Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Nothing about the American correctional system is about actual corrections.
Remember that we have many private prisons here who make their money by accepting inmates or putting them to work. A safe community would be bad for business. Reasonable sentences would reduce their workforce. Actually helping people get their life together would kill their rate of return customers.
Like, private prisons will literally sue the government for "not having enough criminals to send them" so you get garbage like life sentences for drug possession or some other non-violent crime that harms literally nobody else. Throwing children in solitary is not uncommon.
Norway is able to reform serial killers in a matter of years with some of the lowest repeat-offense rates in the world. No death penalty. No life sentences. No solitary confinement. My favorite is the guy who cut some people up with a chainsaw who now works as a lumberjack.
Everything less than this is inadequacy. And solitary confinement exists pretty much for the express purpose of producing more violent criminals.
For the record, IIRC, the US recidivism rate for violent offenses is over 100%. How is that possible? People go in for non-violent offenses, get out, and get back in for violent offenses. We tend to create violent offenders out of non-violent ones. If we have 25% of the world's prisoners, higher than any other country including authoritarian regimes, that only says one of two things about us. Either Americans are uniquely horrible people, or Americans are uniquely horrible at criminal justice. Neither of those really has that "Make America Great" vibe to it.
I feel bad for them, it's too much. USA prison are already horrific from what I have looked into and heard from people who been there. We don't need to torture criminals and be barbarians. Aren't we better?
Some would argue that prison in itself drives people insane and should be abolished.
A regular cell could drive someone insane as much as solitary, so now what?
Being restrained and contained, drives those insane who may be claustrophobic or simply can't handle it.
At what point do we draw the line and say its okay to drive people insane by incarcerating them but not by doing something else?
Prison should not be a nice resort, it should be hell to discourage others to get in. The one person I know who has been in and out of jail (not prison) has said it isn't that bad and he doesn't mind going back.
I don't really care what happens to prisoners, except one thing. The guards should prevent prisoners from attacking other prisoners.
To think people take drugs for that.
You might be interested in the Norwegian system. In some of them, the labor is that they have to grow their own food. The knowledge that they are still in prison still weighs in them, but it isn't built to further their pathologies.
Their entire system was based in the "cruel and unusual punishment" clause from the US Constitution. They ruled life sentences and death sentences to be cruel and unusual. So since all their prisoners will eventually be back out in public, there is strong incentive for them to focus on rehabilitation. Straight punishment doesn't build remorse, it generally builds resentment and worsens crime rates. But for most people, if properly rehabilitated, remorse becomes strong enough to be it's own punishment. So many go out to actively seek to try to make amends.
It's hard to do, and I still don't think it works for everyone. But if we have the highest prison rates in the world by far, including authoritarian regimes like China and the former USSR, then either Americans are inherently worse people, or our system is less effective.
@OpenClose Thank you for your comments and thoughts.
The US really needs to stop putting people away for crimes that damage can be undone.
Financial crimes are the perfect example, they get 20+ years when they should be out being forced to work to pay back what they can, even if they will never come close, they can work the rest of their lives trying to pay back what they stole or undo the damage. How is that for remorse and restitution, seems fair.
But no way a murdered or rapist can make up what they did, ever. They destroyed someone's life forever and can never make amends or undo it, or even attempt to.
Sexual violence victims will never be whole and their lives are often ruined forever as a result. Many even commit suicide as a direct result of their attacks. Many also perpetuate crime due to a lack of real justice happening. When a victim feels justice was not achieved they often will commit crimes themselves, feeling they won't get caught or it won't matter if they do because the system is soft.
I'm for any crime that they can make amends for and allowing them to do so.
Unless someone can bring back the dead or undo a rape or sexual offense, they should never be let out ever again.
I'm for a victim based system, if victims have a life sentence, no reason the perp should get a shorter sentence, that just isn't fair to victims and leads to a lot more other problems in society.
Maybe that right there is why we have so much crime, we perpetuate the cycle by not doing right by the victims.
I'm a huge victim rights advocate as most seem to care about criminals and not victims. We hear lots about rehabilitating criminals but victims are often ignored and not given the same level of help. There is no big push to make victims whole and better, that is where the push should be.
I am aware of the Norwegian system where a guy can kill 77 and potentially be out of prison after 21 years and that is a terrible system in my eyes.
@Aerissa_Jade I can certainly appreciate that perspective. And you pretty much nailed the literal definition of justice, where it means the person who did an injustice be the one to make things right.
I can actually think of a few counters to your idea that sexual assault and murder can't be redeemed. But they are indeed the minority. I've been assaulted "kind of" sexually, and the person admitting it and showing remorse did a lot more to help me heal than all my horrible thoughts of revenge. But that's my particular case, and it relied on her showing actual remorse.
Another was a VERY unusual case where a teenage boy killed a woman's teenage son. When he got out, she actually gave him his son's old apartment and helped him get his life together. That's definitely a TON of generosity in her part. To like a monk-like level.
But those are indeed the minority of cases. And again don't exactly undo or fix the original offense. So I can totally see your perspective. Especially with the guy who killed 77 people. I'd would be curious what the families of the victims thought about it.
@OpenClose Definitely minority but always possible, depends on how bad someone was hurt. Some people can heal, but most seem to never.
Sorry to hear that happened to you and glad she was able to help you.
Read this and think about if this guy should ever be given a second chance or can make amends. Its a long read and a tough read, so good luck... just be glad you didn't have to live through it as it has messed me up seriously bad and destroyed my future.
I am NOT defined by my Scars "A Survivors Account" ↗
I hope he dies from his guilt.
I think it depends on the situation and the individual themselves. If a prisoner tries to shank a guard (as example) they needs to learn there are repercussions to actions, even in jail.
Prisons are dealing with awful behavior from the dregs of humanity. Impressions need to be made in an attempt to keep them in line.
Yeah, that I disagree with.
Thanks for mhg.
Opinion
33Opinion
u Why are these people in solitary confinement?
Okay. Actually an expert on this as my career was being a liaison between the courts and the state correctional system.
Inmates actually have all of the rights that you or I do, however according to numerous courts rulings those rights are not above the prison's right to security. Holt vs. Hobbs in 2014 is a good example. The court ruled in favor of allowing inmates to grow beards for religious reasons because it did not negatively impact the security of the prison.
AdSeg (administrative segregation) is used as tool in prisons to maintain security and order, but it must be justified in those terms or the prison is open to sever liability lawsuits for violating an inmate's civil rights as defined in the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution. Inmates are allowed to keep religious texts and protected correspondence such as letters from lawyers. While this might seem excessive and harsh, it really is used sparingly and only when no other recourse is available. For example if an inmate is a sex offender and the people in his living unit find out, he is in danger and must be separated from them. This is usually done via transfer to a different living unit or institution until all transfer possibilities have been exhausted. I once had to have a man transferred four times in a single night because he just kept talking about what he did to a little boy no matter how much I told him to shut up about it. Morning found him in AdSeg because I had nowhere left to send him. Typically inmates that are known to be violent towards other inmates or staff will end up in AdSeg, because the inmates and staff have a right to be safe. It's not a perfect solution and it's one that I do not like, but I have yet to see a better one.
That depends on what you think the purpose of incarceration is. There's three primary means: incapacitation (simply removing the prisoner from an environment where they can do harm), retribution (intentionally causing injury in some way to the prisoner, in an attempt to give the community a sense of "justice"), or rehabilitation (trying to ameliorate the situation and assist the prisoner in self-improvement). A lot of people like to believe that confinement is about incapacitation, but oftentimes it is apparent that their end goal is retribution. As much as we may talk about "justice", we actually just oftentimes just want revenge. There's a reason the Code of Hammurabi is one of the oldest written laws in existence, because nothing says "just desserts" like "an eye for an eye".
If it is true, as some have pointed out, that a country's moral leanings are defined by how they treat the lowest members of their society, then a society which tolerates or even encourages the physical and psychological torture of inmates because "they deserve it" are no better than the people behind bars. One could say that actually makes the "civilized" residents worse, hiding a desire to cause pain and torment behind a smile and a guise of ethical superiority and decorum--at least the inmates were honest about their intentions.
"We" don't have a "right" to drive anyone insane, whether or not they're guilty of anything. However. prisoners have lost the privileges of the outside world because of their crimes. I suppose their punishment includes getting a dose of their own medicine inside prison.
I have a distant cousin jailed in the Philippines for rape. He's been in-and-out-and-in jail for other terrible crimes besides rape. He's getting his fair share of punishment inside prison there. He has claimed physical & "mental" injuries from being tortured in prison. The mere fact that he can personally & cognitively claim that he's going insane is proof that he isn't.
I have to disagree with the statement that claiming you're going insane is proof that you aren't. Have you ever experienced drug or sleep deprivation induced psychosis? Taken large doses of psychedelics? Been sensory deprived or even been homeless and isolated? You can feel the shift in your cognition, fear spreading, confusion, for a time you understand you're going insane and that nothing that's happening is reality until that part of your mind is swallowed and you're on for the ride.
If the person is mentally ill from the beginning sure, they wouldn't know they're crazy.
But to induce insanity on a sane person I guarantee they know sanity is slipping away
So-if I have to spend my time assessing, whether or not, my Bill of Rights give me the Right to drive criminals’ insane 🤔 you ask?
Given your enormous amount of time deliberation allotted upon torture/fun… Would it not be fair to ask, “Am I Criminally Insane?” 🤔
How bad do you want to drive your Criminally Insane Self, crazy? is the real question.
-Take that Survey to Federal Barbwire Guest Houses as the residents can provide you much more clarity in day-day workings on Criminal Insanity implementation.-It is likely that your CI Development will profoundly grow during your PhD research Government Grant/dissertation ‼️
🤮
I think it makes sense to ask WHY they are in solitary confinement in the first place. If there is a security reason for doing so, what alternative is there? Keep in mind that prisoners in general are trying to manipulate the system any way they can. That said, obviously there are abuses in some cases, so regular auditing of these conditions is necessary.
Some people are kept in solitary confinement for their own safety, others for the safety of others. And both are operational concerns. It may be possible to make solitary confinement more humane. e. g., larger cells, but we cannot endanger prison staff, other inmates or the unpopular inmates by putting them in the general population,
Of course not; it's unconstitutional.
It's a violation of the 8th Amendment, part of The Bill of Rights.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/eighth_amendment
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
AMENDMENT VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Yes, just because you’re being separated from the rest of society doesn’t mean your basic human rights are forfeit. I think we should be asking ourselves what some of these punishments are actually supposed to accomplish. I think we’re losing the plot.
It is wrong. In fact, your constitutional rights are only yours as a free being. Once your arrested there go your rights. Miranda? A made up gaggle of sentences to make the inmate feel as if he has a leg to stand on. Truth of the matter, no one cares after your arrested. Why do you think, unless you have bail money, you have to sit in jail until your court date? If you TRULY ARE innocent until proven guilty, you wouldn't need bail money. So to sit in a cell until your day in court arrives, which could be months, says one thing and one thing only. "WE ARE GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT!!!
no, I disagree with long-term solitary confinement, just as I disagree that people in prison deserve to be raped and abused just because they're guilty of a crime. Their sentence is the incarceration, not daily abuse and torture.
If we want to rehabilitate people, hard work is the key. Having them out doing meaningful physical labor to contribute to the society which they harmed is the real way to effect change. Sucks that it's been deemed as "cruel and unusual punishment" by many courts, due to how it was abused in the past.
It's baffling how leaving someone in solitary, which has been shown to worsen mental states is considered fine, while hard work which has been shown through research to have many positive results, is frowned upon.
You're confused.
Solitary confinement is a punishment within a punishment.
If prisoners act out with others, or wardens, then they need to be separated. That is solitary confinement.
No prisoner goes straight into it, nor do any serve their whole term in such.
What you've not got your head round, is that some prisoners ARE crazy, but don't get treated. Mental health help in America is rather shit. So no surprise they lock up instead of cure/help these people.
I'd say it depends on the crime.
I read a reddit post where a dude finds out his wife was being raped by her stepdad since she was 14 (they were in late 20s during the time of the post). The stepdad let his friends rape her and kept blackmailing her to not sleep with her husband.
I wouldn't give a damn if a guy like the stepdad was put in solitary and went completely mad, he'd deserve it.
If the Constitution was law, that would be cruel and unusual punishment. But of course the Constitution is not law because any law that had no penalty nor means of enforcement is no law at all. Much of the Constitution is no better than a law against bank robbery would be if there was no penalty nor means of enforcement.
I just live my life and they live there's, whatever they did to get into prison they will get what they deserve, but if they touch me... That's a different story.
Definitely wrong. There's nothing to gain but to literally torture someone to insanity and possibly life long mental illness.
I don’t know about constitutional rights. But it is pretty cruel. Are whole Justice system needs a hard rest
Yeah I actually don’t agree with this punishment. It’s inhumane and serves to be ineffective. If a prisoner does something wrong, making him emotionally unstable won’t do much good.
I mean I’m undecided. Honestly some people, such as myself, are loners by nature and would actually be happier in solitary confinement. But does it do society “good” by driving a prisoner insane and then releasing them back into society? Hell no.
I'm a convicted felon, haven't done prison time but I have been to country a ton of times and I can tell you that they don't give a shit. At all. Calling jail staff is just as likely to get you fucked up as it is the help you need.
No. Prison is about trying to reform an individual to become a better person in society. Besides, I think this should be considered cruel an unusual.
I don't care about them tbh, cause why should I care about people who did bad things?
Be kind no..(?)
@sensible27 I don't care about criminals who had no remorse for their victims, they will get a worse punishment in the after life anyway if they don't truly repent... that is my belief and I am glad they will. If we are talking about the worst criminals who are always on isolated confinement like el chapo, yeah I could care less for someone like that...
I was only talking about cold blooded killers, rapists, and child molesters or the worst types.
There are two reason people are the way they are.. genetic or external factors. Both of which are or seem outside their control.. I doubt people are born evil and even if they are intentionally trying to hurt them every moment as much as possible seems odd. As for the afterlife thing, I don't get it.. the rewards or punishments seems disproportionate
People in prison who are in solitary confinement are usually there because they have attacked another prisoner or guard and are a continuing threat to other people's safety. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
No, this is not true. You're not differentiating between solitary confinement and things like ad-seg or administrative segregation which are places where unruly put prisoners are temporarily put. There's a difference between being sentenced to solitary confinement by a court and being sent to administrative segregation by the prison administration because of your behavior.
Not necessarily a risk to others in all cases. More likely they are political prisoners on the federal level, and gang leaders on the state level. You cannot assume they are or would be a risk in prison, and they are not placed in solitary for that reason - they are placed in solitary for vengance.
Not sure I asked if somebody being in prison cause them to go insane then there would be no point in prisons. So I guess it’s offens on the situationp
What specific rights do you feel they are having infringed upon?
I don’t care about people who did bad things to others. It feels like karma to me
I think it's a clear case of cruel and unusual punishment.
We shouldn't call it rehabilitation if it isn't, and it isn't.
Once they impinge on some else's rights, they should be losing theirs.
No that makes everything worse.
Yes of course their rights are being violated, but too many people think they deserve this to be able to stop it, and then those same people whine and complain about recidivism.
Prison is supposed to be a punishment, not a vacation.
It turns out that being placed in a cell where you literally have no human contact for months and years actually DOES fit the definition of torture:
“an act committed by a person. acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or. mental pain or suffering"
in that it almost always results in psychiatric illness.
If the inmate is violent in prison, his right to social interaction is voided by him violating the rights of other prisoners or staff.
This is true but very temporarily. Don't forget that the victim of one prisoner is just another prisoner and for the most part the staff does not care about prisoners being healthy or not. What they do care about however is prisoners dying in prison because this kind of thing gives the prison a bad reputation.
@msc545 Aren't you a public servant? technically not mine, I'm brazilian, but still.
Come on, public servant, serve and prove me right.
Or, it's worst, you refuse to answer about what you claim to know about and I start posting PDFs with prison policies. (well, easier to get training manuals, but the policies would be implied as they are supposedly writen to reflect the policies.)
I don’t understand how solitary helps prepare prisoners to transition back into society
That's a very mature and practical way of thinking I usually don't find in someone so young. Bravo!
@HighlyVolatile Its true man. All solitary really does is drive people insane. And that is the last thing we should want among prison inmates!
Why spend 50,000 a year on them when you can kill them
I guess only do solitary for lifers then
Murders and child/ sex offenders yes. They’re obviously sick in the head so why not? What does it matter if they go crazy? They should have to deal with the insanity and hallucinations their own mind creates. They’re there for a reason.
Not all murderer are on the same level of evil according to the law.
Would you put a woman, who in the heat of the moment after catching her boyfriend cheating, runs him over with her car on the same level as a Ted Bundy? Jeffrey Dahmer? Probably not.
I do agree with on SOs though. Can drop those worms in a volcano for all I care
@SmokyOne Wow. i would suggest you study genocides and how easy it is for certain "adjectives" can be added to any death list.
The Nazi pogroms started against the jews. Then the bolsheviks. Then the social democrats. Then the gypsies. Then mentally handicapped. Then germans with one jewish parent. Then Germans with jewish uncles twice removed. And on and on...
@SmokyOne Right now, there is a convoy of truckers in Canada who are being deprived the fruits of their labor because they are standing up against Justin Trudeau's state-compelled vaccine mandate. The Canadian PM recently invoked the Emergency Act, which means that anyone found to be associated with or attempting to assist the truckers is considered a terrorist and subject to financial sanctions. Those truckers did nothing except park their trucks and refuse to move them, which could be considered as damaging to the nation as a S. O. is to a child (when children are involved).
They might not be responsible for sexual crimes but they could be considering "molesting the nation" by depriving it of necessary resources, at which point they--according to your logic--stop being people and become a contagion that needs to be eradicated.
At this point in history, there is a very thin between "law-abiding citizen" and "worthless scum that deserve the chair", and it's getting thinner every single day.
@Investigator Firstly I do agree with your opinion that society can demagogue certain people easily by mere “labels”. And I don’t like what Trudeau is doing against the truckers.
But this whole anti vax thing is ridiculous and truckers travel the country, endangering many.
Okay, we have to make a distinction (which is getting lost in the noise) between anti-vaxxers, or people who are against all vaccines generally, and people against the current state-mandated vaccinations. They are not the same and the attempt to conflate the two is an obvious ploy to damage discourse, which has worked quite well. Whoever in power wanted this to happen, they were successful.
More importantly, aren't the majority of those truckers vaccinated themselves? It's not about the vaccine, it's about being compelled to address yourself, at the whims of the state, that is at issue. Remember, we literally locked down basically the entire world for a whole year, in order to "flatten the curve" and vaccines--which were administered by the same governments that enacted the lockdowns--were supposed to be serve as the catalyst to end the lockdowns. But, let's be honest: that was not a realistic goal. You can't forcibly keep people quarantined for months on end without reprieve and then expect them to comply with government orders that involve an invasive, irreversible procedure, without some resistance. If people want to get vaccinated, they can, but it should not be demanded of them, either because of personal preference or because of medical complications. That was why people were told to wear masks, until the CDC contradicted itself multiple times, and now the public doesn't really know what to think.
It's kind of funny in a depressing way: "no means no", i. e. affirmative consent, is valid everywhere except being vaccinated because "public health trumps your bodily autonomy." An invisible, omnipresent disease that could be anywhere and everywhere requires that people need to stay indoors or wear 3 layers of masks to protect themselves from it, if they haven't already been jabbed, and even then, they could still contract the illness. It's "AIDS" all over again.
@Investigator don’t see a distinction. They’re using the same reasons to not take the Covid vax.
Just so we're clear, a state-mandated injection is acceptable, in your opinion, if it's in the name of "public safety". You are completely okay with a government-compelled crackdown, on bodily autonomy, for "the greater good"?
Do you take into account people with medical exemptions or "it makes no difference. They've not been vaccinated and that's all that matters"?
@Investigator I don’t know of a “medical exemption” that would trump getting vaxxed. They are vaccines that aren’t allergic etc. I’m not an “absolutist”. I’m just jaw dropped at the number of antivaxers and tired of watching my economy go to shit.
People shouldn't have the "right" to hurt others for sakes sake..
How would that happen , they have more luxuries than I do?
Did prison work for 25 year they are in 8x12 cell 23 to 24 hours a day. Most prison so short that all of them stay incell.
Pedohphiles and women beaters they deserve this among other shit. Other criminals don’t.
Well there is always capital punishment.
Yes. Certain people don't deserve death.
Short drive, mate!
Leave them alone
You can also add your opinion below!
Most Helpful Opinions