News, Inmate Visits Now Carry Added Cost in Arizona. (Phoenix: daycare, school)

[rich67]

Why is this continually referred to as a TAX?? It's NOT A TAX! It's a FEE. A tax implies it is across the board to everyone in the state, regardless if you go to the prison or not. You pay a fee when you go to an amusement park. You pay a fee when you want to gain entry to a museum exhibit. This is no different! You want to visit an inmate, you pay a FEE! So what if it isn't used to pay for a "background check"? So what if it goes to a prison facility building fund? Why have we, as a country, been spoon-fed this criminal sympathy nonsense so much that we are so willing to defend CRIMINALS?? They are in DOC because they have committed crimes-namely felonious ones. Their victims sure as heck could care less if they get to see their loved ones. In fact, ask the victims of crimes (the people who really matter) and ask them how they feel about this fee. I'm sure they would all have no issue with it. The people who have issues with it are the families of the criminals, and the people who "love" these criminals. I have no sympathy for them. My sympathy lies with the people who were VICTIMIZED by these pieces of trash. I say someone go out and ask them how they feel about this, and then present an unbiased news story that way. This story that is posted is biased toward the criminal and the criminals that visit them. I have worked in the correctional system. I have seen people smuggle heroin in diapers (dirty ones at that) on visitation day, I have seen shanks and other contraband being brought in by "visitors". The people that visit them are sometimes no better than the people who are behind bars. The contraband is left in trash cans that are tended to by the inmates, who easily recover them after the visitation day is done. We need to wake up, this "feel sorry for the bad people" attitude is why our justice system is broken, and more criminals are walking the streets.

[observer53]

Originally Posted by BrianH

There are several checks that take place when a vistor wants to be placed on an inmates visitation list. That takes up time and $$$$ so to say there is no background check is just not true. They check to see if they have felonies or whatever, to see if they are eligible to visit an inmate.

Well, I don't know about "several" checks, but checking NCIC would get them sufficient info with a quick computer search. There's no way they are doing any kind of full "background check".

[rich67]

Most of the time the only thing that is done is an NCIC/FCIC check for active warrants. No history check is performed. If it were, I am sure 95% of the visiting population would be denied a visit!
Oh, and this $25 is a ONE TIME fee, not a recurring fee, from what I understand.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by rich67

Why is this continually referred to as a TAX?? It's NOT A TAX! It's a FEE. A tax implies it is across the board to everyone in the state, regardless if you go to the prison or not. You pay a fee when you go to an amusement park. You pay a fee when you want to gain entry to a museum exhibit. This is no different!

Fees are what they're called when they're politically impossible to pass as a tax. I don't smoke (anymore). Do I pay a cigarette tax? Or do I only pay it in the form of bond payments on money borrowed against projected income from cigarette taxes that only smokers pay?

[BrianH]

Originally Posted by observer53

Well, I don't know about "several" checks, but checking NCIC would get them sufficient info with a quick computer search. There's no way they are doing any kind of full "background check".

There is sevearl checks that are done on visitors, I work in the industry. Not a full background check, but not just anybody can get in and see an inmate.

Frequently if somebody gets rejected for a visitation list too, they will go and apply over and over hoping to eventually get on becasue somebody missed out on something.

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by BrianH

There is sevearl checks that are done on visitors, I work in the industry. Not a full background check, but not just anybody can get in and see an inmate.

Frequently if somebody gets rejected for a visitation list too, they will go and apply over and over hoping to eventually get on becasue somebody missed out on something.

Even if it were a "fee" for service, the argument falls flat on its face when you realize that the visitor must pay the 25 bucks for every person they visit. One background check ought to be sufficient and should not have to be repeated for each prisoner someone wants to visit. This is nothing but a low brow way to take money from the people who can least afford it and do not have the political and social standing to oppose it. $25 is a couple weeks of school lunches, or a backpack, or shirt and pants It matters to people who have nothing. It's the worst of a mean-spirited Arizona on display - once again.

I will give Brewer and company credit for having a shred of decency left: the original proposal would have charged the "background check fee" to babies and young children of prisoners as well. For the time being, at least, that part was dropped.

[kdog]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

Even if it were a "fee" for service, the argument falls flat on its face when you realize that the visitor must pay the 25 bucks for every person they visit.

The article didn't say that so where are you getting that info?

Regardless, the fund is used to repair prisons, not for salaries. That makes them safer and more livable for prisoners and guards alike. You would prefer that money come from where? Your paycheck? Schools? Public Works budgets? Or what?

Personally I think Arizona is getting an unfair rap over this. You don't think other states use similar tactics to pay for prisons? Think again. Many states prisons impose huge fees on telephone usage FOR EVERY PHONE CALL. They make millions off of this.

Here's a reference. USATODAY.com - Inmate families paying high phone rates in California jails

And another. Jail phone calls ring up big bills | Zev Yaroslavsky

We recently spent $75 on calls to a friend in jail recently so I'm painfully aware of the tactic. Arizona has NOTHING on California in this regard.

[Bummer]

As expected, the ridiculous Boo Hoo arguments have arrived . . .

Why should I, or any other taxpayer, be expected to cover the additional expenses involved in order for criminals to have visitors? Jail is supposed to be punishment for committing a crime . . . NOT a vacation or a picnic.

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by kdog

The article didn't say that so where are you getting that info?

Regardless, the fund is used to repair prisons, not for salaries. That makes them safer and more livable for prisoners and guards alike. You would prefer that money come from where? Your paycheck? Schools? Public Works budgets? Or what?

Personally I think Arizona is getting an unfair rap over this. You don't think other states use similar tactics to pay for prisons? Think again. Many states prisons impose huge fees on telephone usage FOR EVERY PHONE CALL. They make millions off of this.

Here's a reference. USATODAY.com - Inmate families paying high phone rates in California jails

And another. Jail phone calls ring up big bills | Zev YaroslavskyArizona is no slouch when it comes to gouging families for speaking a member was is incarcerated either. AZ never misses a chance to kick people who are down. As for the fees/person it is quite clearly in the

We recently spent $75 on calls to a friend in jail recently so I'm painfully aware of the tactic. Arizona has NOTHING on California in this regard.

Arizona rarely misses an opportunity to put the screws to the poor and, in the case of phone calls is no different. Arizona also gouges family and friends of prisoners who wish to speak to them on the phone - mercilessly. As for charging the fees for each prisoner, this was in the story as broken by the New York Times if not in the one the OP quoted. It tells of a woman who had to pay 100 dollars, twice, because the state "lost" the original payment she made.

And I would like to see the money come from the rich. OK? The main reason we have jails and courts and cops is to protect the rich and let them take everyone else's money without having to worry about the social consequences of their rapacious behavior. So let them pay.

[kdog]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

Arizona rarely misses an opportunity to put the screws to the poor and, in the case of phone calls is no different. Arizona also gouges family and friends of prisoners who wish to speak to them on the phone - mercilessly. As for charging the fees for each prisoner, this was in the story as broken by the New York Times if not in the one the OP quoted. It tells of a woman who had to pay 100 dollars, twice, because the state "lost" the original payment she made.

No, that's incorrect. The OP quoted the NY Times article and it said nothing about needing to pay per-prisoner. The woman in question was paying $100 for four VISITORS. There was only one relative in jail.

And I would like to see the money come from the rich. OK? The main reason we have jails and courts and cops is to protect the rich and let them take everyone else's money without having to worry about the social consequences of their rapacious behavior. So let them pay.

Yeah, right.