This is how I think our prison system SHOULD work…..

[Gary in Pennsylvania]

I’ve been thinking.

Our country is becoming more and more lenient on criminals (my opinion) and are ridiculously obsessed with prisoner “Quality of Life” (Cable TV, free education, exercise programs, free meals/health care, etc…).
Our prison system is overburdened and busting out at the seams which is causing our judicial system to either not sentence harshly enough or simply letting criminals out in early releases.


American taxpayers are footing the extreme bills for ALL of this…..and their amenities. We’re talking HUNDREDS of BILLIONS of dollars across the country.
Americans are ALSO paying for all the new, hip reformation programs set up that try to get good jobs for newly released prisoners. We pay for their therapy. We pay for monitoring programs. We pay and pay and pay. Some end up back in prison anyway…….some don’t.
American Taxpayers pay for methadone clinics/treatments because the judicial system doesn’t want to put drug crazed criminals in already overpopulated prisons. They ‘sentence’ them to detox in clinics.



Well – Were it up to me…..here’s MY solution.

I remember hearing that the prison system in Turkey or Greece or something still have this policy….but I couldn’t find out for sure in my internet search.

Here ya go:
State or Federal Government would provide the prison and the workers just as they always have. There ARE no amenities except for a back & forth rotation of CNN and FOX on common area television.
The only thing Government/State provides is a room, shower, and toilet. Everything else must be provided by someone who loves you or cares.
You want to eat? You better have someone one the outside who will foot the bill for every meal you eat. You need medical attention? You better have someone on the outside pay those bills…..or you don’t get the doctor/medicine.
If your crime was heinous enough that you got a life sentence – then somebody on the outside BETTER have deep pockets…..or your life sentence may only last a year or two!


I have NEVER understood life sentences with no chance for parole. WHY????!!!!!! I cannot ask that enough. Why? That individual will never amount to anything beyond the walls of the prison, yet the American public will be, in the end, burdened by MILLIONS of dollars for just that ONE life. It’s almost like a peripheral extension of whatever crime was committed that landed the person in jail to begin with. They get to CONTINUE to rob from the innocent.


NOW – I am POSSIBLY open to thresholds or exceptions….but I cannot think of any. I’m sure some of you will have suggestions.


What would this do??? Save America billions of dollars PER YEAR. I think it would deter crime. Our prisons wouldn’t be over capacity. No doubt there would be charity foundations set up to pay the dues of many inmates who have reasonable sentences but truly have NOBODY to step up and pay – that’s OK…..It wouldn’t be taxpayers.


This idea does, by American standards, truly border on barbaric. Yup.
Here’s the most difficult reality of my proposition…….potentially EVERY prison sentence may be a DEATH sentence. Well then…..don’t rape. Don’t drink & drive – though you didn’t really MEAN to cause that car crash. Don’t mug or steal. ENRON & other white collar crimes – don’t do it (which points out that this suggestion is WAY unfair for the poor. Let’s hope there is a charity out there to support you.)
Look here http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/spe01.pdf that’s after just a brief on-line search. And this is only at the STATE level!
No burial – takes up too much space……..cremate or leave it up to those who want the body. Barbaric? Maybe for the first 10-15 years. But when people see what happens over time, they’ll think TWICE about committing a crime. Give it 10 years and folks will understand.


Mentally/criminally insane? Must be proven – I’ll allow some sort of leniency there.



I know that many who read this have acquaintances, friends, or maybe even loved one incarcerated in prisons.
Where do your thoughts lie regarding my prison policy?
Shockingly Barbaric? You’d consider it – maybe with modification? Hell yeah – when does it start?

[Farbmeister]

My father was a CO for 15 years, I was one for a year before I left for more money.

Your plan fails on it face becuase the have not's will take from the haves. Violence and gangs would be a huge problem.. also how are you going to search all that stuff coming in from the outside?

How are you going to hire good COs to manage all that crap?
You DO NOT want to be around a person who has nothing to lose. Plus the Constitution says that there cannot be any cruel and unusual punishment. I know, that pesky constitution. We fought a revolution for it... and its done pretty well for us so far.. I am not ready to toss it out because I want to be hard on crime. One day *I* may have to go to jail.


The REAL problem is that the 'War on Drugs' is filling our prison with non-violent offenders jailed form simply selling a product. Prison should be for violent crimes.

A dealer can get more time than someone who killed someone. That makes sense?

Punishment should fit the crime... drunk driver? Take his car. Drug dealer? Relocate them to the mid-west so there are out of the environment that caused the crime. IF a person gets out of jail/prison.. they should not be allowed to return to the area of their crime for 5 years. Why send them right back into the same place that they will start dealing/get in with gangs etc.

There are good solutions to crime.. none are popular with the politicians becuase they cannot have a press conference about a big drug bust.

[1861]

My father was a CO for 15 years, I was one for a year before I left for more money.

Your plan fails on it face becuase the have not's will take from the haves. Violence and gangs would be a huge problem.. also how are you going to search all that stuff coming in from the outside?

How are you going to hire good COs to manage all that crap?
You DO NOT want to be around a person who has nothing to lose. Plus the Constitution says that there cannot be any cruel and unusual punishment. I know, that pesky constitution. We fought a revolution for it... and its done pretty well for us so far.. I am not ready to toss it out because I want to be hard on crime. One day *I* may have to go to jail.


The REAL problem is that the 'War on Drugs' is filling our prison with non-violent offenders jailed form simply selling a product. Prison should be for violent crimes.

A dealer can get more time than someone who killed someone. That makes sense?

I agree with your post until the last two sentences . after working 30 years as a street cop , I can tell you , drug users & drug dealers are for the most part very violent individuals . I have scars to prove it.

[Gary in Pennsylvania]

Your plan fails on it face because the have not's will take from the haves. Violence and gangs would be a huge problem.. also how are you going to search all that stuff coming in from the outside? How are you going to hire good COs to manage all that crap? You DO NOT want to be around a person who has nothing to lose.

The prisons & CO’s will still be there. Recreation time? Yard Time? Weight Lifting? Uh-uh. No way. Meals would come to the CELL trough a slot.

Plus the Constitution says that there cannot be any cruel and unusual punishment. I know, that pesky constitution. We fought a revolution for it... and its done pretty well for us so far.. I am not ready to toss it out because I want to be hard on crime.

Yeah……OK.
You and I BOTH know that this prison policy is RIDICULOUSLY impossible and would never happen (in America)….ever! So don’t toss the Constitution into this…..duh.This policy is soooo wacky hypothetic that Constitution is already assumed to be a non-barrier issue.

One day *I* may have to go to jail.

Better be good then! And if you commit a crime, let’s hope it’s a small one and you have someone willing to pay.
Me too!

A dealer can get more time than someone who killed someone. That makes sense?

NEVER has to me.

Punishment should fit the crime... Drug dealer? Relocate them to the mid-west so there are out of the environment that caused the crime. IF a person gets out of jail/prison.. they should not be allowed to return to the area of their crime for 5 years. Why send them right back into the same place that they will start dealing/get in with gangs etc.

You’re KIDDING…right! I’m sure that I’m not the only one who will question THAT statement!

[talldean]

American Taxpayers pay for methadone clinics/treatments because the judicial system doesn’t want to put drug crazed criminals in already overpopulated prisons. They ‘sentence’ them to detox in clinics.

We use methadone clinics because they've been proven to be the most cost-effective way to address the problem.

I have NEVER understood life sentences with no chance for parole. WHY????!!!!!!

Because it's many, many times cheaper than putting someone on Death Row. Death sentences have special appeals, and several checks and balances so we don't kill innocent people. Life sentence doesn't have nearly the number of checks, since we can reverse a life sentence.

Again, it's the way it is out of cost effectiveness.

[talldean]

I agree with your post until the last two sentences . after working 30 years as a street cop , I can tell you , drug users & drug dealers are for the most part very violent individuals . I have scars to prove it.

The only drug users you're running into as a cop are the violent ones. Being that the majority of the population have at least tried drugs at some point, I don't think you're getting a full view of the population.

[Gary in Pennsylvania]

We use methadone clinics because they've been proven to be the most cost-effective way to address the problem.

YUP! In my prison policy, it WOULDN'T be as expesive. Have loved ones pay.
Going back to what you said - It's the most COST-EFFECTIVE way to address the problem. But is it the MOST EFFECTIVE way to fix the problem.

Because it's many, many times cheaper than putting someone on Death Row.

C'mon! We don't sentence people to death thinking "Whew! Thank goodness this will take DECADES cuz maybe we made a mistake!" No. People are sentenced to Death Row because their crime commited is worth the taking of their life. And putting them in for LIFE on this prison concept may very well be a death sentence......or at least keep them locked away for life at minimal cost to the 'system'.

Again, it's the way it is out of cost effectiveness.

That's what the OP tackles. Punishment for crime that is both effective AND cost effective.

[1861]

The only drug users you're running into as a cop are the violent ones. Being that the majority of the population have at least tried drugs at some point, I don't think you're getting a full view of the population.

yep , but the ones we ran into were the ones who went to prison .

[talldean]

YUP! In my prison policy, it WOULDN'T be as expesive. Have loved ones pay.

That's kind of sociopathic. What if they don't have loved ones? My buddy Steve is a straight-arrow guy, but both of his parents died from cancer on Christmas day last year, and he's not married. If he screws up, he has to pay the piper a hundred times worse than someone who's from a big, rich family. How the heck is that anyway near fair?

Going back to what you said - It's the most COST-EFFECTIVE way to address the problem. But is it the MOST EFFECTIVE way to fix the problem.

Can you rephrase that? I think you forgot a word somewhere, as it stands, that doesn't make any sense.

C'mon! We don't sentence people to death thinking "Whew! Thank goodness this will take DECADES cuz maybe we made a mistake!" No. People are sentenced to Death Row because their crime commited is worth the taking of their life.

We allow appeals, because courts occasionally make mistakes. The appeals process for death row is long, and should be, because killing innocents in the name of justice is a pretty big perversion of freedom.

And putting them in for LIFE on this prison concept may very well be a death sentence......or at least keep them locked away for life at minimal cost to the 'system'.

That's about the least ethical thing I've heard this week.

I could just as easily say that "let's just shoot all criminal defendents in the head before they're found guilty", and justify it by saying "it's cheap and effective!"


This forum depresses me for the future of America.

[Gary in Pennsylvania]

That's kind of sociopathic. What if they don't have loved ones? My buddy Steve is a straight-arrow guy, but both of his parents died from cancer on Christmas day last year, and he's not married. If he screws up, he has to pay the piper a hundred times worse than someone who's from a big, rich family. How the heck is that anyway near fair?

If he’s a straight-arrow guy….he won’t be in prison (granted – one of the loopholes in my prison is we have some fucked-up stupid laws)

Can you rephrase that? I think you forgot a word somewhere, as it stands, that doesn't make any sense.

Nope. It reads properly except for a missing question mark. Your suggestion may be the most COST effective……..but that doesn’t make it the MOST effective (all-around)

I could just as easily say that "let's just shoot all criminal defendents in the head before they're found guilty", and justify it by saying "it's cheap and effective!"

C’MON NOW! THAT, Sir, would be dreadful and despicable.

….. That's about the least ethical thing I've heard this week.
…….This forum depresses me for the future of America.

Keep in mind Tall……you’re in the Lounge. Don’t take what you read here so seriously…..