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

31–40 of 130 posts

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

#31

Post by bruceb »

avs733 wrote: post #18
sacks2k wrote: post #2

I can understand private prisons (which make up a small percentage of overall prisons). However, what will be the solution for people that come into the US illegally, if not temporary detainment?

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?

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

#32

Post by ogre_codes »

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…

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 regardless of whether it makes sense for the crime or not.

Tons of conflict of interest in private prisons which are in addition to the potential abuses associated with public prisons.

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

#33

Post by eagsalazar2 »

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.

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 the issue is far from a straw man. It is a rallying call that the fight is far from over (!!)

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

#34

Post by jobigoud »

gizmo686 wrote: post #29
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…

Am I missing something here? How can sterilizations save money when prisons are already gender segragated? Unless they are saying that it is inpractical to have male prison guards/staff not have sex with the inmates.

I'm not sure but I think inmates can have special "conjugal visits" where sex with a visitor is allowed. I assume that when a female inmate has a baby, she keeps it with her until the child reaches a certain age like 3 years old or something, maybe with special accommodations. This is based on a video I saw about Mexican prisons but I assume it could be the same in the US.

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

#35

Post by jokit »

When California needs to be bailed out, will the correctly managed states even be heard about not wanting to pay for CA's sabotage?

Since the self destruction is obviously intentional, any welfare for the state should come at the expense of federal representation until they have reimbursed, with interest, all that they take.

Forced redistribution of wealth is dysgenics.

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

#36

Post by syndacks »

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.

This is absolutely not straw man. Just because one changes prisons from "private" prisons to "state" prisons doesn't change the fundamental issue of putting humans in cages.

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

#37

Post by hn_check »

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…

Just to understand your broken, the-conclusion-will-sustain-my-baises noise, this is all some masterful powerplay by a union that has control of both the public and private sectors.

HURRRRRRRRRRR

That's some grade A stupid nonsense. I see from your history that this "Let me tell you what the reality is" conspiratorial trash is the foundation of almost everything you say.

Get back to stupid youtube videos.

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

#39

Post by ceejayoz »

syndacks wrote: post #36
thebean11 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

This is absolutely not straw man. Just because one changes prisons from "private" prisons to "state" prisons doesn't change the fundamental issue of putting humans in cages.

Acting like there's only one problem with private prisons is the strawman.

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

#40

Post by notRobot »

jobigoud wrote: post #34
gizmo686 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I missing something here? How can sterilizations save money when prisons are already gender segragated? Unless they are saying that it is inpractical to have male prison guards/staff not have sex with the inmates.

I'm not sure but I think inmates can have special "conjugal visits" where sex with a visitor is allowed. I assume that when a female inmate has a baby, she keeps it with her until the child reaches a certain age like 3 years old or something, maybe with special accommodations. This is based on a video I saw about Mexican prisons but I assume it could be the same in the US.

> This is based on a documentary about Mexican prisons but I assume it could be the same in the US.

Assuming stuff like this isn't a good idea. They're completely different countries.

Post reply on HN