Private prisoners are very dangerous and torture prisoners as in the movie prison break
California bans private prisons
511–520 of 646 posts
Re: California bans private prisons
#512> Private prison companies used to view California as one of their fastest-growing markets. This is such a bizarre and twisted sentence to hear without a hint of irony. It's like dream/nightmare logic except in real life. In 100 years private prisons are going to be a hideous stain on our history and this is such a huge step in the right direction that it really makes me proud to be living in California and supportin…
Well done California. Hopefully this is a step towards abolishing the prison system.
Re: California bans private prisons
#513Earlier quoted context omitted.
Going after public sector unions at all is extremely difficult. The most successful attempt to do so that I'm aware of was Gov. Scott Walker's in Wisconsin. And even he didn't go after the law enforcement unions. (It might be possible to split off the police unions from the prison guard unions, but it's not clear to me that it is.) Law enforcement unions are one of the few American institutions with completely bipart…
"Law enforcement unions are one of the few American institutions with completely bipartisan protection. Democrats don't go after them because Democrats are pro-union. Republicans don't go after them because Republicans are pro-police." Perhaps your "democracy" needs more than 2 parties. "What happens if police officers and prison guards go on strike?" The American culture is very antagonistic. In democratic societies…
"The American culture is very antagonistic. In democratic societies, which are less antagonistic, this would become a matter of new public consensus much sooner before they would go on actual strike"
Like France?
Re: California bans private prisons
#514I think private prisons could work if: - Convicts could choose whether to be sent to a public or private prison. - Private prisons had financial incentives for post-incarceration behavior. Eg: If their prisoner recidivism rate after 3 years was 10% lower than the average public prison, they would get a 20% bonus. Those changes would create enough competition and align incentives such that we could see some real innov…
Isn't the primary issue anyone has with private prisons the same one we have with defense contractors: that they might, would, or do subvert the system to get innocent people imprisoned or their prison terms extended in the case of private prisons, or promote wars America doesn't want or need in the case of defense contractors? What I mean is nobody really cares if prisons buy commercial toilet paper, for example. (A…
> So why are innocent black people jailed? Well, to fill prison beds, apparently. That is one of the reasons that people don't like private prisons.
Utter nonsense. Black people are jailed for being black in America because American police are racist and American legislators are racist and American media are racist and American prosecutors are racist and American judges are racist. And then, because of this, black people in America have learnt that police, legislators, media, prosecutors and judges are best avoided.
If private prison operators have an incentive to get more people to serve more time, then they're not going to pick black people because they're just smart business people and black people represent an untapped growth market. If they've actually done anything to encourage oversentencing, they only reason they picked black people is because them and everyone around them are racists.
Re: California bans private prisons
#515Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find it very malicious to just drop numbers like this. It gives the impression that you state a simple fact, while the reality is much more complicated than that. The studies on the subject require much more subtlety and statistical understanding when interpreting the results that a 2 line quotation to make a point. There are a number of factors to take into account when giving credit to such studies: - Is there en…
Thank you for the last bit about Freakonomics- it lets everyone know it's safe to ignore you.
Ouch, please don't. We ban accounts that do personal attacks like this, and I don't want to ban you.
Re: California bans private prisons
#516Good riddance. The whole premise of private, for-profit, prisons has always seemed deeply troubling to me. The focus of a healthy prison system should be to rehabilitate people and help them turn their lives around so that they contribute positively to society. That can take years of hard work by the individual, and require assistance from professionals (therapists, teachers, ...). A for-profit company by definition…
The purpose of imprisonment is to punish criminals by depriving them of their liberty. As a side-effect, society benefits because a criminal has been forcibly removed from visiting further misery on law-abiding people. Imprisonment is and should be a deterrent punishment - it is not a support group. One can both be in favor of abolishing for-profit prisons and also in favor of severe deterrent sentences for law-break…
I thought the imprisonment was to make society safer? Forcefully removing criminals and using deterrent punishment is one way to try to do this, but it's not the only way.
Crime rates in the U.S. vs other developed countries, where rehabilitation is the focus, suggests rehabilitation is a much more efficient solution. See for example the crime rates in the Nordic countries.
Re: California bans private prisons
#517Earlier quoted context omitted.
Classic to see the correct take get downvoted. If anyone's interested in actually learning about the causes of mass incarceration, I'd strongly recommend John Pfaff's _Locked In_: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01L6SLKK8/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?... In short: a) It's not the war on drugs. b) It's not private prisons. c) It's not sentencing laws. You could get rid of all of those and America would still lead the "free" worl…
For the lazy: Pfaff is convinced that aggressive prosecution is the biggest cause of over-incarceration. His argument here is compelling. He notes that while incarceration rates began to climb in the 1980s as a response to rising crime, those trend lines continued through the Nineties, even though crime was steadily falling. Why did that happen? Examining all the relevant variables (crime reports, arrests, charges fi…
The change in monetary system caused a cascade of despair.
Re: California bans private prisons
#518Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The rising violence rate due to the marijuana trade in California (and other states) does not agree with your made up reasoning. It actually does, because federal prohibition has not been lifted (even though there is non-assured enforcement forebearance). The fact that anyone in a significant ownership, leadership, or management position in any business in the industry is technically guilty of a federal felony with…
Also, much of violence is related to legal marijuana businesses being unbanked. Large amounts of cash always attract crime.
> Also, much of violence is related to legal marijuana businesses being unbanked
Right, except for the critical fact that there are no legal marijuana businesses, that is certainly an important effect of the continued federal prohibition.
Re: California bans private prisons
#519Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then what is it?
According to the Amazon summary from the linked book: "a major shift in prosecutor behavior that occurred in the mid-1990s, when prosecutors began bringing felony charges against arrestees about twice as often as they had before"
If you don't want to do time, Don't do the crime.
Re: California bans private prisons
#520I find it fascinating that private prisons draw such ire while the prison guard union draws so little, when the prison guard union has all the exact same incentives and is drastically more powerful. California would have had legal marijuana a decade sooner except for lobbing by the union, they're a major force for mandatory minimum sentences and tougher sentencing in general. This seems like a trivial easy-PR win for…
> California would have had legal marijuana a decade sooner except for lobbing by the union, they're a major force for mandatory minimum sentences and tougher sentencing in general.
edit: Do you have any articles to recommend that would shed some lights on this matter ?
Do you have some sources ? (I don't live in the US, but I find the idea that guards somehow lobby fascinating)