Quantcast

On "justice"

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
18,852
9,557
AK
It's always bugged me how incomplete it is. There's punishment, which should be part of a conviction, but then you are basically "marked for life" with your record, so your punishment is basically forever. Then there's what happens IN prison, which is basically where criminals become "better" at criminalling and subverting the law. They've created an institution where to survive, you have to not only continue, but usually be much worse in that way as compared to the "outside". So jail basically has the reverse effect. It's an F-ed up system.
 

stevew

resident influencer
Sep 21, 2001
40,494
9,524
^

how many fucks do you think kamala harris gives....about as many donnie fucks his daughter...
 

6thElement

Schrodinger's Immigrant
Jul 29, 2008
15,827
13,063
What else can you expect in a society where a DA's high conviction rate jump starts her/his political career?
But what would you have the DA do? Genuine question. People want those who have committed crimes to be punished.
 

StiHacka

Compensating for something
Jan 4, 2013
21,560
12,504
In hell. Welcome!
But what would you have the DA do? Genuine question. People want those who have committed crimes to be punished.
Just read the Kamala Harris wikipedia page. It's all fucking marketing, hard cases get dropped, most cases get a "plea deal" because the due process is extremely punishing in this country. DA's discretion is unchecked power, as are property confiscation practices by police all over the US.
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
18,852
9,557
AK
Just read the Kamala Harris wikipedia page. It's all fucking marketing, hard cases get dropped, most cases get a "plea deal" because the due process is extremely punishing in this country. DA's discretion is unchecked power, as are property confiscation practices by police all over the US.
There is some truth to this. If you buy into what the police officer/detective is selling when they say "just cooperate with us and tell us what you did", thinking that it'll minimize the negative outcome to be honest, cooperative, etc., the DA will just use that to throw the book at you, forcing you to take the plea deal due to incriminating yourself so badly. In those circumstances, they love to take people to court and plenty are that stupid. If you just shut up and not say a word till you speak with a lawyer, then they often wouldn't have nearly as strong a case, and your plea deal would be much better due to the case being weaker, etc. That's F-ed up, but it's the way it is.
 

dan-o

Turbo Monkey
Jun 30, 2004
6,499
2,805
I have zero fucks to give for violent criminals.
They deserve a for profit prison system that makes every waking moment a reflection of regret, the low level criminals not so much.
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
18,852
9,557
AK
If you've already crossed the line of killing someone etc, how much more violent can you become?
So you are saying that the only violent crime is killing someone? Or that people that have killed someone are beyond any help? You are already starting off with a flawed argument that doesn't appear to make any sense.

I don't believe that anyone not disabled is beyond saving (able to realize their mistakes and not make them again). I do, however, believe that the death penalty should apply in certain situations where crimes or acts are extremely egregious and horrific or with extreme loss of life.

Prison is punishment, it should be. Beyond that, it should not be a place where you get Hep, Aids, where you get stabbed, where you stab other people, where you traffic drugs, where you have to join a gang to get "protection", and so on. All of that stuff basically perpetuates the cycle. My dad retired as a correctional nurse. It's a tireless and thankless profession and as a society, we don't want to spend any money or time trying to fix this...yet we continually wonder why we keep having so much crime and people that revolve in and out of prison.
 

dan-o

Turbo Monkey
Jun 30, 2004
6,499
2,805
Prison is punishment, it should be. Beyond that, it should not, where you get stabbed, where you stab other people, where you traffic drugs, where you have to join a gang to get "protection", and so on. All of that stuff basically perpetuates the cycle. My dad retired as a correctional nurse. It's a tireless and thankless profession and as a society, we don't want to spend any money or time trying to fix this...yet we continually wonder why we keep having so much crime and people that revolve in and out of prison.
Other than solitary confinement/isolation how do you suggest prisons stop the behavior you listed?
I'm sure there are rules against such things.

Blame 'society' all you want but at some point there's an individual decision being made.
And then made again, at significantly higher rates than non-violent prisoners who endure the same conditions.

  • Violent offenders recidivated at a higher rate than non-violent offenders. Over 60 percent (63.8%) of violent offenders recidivated by being rearrested for a new crime or for a violation of supervision conditions. This compares to less than 40 percent (39.8%) of non-violent offenders who were rearrested during the follow-up period.
  • Violent offenders recidivated more quickly than non-violent offenders. Of those violent offenders who recidivated, the median time from release to the first recidivism event was 18 months. Comparatively, the median time from release to the first recidivism event for non-violent offenders was 24 months.
  • Violent offenders recidivated for more serious crimes than non-violent offenders. Over one-fourth (28.4%) of the violent offenders who recidivated had assault as their most serious new charge, followed by public order crimes (15.6%) and drug trafficking (11.1%). Of the non-violent offenders who recidivated, public order crimes were the most common new charge (20.9%), followed by assault (17.9%) and drug trafficking (12.0%).
  • Violent offenders have higher recidivism rates than non-violent offenders in every Criminal History Category, however, the difference in recidivism rates between violent and non-violent offenders is most pronounced in the lower Criminal History Categories and among offenders designated as career offenders or armed career criminals.
  • Recidivism rates for violent offenders in every age group at the time of release from custody were higher than the rates for non-violent offenders. Violent offenders recidivated at twice the rate of non-violent offenders among those released after age 40.
  • Analyzed separately, violent instant offenders and violent prior offenders both recidivated at a higher rate and for more serious crimes than non-violent offenders.

I don't believe in the death penalty and support fully reinstating all rights (voting, guns, you name it) to non-violent criminals who've served their time. But social predators (murderers, human trafficking, serial rapists)....cry me a river, we've got plenty of other issues that deserve our attention before them..
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
18,852
9,557
AK
Other than solitary confinement/isolation how do you suggest prisons stop the behavior you listed?
I'm sure there are rules against such things.
I call it "science". You work with "scientists" and "doctors" to implement programs that show success in integrating people back into society and changing behaviors, using what is shown to be the most effective. At the same time, you crack down on prison corruption and standards, invest money into it so people aren't crowded into the same areas, crimes and violence in prison is stopped by ensuring security, etc. Those numbers are meaningless to me because we don't have anything to compare to. Because we don't make any meaningful effort to not make prison a breeding ground for further criminal enterprise, I interpret the numbers as a result of our justice system. If we as society gave a shit and wanted to make things better, we'd invest into addressing just that. But who can sell that when lawmakers are trying to suck-off businesses?

Again, I think your argument is just picking and choosing. People go to prison and LEARN how to become violent and more-violent criminals. It's a breeding ground for it.

What I also don't agree with is "no chance". If you are not assigned a death penalty, there should be "some chance", maybe far down the road, as well as a realistic way to achieve it. Death sentences by way of prison or hoping that there will be "prison justice" is bullshit. Again, we are breeding the behavior that we want to prevent.

The republican idea is, if we just make punishment worse, we'll fix the problem. The huge misstep is that they fail to people aren't making rational decisions when they commit crimes. They try to apply the "well, I never would" and use their decision making process to arrive at the outcome that a criminal does. To put it simply, they don't think that far ahead no "level" of punishment changes that. Death penalty doesn't stop people. Suicide bombers kill themselves and aren't afraid of death. Soldiers go to war and the outcome might be death. Another reason for all of this is that the subject "never thinks they'll get caught", and it's not practical to have enough resources out on the street to catch everyone, it'll never happen. So for several reasons, you can't just figure "if we have stiffer penalties, we'll solve crime". This is one of my big problems with the justice system, it generally doesn't include how to rehabilitate and resolve the actual issues, in a large part due to how jail operates. Then you get done with your prison sentence, how-many-years of gang violence, stabbings, drugs, protection, prison rapes, etc., and they expect people to be able to transition into society...after their brain has basically been fried in prison. You are right, under the current system, it's just not going to happen. People are going to go back to violent crime because we as a society basically made no significant effort in the justice system to prevent it.

IME, when humans see that they basically have no real way "out", they resort to irrational behavior. We basically breed this.
 
Last edited:
I call it "science". You work with "scientists" and "doctors" to implement programs that show success in integrating people back into society and changing behaviors, using what is shown to be the most effective. At the same time, you crack down on prison corruption and standards, invest money into it so people aren't crowded into the same areas, crimes and violence in prison is stopped by ensuring security, etc. Those numbers are meaningless to me because we don't have anything to compare to. Because we don't make any meaningful effort to not make prison a breeding ground for further criminal enterprise, I interpret the numbers as a result of our justice system. If we as society gave a shit and wanted to make things better, we'd invest into addressing just that. But who can sell that when lawmakers are trying to suck-off businesses?

Again, I think your argument is just picking and choosing. People go to prison and LEARN how to become violent and more-violent criminals. It's a breeding ground for it.

What I also don't agree with is "no chance". If you are not assigned a death penalty, there should be "some chance", maybe far down the road, as well as a realistic way to achieve it. Death sentences by way of prison or hoping that there will be "prison justice" is bullshit. Again, we are breeding the behavior that we want to prevent.

The republican idea is, if we just make punishment worse, we'll fix the problem. The huge misstep is that they fail to people aren't making rational decisions when they commit crimes. They try to apply the "well, I never would" and use their decision making process to arrive at the outcome that a criminal does. To put it simply, they don't think that far ahead no "level" of punishment changes that. Death penalty doesn't stop people. Suicide bombers kill themselves and aren't afraid of death. Soldiers go to war and the outcome might be death. Another reason for all of this is that the subject "never thinks they'll get caught", and it's not practical to have enough resources out on the street to catch everyone, it'll never happen. So for several reasons, you can't just figure "if we have stiffer penalties, we'll solve crime". This is one of my big problems with the justice system, it generally doesn't include how to rehabilitate and resolve the actual issues, in a large part due to how jail operates. Then you get done with your prison sentence, how-many-years of gang violence, stabbings, drugs, protection, prison rapes, etc., and they expect people to be able to transition into society...after their brain has basically been fried in prison. You are right, under the current system, it's just not going to happen. People are going to go back to violent crime because we as a society basically made no significant effort in the justice system to prevent it.

IME, when humans see that they basically have no real way "out", they resort to irrational behavior. We basically breed this.
Agreed. We should also stop imprisoning people simply so prosecutors get merit badges. I would hazard that at a minimum, 50% of the people we have imprisoned should not be there.
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
18,852
9,557
AK
If you read a lot about how prosecutors operate, they browbeat many into confessing crimes that they have not committed.
50%? No way.

Not following due process and coercing or doing things like generating false evidence/ignoring other evidence? Sure. Now, a good number of those people ARE STILL guilty, but shouldn't be imprisoned due to the failure of the DA and department or at least not on all the charges. The way you are saying it makes it sound like mistaken identity, which would be incredibly rare. It would be where they know the person can't fight them, so they pile on stuff that wouldn't be allowed by the court or would be easily fought, knowing the person will "fold" without a high power legal team.
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
18,852
9,557
AK
And why the F are prisoners in prison and not out building trails?
 
50%? No way.

Not following due process and coercing or doing things like generating false evidence/ignoring other evidence? Sure. Now, a good number of those people ARE STILL guilty, but shouldn't be imprisoned due to the failure of the DA and department or at least not on all the charges. The way you are saying it makes it sound like mistaken identity, which would be incredibly rare. It would be where they know the person can't fight them, so they pile on stuff that wouldn't be allowed by the court or would be easily fought, knowing the person will "fold" without a high power legal team.
I wasn't arguing mistaken identity, and I pulled the 50% number out of my ass. The "easily fought, knowing the person will "fold" without a high power legal team" piece is what i was approaching.
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
18,852
9,557
AK
I don't see this as the biggest issue to address, more of a periphery, as the vast majority of these people probably do belong in prison for crimes, just for either not as long, or not for the charge that was brought. I'd rather center on getting rid of private prisons, focusing on work skills and qualifications, re-integration, serious efforts to limit prison violence and crime. Serious attention and efforts to change attitudes and behavior, not bullshit religion. Never should be a holiday, but it needs to move away from being somewhere that criminals learn how to criminal better.