4 ms·

Why is actually acceptable to limit the communications of prisoners at all. They have their mobility limited - it is punishment enough. Not sure how limiting th

Why is actually acceptable to limit the communications of prisoners at all. They have their mobility limited - it is punishment enough. Not sure how limiting them from the internet and cell phones helps with their debt to society.

danielmg 9y ago
To prevent commissioning of crimes is probably the best reason. For example smuggling in drugs, arranging escapes, harassing victims, etc.
- panzer_wyrm 9y ago
  All of those are crimes and easily trackable. If you want to make it life sentence be my guest.
  - justabystander 9y ago
    If crimes were easily trackable and prosecutable, we probably wouldn't have such a hard time keeping criminals in jail. We still have crimes committed in jail that don't get properly solved, much less sentenced. Also, this isn't necessarily about dumb kids being busted for drugs or stealing, but organized crime members. The possibility of them ordering hits from inside prison walls or tracking down people in witness protection kind of makes people nervous about letting them talk with anyone and everyone. That's not to say it's the most effective means, since smuggling, messengers, visitors and other means still exist for passing information. But that's not really an excuse to not try at all.
    - jakobegger 9y ago
      I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of prisoners are not mafia bosses who order hits from prison. I'd consider it totally okay to isolate these people. But most prisons are filled with dumb kids busted for drugs or stealing, and I see no reason why we should make them even more miserable... I'd rather have them keep their connections in the outside world, so they have more of a chance to get back on their feet once they are released. (Also, I'm pretty sure an prisoner browsing Facebook all day makes a lot less trouble than one who has nothing to do all day...)
      - moftz 9y ago
        Prisoners already have communication mediums that guards can monitor and if they want to talk to someone with no prying ears or eyes, they can talk to a lawyer. Prisoners should have no need for cell phones or access to unrestricted communications. Yes, there are some young people in prison that really shouldn't be but there are plenty of dangerous gang members in there that should be totally removed from their "business responsibilities".
        Chaebixi 9y ago
        > Prisoners already have communication mediums that guards can monitor Those are often exploitatively priced, a situation Ajit Pai has sought to preserve: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/republican-led-fcc-drops-court-defense-of-inmate-calling-rate-cap/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/republican-led-f... https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/technology/fcc-prison-phone-calls-regulations.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/technology/fcc-prison-pho...
        moftz 9y ago
        That's a different issue and shouldn't be resolved by letting prisoners have unrestricted access to cell phones.
        placeybordeaux 9y ago
        But it's not solved so the smuggling will continue.
      - sluggg 9y ago
        You forget that mafia bosses don't get put into jail for being mafia bosses. Many times they got caught with smaller crimes, like tax evasion.
gsich 9y ago
Let's say you are in prison for online fraud. You get internet access. You'll continue to fraud.
- occultist_throw 9y ago
  Sure, because segregating and separating prisoners from everything is a great way to reintegrate them back in society... Oh, that. We don't care about reintegration. We don't care if they survive outside of prison. And with what little educational abilities have been destroyed, are we surprised in the least that they go back to criminal actions to make money?
  - Cthulhu_ 9y ago
    So you're saying people guilty of computer fraud should retain access to computers? Don't get me wrong, I do agree that the US justice system is focused on punishment instead of revalidation and there's a lot that can be improved there, but this is about giving people who have a problem access to that which enabled their problem.
    - mavhc 9y ago
      To be fair we do let people convicted of arson continue to have access to oxygen
    - Pica_soO 9y ago
      Eh, yes, because IOT makes everything a computer on the internet? That law cuts them off from shoes, cups and cars? Basically a mandatory tamper-proof store of a felonys internet use and access would be enough. If the evidence is not there - or they went astray..
  - icebraining 9y ago
    Does any limit imposed on the inmate's communications prevent reintegration? I'm not saying the current system - which is very exploitative of inmates, with extremely expensive calls - is anywhere near OK. But that doesn't mean you can't have provide inmates with decent communication accessibilities without having uncontrolled cellphones with them.
DanBC 9y ago
We know that some prisoners continue to commit crime, and that they use mobile phones to do so. I'm strongly in favour of rehabilitation. I don't think prison works and it should be used far less than it is. But even I think that control of mobile phones is important. And it's not just about phones. A prisoner could easily pack Stanley knife blades in a safe package and put those up his anus. There are some important human rights balances here. We can't insert fingers into the anus of all prisoners just in case, but we do need to protect prisoners from violent crime. This is especially true because there are a range of different types of detention against your will - patients in a mental health hospital on a short assessment stay; people in a police cell overnight; medium term patients in MH hospital; long term patients in a forensic hospital (they committed an act of serious violence while they were mentally ill and were sent to hospital); long term prisoners who keep committing acts of violence while in prison. We can't perform the same levels of checking on all of them. There has been some work on this, on checking what type of airport scanners work or don't work for detecting blades. It's a bit scary to see what gets through.

danielmg 9y ago

To prevent commissioning of crimes is probably the best reason. For example smuggling in drugs, arranging escapes, harassing victims, etc.

panzer_wyrm 9y ago
All of those are crimes and easily trackable. If you want to make it life sentence be my guest.
- justabystander 9y ago
  If crimes were easily trackable and prosecutable, we probably wouldn't have such a hard time keeping criminals in jail. We still have crimes committed in jail that don't get properly solved, much less sentenced. Also, this isn't necessarily about dumb kids being busted for drugs or stealing, but organized crime members. The possibility of them ordering hits from inside prison walls or tracking down people in witness protection kind of makes people nervous about letting them talk with anyone and everyone. That's not to say it's the most effective means, since smuggling, messengers, visitors and other means still exist for passing information. But that's not really an excuse to not try at all.
  - jakobegger 9y ago
    I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of prisoners are not mafia bosses who order hits from prison. I'd consider it totally okay to isolate these people. But most prisons are filled with dumb kids busted for drugs or stealing, and I see no reason why we should make them even more miserable... I'd rather have them keep their connections in the outside world, so they have more of a chance to get back on their feet once they are released. (Also, I'm pretty sure an prisoner browsing Facebook all day makes a lot less trouble than one who has nothing to do all day...)
    - moftz 9y ago
      Prisoners already have communication mediums that guards can monitor and if they want to talk to someone with no prying ears or eyes, they can talk to a lawyer. Prisoners should have no need for cell phones or access to unrestricted communications. Yes, there are some young people in prison that really shouldn't be but there are plenty of dangerous gang members in there that should be totally removed from their "business responsibilities".
      - Chaebixi 9y ago
        > Prisoners already have communication mediums that guards can monitor Those are often exploitatively priced, a situation Ajit Pai has sought to preserve: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/republican-led-fcc-drops-court-defense-of-inmate-calling-rate-cap/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/republican-led-f... https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/technology/fcc-prison-phone-calls-regulations.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/technology/fcc-prison-pho...
        moftz 9y ago
        That's a different issue and shouldn't be resolved by letting prisoners have unrestricted access to cell phones.
        placeybordeaux 9y ago
        But it's not solved so the smuggling will continue.
    - sluggg 9y ago
      You forget that mafia bosses don't get put into jail for being mafia bosses. Many times they got caught with smaller crimes, like tax evasion.

gsich 9y ago

Let's say you are in prison for online fraud. You get internet access. You'll continue to fraud.

occultist_throw 9y ago
Sure, because segregating and separating prisoners from everything is a great way to reintegrate them back in society... Oh, that. We don't care about reintegration. We don't care if they survive outside of prison. And with what little educational abilities have been destroyed, are we surprised in the least that they go back to criminal actions to make money?
- Cthulhu_ 9y ago
  So you're saying people guilty of computer fraud should retain access to computers? Don't get me wrong, I do agree that the US justice system is focused on punishment instead of revalidation and there's a lot that can be improved there, but this is about giving people who have a problem access to that which enabled their problem.
  - mavhc 9y ago
    To be fair we do let people convicted of arson continue to have access to oxygen
  - Pica_soO 9y ago
    Eh, yes, because IOT makes everything a computer on the internet? That law cuts them off from shoes, cups and cars? Basically a mandatory tamper-proof store of a felonys internet use and access would be enough. If the evidence is not there - or they went astray..
- icebraining 9y ago
  Does any limit imposed on the inmate's communications prevent reintegration? I'm not saying the current system - which is very exploitative of inmates, with extremely expensive calls - is anywhere near OK. But that doesn't mean you can't have provide inmates with decent communication accessibilities without having uncontrolled cellphones with them.

DanBC 9y ago

We know that some prisoners continue to commit crime, and that they use mobile phones to do so. I'm strongly in favour of rehabilitation. I don't think prison works and it should be used far less than it is. But even I think that control of mobile phones is important. And it's not just about phones. A prisoner could easily pack Stanley knife blades in a safe package and put those up his anus. There are some important human rights balances here. We can't insert fingers into the anus of all prisoners just in case, but we do need to protect prisoners from violent crime. This is especially true because there are a range of different types of detention against your will - patients in a mental health hospital on a short assessment stay; people in a police cell overnight; medium term patients in MH hospital; long term patients in a forensic hospital (they committed an act of serious violence while they were mentally ill and were sent to hospital); long term prisoners who keep committing acts of violence while in prison. We can't perform the same levels of checking on all of them. There has been some work on this, on checking what type of airport scanners work or don't work for detecting blades. It's a bit scary to see what gets through.