Criminal Justice Reform - We've got some ugly shit to face.

[*Asterisk*]

I was reading Robby Soave's article on Nate Parker and the Carcer State this morning.

It really got me thinking about the SJW doublethink on crimibal justice reform being necessary while simultaneously up punitivity on sex crimes and domestic violence higher than ever. These two points cannot live while the other survives, and there are far too few drug offenders in prison to make a significant reduction in the Nation's prison-pop.

A major conflict is coming, and I'd love to here from @Jaimas, @AnOminous, @Gym Leader Elesa, and anybody else interested: How will this connundrum be resolved?

 

[Jaimas]

I was reading Robby Soave's article on Nate Parker and the Carcer State this morning.

It really got me thinking about the SJW doublethink on crimibal justice reform being necessary while simultaneously up punitivity on sex crimes and domestic violence higher than ever. These two points cannot live while the other survives, and there are far too few drug offenders in prison to make a significant reduction in the Nation's prison-pop.

A major conflict is coming, and I'd love to here from @Jaimas, @AnOminous, @Gym Leader Elesa, and anybody else interested: How will this connundrum be resolved?

I'll make my opinion on this short and simple.

This kind of idiocy needs to be mocked.

 

[Ruin]

The biggest problem I have with criminal justice reform is it's almost always code for "Let's order the mass release of violent criminals so they can continue to terrorize innocent people," instead of "Let's stop locking people up for drug use and shoplifting/property crimes so we have enough cells for the rapists and murderers."

 

[Joan Nyan]

Of course SJW's beliefs are contradictory, all SJW beliefs are completely illogical.

I don't see what's wrong with the criminal justice system. If the prisons are getting too full, that shows that we need to be working to reduce the crime rate, not stop enforcing laws.

 

[AnOminous]

I was reading Robby Soave's article on Nate Parker and the Carcer State this morning.

It really got me thinking about the SJW doublethink on crimibal justice reform being necessary while simultaneously up punitivity on sex crimes and domestic violence higher than ever. These two points cannot live while the other survives, and there are far too few drug offenders in prison to make a significant reduction in the Nation's prison-pop.

A major conflict is coming, and I'd love to here from @Jaimas, @AnOminous, @Gym Leader Elesa, and anybody else interested: How will this connundrum be resolved?

That's nonsense. No less than half of federal prison inmates are serving time for drug offenses. The numbers are better for state prisons, but there's still a huge burden for the other drug offenses that get diverted to drug court and alternate resolutions.

Anyway, the primary distinction should be between violent and nonviolent offenses. While I wouldn't agree that no nonviolent crimes should result in incarceration (some kinds of scam and financial crime are incredibly devastating to society), those people don't represent the kind of threat to society as violent offenders do.

I think incorrigible violent offenders should be more or less isolated from society, including nonviolent offenders, who should not be unfairly punished by basically being sentenced to be the rape and murder toys of the true scum of society. Save that treatment for the chomos.

So I disagree on the general concept about the drug offenders. There are far too many of them and they really would make a substantial dent in the prison population if you just let all of them go, so long as their crime cocktail didn't include violence or illegal weapons or weapons used illegally, a distinction I think is important because the mere fact that someone who had some weed also had a gun for no illegal purpose shouldn't get extra punishment for that, as is often the case.

Anyway, while incarceration serves many penological purposes, I am of the opinion that its core purpose is incapacitation, that is, that people who are incarcerated are unable while incarcerated to commit further crimes against the public. Prison populations should, therefore, mainly contain people whose incarceration serves this core purpose, rather than bullshit like being "tough on crime," i.e. the bullshit deontological ethical idea that people "deserve" to be punished and therefore we should do this even if it serves no useful purpose or even causes harm to society. The fetish for punishment for its own sake has done no good.

 

[Gym Leader Elesa]

I was reading Robby Soave's article on Nate Parker and the Carcer State this morning.

It really got me thinking about the SJW doublethink on crimibal justice reform being necessary while simultaneously up punitivity on sex crimes and domestic violence higher than ever. These two points cannot live while the other survives, and there are far too few drug offenders in prison to make a significant reduction in the Nation's prison-pop.

A major conflict is coming, and I'd love to here from @Jaimas, @AnOminous, @Gym Leader Elesa, and anybody else interested: How will this connundrum be resolved?

That's nonsense. No less than half of federal prison inmates are serving time for drug offenses. The numbers are better for state prisons, but there's still a huge burden for the other drug offenses that get diverted to drug court and alternate resolutions.

Anyway, the primary distinction should be between violent and nonviolent offenses. While I wouldn't agree that no nonviolent crimes should result in incarceration (some kinds of scam and financial crime are incredibly devastating to society), those people don't represent the kind of threat to society as violent offenders do.

I think incorrigible violent offenders should be more or less isolated from society, including nonviolent offenders, who should not be unfairly punished by basically being sentenced to be the rape and murder toys of the true scum of society. Save that treatment for the chomos.

So I disagree on the general concept about the drug offenders. There are far too many of them and they really would make a substantial dent in the prison population if you just let all of them go, so long as their crime cocktail didn't include violence or illegal weapons or weapons used illegally, a distinction I think is important because the mere fact that someone who had some weed also had a gun for no illegal purpose shouldn't get extra punishment for that, as is often the case.

Anyway, while incarceration serves many penological purposes, I am of the opinion that its core purpose is incapacitation, that is, that people who are incarcerated are unable while incarcerated to commit further crimes against the public. Prison populations should, therefore, mainly contain people whose incarceration serves this core purpose, rather than bullshit like being "tough on crime," i.e. the bullshit deontological ethical idea that people "deserve" to be punished and therefore we should do this even if it serves no useful purpose or even causes harm to society. The fetish for punishment for its own sake has done no good.

I would comment more at length, but @AnOminous basically hit every single point I possibly could have, except perhaps my thoughts on the death penalty (which I believe should not be used as a punishment or a deterrent, but only as a necessary tool to deal with those who could and would continue to perpetrate mass violence from behind prison walls).

 

[AnOminous]

I would comment more at length, but @AnOminous basically hit every single point I possibly could have, except perhaps my thoughts on the death penalty (which I believe should not be used as a punishment or a deterrent, but only as a necessary tool to deal with those who could and would continue to perpetrate mass violence from behind prison walls).

Yes, I should have hit that, too. I'm not going to go into detail, but while I don't necessarily have an absolute philosophical abhorrence of the concept of a death penalty, as a practical matter, it's a useless, cumbersome waste and does no actual good. I think it should be generally abolished. There is a special case that I would call the "human cancer" where there are a few people so utterly evil and violent that their mere existence is a threat to humanity in general. However, these people are so rare that it's worth putting up with them, in places like Broadmoor and the so-called supermax prisons (most of those should be abolished too though).

My personal favorite example of a "human cancer" is this guy.

 

[feedtheoctopus]

There's actually something of a bipartisan consensus at this point on the need to lower our prison population. Thing is nobody knows how to do that effectively.

 

[*Asterisk*]

Yes, I should have hit that, too. I'm not going to go into detail, but while I don't necessarily have an absolute philosophical abhorrence of the concept of a death penalty, as a practical matter, it's a useless, cumbersome waste and does no actual good. I think it should be generally abolished. There is a special case that I would call the "human cancer" where there are a few people so utterly evil and violent that their mere existence is a threat to humanity in general. However, these people are so rare that it's worth putting up with them, in places like Broadmoor and the so-called supermax prisons (most of those should be abolished too though).

My personal favorite example of a "human cancer" is this guy.

It's amazing how many compromises leave you with the worst of both worlds.

As for myself, my justification for the Death Penalty is under the rationale that the government -- in a well functioning society -- should hold a monopoly on the legitimate use of lethal violence in the nation. Executions are a part of that, as is the loss of time experienced during even regular incarceration. Even lax European countries can't escape such things; the right of criminals to end their own life is already a flashpoint in Belgium.

None of these issues will be fixed, however, until prosecuters no longer have the incentive to be as punative as possible with every case they get. There are no real consequences in the US for needlessly putting someone on the Sex-Offender Registry, the No-fly List, or the Terror Watch List. There's every reason to believe this'll get worse; Obama, Clinton, and Trump have all supported using the latter two as a means of gun control. We could be looking at adding hundreds of thousands more to these lists indefinitely by 2020 no matter who's present.

If that doesn't terrify and disgust you, I've got a Nigerian Prince who wants to wire his fortune over the Atlantic to introduce you to.

 

[Beaniebon]

Locking up people for non violent crimes such as drug possession is fucking stupid and counter productive especially since they're put in with actual criminals (murders, robbers, rapists, gang members, ect.) and will, by proximity, be more drawn into these crimes.

Also, private for profit prisons are shit and most likely a big part of why the answer is 9/10 to throw them in prison.

Prison is supposed to be about reform and America is even more dumb than I thought if 'reform' is locking up someone caught with heroin with a literal murderer.

 

[Oddjob OTP]

Maybe more of a News forum thing, but worth mentioning here too: DoJ is phasing out private prisons in because they're shit.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...se-of-private-prisons/?utm_term=.16f67f3b931a

“They simply do not provide the same level of correctional services, programs, and resources; they do not save substantially on costs; and as noted in a recent report by the Department’s Office of Inspector General, they do not maintain the same level of safety and security,” Yates wrote.

Which is pretty cool, even if their reasons also glaze over the corrupting nature of the private prison industry.

 

[feedtheoctopus]

Maybe more of a News forum thing, but worth mentioning here too: DoJ is phasing out private prisons in because they're shit.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...se-of-private-prisons/?utm_term=.16f67f3b931a


Which is pretty cool, even if their reasons also glaze over the corrupting nature of the private prison industry.

Unfortunately I don't think it's going to effect state level facilities or ICE detention centers so much. Which is most of their business.

That said it's a blow to neoliberalism's "privatization is always good" bullshit, so it's a good step.

 

[AnOminous]

There's actually something of a bipartisan consensus at this point on the need to lower our prison population. Thing is nobody knows how to do that effectively.

Bullshit. It's obvious how to do it. It's just the people (Congress) in charge of doing it are completely owned by people who make all their money from not doing it.

So don't expect it to be done. Ever.