suc…

The ones I've talked to have said they'd probably watch TV, hang out with friends or play video games.

Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions

#383

Post by dns_snek »

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #187
_trampeltier wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Germany are about 1/3 people in prison because they used a train or bus without ticket. If you can't pay you will end up in prison. Imagine how much money this does cost.

> In Germany are about 1/3 people in prison because they used a train or bus without ticket. I think this could be read two ways: > In Germany, 1/3 of the total population is in prison because they used a train or bus without a ticket. > In Germany, 1/3 of the total prison population is there because they used a train or bus without a ticket. I suspect you mean the second, just noting that it could be misunderstood.…

It's ambiguous but first interpretation can be ruled out immediately because it can't possibly be true.

Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions

#384

Post by JamesBarney »

Spivak wrote: post #364
JamesBarney wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

State prisons are 60% violent offences. Robbery, assault, rape, and murder. Another ~8% are burglaries which have a high likelihood of leading to violence.

Well let the other 40% out and then we can start looking at the 60%. This kind of thinking makes no sense in a world where prison sentences are finite. If you think being arrested for a “violent” offense means you are such a danger to others you have to be physically separated from society then you might as well make all prison sentences for life. “But people can reform” — Great then let them out the moment that happ…

> The thing I care about when it comes to “violent” offenses isn’t what they did but why. If I had an oracle that could see into their soul and know with certainty they would never reoffend I wouldn’t even bother locking them up at all.

Business man built a giant company and is about to get divorced. Wife is about to get half of everything because he got married before he had any success. He likes her to keep it.

Highly situational murder, zero risk to reoffend. You're saying because he had a zero recidivism rate we shouldn't jail him?

Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions

#385

Post by hungryforcodes »

giraffe_lady wrote: post #240
hungryforcodes wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every online site is an echo chamber. Why are you here?

Why would participating preclude criticism? Does anything else work like that?

True, but useful criticism. The OP's point was just patently obvious -- for any social media site.

Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions

#386

Post by Spivak »

JamesBarney wrote: post #384
Spivak wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well let the other 40% out and then we can start looking at the 60%. This kind of thinking makes no sense in a world where prison sentences are finite. If you think being arrested for a “violent” offense means you are such a danger to others you have to be physically separated from society then you might as well make all prison sentences for life. “But people can reform” — Great then let them out the moment that happ…

> The thing I care about when it comes to “violent” offenses isn’t what they did but why. If I had an oracle that could see into their soul and know with certainty they would never reoffend I wouldn’t even bother locking them up at all. Business man built a giant company and is about to get divorced. Wife is about to get half of everything because he got married before he had any success. He likes her to keep it. Hig…

Definitely, what is even the point of jailing him? You want him jailed as punishment not for anyone’s actual safety. To me that is exceedingly cruel and a waste of a human life. We can do better than that.

- Instead of losing half his money he now loses 75% of it.

- Instead of alimony 40% of his earnings and appreciation of assets are garnished.

All the money gets split between the wife’s family and a charity that financially supports the victims of violent crime.

- He loses all stake in the company he built and can’t hold any position in the company or a position the company contracts with. All his shares get returned to the company itself like a buyback (that he doesn’t benefit from).

- He is not allowed to remarry.

- He will get tattooed with a symbol people will recognize as a domestic abuser on his pelvis. It won’t show in normal circumstances but any intimate partner will know and he’ll have to explain it for the rest of his life.

If that’s not punishment enough for you then come up with your own scheme. Just so long as it’s not torture and he can continue living a semi-normal life among the rest of society since he’s not actually a danger to anyone.

Bet our hypothetical homeboy will regret his murder a million times more than sitting in a luxury prison for rich people while his stocks appreciate.

Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions

#387

Post by SideQuark »

autoexec wrote: post #376
SideQuark wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The data above had Norway at 20% at 2 years, so it would be surprising to still be 20% at 5 years. They're also low population, and quite wealthy from the giant oil fields national income. If you broke the 330 million in the US into 5 million sized chunks, you likely find well performing outliers like Norway too. That's the problem when assuming a small thing should scale.

> The data above had Norway at 20% at 2 years, so it would be surprising to still be 20% at 5 years. This article puts it at 25% ( https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-48885846 ) which admittedly isn't 20, but isn't far off. Wikipedia has it at 20% after 5 years using 2016 data, but I haven't checked their sources on that ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_Norway )

The article is a quote from someone talking offhand who is not a researcher.

The wiki claim has three sources listed, none of which state the claim. The first claims 20%, no timeframe (so may well be the same 2 year value stated lots of places), the second sources the 20% in 2 years and a report (which looks to be a decent study, but does not have any claim of 25% at 5 years), and the third again has the 20% at 2 years with a linked report (the report also has that data).

Not one is a very good source, and if the person speaking for an interview were right, you'd think that data would appear all the times the 20% at 2 appears.

Given that, and that the data I cited was from a careful study [1] including lots of research from many countries (including the 20% at 2 years results from Norway), I tend to think the 25% is more or less made up wishful thinking. If it were defensible, it would be cited in other studies that aggregate all this data.

When you find something online, try to determine it's original source. Someone simply saying something is not generally true unless it's from a reputable place that actually measured it.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6743246/pdf/wel...

Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions

#388

Post by ok_dad »

concordDance wrote: post #382
ok_dad wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This has the effect of discouraging people from working. Does it? I don't know that we can say it will, for sure. You're just assuming people are lazy, probably. Maybe it will discourage people from doing bullshit jobs and working on shitty advertising crapola, and instead we will have another human renaissance period of amazing things. Everyone I know, even those who aren't college educated and on the track to suc…

The ones I've talked to have said they'd probably watch TV, hang out with friends or play video games.

People say a lot of things. I constantly say I hate working and wish I could play vidya all day, but in reality when I'm on vacation I fucking hate it.

Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions

#389

Post by TaylorAlexander »

JamesBarney wrote: post #265
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going a step further, we can reduce costs by funding social services that help prevent people from ending up in prison in the first place. I agree with your assessment of our Calvinist thinking.

Do we have any silver bullets? My understanding is most social services show very small effects once replicated.

I think this understanding is incorrect. My understanding is that housing services, mental health services, medical services, transportation infrastructure, and related things like maternity and paternity leave, good labor rights, good pay and fair working conditions all lead to a reduction in low level crime and homelessness. There is no need for a single silver bullet if we have a collection of policies that work. To just pick one issue here is a nice article about housing:

https://charterforcompassion.org/shareable-community-ideas/p...

Re: NYC jails want to ban physical mail, then privatize scanning of digital versions

#390

Post by indymike »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #381
indymike wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's like saying software is written in C vs Java. It's still software.

Jails are for very short sentences and short term pre-trial incarceration. This can lead to some really dumb "X% of people in jail Y" type states that sound outrageous until you realize that X is drawn from a very specific subset of the incarcerated population.

I wish it was as clear as string vs float, but it isn't. People get stuck in jails for 3-Undefined years all the time, all over the US. The only difference is "big state owned" and "many sizes incorporated area owned". Some states have laws that define this clearly, some don't. In many cases, even though it might be against the law, a prison is over-filled, so they outsource to county jails, and in others, the jail is over-filled so they outsource to another incarceration facility. It's a shit show, and I feel really bad for people that are caught in it.
Post reply on HN