5 ms·

This is complete nonsense. Money has influenced these policies and most "Americans" tune out the process.

MGMXI 10y ago
Agreed. @Unbeliever69 Don't flatter Americans with this being our "will". It's a select group of people deciding on policies and their oversights are ultimately permitted by the public's indifference towards the political process.
shkkmo 10y ago
I believe Unbeliever69 is referring the difficulties involved in finding jobs or housing once you have a criminal record. That isn't just 'policies', that is the result of the individual actions people take. There certainly are exceptions, but those exceptions tent to prove the rule.
Daishiman 10y ago
Ever heard any elected American politician running on a platform of shorter sentences, rehabilitation and reducing prison population?
- erichocean 10y ago
  > running on a platform of shorter sentences Trump? Oh, you meant criminal sentencing, not grammar. Got it.
- cmdrfred 10y ago
  I did hear of a guy like that once but it turns out I would be sexist if I didn't vote for his opponent. You see, it was her turn.
- Chathamization 10y ago
  A number of politicians have advocated that, particularly when it comes to non-violent drug offenses. Clinton, for example, is running on that platform: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/criminal-justice-reform/ https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/criminal-justice-refor... Though I should say that I'm not sure shorter sentences across the board are what's needed. We definitely need shorter sentences for non-violent drug offenses, and shorter sentences for inmates who seem like they can be rehabilitated is a good idea. On the other hand, I infrequently read about cases in the news where some deeply disturbed individual commits a truly heinous crime, and then is back out in the general population after only 2 or 3 years. There are some people who really should be in for a longer time. I often look at sentencing through the lens of "how would I feel if this person lived in my neighborhood." Someone like Mumia Abu-Jamal is in for life, but I wouldn't be particularly bothered if he lived next door to me (or Bernie Madoff, sentenced to 150 years). Then there are people who only get a few years, but I wouldn't want them living anywhere near me.
  - cmdrfred 10y ago
    I find her stance on prisons hard to believe considering her comments[0] as first lady. You might believe she changed but it shows a massive error in judgement at very least. [0]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8k4nmRZx9nc http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8k4nmRZx9nc
    - nck4222 10y ago
      You're commenting in a thread that's advocating for the need to give people second chances, but you have a problem with a politician because they said something 22 years ago that you disagree with. If you hold everyone to that standard you'll never be able to trust anything anyone says.
      - cmdrfred 10y ago
        >If you hold everyone to that standard you'll never be able to trust anything anyone says. Can you link to the Bernie Sanders super predator video? Do you know why you can't find it? Integrity. Is that really an unreasonable requirement in this day and age?
  - ashitlerferad 10y ago
    Prison doesn't make deeply disturbed individuals less disturbed.
    - Chathamization 10y ago
      True, and some people should probably be removed from society in general. Give them a pleasant life, but understand that they are too dangerous to allow back into society. We expect common citizens to be willing to sacrifice their lives in defense of our society. I don't think asking someone who was trying to murder random strangers (for example) to sacrifice their freedom is asking too much.
      - ashitlerferad 10y ago
- mahyarm 10y ago
  Well if these two passing california props are any indicator, yes: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/california-prop-36_n_2089179.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/california-prop-36_... http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-ff-pol-proposition47-20141106-story.html http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-ff-pol-propositi...
rayiner 10y ago
Money from where? Look at the graph of U.S. incarceration rate: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwards.png/800px-U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwards.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/U..... The inflection point is around 1975-1980--a response to a spike in crime that started in the 1960s. The first private prison operator (CCA) wasn't even founded until 1983 and even in the 1990's, it was losing money. The whole "private prisons cause incarceration" shtick is the same as "umbrella sales cause rain." No, rain came first, umbrella companies came after as a way to profit from rain.
- John23832 10y ago
  > a response to a spike in crime that started in the 1960s Care to back that statement up? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Drugs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Drugs Crime and punishment is a for profit business. If you don't believe that... well then I don't know what to tell you. The War on Drugs, DRAMATICALLY increased the prison populations in the United States. States that saw an explosion in their prison populations and that we strapped for cash / didn't care to deal with the incarcerated (particularly southern states) turned to private industry to house their incarcerated populations. > Money from where? What money? Taxpayer money. And once private business get's a taste of blood, and politicians in the US get that first taste of kickback money, we all know where it goes from there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison%E2%80%93industrial_complex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison%E2%80%93industrial_comp... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School-to-prison_pipeline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School-to-prison_pipeline If WE as a society decide that WE want to sent people to prison, WE should have to deal with the consequences of it. WE should be responsible for the incarcerated. WE should be who those prisoners are reporting to. After all, WE should have reform as the end goal. We should't have some black box prison company as the intermediary who's best interest it is to hush, abuse and prevent reform of prisoners in order to keep them coming and their pockets fat.
  - rayiner 10y ago
    The spike in crime started in the 1960s. Incarceration rate started ramping up in the 1970s. Drug war started ramping up in the 1980s. Private prisons started ramping up in the 1990s. https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.factcheck.org%2FUploadedFiles%2F2016%2F07%2FViolent-Crime-Rate-Chart1.png&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.factcheck.org%2F2016%2F07%2Fdueling-claims-on-crime-trend%2F&docid=J6YtPeKXWOex6M&tbnid=AQb3aEIt35hq2M%3A&w=500&h=315&hl=en-us&client=safari&bih=628&biw=414&ved=0ahUKEwjXiKrZhczOAhVJGx4KHcFnAD4QMwhDKBIwEg&iact=mrc&uact=8 https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.factch... Your theory of causation (kickbacks from private prison companies cause harsher laws and more incarceration), though popular, doesn't explain the data. If you look at the ordering of events, what makes more sense is actually the opposite causation. Crime started going up in the 1960s due to depopulation of the cities and exporting jobs. Drugs got blamed as the bogeyman, which got the drug war started in the 1970s and 1980s. Fed up with skyrocketing crime, people voted for tough on crime laws (by huge margins and often in public referendums rather than legislation) in the 1970 through 1990s. And the last step in the chain, in the 1990s and 2000s, was private companies springing up to take advantage of the massive growth in need for prisons.

MGMXI 10y ago

Agreed. @Unbeliever69 Don't flatter Americans with this being our "will". It's a select group of people deciding on policies and their oversights are ultimately permitted by the public's indifference towards the political process.

shkkmo 10y ago

I believe Unbeliever69 is referring the difficulties involved in finding jobs or housing once you have a criminal record. That isn't just 'policies', that is the result of the individual actions people take. There certainly are exceptions, but those exceptions tent to prove the rule.

Daishiman 10y ago

Ever heard any elected American politician running on a platform of shorter sentences, rehabilitation and reducing prison population?

erichocean 10y ago
> running on a platform of shorter sentences Trump? Oh, you meant criminal sentencing, not grammar. Got it.
cmdrfred 10y ago
I did hear of a guy like that once but it turns out I would be sexist if I didn't vote for his opponent. You see, it was her turn.
Chathamization 10y ago
A number of politicians have advocated that, particularly when it comes to non-violent drug offenses. Clinton, for example, is running on that platform: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/criminal-justice-reform/ https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/criminal-justice-refor... Though I should say that I'm not sure shorter sentences across the board are what's needed. We definitely need shorter sentences for non-violent drug offenses, and shorter sentences for inmates who seem like they can be rehabilitated is a good idea. On the other hand, I infrequently read about cases in the news where some deeply disturbed individual commits a truly heinous crime, and then is back out in the general population after only 2 or 3 years. There are some people who really should be in for a longer time. I often look at sentencing through the lens of "how would I feel if this person lived in my neighborhood." Someone like Mumia Abu-Jamal is in for life, but I wouldn't be particularly bothered if he lived next door to me (or Bernie Madoff, sentenced to 150 years). Then there are people who only get a few years, but I wouldn't want them living anywhere near me.
- cmdrfred 10y ago
  I find her stance on prisons hard to believe considering her comments[0] as first lady. You might believe she changed but it shows a massive error in judgement at very least. [0]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8k4nmRZx9nc http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8k4nmRZx9nc
  - nck4222 10y ago
    You're commenting in a thread that's advocating for the need to give people second chances, but you have a problem with a politician because they said something 22 years ago that you disagree with. If you hold everyone to that standard you'll never be able to trust anything anyone says.
    - cmdrfred 10y ago
      >If you hold everyone to that standard you'll never be able to trust anything anyone says. Can you link to the Bernie Sanders super predator video? Do you know why you can't find it? Integrity. Is that really an unreasonable requirement in this day and age?
- ashitlerferad 10y ago
  Prison doesn't make deeply disturbed individuals less disturbed.
  - Chathamization 10y ago
    True, and some people should probably be removed from society in general. Give them a pleasant life, but understand that they are too dangerous to allow back into society. We expect common citizens to be willing to sacrifice their lives in defense of our society. I don't think asking someone who was trying to murder random strangers (for example) to sacrifice their freedom is asking too much.
    - ashitlerferad 10y ago
mahyarm 10y ago
Well if these two passing california props are any indicator, yes: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/california-prop-36_n_2089179.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/california-prop-36_... http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-ff-pol-proposition47-20141106-story.html http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-ff-pol-propositi...

rayiner 10y ago

Money from where? Look at the graph of U.S. incarceration rate: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwards.png/800px-U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwards.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/U..... The inflection point is around 1975-1980--a response to a spike in crime that started in the 1960s. The first private prison operator (CCA) wasn't even founded until 1983 and even in the 1990's, it was losing money. The whole "private prisons cause incarceration" shtick is the same as "umbrella sales cause rain." No, rain came first, umbrella companies came after as a way to profit from rain.

John23832 10y ago
> a response to a spike in crime that started in the 1960s Care to back that statement up? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Drugs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Drugs Crime and punishment is a for profit business. If you don't believe that... well then I don't know what to tell you. The War on Drugs, DRAMATICALLY increased the prison populations in the United States. States that saw an explosion in their prison populations and that we strapped for cash / didn't care to deal with the incarcerated (particularly southern states) turned to private industry to house their incarcerated populations. > Money from where? What money? Taxpayer money. And once private business get's a taste of blood, and politicians in the US get that first taste of kickback money, we all know where it goes from there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison%E2%80%93industrial_complex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison%E2%80%93industrial_comp... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School-to-prison_pipeline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School-to-prison_pipeline If WE as a society decide that WE want to sent people to prison, WE should have to deal with the consequences of it. WE should be responsible for the incarcerated. WE should be who those prisoners are reporting to. After all, WE should have reform as the end goal. We should't have some black box prison company as the intermediary who's best interest it is to hush, abuse and prevent reform of prisoners in order to keep them coming and their pockets fat.
- rayiner 10y ago
  The spike in crime started in the 1960s. Incarceration rate started ramping up in the 1970s. Drug war started ramping up in the 1980s. Private prisons started ramping up in the 1990s. https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.factcheck.org%2FUploadedFiles%2F2016%2F07%2FViolent-Crime-Rate-Chart1.png&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.factcheck.org%2F2016%2F07%2Fdueling-claims-on-crime-trend%2F&docid=J6YtPeKXWOex6M&tbnid=AQb3aEIt35hq2M%3A&w=500&h=315&hl=en-us&client=safari&bih=628&biw=414&ved=0ahUKEwjXiKrZhczOAhVJGx4KHcFnAD4QMwhDKBIwEg&iact=mrc&uact=8 https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.factch... Your theory of causation (kickbacks from private prison companies cause harsher laws and more incarceration), though popular, doesn't explain the data. If you look at the ordering of events, what makes more sense is actually the opposite causation. Crime started going up in the 1960s due to depopulation of the cities and exporting jobs. Drugs got blamed as the bogeyman, which got the drug war started in the 1970s and 1980s. Fed up with skyrocketing crime, people voted for tough on crime laws (by huge margins and often in public referendums rather than legislation) in the 1970 through 1990s. And the last step in the chain, in the 1990s and 2000s, was private companies springing up to take advantage of the massive growth in need for prisons.