4 ms·
NYC Votes to Close Rikers Island
- noarchy 7y agoMaybe a small nitpick, but it was actually the city council that voted, not NYC as a whole.
- slimed 7y agoA nitpick for whom? OP copied the title from the Times.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago>A nitpick for whom? For people living in the CA filter bubble where everything is done via ballot measure. Edit:I shouldn't have to explain this but not literally everything in CA is done via ballot measure.
- slimed 7y agoI see. Just pointing out that OP did not incorrectly summarize. I sometimes forget that there are those who read the HN comments before clicking on the article.
- dragonwriter 7y ago> For people living in the CA filter bubble where everything is done via ballot measure. California has city governments that set policy by city council action, too.
- Shivetya 7y agoMore impressed with changes to bail and what constitutes a misdemeanor and more. modifying the war on drugs to target those exploiting others instead of merely using would go a long way to meeting their lower incarceration numbers they want. but let us not kid ourselves, those numbers are not majority small time offenders. a city that large has a good number of people not fit to be around the rest
- walrus01 7y agoNot specific to NYC, but the United States always seems to have plenty of money for the criminal justice system and incarceration, but relatively little for drug addiction rehab and treatment. But look at the cost per day to keep one person in jail for a nonviolent drug offense... Decriminalization in Portugal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal
- hanniabu 7y agoIt's by design
- shuckles 7y agoThere were lots of European countries were serious drug abuse problems in the 80s and many were able to solve them (Berlin, Amsterdam, and Switzerland all come to mind) with a range of policies on the supportive to punitive spectrum. I don't know why Portugal tends to get disproportionate attention.
- dsfyu404ed 7y agoIt'll be interesting to see how they actually pull off the prisoner reduction numbers in practice. Hopefully they don't just start ignoring petty theft like some other places have done. That would likely eventually result in the policy pendulum swinging hard the other way eventually.
- MisterTea 7y agoI'd just like to know how spending 8 billion on new buildings will fix the scandal and corruption issues. I get that the new jails will be more modern and humane but that's only part of the issue. The only thing this appears to be doing is freeing up a lot of interesting real estate for development while leaving more questions than answers.
- sandworm101 7y agoThis is NYC. The one rule in the big apple is that real estate trumps everything. Nothing happens there without an underlying benefit to property owners. That said, reforming jails isn't one of those things that societies do in isolation. Jail/prison reform always rides on the back of some other program. What matters is that they make the change. Whether that change is funded by altruism or greed doesn't matter to those on the inside, today and tomorrow. They only care about the change itself.
- pastor_elm 7y agoRikers is a nasty place. I know guards that work there. Very soul crushing. Borough jails aren't going to be any easier to maintain if the federal ones are anything to go by.
- core-questions 7y agoIsn't that supposed to be part of the dissuading nature of punishment? Like, aren't we supposed to deter the more basal among us from committing crimes based on their fear of what will happen to them? Obviously not to the extent of cruel and unusual punishment, but having a rough go of things seems reasonable enough for a jail environment. It's not a damned country club.
- fossuser 7y agoI think Rikers goes beyond that. Preet Bharara talks about it in his book (specifically an example where a guard beats a prisoner awaiting trial to death along with examples of other problems). Some places may be so problematic they are beyond reform.
- tqi 7y agoExcept the vast majority (85% according to this NYT article [1]) of Rikers inmates are pretrial detainees, ie people who have not been convicted of anything. Many are there because they can't afford bail, meaning they are in effect being punished for being poor. Also I disagree that the conditions in jail are part of the punishment. I think the punishment is supposed to be the loss of freedom, not the risk of harm at the hands of other inmates. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/16/nyregion/what-is-happening-at-rikers-island.html https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/16/nyregion/what-is-happenin...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- andrewxdiamond 7y agoAs it turns out, not many people commit crimes because they are fun. Deterrents like hash punishments work, but only to the extent that the person has an option. Many people who turn to crime have no or few professional skills, and would struggle to make a living completely legitimately. Hence, they do what anyone would do in that situation, and commit crime to survive. And when individuals are locked away in prisons for years at a time with no rehabilitation, nothing's really changed. They are still in the same situation as before, except now they have a criminal record, making their situation even more dire. This leads to a revolving door effect where many individuals end up back in the same prison they just left. Not only does this ruin the person's life, it also costs the public in both lost productivity, and costs associated with housing imprisoned individuals. Many modern countries short circuit this cycle by educating and rehabilitating imprisoned individuals so by the time they leave their cells they are ready to join the economy as an effective worker. Think of it this way, if your child was struggling to get passing grades in school, what would be more effective? Locking them in their room with a book, or hiring a tutor?
- mc3 7y agoWhats the TLDR for the paywalled? Not from the US, but I get the impression a lot of people were in Rikers on remand, some for years without trial. Is that addressed, or it this just a move them to another prison?
- dantheman 7y agoI hoping this will reduce the number of people who await trial in jail and we can move to more supervised release for people.
- __jal 7y agoFor their next trick, I would encourage them to abolish and reform the NYPD. Although I fear if someone seriously tried, there would be a coup.
- slimed 7y agoMore likely riots and looting. I say this as a proud New Yorker well versed in local history.
- thrower123 7y agoNew York actually has a functioning police force. It's borderline amazing that it is such a nice, clean, well-running city. Despite Cuomo's attempts, it is still generally well-regulated.
- capnslowish 7y agoCuomo’s a putz.
- core-questions 7y agoI'm not sure I understand. How is a city supposed to function with no police force? Wouldn't it essentially be anarchy? How long would it take for looting to start, once people realize nobody will stop them? It only takes an hour or so of rioting, usually.... If you did something like this, the result would likely be having the National Guard come in and restore order and be far more oppressive than the NYPD is.
- pjc50 7y agoI think people intend something more like the RUC -> PSNI transition, with a wholesale replacement of only senior staff and a rebuild of the ethos. Some of the US police problems might be solvable by a floating Federal civilian force which could come in from outside to replace and investigate the most corrupt local forces.
- core-questions 7y ago
- creaghpatr 7y agoAside from the history of the prison, I imagine there are more profitable uses for that land as well.
- hanniabu 7y agoWouldn't be surprised if this is why it's closing. I'm sure there's some nice kickback from land developers that will put multi-million dollar condos there or something of the sort.