Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
i wish this would happen in states like texas where ppl. would just shoot them to death once they try a crime upon release. would save a lot of money, time, and headache for everyone, the prison criminal guy included. finish it all. most if not all violent criminals should be killed off like they do in china or saudi arabia. just get rid of that guy or girl from the earth. huge waste of money and resources into a dead end life. pathetic.
Our for-profit, corporate-run prisons would stand totally opposed to this, as they mandate that when they build/operate a prison, there's minimal occupancy at all times.
The prison guards would be opposed to this as well! Institute something like this and the prison guards, across the country, would go on strike!
The main reason why we have so much violent crime is not because we lock people in prison, but because we let them out.
Yes, we already lock up more people, then any other country in the world. But we still have much more crime then other countries. So the only possible explanation must be, that we are still not locking up enough people.
Yes, we already lock up more people, then any other country in the world. But we still have much more crime then other countries. So the only possible explanation must be, that we are still not locking up enough people.
In a country saturated with guns, and with bullets flying everywhere, it's no wonder we need more people locked up. One alternative would be to make all gun crimes carry an automatic death penalty. That way we wouldn't need to lock up most of the violent criminals, except on death row. If we could find a way to speed up the executions, we could keep the population of death row smaller and more transient, like a motel instead of a retirement home.
Since everything is based on politics, it could be a political compromise. On the liberal side, we would stop locking people up for possessing marijuana, and other victimless crimes. On the conservative side, we would be doing more executions faster. The victimless crimes and minor crimes becoming civil cases instead of criminal, would make liberals drool. The faster executions, would make conservatives drool. Then all we would need would be some illegal immigrants to clean up the drool.
A truly interesting post. Unfortunately for the rose-colored glasses crowd here, you have confirmed my points (which they will continue to ignore).
I will try to address your points ... and I say this from the start ... I AM NOT ATTACKING YOU ... on the contrary, I am trying to give you a pat on the back with agreement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by murksiderock
@el nox, I'd say that I know very few people that are like me, that completely turned away from a criminal existence. It should be understood that there's no way I've kept in contact with everyone I did time with or met over the years, so I'm unable to give a scientific response. However, of the people I have known, I'd say the single digits have completely and fully left a life of crime behind. But if I put a realistic estimation on it in terms of percentage, I'd say it's much higher, maybe 15-20%. That's not an unreasonable estimate...
I don't know if any numbers actually exist, however, as I said before, I have had ZERO experience with one such as yourself who even claimed to have turned around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by murksiderock
1 My story is that I didn't find Christ or religion to change my life. I simply got to the point where that existence was physically and emotionally draining, and was 25 years old on my third strike. Any subsequent offense pretty much doom(s/ed) me, and while I didn't care about it before, it became very real to me. Probably the other huge factor was I got tired of being around those types of people; I no longer wanted those associations or to be around those people, I decided I wanted a better life for myself. But like you, I knew many guys who found jailhouse religion, I agree with you there... .
AMEN AND AMEN ... for both the "draining" and "being around those types of people". While you were stuck with that crap 24/7, I only had ~ 8/5. And yes, unfortunately for me, I inadvertently took the mental trash home with me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by murksiderock
I wasn't much different from anyone else, far as recidivism goes. I only went to prison once (38 months), but went to jail like five times in the following five years of my release. My point, though, is that recidivism statistics don't tell the whole story, because they paint a picture that someone who goes back to jail/prison is somehow "incurable". That was my point, and I didn't state that. But obviously, I've been to jail a bunch of times, so I know this "incurable" perception is false. Also, I agree with s previous poster who said probation/parole is designed for people to fail, because it is a part of the larger business of incarceration. Please don't mistake what I'm saying as it's impossible to overcome probation/parole/having a record, because that wouldn't be true. But the deck is definitely stacked, and I could devote an entire thread of insights on that topic alone...
I totally agree about the deck being stacked and the "business of incarceration". That brings me back to the Sheriff Joe position. I got it about all the lawsuits ... my classroom was next door to the joint law library (which was always packed). The frivolous lawsuits flowed like the mighty Mississippi and there was no way to stop them. A previous poster talked about the cost of Sheriff Joe's lawsuits ... and is completely in the dark about what virtually all of these lawsuits are about. Did I happen to mention something about rose-colored glasses?
Quote:
Originally Posted by murksiderock
I think that you haven't met a person who reformed from a criminal lifestyle is telling of the disconnect between people who "think" they have all the answers for crime/criminals (CO's, PO's, police, prosecutors, and anyone who generally agreed with their practices/judgements) and those who truly understand crime and the criminal mind (reformed criminals, sociologists, 'some' defense attorneys, and regular people who generally have lived intimately with those). But trust me on this one---you've met someone like me. You just don't know it, because like me, you haven't kept tabs on most people you had to officiate. Like I said, people like me are definitely in the minority, but we're not that rare. Sometimes, it takes a few times, unfortunately, for one to decide to change his life. More often, though, one doesn't...
Score another for you. It is highly probable that what you say about me not knowing is 100% true. As an example, and you know this to be true, you NEVER ask an inmate what they did, you only ask what lies they told saying what you did. I respect people's privacy and have NEVER asked anyone if they were ever in the joint. On the lawyers ... I have yet to meet a lawyer who ever gave a sh#t about their client in the joint. Win or lose, they get paid, which is THE ONLY THING THEY CARE ABOUT. They use the cop-out about the Code of Lawyer Ethics ... and I say again COP-OUT. I am now ready for the rose-colored glasses crowd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by murksiderock
Now, it is definitely rarer for someone to change after their first offense. But part of my problem with America's incarceration system, the part of the story that recidivism doesn't mention, is that jails and prisons aren't designed to rehabilitate. So all of the "lock me up and throw away the key types" are helping contribute to the crumbling family infrastructure in America. But this is just my take...
I agree ... however, the Sheriff Joe approach is designed to make jail a place where you don't want to be. Isn't that considered a form of rehab? Growing up, my parents believed in physical punishment. Did it work on me? Absolutely not, but it didn't stunt my growth and did establish a moral foundation that endures to this day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by murksiderock
And no, the causes of criminality shouldn't exempt criminals from punishment.
The rose-colored glasses crowd will disagree with you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by murksiderock
The problem is that the punishment is by and large uneven, racist, and unaccounting of unique circumstances;
I have trouble with the word racist here. I am still undecided about the cocaine/crack issue since the drug thugs I had (all races) were pretty much the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by murksiderock
instead, punishment is doled out on a one size fits all scale.
I agree ... however, how to you write a law that will be equitable (definition - unbiased for whatever reason)? Impossible to do because the exceptions would be astronomical. I followed a law being drafted while teaching at the joint and tried to apply that contemplated law to each of my students. All I got was a headache.
Quote:
Originally Posted by murksiderock
The problem is that people are realistically sent into institutions that do more to build criminality and crime than rehabilitate....
Yep, I agree. And the thugs I got back were better trained at being a thug than they were the first time I had them.
i wish this would happen in states like texas where ppl. would just shoot them to death once they try a crime upon release. would save a lot of money, time, and headache for everyone, the prison criminal guy included. finish it all. most if not all violent criminals should be killed off like they do in china or saudi arabia. just get rid of that guy or girl from the earth. huge waste of money and resources into a dead end life. pathetic.
[Mod Cut]what do you do later when you find out they didn't actually commit the crime? just say "oops" The Cases: DNA Exoneree Profiles
Last edited by Jeo123; 08-05-2015 at 01:51 PM..
Reason: Sarcasm is unnecessary
"Seriously, the US has slightly more crime than European countries, but have substantially more prisoners than Russia. Russia! The country that Soviet wannabe Vladimir Putin is 'president' of. We have more people in jail than that country and we're just totally ok with it."
Maybe the reason for that is because it is estimated that Russian government is so entwined with organized crime that it's estimated to be over fifty percent? You can't expect the criminals to be interested in incarceration. Especially where there are bribes to be had.
As opposed to the US government, which is totally transparent and ethical?
Corporate lobbyism is cut from the same cloth as the Russian mob if you ask me. I mean, really, even a murderer has less of an effect on society than corporate lobbyists. Murders effect their victims and their loved ones; corporate lobbyists effect all tax payers.
And you also missed my point. A guy like Putin could put anyone in jail for any made up reason, and probably does. And yet, we still have a prison population that dwarf's Russia's. How does this happen? How does a benevolent freedom loving country like the US allow for more incarcerated people than a crazy authoritarian dictatorship masquerading as a democracy like Russia?
The difference.. There is no parole in the federal system.
Quote:
DUI with injury is considered a violent crime, in my opinion a drunk driver who harms or kills someone has shown their disregard for the safety of others and deserves to serve at least some time in prison or jail.
No disagreement.. Though.. I might say that unless you kill someone, you should be eligible for alternative sentences.. "Weekend Jail" and the like. Many people who have DUIs are people who made a mistake and ripping apart their lives is not the best way to handle it.. You kill someone while driving drunk, all bets are off. Prison time.
Quote:
Sorry to have abbreviated that so much, but basically sex crimes and any form of robbery ARE violent felonies. Burglaries unless they are committed with force (in which case they are a robbery) are not violent crimes, neither is embezzlement. We have a right to be afraid of people who commit violent crimes and we should expect them to be kept away from society until such time that we can be reasonably assured that they are no longer a danger to the public. Non-violent crimes may well be managed by civil penalties or some combination of that with ankle monitoring or work release programs.
One size fits all? How about that 17 year old up in Illinois or wherever that was that hit the news lately because he had sex with a 14 year old who lied about her age? Is he a violent felon?
Quote:
Do you mean like being late to your parole appointment because you didn't have transportation to get there? Or being violated for being homeless when you can't find a place to live? For the most part, probation and parole are just set-ups for failure, in most cases no support or services are offered just a whole lot of rules, some of which are absurd. More people recidivate due to parole violations (around 60-70%) than those committing a new offense while on parole (around 20-25%)
Probation/parole in many cases is VERY hard to get violated.. Pending on where you are.. California.. Almost impossible unless you catch a new case. Feds.. You test positive for pot, you're likely to be violated (Probation only in the fed system, again)
But, there's other times when it's simple.. How about Florida having the counties that the only legal place for a sex offender to live was under a bridge?
No disagreement.. Though.. I might say that unless you kill someone, you should be eligible for alternative sentences.. "Weekend Jail" and the like. Many people who have DUIs are people who made a mistake and ripping apart their lives is not the best way to handle it.. You kill someone while driving drunk, all bets are off. Prison time.
I'd argue that someone who kills someone while drunk driving, while a complete idiot, should still not get prison for murder. Some prison? Absolutely. But I think their issue is alcohol use, not that they're killers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Labonte18
One size fits all? How about that 17 year old up in Illinois or wherever that was that hit the news lately because he had sex with a 14 year old who lied about her age? Is he a violent felon?
I heard about that. Makes me sad. As wrong as his actions were, his intentions weren't necessarily wrong. The girl lied to him about her age, and he had been completely honest the entire time. And according to the girl's parents, all activists were consensual.
One size fits all laws are a bad idea. This kid is facing 25 years as a registered sex offender, can't own a computer, or live in a house with internet. Why? Because someone lied to him. That's not justice. Not at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Labonte18
Probation/parole in many cases is VERY hard to get violated.. Pending on where you are.. California.. Almost impossible unless you catch a new case. Feds.. You test positive for pot, you're likely to be violated (Probation only in the fed system, again)
But, there's other times when it's simple.. How about Florida having the counties that the only legal place for a sex offender to live was under a bridge?
Sex offender laws are pretty absurd if you ask me. Housing restriction and public shaming does no long term good; some studies suggest it's harmful. I'm not against a registry for police use; that makes sense. Though only actual predators should ever be on a registry, regardless of if it's public or not. A guy taking a leak in public or the kid from above is not a dangerous person. Stupid, perhaps, but not dangerous. We need to smarten up our laws a lot. The problem is people's reaction to changing sex offender laws would usually follow the logic of 'but what about the kids!' regardless of the astonishing lack of evidence that the registry has kept people safe.
But whatever. Our laws need reform. Our justice system is not working. That's become very apparent to me.
I will say this, I did not know the federal government had no parole. That's interesting. There are still parole like provisions, but nothing that is actually parole.
The difference.. There is no parole in the federal system.
Right, and I think federal inmates have to do 85% of the time right? Didn't they make that change when they did away with parole? [/quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Labonte18
No disagreement.. Though.. I might say that unless you kill someone, you should be eligible for alternative sentences.. "Weekend Jail" and the like. Many people who have DUIs are people who made a mistake and ripping apart their lives is not the best way to handle it.. You kill someone while driving drunk, all bets are off. Prison time.
I agree, I have always felt that keeping offenders working and preventing homelessness should be the primary focus in sentencing, or if they aren't working making educational goals part of their sentence. We certainly have the technology to use GPS tracking and ensure that alternate sentence offenders aren't out committing new crimes. I think house arrest, restitution and goal oriented probation should be the sentence for all but the most serious offenders.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Labonte18
One size fits all? How about that 17 year old up in Illinois or wherever that was that hit the news lately because he had sex with a 14 year old who lied about her age? Is he a violent felon?
I don't think statutory sex crimes should ever be classified the same same as forcible rape or child molestation, and people arrested for a statutory offense should not end up spending their life on a sex offender registry. I've seen lives of young men destroyed because at 21 they had sex with a 17 year old. There is NO reason to even prosecute cases like that. If a girl is of an age where she can willingly agree to have sex and understands what the act is, and the implications of it (and I'm sure a psychologist interviewing her could determine that) then IMO there is no criminal offense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Labonte18
Probation/parole in many cases is VERY hard to get violated.. Pending on where you are.. California.. Almost impossible unless you catch a new case. Feds.. You test positive for pot, you're likely to be violated (Probation only in the fed system, again) .
I worked in LE in California and used to assist parole agents when they would arrest violators, and believe me they would routinely arrest them for very minor violations, i.e. dirty test, being late to parole appointments, etc. The parole board would determine the length of violation and it was usually 6-12 months, and the time served on a violation was added to your parole expiration date. In 2010 California had around 120,000 people on parole, and in one year they had 72,000 parolees in custody. I read one report with statistical data on parole offenders and I think the average parolee was violated 5 times before they discharged parole. IMO it was a racket designed to avoid parole agent layoffs and grow the prison system. In 2011 AB109 changed much of that and Counties supervise most parolees now and have what they call 'flash incarceration' which means 10 days in jail to think about what you did with no further action - that makes much more sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Labonte18
But, there's other times when it's simple.. How about Florida having the counties that the only legal place for a sex offender to live was under a bridge?
Don't get me started... I have a friend who is a parole agent in California, a few years ago they had a large caseload of sex offenders and a few dozen of them had no where to live due to the distance they had to be from schools and parks. But the irony was that while they had no where to legally live, it was also a violation of parole for them to be homeless. The parole agents allowed the ones with cars to sleep in the parole office parking lot, it was either that or arrest them all, that's how bizarre that law is. This year the Supreme Court ruled that parts of Jessicas law that imposed these restrictions were unconstitutional so I think now there are a few places in Cities like San Francisco where they can live. California Loosens Sex Offender Residency Restrictions | The California Report | KQED News
In a country saturated with guns, and with bullets flying everywhere, it's no wonder we need more people locked up. One alternative would be to make all gun crimes carry an automatic death penalty. That way we wouldn't need to lock up most of the violent criminals, except on death row. If we could find a way to speed up the executions, we could keep the population of death row smaller and more transient, like a motel instead of a retirement home.
Since everything is based on politics, it could be a political compromise. On the liberal side, we would stop locking people up for possessing marijuana, and other victimless crimes. On the conservative side, we would be doing more executions faster. The victimless crimes and minor crimes becoming civil cases instead of criminal, would make liberals drool. The faster executions, would make conservatives drool. Then all we would need would be some illegal immigrants to clean up the drool.
I don't know how serious you are about the section I BOLDED but for certain gun crimes I might agree with you. Get rid of all the stupid GUN LAWS that turn law abiding citizens into criminals and just KILL the people that use a gun to rob and commit violence against innocents or stealing a firearm I would say "go for it". If I knew that you DID NOT want to see citizens that only want to exercise their second amendment rights executed I would have given you reputation points. Let me know that that is not your intent and I will definitely give you rep points.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
