What is your take in private prisons?

2»

Replies

  • JeeperJeeper Senior Member Posts: 2,952 Senior Member
    IMHO You`re all argung about something that makes no difference. The real issue is not whether inmates should be watched by private or Government facilities. The REAL issue is that we have allowed an entire criminal clture to grow and thrive. We have huge gangs all across the country committing crimes daily with little to no real punishment. Sticking them in facilities with air cnditioning, free health care, and three meals a day where they can work out all day is simply INSANE.

    We need MUCH more harsh penalties than we have now. Trust me when I tell you that our current incarceration is not even the slightest deterrent to the average criminal.

    What we DO need is less than one tenth of our current population of repeat offenders.

    Luis
    Wielding the Hammer of Thor first requires you to lift and carry the Hammer of Thor. - Bigslug
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    France was partial to that idea, also. From 1854 to 1946, 80,000 prisoners were sent to Devil's Island, a 34-acre Hell on earth a few miles off the coast of French Guiana. Only 30,000 of them survived, many of whom were never allowed to return home to France, forced to live out the remainder of their lives on the mainland.

    Like Citroen automobiles, restaurant menus featuring escargot, and battle rifles sold for surplus "Never fired- - - -only dropped once", the French experiment in prison management was a dismal failure!
    Jerry

    Good one Teach!!!! Hey didn't England try something like this too a long long time ago and that's how the country of Austrila was made?... On the other hand What French experiments in anything hasn't been a dismal failure?!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    "It is what it is":usa:
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    Jeeper wrote: »
    IMHO You`re all argung about something that makes no difference. The real issue is not whether inmates should be watched by private or Government facilities. The REAL issue is that we have allowed an entire criminal clture to grow and thrive. We have huge gangs all across the country committing crimes daily with little to no real punishment. Sticking them in facilities with air cnditioning, free health care, and three meals a day where they can work out all day is simply INSANE.

    We need MUCH more harsh penalties than we have now. Trust me when I tell you that our current incarceration is not even the slightest deterrent to the average criminal.

    What we DO need is less than one tenth of our current population of repeat offenders.

    Luis
    We need MUCH more harsh penalties than we have now. Trust me when I tell you that our current incarceration is not even the slightest deterrent to the average criminal.

    I have always said that the strength of a law is by its punishment. You are right about the current incarceration in not even the slightest deterrent to the average criminal.
    Sticking them in facilities with air cnditioning, free health care, and three meals a day where they can work out all day is simply INSANE.

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You got that right Jeepers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What ever happened to the good ole days when they made little ones out of big ones, or a night in the box? I guess there's no such thing that as 'Hard labor' anymore.
    "It is what it is":usa:
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,347 Senior Member
    Robert, we don't have to go all the way to Australia for an example of an overseas British penal colony- - - - -how about the colony (later state) of Georgia, which was established as a penal colony for English debtors' prison inmates? The pejorative term "Pommy" for Australians was an anagram for "Prisoner of Mother England".
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Robert, we don't have to go all the way to Australia for an example of an overseas British penal colony- - - - -how about the colony (later state) of Georgia, which was established as a penal colony for English debtors' prison inmates? The pejorative term "Pommy" for Australians was an anagram for "Prisoner of Mother England".
    Jerry

    Thanks Teach!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    "It is what it is":usa:
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,084 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Robert, we don't have to go all the way to Australia for an example of an overseas British penal colony- - - - -how about the colony (later state) of Georgia, which was established as a penal colony for English debtors' prison inmates? The pejorative term "Pommy" for Australians was an anagram for "Prisoner of Mother England".
    Jerry

    Buncha thieves, vagrants, miscreants, and ne'erdowells were sent to Georgia. The really bad ones left for Tennessee!
    Overkill is underrated.
  • bobbyrlf3bobbyrlf3 Senior Member Posts: 2,465 Senior Member
    :popcorn:
    Knowledge is essential to living freely and fully; understanding gives knowledge purpose and strength; wisdom is combining the two and applying them appropriately in words and actions.
  • bullsi1911bullsi1911 Moderator Posts: 9,688 Senior Member
    I would much rather have a number of politically appointed individuals feeding from the trough than large corporations which have billions of dollars in profit motive and a greater ability to concentrate power and influence feeding at the trough.

    Not me. I would rather have someone with their job and livelihood on the line for pretty much anything. Because a Govt job is always going to remain. Private sector- you cause the bottom line to shrink- you are gone.

    BTW, you need to watch this video: http://dauckster.posterous.com/a-31-year-old-video-clip-absolutely-worth-you

    the Govt is NEVER better than the private sector.
    To make something simple is a thousand times more difficult than to make something complex.
    -Mikhail Kalashnikov
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,347 Senior Member
    The really bad ones left for Tennessee!

    Yep, and when they got into the east Tennessee hills, the Brits knew better than to try to bring 'em back! My ancestors got to South Carolina from Scotland/Ireland in 1763, and were in middle Tennessee west of Nashville by the 1820's.
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,084 Senior Member
    My paternal ancestors are English/Scottish/Irish who were imported to GA with Oglethorpe. There's an island in England with the paternal surname. What kind of people get thrown off an island named for them?
    Overkill is underrated.
  • blueslide88blueslide88 Member Posts: 273 Member
    I would much rather have a number of politically appointed individuals feeding from the trough than large corporations which have billions of dollars in profit motive and a greater ability to concentrate power and influence feeding at the trough. There's orders of magnitude difference in the risks. It is a micro risk vs. a macro risk. By privatizing you are likely to get an operation that runs more efficiently at the small, per inmate scale, but one that is going to be working actively against your interest at the macro level...ensuring that prison population grows and is ineffective at rehabilitating inmates. It is like the "free" razor that has $10 replacement blades or the cheap printer that requires you to by 5 $30 ink cartridges every few months. If you only base your decision on the free or cheap part and ignore the overall costs it sounds like a good deal, but it's not.

    This line caught my eye:

    ensuring that prison population grows and is ineffective at rehabilitating inmates.

    The state of California has achieved this all by itself. It's prisons are so stuffed full of inmates, SCOTUS decided it had to change it's ways. A violation of the 8th amendment. What a mess.

    Texas, on the other hand, accomplished it's goal by the use of private prisons AND by streamlining its system of processing parolees and by emphasizing rehabilitation of non-violent prisoners.

    How do you explain the fact that one failed miserably (government alone) and the other succeeded through the use of private enterprise?
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,084 Senior Member
    Don't forget that California got part of its prison glut from the 3-strikes rule mandating sentencing. The rule was passed by its citizens.

    It was also heavily lobbied for by the state's corrections officer's union. With the growth of the prison population, more corrections officers were needed, leading to greater union influence. It's now one of the most powerful unions in the state. Concurrent with 3-strikes, the recidivism rate of inmates rose to one of the highest in the nation. What once was a program for rehabilitation has now become strictly incarceration. Also, the formerly minimal prisons budget has bloated severely.

    http://www.npr.org/2009/08/13/111843426/folsom-embodies-californias-prison-blues
    Overkill is underrated.
  • blueslide88blueslide88 Member Posts: 273 Member
    Don't forget that California got part of its prison glut from the 3-strikes rule mandating sentencing. The rule was passed by its citizens.

    It was also heavily lobbied for by the state's corrections officer's union. With the growth of the prison population, more corrections officers were needed, leading to greater union influence. It's now one of the most powerful unions in the state. Concurrent with 3-strikes, the recidivism rate of inmates rose to one of the highest in the nation. What once was a program for rehabilitation has now become strictly incarceration. Also, the formerly minimal prisons budget has bloated severely.

    http://www.npr.org/2009/08/13/111843426/folsom-embodies-californias-prison-blues

    Excellent article, and I quote from it:

    In three decades, the California Correctional Peace Officers Association has become one of the most powerful political forces in California. The union has contributed millions of dollars to support "three strikes" and other laws that lengthen sentences and increase parole sanctions. It donated $1 million to Wilson after he backed the three strikes law.

    And the result for the union has been dramatic. Since the laws went into effect and the inmate population boomed, the union grew from 2,600 officers to 45,000 officers. Salaries jumped: In 1980, the average officer earned $15,000 a year; today, one in every 10 officers makes more than $100,000 a year.


    So, alpha, it's unions that have corrupted California's penal system, throwing cash around, paying off politicians (with donations) and influencing voters, inflating the payroll, and discouraging rehabilitation.

    Interestingly, Florida did the "three strikes you're out" approach, with what it calls the 5-10-20 law, which automatically escalates sentences for repeat offenders. But by the intelligent use of "private prisons" for minimum security facilities, some of which actually give prisoners paying jobs, offer drug rehab programs, other counseling services, and encouraging rehabilitation (since somewhere in the 1980's), it faces no prison crisis.

    The facts, it sure seems to me, lead to the conclusion that a conservative, pro-business approach to problem solving is far, far superior to government's incompetence and wasteful spending.

    Here's a link to a report that Florida's prison union is doing its best in court to prevent the state from further expanding its private prison approach:

    http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/10/31/2481294/state-to-appeal-private-prison.html
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,669 Senior Member
    Excellent article, and I quote from it:

    In three decades, the California Correctional Peace Officers Association has become one of the most powerful political forces in California. The union has contributed millions of dollars to support "three strikes" and other laws that lengthen sentences and increase parole sanctions. It donated $1 million to Wilson after he backed the three strikes law.

    And the result for the union has been dramatic. Since the laws went into effect and the inmate population boomed, the union grew from 2,600 officers to 45,000 officers. Salaries jumped: In 1980, the average officer earned $15,000 a year; today, one in every 10 officers makes more than $100,000 a year.


    So, alpha, it's unions that have corrupted California's penal system, throwing cash around, paying off politicians (with donations) and influencing voters, inflating the payroll, and discouraging rehabilitation.

    Interestingly, Florida did the "three strikes you're out" approach, with what it calls the 5-10-20 law, which automatically escalates sentences for repeat offenders. But by the intelligent use of "private prisons" for minimum security facilities, some of which actually give prisoners paying jobs, offer drug rehab programs, other counseling services, and encouraging rehabilitation (since somewhere in the 1980's), it faces no prison crisis.

    The facts, it sure seems to me, lead to the conclusion that a conservative, pro-business approach to problem solving is far, far superior to government's incompetence and wasteful spending.

    Here's a link to a report that Florida's prison union is doing its best in court to prevent the state from further expanding its private prison approach:

    http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/10/31/2481294/state-to-appeal-private-prison.html

    How long has Florida had this system? Talk to me in 20-30 years after Florida has had these laws and private prisons in place for as long as CA has had 3 strikes and prison unions. Then again all of that is besides the point. You're reading the wrong answer to the wrong question. The real issue in CA had nothing to do with private vs. public prisons, it had to do with a powerful lobbying interest with a strong profit motive for stronger criminal penalties and increased spending on prisons successfully pushing laws that are good for them but bad for the state.

    Simply swapping out prison unions for large private prison corporations just changes who the people with the profit motive are. Instead of corrections officers lobbying for and gaining the benefits you'll have private corporations doing the same. No the problem isn't public vs. private but the REAL problem is the fact that our political process serves only the well funded special interests and not the will of the people and what is good for the state or country overall. Let the private prison corporations grow and they'll be hundreds of times more powerful than any prison union. The only way to fix this is to eliminate the money in politics.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,619 Senior Member
    The only way to fix this is to eliminate the money in politics.

    That's a very funny statement coming from an Obama apologist. His campaign and the DNC machine will spend a billion dollars or more to get him re-elected, much of it coming from the slush fund created by 'stimulus' packages, and you weep for the poor taxpayers - while voting a straight Democrat ticket and bemoaning the retirement of Barney Frank. The contradictions are just hilarious. Makes me wish I'd gone to one of those wild and crazy colleges for 6 or 7 years. :jester:
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,669 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    That's a very funny statement coming from an Obama apologist. His campaign and the DNC machine will spend a billion dollars or more to get him re-elected, much of it coming from the slush fund created by 'stimulus' packages, and you weep for the poor taxpayers - while voting a straight Democrat ticket and bemoaning the retirement of Barney Frank. The contradictions are just hilarious. Makes me wish I'd gone to one of those wild and crazy colleges for 6 or 7 years. :jester:

    Nice Bisley! At least I recognize that my guy is bought and sold and keep looking for someone who isn't. Most of you guys won't even recognize how corrupt your side is. I'm open to a third party that's interested in real reform and focused on what's right for the country rather than what's right for the donors, but since that isn't likely and since my choice is going to be between a giant douche and a turd sandwich, I've got to pick one. For now I'm going with the turd sandwich I know rather than the giant douche I don't.

    For those who don't get the joke:
    http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/154582/debate-2004

    PS The RNC machine puts the DNC to shame! What I wouldn't give for a machine that ruthless and efficient on my side!
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,619 Senior Member
    Now, that's the kind of fire I like to see!

    It's more of what I have come to expect from talking point soldiers for the cause. :yesno:
  • blueslide88blueslide88 Member Posts: 273 Member
    Nice Bisley! At least I recognize that my guy is bought and sold and keep looking for someone who isn't. Most of you guys won't even recognize how corrupt your side is. I'm open to a third party that's interested in real reform and focused on what's right for the country rather than what's right for the donors, but since that isn't likely and since my choice is going to be between a giant douche and a turd sandwich, I've got to pick one. For now I'm going with the turd sandwich I know rather than the giant douche I don't.

    For those who don't get the joke:
    http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/154582/debate-2004

    PS The RNC machine puts the DNC to shame! What I wouldn't give for a machine that ruthless and efficient on my side!

    Nothing like elevating the maturity of the discussion. The word "sophomoric" comes to mind. Rather apt, I think.:yawn:
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,619 Senior Member
    I'm open to a third party that's interested in real reform and focused on what's right for the country rather than what's right for the donors, but since that isn't likely and since my choice is going to be between a giant douche and a turd sandwich, I've got to pick one.

    Your choice is going to be either a very boring guy who keeps saying to cut the spending, control the flow of immigrants, and unleash the power of small businesses to rescue the economy and put people back to work...or a community organizer who neither knows nor cares about capitalism, because he never had a job of work in his entire life, doesn't believe in it, anyway, and only knows what the union thugs he works for tell him it is.

    If you are lucky, one of those boring guys will win, in spite of your efforts, and you can spend the next four years gleefully ripping him to shreds, while reaping the benefits of an economy that has been barely saved from collapse...at least until the next Marxist/Leninist/Maoist gets elected and finishes the job this one started. You will probably even get to keep your guns for a while longer.
  • JeeperJeeper Senior Member Posts: 2,952 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    Your choice is going to be either a very boring guy who keeps saying to cut the spending, control the flow of immigrants, and unleash the power of small businesses to rescue the economy and put people back to work...or a community organizer who neither knows nor cares about capitalism, because he never had a job of work in his entire life, doesn't believe in it, anyway, and only knows what the union thugs he works for tell him it is.

    If you are lucky, one of those boring guys will win, in spite of your efforts, and you can spend the next four years gleefully ripping him to shreds, while reaping the benefits of an economy that has been barely saved from collapse...at least until the next Marxist/Leninist/Maoist gets elected and finishes the job this one started. You will probably even get to keep your guns for a while longer.

    :win: :that:

    Luis
    Wielding the Hammer of Thor first requires you to lift and carry the Hammer of Thor. - Bigslug
2»
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.