Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Hugo Chavez on October 30, 2009, 03:10:00 AM
-
:o
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/24/us/24prison.html?_r=2
-
I like it. No reason the taxpayers should have to carry the entire burden of supporting the filth of society. One issue that was brought up was the worry of being able to control the deathrow inmates. Could be easily addressed by just limiting the amount of contact with staff and other inmates, but that won't happen because the "prisoner advocate" douches will pitch a little hissy fit. Hell, I wouldn't care if they built cages with catwalks above them to drop their food in from a safe distance. Why we try to treat animals, and I'm talking exclusively about the death row inmates, humanely is beyond me. They didn't treat their victims humanely, so why do they deserve anything different?
-
Might be a good idea....
As long as we don't privatize the justice system? :P
-
I like it. No reason the taxpayers should have to carry the entire burden of supporting the filth of society. One issue that was brought up was the worry of being able to control the deathrow inmates. Could be easily addressed by just limiting the amount of contact with staff and other inmates, but that won't happen because the "prisoner advocate" douches will pitch a little hissy fit. Hell, I wouldn't care if they built cages with catwalks above them to drop their food in from a safe distance. Why we try to treat animals, and I'm talking exclusively about the death row inmates, humanely is beyond me. They didn't treat their victims humanely, so why do they deserve anything different?
How would you fix the problem with innocents being convicted?
-
How would you fix the problem with innocents being convicted?
Tough question and there will never be a perfect system.
I would start by seeking some balance on the issue of race and the death penalty. I also think we need stringent rules on when the death penalty is to be applied. Have some honesty in the debate.
Second, I think before sentencing someone to death row an outside panel should review the case. Or even let the states supreme court review each case. It really isn't nearly as many as people probably believe.
Don't know if you are aware of it, but we have an interesting case/s going on here in NC at the moment...
http://www.wral.com/news/state/story/6261276/
I fully support the Governor in this situation and I am actually surprised, but proud, of her stance on it.
these are just some suggestions.
-
A system that thrives on keeping people incarcerated? I don't like the sound of this.
-
A system that thrives on keeping people incarcerated? I don't like the sound of this.
It's already that way now, except taxpayers are carrying ALL of the burden.
-
True, but it isn't a for profit system. A company that can build it's own jail/prison, hire it's own guards, will have a vested interest in keeping a population incarcerated. I just think this opens a door that shouldn't even be there, much less opened.
-
True, but it isn't a for profit system. A company that can build it's own jail/prison, hire it's own guards, will have a vested interest in keeping a population incarcerated. I just think this opens a door that shouldn't even be there, much less opened.
It doesn't sound like that is the way AZ is setting it up. The private company makes a 100 million dollar bid and it's up to them to run it so that they make a profit. They wouldn't be getting paid "per prisoner" so the incentive to keep people incarcerated isn't there. Besides, there isn't any problem with a shortage at the moment, it's all about overcrowding. I would actually be more concerned about the living conditions for the min and mod level inmates (don't give two brown squirts about the deathrow inmates because they made their choice) as a private company would be more apt to take shortcuts to increase their profit margin. But it could be inspected and controlled.
-
It doesn't sound like that is the way AZ is setting it up. The private company makes a 100 million dollar bid and it's up to them to run it so that they make a profit. They wouldn't be getting paid "per prisoner" so the incentive to keep people incarcerated isn't there. Besides, there isn't any problem with a shortage at the moment, it's all about overcrowding. I would actually be more concerned about the living conditions for the min and mod level inmates (don't give two brown squirts about the deathrow inmates because they made their choice) as a private company would be more apt to take shortcuts to increase their profit margin. But it could be inspected and controlled.
How would they make money without prisoners? See my point?
Granted, you have a point as far as overcrowding, living conditions, shortcuts, etc. when I was thinking shortcuts I was thinking either fewer guards per prisoner block, or less security in general i.e. fewer gates, fewer cameras, etc.
-
How would they make money without prisoners? See my point?
Granted, you have a point as far as overcrowding, living conditions, shortcuts, etc. when I was thinking shortcuts I was thinking either fewer guards per prisoner block, or less security in general i.e. fewer gates, fewer cameras, etc.
With the massive overcrowding, I don't think the problem of not enough prisoners would occur. If a state did have a shortage, I'm sure arrangements could be made to handle other states prisoners, much like it is now. Besides, if anything they could probably run a more profitable business with less prisoners, not more, as it's not a "pay per prisoner" setup in AZ.
-
With the massive overcrowding, I don't think the problem of not enough prisoners would occur. If a state did have a shortage, I'm sure arrangements could be made to handle other states prisoners, much like it is now. Besides, if anything they could probably run a more profitable business with less prisoners, not more, as it's not a "pay per prisoner" setup in AZ.
How would they make a profit? Would the taxpayers ultimately pay for it?
-
With the massive overcrowding, I don't think the problem of not enough prisoners would occur. If a state did have a shortage, I'm sure arrangements could be made to handle other states prisoners, much like it is now. Besides, if anything they could probably run a more profitable business with less prisoners, not more, as it's not a "pay per prisoner" setup in AZ.
I think prisoners should be forced to pay off their costs either though payment or prison labor of some kind and take over tasks currently held by govt employees.
There is no reason they should be sitting around watching TV and lifting. Let them learn how to work and be productive and actually make good use of their time.
-
I think prisoners should be forced to pay off their costs either though payment or prison labor of some kind and take over tasks currently held by govt employees.
There is no reason they should be sitting around watching TV and lifting. Let them learn how to work and be productive and actually make good use of their time.
AMEN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I wholeheartedly agree.
-
AMEN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I wholeheartedly agree.
Look, we are not going to have these people in isolation since its wrong and probably dangerous to the guards etc.
Look at what Sheriff Joe has done over there with the letting the good inmates run the horse stables and lost dogs etc. It saved the county millions, let inmates have an incentive to be good to get on that duty, and let the inmates engage in an activity likely to lessen their hostility.
-
Look, we are not going to have these people in isolation since its wrong and probably dangerous to the guards etc.
Look at what Sheriff Joe has done over there with the letting the good inmates run the horse stables and lost dogs etc. It saved the county millions, let inmates have an incentive to be good to get on that duty, and let the inmates engage in an activity likely to lessen their hostility.
Again, I totally agree. With the exception of deathrow trash and habitual offenders, I would have them all doing something more active. Give them some purpose.
-
Again, I totally agree. With the exception of deathrow trash and habitual offenders, I would have them all doing something more active. Give them some purpose.
It sounds good to be "tough on criminals", but in reality, it often backfires.
Checkt his out and look who the usual idiots are in this. Serious - look who the usual gang of assholes are: the ACLU, the govt employees, etc.
________________________ ________________________ ________________
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0609animaljail09.html
-
It sounds good to be "tough on criminals", but in reality, it often backfires.
Checkt his out and look who the usual idiots are in this. Serious - look who the usual gang of assholes are: the ACLU, the govt employees, etc.
________________________ ________________________ ________________
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0609animaljail09.html
The usual suspects have to weigh in.....strangely they never do anything for the victims of the crimes that these dregs of society commit. They are worse than the criminals in many instances.
-
Next we will have this on pay-per view
(http://screenrant.com/wp-content/uploads/death-race-trailer.jpg)
-
It's already that way now, except taxpayers are carrying ALL of the burden.
that's not an excuse. things can be changed as needed now. such as a state getting or getting rid of death penalty. put a thriving corporate industry behind it and watch how fast the state and people basically have no control. plus with this, taxpayers will still be paying. if they lead you to believe otherwise they're full of shit. I also posted a corruption case not long ago where the judge was getting kickbacks to send the compamy more inmates. the last thing we need in our justice system is another avenue for misjustice.
-
that's not an excuse. things can be changed as needed now. such as a state getting or getting rid of death penalty. put a thriving corporate industry behind it and watch how fast the state and people basically have no control. plus with this, taxpayers will still be paying. if they lead you to believe otherwise they're full of shit. I also posted a corruption case not long ago where the judge was getting kickbacks to send the compamy more inmates. the last thing we need in our justice system is another avenue for misjustice.
I think most of our prison system is a joke. It should be for the violent criminals and truly worst among us. The rest of the bunch can be dealt with in other ways the cost less and help some of these people rehabilitate. The prison system makes them worse if anything since they are hanging out all day with other criminals and trading skill sets.
Put these people in factories or on farms. Teach these people how to work, how to sweat, how to be productive, how to be responsible. That seems a far cheaper and more effective way since the current system has a huge recidivist rate.
-
Why would the government want to do that 33? If we create a system where these people are repeat offenders we can fine them out the ass and control them.
-
that's not an excuse. things can be changed as needed now. such as a state getting or getting rid of death penalty. put a thriving corporate industry behind it and watch how fast the state and people basically have no control. plus with this, taxpayers will still be paying. if they lead you to believe otherwise they're full of shit. I also posted a corruption case not long ago where the judge was getting kickbacks to send the compamy more inmates. the last thing we need in our justice system is another avenue for misjustice.
The current prison system is a failure. Witness CA releasing prisoners, not because they have paid their debt to society, but just because of overcrowding. Combine that with it basically just creating a "wiser" criminal when they are released, and you are just teaching idiots to be better criminals, sending them to the outside with little chance of getting meaningful employment and just basically asking them to start commiting more crimes. I agree with 33's idea of a more work related system for low level offenders. Something to head them off before they become career criminals.
And as for getting rid of the death penalty, I'm assuming you mean because of the massive cost to the taxpayers, I would prefer to either see REAL life in prison sentences....or better yet, streamline the current system so they aren't sitting on death row for years while their joke appeals get kicked around. Have certain criteria in place that speeds up the process....DNA evidence, confessions, etc... we get too caught up in the system instead of true justice being served.
-
The current prison system is a failure. Witness CA releasing prisoners, not because they have paid their debt to society, but just because of overcrowding. Combine that with it basically just creating a "wiser" criminal when they are released, and you are just teaching idiots to be better criminals, sending them to the outside with little chance of getting meaningful employment and just basically asking them to start commiting more crimes. I agree with 33's idea of a more work related system for low level offenders. Something to head them off before they become career criminals.
And as for getting rid of the death penalty, I'm assuming you mean because of the massive cost to the taxpayers, I would prefer to either see REAL life in prison sentences....or better yet, streamline the current system so they aren't sitting on death row for years while their joke appeals get kicked around. Have certain criteria in place that speeds up the process....DNA evidence, confessions, etc... we get too caught up in the system instead of true justice being served.
i wasn't making an argument for or against the death penalty. way not my point.
-
i wasn't making an argument for or against the death penalty. way not my point.
My whole arguement agrees with you. The taxpayers will still shoulder the costs, to think otherwise is naive.
-
Have you people got your head up your asses - privatised does NOT mean you won't pay for it - all it means is that a third party (not the government - state or federal) will be running the prison. Your government will still be paying this private company to incarcerate prisoners.
-
Have you people got your head up your asses - privatised does NOT mean you won't pay for it - all it means is that a third party (not the government - state or federal) will be running the prison. Your government will still be paying this private company to incarcerate prisoners.
yea, and it could cost more! lol...
-
ffwd to 1:15:45 - 1:18:45 .. about PIC
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9077214414651731007 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9077214414651731007)
-
ffwd to 1:15:45 - 1:18:45 .. about PIC
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9077214414651731007 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9077214414651731007)
That's insane - prisons should never be privatised.
-
Sheriff Joe
::)
Sources: FBI Investigating Joe Arpaio
http://www.kpho.com/news/21470567/detail.html (http://www.kpho.com/news/21470567/detail.html)
Report: FBI Probing Controversial Arizona Sheriff For "Investigating" Political Foes
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/report_fbi_probing_arpaio_for_targeting_political.php?ref=mp (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/report_fbi_probing_arpaio_for_targeting_political.php?ref=mp)
FBI is investigating Arpaio CBS 5 News.
-
private prison video
-
private prison video
good video
-
::)
Sources: FBI Investigating Joe Arpaio
http://www.kpho.com/news/21470567/detail.html (http://www.kpho.com/news/21470567/detail.html)
Report: FBI Probing Controversial Arizona Sheriff For "Investigating" Political Foes
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/report_fbi_probing_arpaio_for_targeting_political.php?ref=mp (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/report_fbi_probing_arpaio_for_targeting_political.php?ref=mp)
FBI is investigating Arpaio CBS 5 News.
They are going after Sheriff Joe because he gets the job done and makes the Fed gov look like the incompetent morons they are.
-
Have you people got your head up your asses - privatised does NOT mean you won't pay for it - all it means is that a third party (not the government - state or federal) will be running the prison. Your government will still be paying this private company to incarcerate prisoners.
Who on here said that? some of you people have zero reading comprehension..... AZ is simply trying to keep the tax payer from paying a higher cost. I'll state it again for you simple minded that didn't follow the first 5 times.....
A private company makes a bid to run it, ok got that part? Then, if they can run the prison for less than that, they make a profit....so their incentive would be to run the prison more efficiently......stay with me now.....you could easily take bids over time where the least expensive company to the taxpayer would win.....simple enough?
The key would be to make sure there isn't any of the "no bid" crap that goes on with gov't contractors.
As for the video....I'll state again for about the 3rd time.....the lawyer is talking about a "pay per prison" system when he jumps all over the place with his $30,0000-60,000 cost.....AZ isn't talking about doing that. It's a lump sum bid. So if anything the prison would stand to make more profit with LESS prisoners. And with overcrowding in virtually every prison in America....needing to keep it full, won't be a problem.
-
Who on here said that? some of you people have zero reading comprehension..... AZ is simply trying to keep the tax payer from paying a higher cost. I'll state it again for you simple minded that didn't follow the first 5 times.....
A private company makes a bid to run it, ok got that part? Then, if they can run the prison for less than that, they make a profit....so their incentive would be to run the prison more efficiently......stay with me now.....you could easily take bids over time where the least expensive company to the taxpayer would win.....simple enough?
The key would be to make sure there isn't any of the "no bid" crap that goes on with gov't contractors.
As for the video....I'll state again for about the 3rd time.....the lawyer is talking about a "pay per prison" system when he jumps all over the place with his $30,0000-60,000 cost.....AZ isn't talking about doing that. It's a lump sum bid. So if anything the prison would stand to make more profit with LESS prisoners. And with overcrowding in virtually every prison in America....needing to keep it full, won't be a problem.
I understood fine - potentially this could save money. But from some of the posts I read people are thinking yippee someone else can take the burden of the cost of running these prisons - that simply isn't so. Another thing I'd be suspicious of is how are they going to cut costs, how are they going to run it more efficiently, I mean prisoners still have rights. And if they can cut costs why can't a government run prison also cut costs? What are they going to do post less guards on longer hours? What gives?
-
I understood fine - potentially this could save money. But from some of the posts I read people are thinking yippee someone else can take the burden of the cost of running these prisons - that simply isn't so. Another thing I'd be suspicious of is how are they going to cut costs, how are they going to run it more efficiently, I mean prisoners still have rights. And if they can cut costs why can't a government run prison also cut costs? What are they going to do post less guards on longer hours? What gives?
One of the big issues is that that the privvate companies wont be on the hook for pensions, etc like the govt and taxpayer would be.
-
I understood fine - potentially this could save money. But from some of the posts I read people are thinking yippee someone else can take the burden of the cost of running these prisons - that simply isn't so. Another thing I'd be suspicious of is how are they going to cut costs, how are they going to run it more efficiently, I mean prisoners still have rights. And if they can cut costs why can't a government run prison also cut costs? What are they going to do post less guards on longer hours? What gives?
I mentioned your concern in a post too. I would think they would need serious regulation to keep them from having substandard living conditions, etc.... but as 33 pointed out, private companies not having pensions, etc... could save money. I am just for getting as many things out of the govt's hands and letting a TRUE "capitalist/free enterprise" system work. hahah, man I sound like Ron Paul.....