Earlier quoted context omitted.
Putting a person in prison for life for three separate shop-lifting sentences is inhuman (just an example I thought of myself right now but I'm pretty sure it's real).
To be clear, the individual in question was neither incarcerated life, nor was incarcerated for shoplifting. >just an example I thought of myself right now but I'm pretty sure it's real You're pretty sure it's real eh?
A pacifist's plan to survive the violent world of prison
121–130 of 136 posts
Re: A pacifist's plan to survive the violent world of prison
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
>10 years for a non violent burglary. There are two common ways to get a crazy prison sentence. Drug and/or gun possession often acts as a multiplier on sentencing guidelines for whatever the underlying crime is. Multiple contacts with the system (three strikes laws and parole/probation violations) tend to have compounding sentences so screwing up on parole or probation can net you an additional sentence than in addi…
Also fighting the charge typically results in a high sentence, i.e. not taking the plea deal. Prosecutors notoriously over charge and if you fight it, you typically get the over charge time. See Aaron Schwartz. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz
This is a particularly nasty thing; if you are innocent and plead your innocence you will be penalized. If a plea bargain is just why should it be withheld ? The answer of course is that it is cheaper for the system to get people through without a serious trial; what value does a society like that truly put on liberty?
Re: A pacifist's plan to survive the violent world of prison
#123Is it common to house non-violent offenders with ones convicted of violent crimes?
a large portion of the US electorate sees drug users and criminals as inherently violent. It isn't a fact or a conscious choice but rather a belief built from the constant narrative of tough on crime. It is also fundamentally, systematically, and intentionally racist.
Seeing some people as inherently violent is a very destructive attitude. Almost nobody is inherently violent. It all depends on context. Someone who might be violent in one context might not be violent in a different context. Changing the context can help a lot. A US prison is probably not it.
Re: A pacifist's plan to survive the violent world of prison
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be clear, the individual in question was neither incarcerated life, nor was incarcerated for shoplifting. >just an example I thought of myself right now but I'm pretty sure it's real You're pretty sure it's real eh?
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/cruel-an...
I know you're proving something here, but I'm not sure what. The first example they cite is a man who was convicted for multiple robberies (robbery is a violent crime, by the way), and even after a string of prison stints, he goes and shoplifts. What is he thinking? What in the world is he doing to his life!?!?!? As is typical of this kind of slant, all agency is removed from him. He is not responsible for going to prison, society is.
I understand what the arguments are, and I agree with the length of sentences ... to a point, but I'm always frustrated that victims are ignored in these arguments and the focus is always on the rights of the abuser. The context for 'three-strike' type of policy is the high level of crime in America and an attempt to protect and provide justice to law-abiding citizens who are victimized by these individuals.
Re: A pacifist's plan to survive the violent world of prison
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Last sentence is especially valid - decriminalization does absolutely 0 with organized crime earning tens of billions every year from all addictives. The same folks that deal in kidnappings, ransom, contract killing, weapons smuggling and many more. As a bonus health of patients(addicts) is not deteriorating so rapidly due to crap they take along with actual drugs, so bonuses go back to whole society in form of lower…
> Last sentence is especially valid - decriminalization does absolutely 0 with organized crime earning tens of billions every year from all addictives. The same folks that deal in kidnappings, ransom, contract killing, weapons smuggling and many more. Surely decriminalization is an improvement.
How do you expect it to have an impact on those things? It will be an improvement for drug users in the US, but I doubt much will change for the cartels. To really have an impact the drugs need to be produced and distributed legally.
Re: A pacifist's plan to survive the violent world of prison
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
It isn't enough. Legalisation needs to happen, even for things I wouldn't touch. It isn't just about breaking a cycle, though not shaming addiction is helpful. It isn't just addicts that do drugs: I've met folks that do cocaine twice a year, for example. Few folks are addicted to LSD, and most folks only take MDMA occasionally. There is more than one way to take heroin, and folks do use occasionally. All drugs I woul…
> There is more than one way to take heroin, and folks do use occasionally. My anecdata contradicts this. I know a lot of musicians who say "Yeah, they lied to us about pot. So, I assumed they were lying about everything else, too. And they were--except heroin. Do NOT do heroin--that's a path you do not want to be on." I don't know of any who use it "recreationally" and control it. It just doesn't seem to work that w…
https://life.spectator.co.uk/articles/the-case-for-prescript...
Ok, this might not really contradict you since it is more about being able to use it regularly and still be functional.
Re: A pacifist's plan to survive the violent world of prison
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
What help would or could you give to an unrepentant rapist before they are captured by the police?
I'm suggesting a government, medical system, and community focused on helping people before they get to that point in their lives. I'm focusing on the part I think we can all agree on and therefore is solvable.
When that inevitably fails, where do you put the unrepentant rapist, if not in a prison? This is a simple question, if you find yourself unable to answer it, it's because your proposal is moronic.
Re: A pacifist's plan to survive the violent world of prison
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a whole lot of words to not answer my question. Where would you put unrepentant rapists, if not in a prison?
It does answer your question: you kill them (e.g. law systems that stone them to death) or reintegrate them into society or just keep doing the prison/release/relapse dance indefinitely, burning through tax dollars all the while. You may put a rapist in a prison but then they serve their sentence and might go on to become your neighbor, regardless of whether they repent or are willing to rape again. Where do you put…
I can see you're not taking this conversation seriously, since your proposal would entail a massive increase in executions, which I know you do not seriously desire. You know, as well as I do, that justice systems make mistakes. I do not have to explain to you that an innocent man can be released from prison, but cannot be unexecuted. You know this, yet I bring it up anyway because you insist on pretending to be a moron.
Re: A pacifist's plan to survive the violent world of prison
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Last sentence is especially valid - decriminalization does absolutely 0 with organized crime earning tens of billions every year from all addictives. The same folks that deal in kidnappings, ransom, contract killing, weapons smuggling and many more. Surely decriminalization is an improvement.
Yes, “an improvement.” Is a pretty low bar. Would “drug courts,” where offenders are not prosecuted provided they complete treatment not also be an improvement?
[deleted]
Re: A pacifist's plan to survive the violent world of prison
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does answer your question: you kill them (e.g. law systems that stone them to death) or reintegrate them into society or just keep doing the prison/release/relapse dance indefinitely, burning through tax dollars all the while. You may put a rapist in a prison but then they serve their sentence and might go on to become your neighbor, regardless of whether they repent or are willing to rape again. Where do you put…
I can see you're not taking this conversation seriously, since your proposal would entail a massive increase in executions, which I know you do not seriously desire. You know, as well as I do, that justice systems make mistakes. I do not have to explain to you that an innocent man can be released from prison, but cannot be unexecuted. You know this, yet I bring it up anyway because you insist on pretending to be a mo…
It isn't _my_ proposal. Stoning is a real punishment that was implemented in certain societies. You asked for alternatives to prison sentences and I presented them. It's a bit tall to then suggest that I invented things like islamic law and further, that I'm a moron for bringing it up.
If you scroll elsewhere, you can see I also mentioned that one could spend weeks fruitlessly debating what constitutes a criminal beyond redemption and that that does add extra layers of touchiness when it comes things like capital punishment.
You may not like capital punishment (and I'm neither condemning nor advocating for it), but it is a real punishment framework that addresses tax burden and the problem of discomfort of having to live near a sex offender. Does it have flaws? Absolutely. As you said yourself, justice systems make mistakes. When I said "tautological idea of justice", what I'm deriding is the double standard some people fall into when making an argument that boils down to "killing innocent people is wrong because it cannot be undone" and use that as a differentiator in opinion between capital punishment and long prison sentences, since one can also make the same argument about innocent inmates (the "silver lining" type of argument is usually callously oblivious to the horrors of prison life, as well as stigma, trauma, loss of opportunity and health, etc and the fact that this damage cannot be undone, no matter how much one thinks saying "oops, sorry" is good enough). One can flip the silver lining argument as such: "at least he was put out of his misery quickly". (Again, not advocating for it, just reiterating that side of the debate)
A lot of anti-prison folks will argue that the better option is reintegration, which involves skill development, counseling, etc. This gels well with the vast majority of inmates who are in prison for small crimes. The flaw, of course, is that you can't really proactively stop the odd psychopath. Trade-offs, trade-offs.