4 ms·

> Basically, locking people up prevents them from committing crimes for that duration. [...] that's going to reduce crime by removing whatever crimes they'd com

by furyg3 8y ago

> Basically, locking people up prevents them from committing crimes for that duration. [...] that's going to reduce crime by removing whatever crimes they'd commit. You're making a lot of assumptions here. 1) There is no crime in prison. 2) The imprisoned would have kept on committing crime for their total sentence if they were not in jail. 3) Prisoners 'return' to the world committing the same type/volume of crimes that they were committing when they went in. For #1: There is crime in prison, a whole lot of it, and (even if you don't have sympathy for criminals) it's bad for society; people may come out worse off than they went in, driving crime up further. Jail is an intense experience, and it seems like the skills that you develop while 'surviving' in jail may not be so constructive for society when you're released. For #2: As a kid my friends and I made a lot of stupid mistakes and some pretty bad decisions. Purely arbitrary factors (race, affluence, geography, etc) meant that none of us were ever locked up for them. We had the opportunity to correct our behavior, grow out of it. Had we have been punished harshly, it's likely that that our bad behavior would have continued. This is due to #1 (exposure to crime/criminals in prison, and contact with the justice system), but also loss of opportunities, and probably a different exposure or experience with drugs. For #3: The above two points lead to the possibility that people who come out of jail are more likely to engage in more or worse criminal activity when they're released than when they went in. So while there need to be consequences for crime, it's not at all evident that increased incarceration, certainly the way we are doing it, would lead to reduced criminal activity.

skate22 8y ago
Well for my family member who was/is a heroin addict, 6 months in jail meant 6 months of not stealing from her family. 6 months of not neglecting her kid. 6 months of sobriety to reflect on where her life was going. She did not stay clean, and I'm sure we can do better as a society to rehab our people, but for 6 months she was limited in the damage she could do to those around her. I'm pretty conflicted on the topic
- emiliobumachar 8y ago
  How could one possibly not neglect one's kid while in jail? Presumably someone or some institution stepped in, probably the family. How much was the jailing necessary for the kid to get this help?
  - jothezero 8y ago
    By screaming at the child, hitting the child, taking drugs around the child.... Keep the easy questions coming.
    - nostoc 8y ago
      That's abuse, not neglect.
      - parsnips 8y ago
        A distinction without a meaningful difference.
        ilovetux 8y ago
        I believe that the difference is meaningful. Neglect is a very specific type of abuse. Physical, emotional and sexual abuse are all very different from neglect. All forms of abuse are different in terms of the psychological effects on the abused, societal reactions to both parties, motivation on the part of the abuser and much more.
  - skate22 8y ago
    She was not going to willingly give up the kid, even to family. I worded that poorly, but what i meant is that the child was no longer being neglected
- sewercake 8y ago
  All of those things would be even easier if the system was rehabilitative!
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  I hope you agree that sending that person to jail is only a short term solution. As far as I know prison is quite expensive. Wouldn't it be more effective to send her to rehab instead? It seems the US is using prison as the catch all for people who have trouble living in society. Be it for mental health reasons or drug addiction.
  - skate22 8y ago
    She has been to rehab, and she was able to get drugs & pregnant while there. I think you are underestimating the power of a heroin addiction and overestimating the effectiveness of rehab in the US, especially for unwilling participants
    - maxxxxx 8y ago
      I have dealt with (alcohol) addicts myself. I still prefer them going to rehab repeatedly instead of going to jail. Rehab is probably cheaper and there is at least some chance that things will improve. Sending addicts to jail just makes things worse. Improving the quality of rehab is certainly worth a discussion. But there the US mindset gets in the way that doesn't want to spend money on welfare but instead prefers to spend more money on prisons. The only problem is that prisons don't know that their role now is not only to hold criminals but also people with mental health issues or addiction.
- pas 8y ago
  > 6 months of sobriety to reflect on where her life was going. https://anaheimlighthouse.com/blog/drug-use-in-us-prisons/ https://anaheimlighthouse.com/blog/drug-use-in-us-prisons/
  - skate22 8y ago
    She came out clean, it just only lasted a few months.
- arcticbull 8y ago
  I'm confident she did drugs in prison. Because opiates are a way to escape, and prison sucks, and prison has drugs. [1] If you want to help people get off drugs, don't criminalize them, send them to rehab, end of story. Portugal decriminalized all drugs and started sending people to mandatory rehab if they had problems and the rate of drug harm went from one of the highest in the EU to one of the lowest in just 15 years. Portugal has 3 overdose deaths per million citizens, compared to the EU average of 17.3 [2, 3] The US is 213 per million, accounting for 1 in every 4 worldwide. [4] Clearly the US system does not work. It's crazy, right, that a country where all drugs are legal has a 100x lower overdose rate than one where drugs crimes are enforced as strictly as humanly possible. [1] https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/13/17020002/prison-opioid-epidemic-medications-addiction https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/13/17020002/p... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-hasnt-the-world-copied-it https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radic... [3] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/portugal-decriminalised-drugs-14-years-ago-and-now-hardly-anyone-dies-from-overdosing-10301780.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/portugal-dec... [4] https://www.overdoseday.com/resources/facts-stats/ https://www.overdoseday.com/resources/facts-stats/
  - skate22 8y ago
    She came out clean and relapsed several months later, but who am i to argue with your links
    - arcticbull 8y ago
      Let me start off by saying I feel for you and your family. It's important to remember a single data point (an anecdote) is no substitute for large-scale studies (country-wide in the case of Portugal). The data I gave you covers millions and millions of individuals, and in my opinion, and should be weighed accordingly. I'd love for you to read them and provide your own thoughts rather than just saying "no, I have one data point close to me and advocate policy based on it." Drug addictions are truly complicated things. In regards to the relapse after release, there's some evidence that addictions are in part situational. By the end of the Vietnam war, some 20% of service members where addicted to heroin. 95% of them were no longer addicted to heroin as soon as they returned home. Whereas people with additions in the US had a 90% chase of relapse after they returned home to the environment in which they used to be addicted. [1] I even notice this to a smaller degree myself, I drink more in SF - when I'm there, I drink more, when I travel, I drink less even controlling for everything else to the best of my abilities (again, an anecdote not a study). Prison is a hammer, we need a scalpel, and it's important we use data dispassionately to solve this problem. What we have so far is clearly not working, and it's time to look outside and adopt things that have worked elsewhere even if they fly in the face of the status quo. I would argue especially if they fly in the face of the status quo. [1] https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2012/01/02/144431794/what-vietnam-taught-us-about-breaking-bad-habits https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2012/01/02/1444317...
ataturk 8y ago
Affluence has its privileges, what's your point? I experienced many of the same things, quite frankly. I have been through the criminal "justice" system as a juvenile many years ago. One of my associates did get locked up, but it was kind of his choice versus years of probation. The fines were steep as well. Locking people up doesn't happen often enough because the system is overwhelmed and far too liberal. For example: A repeat offender (think: 20+ offenses) crashed a borrowed car through my neighbor's fence and nearly hit their house. He drives drunk/under the influence of drugs constantly. Nobody had insurance, not him, not the actual owner of the car. At the end of the day, Joe Repeat Offender got off scott-free and never even had to pay restitution. Joe will eventually kill someone and then get a light jail sentence for it. It's only a matter of time because his behavior is never corrected or ended. The people at the bottom rung of society give zero shits about anything because nothing can be taken from them that they haven't already lost and so they, in their minds, are free to do anything they please. And that right there is the difference between how your and my cohort was treated and how the dregs of society are treated. If they can't be civilized, we will civilize them. I laugh at anyone who hasn't been around these types of people: They destroy their lives and the lives of everyone around them and it's a good day when one of them gets put away or dies because it relieves a whole bunch of people of a massive burden.

by furyg3 8y ago

skate22 8y ago

Well for my family member who was/is a heroin addict, 6 months in jail meant 6 months of not stealing from her family. 6 months of not neglecting her kid. 6 months of sobriety to reflect on where her life was going. She did not stay clean, and I'm sure we can do better as a society to rehab our people, but for 6 months she was limited in the damage she could do to those around her. I'm pretty conflicted on the topic

emiliobumachar 8y ago
How could one possibly not neglect one's kid while in jail? Presumably someone or some institution stepped in, probably the family. How much was the jailing necessary for the kid to get this help?
- jothezero 8y ago
  By screaming at the child, hitting the child, taking drugs around the child.... Keep the easy questions coming.
  - nostoc 8y ago
    That's abuse, not neglect.
    - parsnips 8y ago
      A distinction without a meaningful difference.
      - ilovetux 8y ago
        I believe that the difference is meaningful. Neglect is a very specific type of abuse. Physical, emotional and sexual abuse are all very different from neglect. All forms of abuse are different in terms of the psychological effects on the abused, societal reactions to both parties, motivation on the part of the abuser and much more.
- skate22 8y ago
  She was not going to willingly give up the kid, even to family. I worded that poorly, but what i meant is that the child was no longer being neglected
sewercake 8y ago
All of those things would be even easier if the system was rehabilitative!
maxxxxx 8y ago
I hope you agree that sending that person to jail is only a short term solution. As far as I know prison is quite expensive. Wouldn't it be more effective to send her to rehab instead? It seems the US is using prison as the catch all for people who have trouble living in society. Be it for mental health reasons or drug addiction.
- skate22 8y ago
  She has been to rehab, and she was able to get drugs & pregnant while there. I think you are underestimating the power of a heroin addiction and overestimating the effectiveness of rehab in the US, especially for unwilling participants
  - maxxxxx 8y ago
    I have dealt with (alcohol) addicts myself. I still prefer them going to rehab repeatedly instead of going to jail. Rehab is probably cheaper and there is at least some chance that things will improve. Sending addicts to jail just makes things worse. Improving the quality of rehab is certainly worth a discussion. But there the US mindset gets in the way that doesn't want to spend money on welfare but instead prefers to spend more money on prisons. The only problem is that prisons don't know that their role now is not only to hold criminals but also people with mental health issues or addiction.
pas 8y ago
> 6 months of sobriety to reflect on where her life was going. https://anaheimlighthouse.com/blog/drug-use-in-us-prisons/ https://anaheimlighthouse.com/blog/drug-use-in-us-prisons/
- skate22 8y ago
  She came out clean, it just only lasted a few months.
arcticbull 8y ago
I'm confident she did drugs in prison. Because opiates are a way to escape, and prison sucks, and prison has drugs. [1] If you want to help people get off drugs, don't criminalize them, send them to rehab, end of story. Portugal decriminalized all drugs and started sending people to mandatory rehab if they had problems and the rate of drug harm went from one of the highest in the EU to one of the lowest in just 15 years. Portugal has 3 overdose deaths per million citizens, compared to the EU average of 17.3 [2, 3] The US is 213 per million, accounting for 1 in every 4 worldwide. [4] Clearly the US system does not work. It's crazy, right, that a country where all drugs are legal has a 100x lower overdose rate than one where drugs crimes are enforced as strictly as humanly possible. [1] https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/13/17020002/prison-opioid-epidemic-medications-addiction https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/13/17020002/p... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-hasnt-the-world-copied-it https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radic... [3] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/portugal-decriminalised-drugs-14-years-ago-and-now-hardly-anyone-dies-from-overdosing-10301780.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/portugal-dec... [4] https://www.overdoseday.com/resources/facts-stats/ https://www.overdoseday.com/resources/facts-stats/
- skate22 8y ago
  She came out clean and relapsed several months later, but who am i to argue with your links
  - arcticbull 8y ago
    Let me start off by saying I feel for you and your family. It's important to remember a single data point (an anecdote) is no substitute for large-scale studies (country-wide in the case of Portugal). The data I gave you covers millions and millions of individuals, and in my opinion, and should be weighed accordingly. I'd love for you to read them and provide your own thoughts rather than just saying "no, I have one data point close to me and advocate policy based on it." Drug addictions are truly complicated things. In regards to the relapse after release, there's some evidence that addictions are in part situational. By the end of the Vietnam war, some 20% of service members where addicted to heroin. 95% of them were no longer addicted to heroin as soon as they returned home. Whereas people with additions in the US had a 90% chase of relapse after they returned home to the environment in which they used to be addicted. [1] I even notice this to a smaller degree myself, I drink more in SF - when I'm there, I drink more, when I travel, I drink less even controlling for everything else to the best of my abilities (again, an anecdote not a study). Prison is a hammer, we need a scalpel, and it's important we use data dispassionately to solve this problem. What we have so far is clearly not working, and it's time to look outside and adopt things that have worked elsewhere even if they fly in the face of the status quo. I would argue especially if they fly in the face of the status quo. [1] https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2012/01/02/144431794/what-vietnam-taught-us-about-breaking-bad-habits https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2012/01/02/1444317...

ataturk 8y ago

Affluence has its privileges, what's your point? I experienced many of the same things, quite frankly. I have been through the criminal "justice" system as a juvenile many years ago. One of my associates did get locked up, but it was kind of his choice versus years of probation. The fines were steep as well. Locking people up doesn't happen often enough because the system is overwhelmed and far too liberal. For example: A repeat offender (think: 20+ offenses) crashed a borrowed car through my neighbor's fence and nearly hit their house. He drives drunk/under the influence of drugs constantly. Nobody had insurance, not him, not the actual owner of the car. At the end of the day, Joe Repeat Offender got off scott-free and never even had to pay restitution. Joe will eventually kill someone and then get a light jail sentence for it. It's only a matter of time because his behavior is never corrected or ended. The people at the bottom rung of society give zero shits about anything because nothing can be taken from them that they haven't already lost and so they, in their minds, are free to do anything they please. And that right there is the difference between how your and my cohort was treated and how the dregs of society are treated. If they can't be civilized, we will civilize them. I laugh at anyone who hasn't been around these types of people: They destroy their lives and the lives of everyone around them and it's a good day when one of them gets put away or dies because it relieves a whole bunch of people of a massive burden.