s/o Prisons

[tntgoodwin]

The thread about having prisoners assist firefighters got me thinking about this.

 

The US has an incarceration rate of 743 per 100,000 of national population (as of 2009), the highest in the world... While Americans only represent about 5 percent of the world's population, one-quarter of the entire world's inmates are incarcerated in the United States.

From Wikipedia.

 

 

 

 

What do you think about that? Is it a good thing? Why do you think there are so many Americans in prison? Too many criminals...or too many laws?

What is your solution, if you consider this a problem?

[Mergath]

I think a good part of it is the criminalization of "victimless" crimes. If we eliminated laws banning drug use and prostitution, and instead legalized and regulated both industries, everyone would be a lot better off.

 

Plus, collecting taxes from drugs sold legally and prostitution transactions would help solve some of our deficit problem.

 

Win-win.

[Renee in NC]

It's like a vicious cycle. Here in NC, all crimes committed by someone 16 or over are handled in adult court. Sixteen year old does something REALLY dumb/criminal and is convicted of a felony. They get out of jail/off probation and they now have a criminal record. This record will follow them forever. Many employers will not hire a felon and those that do are often low wage jobs. I will say that some employers don't automatically eliminate someone with a felony, though. My dh's employer doesn't and he works with LOTS of people with felonies (mostly drug/gang related.)

 

I read recently a judge who said, "Prison just teaches criminals to be better criminals." There is a huge percentage of women in prisons who are there because their boyfriends/husbands were drug dealers. They get caught in the snare and go to jail even though their involvement is peripheral.

 

I wonder about the statistics, though. Do we have a higher rate of crime as well? Is it related to the poverty level and lack of social supports? (I know some think we have all this welfare, but the reality is that the social supports here are much less than in many other countries.)

[Mama Geek]

I tend to think there are too many laws and too many criminals both. As for what to do about it...I really don't think this country will be willing and or able to do anything about it.

[TheReader]

As far as the statistics go, and living outside the US (but as an American), I think part of the difference is in the enforcing of the laws. Not necessarily that the US has more or less laws than other places, but that in the US they are much more strictly enforced.

 

Partly, as has been said, in enforcing victimless crimes (though I do not agree that drug use is a victimless crime; any family who's lost someone to drug addiction can attest to that) -- but things like, say you have unpaid traffic tickets. Eventually, enough time passes and a warrant is sent out for your arrest, and you are now a prisoner. That's just one small example.

 

In general, though, the laws in some other countries (at least, certainly here in Brazil) are poorly enforced. There is corruption in the police department(s), a blind eye is turned, the honest police are overwhelmed, the poor have nothing to lose and so no way to hold them accountable, and for whatever reason the laws that are on the books just are not enforced. Or are very selectively enforced.

 

In the US....not so, but I'm not sure it's too many laws rather than just more heavily enforced. Partly that's a problem (ex: the parking tickets turned arrest warrant), partly that's what keeps the US a step above other places.

 

Someone mentioned poverty......okay, fine. Now imagine we empty the prisons and jails of all but the most violent criminals and they are all suddenly homeless or on the streets. Do we like the face of that US any better?

[twoforjoy]

We incarcerate far, far too many people in this country. The reasons for it are complex (a large part, I think, it not just that we prosecute too much, but that we allow so little leeway in sentencing for many crimes, which means that people automatically end up serving a sentence of a certain length regardless of the level of risk they pose or whether that time will actually rehabilitate them), and there aren't, I don't think, easy solutions, but I do think that it's something that urgently needs to be addressed, especially since we're just locking up more and more people each year.

 

Personally, I'd like to see us move toward more of a restitution-based system for non-violent crimes. Not to say we'd do away with prison time for that, but that restitution would at least be considered as an alternative in some cases.

[Renee in NC]

As far as the statistics go, and living outside the US (but as an American), I think part of the difference is in the enforcing of the laws. Not necessarily that the US has more or less laws than other places, but that in the US they are much more strictly enforced.

 

Partly, as has been said, in enforcing victimless crimes (though I do not agree that drug use is a victimless crime; any family who's lost someone to drug addiction can attest to that) -- but things like, say you have unpaid traffic tickets. Eventually, enough time passes and a warrant is sent out for your arrest, and you are now a prisoner. That's just one small example.

 

In general, though, the laws in some other countries (at least, certainly here in Brazil) are poorly enforced. There is corruption in the police department(s), a blind eye is turned, the honest police are overwhelmed, the poor have nothing to lose and so no way to hold them accountable, and for whatever reason the laws that are on the books just are not enforced. Or are very selectively enforced.

 

In the US....not so, but I'm not sure it's too many laws rather than just more heavily enforced. Partly that's a problem (ex: the parking tickets turned arrest warrant), partly that's what keeps the US a step above other places.

 

Someone mentioned poverty......okay, fine. Now imagine we empty the prisons and jails of all but the most violent criminals and they are all suddenly homeless or on the streets. Do we like the face of that US any better?

 

Most of them would not be homeless or in the streets. Most homeless are either mentally ill or addicted to drugs/alcohol. Most criminals have homes to go to and friends and family that are there for them. Poverty doesn't equal homeless, but in some areas it does equal hopeless. The risk factors for committing crimes are health, education, family status, and economics. All of those are more prevelent in lower socioeconomic groups (and they have less money to hire lawyers.;))

[TheReader]

Most of them would not be homeless or in the streets. Most homeless are either mentally ill or addicted to drugs/alcohol. Most criminals have homes to go to and friends and family that are there for them. Poverty doesn't equal homeless, but in some areas it does equal hopeless. The risk factors for committing crimes are health, education, family status, and economics. All of those are more prevelent in lower socioeconomic groups (and they have less money to hire lawyers.;))

 

I understand that most people currently in US prisons/jails are not w/o family, but the family does not always take back the criminal and some, not all, might well end up on the streets.

 

I didn't mean to imply that criminal = homeless or that homeless = criminal, I was (very poorly) drawing a picture of problem in the US (high incarceration rate) vs. picture of other countries (high poverty/homeless rate). It was meant as a contrast between the two, nothing more.

[Impish]

I think what needs to be addressed is WHY ppl are commiting these crimes in the first place.

 

Why do some have no problems viewing the laws as mutable, or not applicable to 'them', whereas others have no problem obeying the laws of the land?

 

Its not as simple as 'poverty', 'domestic violence', etc...b/c there are many that grow up in the same situations who do not get into criminal activity...so where does that difference come in?

[twoforjoy]

I understand that most people currently in US prisons/jails are not w/o family, but the family does not always take back the criminal and some, not all, might well end up on the streets.

 

I didn't mean to imply that criminal = homeless or that homeless = criminal, I was (very poorly) drawing a picture of problem in the US (high incarceration rate) vs. picture of other countries (high poverty/homeless rate). It was meant as a contrast between the two, nothing more.

 

Certainly the lack of long-term services for the seriously mentally ill and addicted--especially if they don't have family to advocate for them--compounds the problem. We let so many mentally ill people out on the streets in the 1980s, when we stopped funding long-term care, and now it seems like many bounce between jail/prison and homelessness.

[twoforjoy]

I think what needs to be addressed is WHY ppl are commiting these crimes in the first place.

 

Why do some have no problems viewing the laws as mutable, or not applicable to 'them', whereas others have no problem obeying the laws of the land?

 

Its not as simple as 'poverty', 'domestic violence', etc...b/c there are many that grow up in the same situations who do not get into criminal activity...so where does that difference come in?

 

We can also ask that internationally, though. Why do we, in the U.S., have such high rates of incarceration? Are our citizens less moral than the citizens of France or Germany or Spain? If so, why? If not, then what accounts for the huge difference in incarceration rates?

[Impish]

We can also ask that internationally, though. Why do we, in the U.S., have such high rates of incarceration? Are our citizens less moral than the citizens of France or Germany or Spain? If so, why? If not, then what accounts for the huge difference in incarceration rates?

I see what you're saying...All I'm getting at is if ppl weren't committing crimes to be convicted of, then obviously incarceration wouldn't be an issue, kwim?

[tntgoodwin]

I think it says something when you see that the US incarcerates more than China, Iran, or North Korea.

[Impish]

I think it says something when you see that the US incarcerates more than China, Iran, or North Korea.

The question is, what *does* it say?

 

What are the actual crime statistics? Do ppl in other countries fear the penal system more than in North America? The jails are acknowledged h*ll holes in comparison to what exists in North America, how large a part does that play?

 

Are we more into enforcing law, more capable of doing so, is our legal system more honest than other countries?

 

There are a myriad of factors in this, that go way beyond simple incarceration numbers.

[TheReader]

I think it says something when you see that the US incarcerates more than China, Iran, or North Korea.

 

I'll take high incarceration rates over fear inducing dictatorships and Big Brother societies where my every move is monitored.

[TheReader]

The question is, what *does* it say?

 

What are the actual crime statistics? Do ppl in other countries fear the penal system more than in North America? The jails are acknowledged h*ll holes in comparison to what exists in North America, how large a part does that play?

 

Are we more into enforcing law, more capable of doing so, is our legal system more honest than other countries?

 

There are a myriad of factors in this, that go way beyond simple incarceration numbers.

 

I think it's definitely your middle statement there, at least in part. The US is more capable of, and for some reason more determined to, and also more honest about enforcing laws.

 

And the US is more bent on enforcing *every* law, from the tiny to the huge, where a lot of places focus on the worst of the worst and the little stuff slips through the cracks of over-taxed, possibly/probably corrupt police forces.

 

And absolutely this is not just a black and white, the US incarcerates this many, everyone else incarcerates less, situation. Like you say, a myriad of factors go into this...

[Moxie]

The jails are acknowledged h*ll holes in comparison to what exists in North America, how large a part does that play?

 

 

 

I think this is a big part of it. My neighbor robbed a bank; no weapon, didn't try to hide his face, just walked in with a note and then walked home. I'm 100% convinced that he looked at his life (high school drop-out, 2 young kids with a girl he didn't really like, no job, health issues) and decided that going to jail would be better. And really, isn't it?? He now gets 3 meals/day, doesn't have to deal with his girlfriend and her drama, free healthcare, heck he probably has cable TV now!!

[Impish]

Prisons might be hell holes, but honestly I think some people's lives are hell holes. At least in prison you have the comfort of knowing what you will be doing each day and that you have a meal and a place to sleep for the night. You won't freeze to death. You won't be alone. You will have your medical needs attended to.

 

Granted, none of that sounds attractive to me, but I can see how it would appeal to some people who don't have a lot going for them.

That's in North America. I'm thinking of other countries that prisoners aren't always fed, medically tended to, warm...but are abused, tortured, etc.

 

Those are the prisons I'm thinking of when I use the term 'h*ll holes', not what we have in North America.

 

In fact, according to an article I read many years ago, prisoners have a better standard of living than a single parent on welfare. I know the women's shelter I was involved with had a far lesser budget for food than what was budgeted for the average prisoner. How is that right? I'm talking strictly food budget, not all the other costs involved w/incarceration.

[Mimm]

I think we imprison people far too easily for crimes that don't deserve it.

[Mimm]

I see what you're saying...All I'm getting at is if ppl weren't committing crimes to be convicted of, then obviously incarceration wouldn't be an issue, kwim?

 

There are simply too many laws. No one can possibly be expected to know them all. You can easily commit a crime without even realizing it.

[twoforjoy]

There are simply too many laws. No one can possibly be expected to know them all. You can easily commit a crime without even realizing it.

 

I'm not sure that's the issue when it comes to incarceration, though. While there certainly are people committing crimes they didn't realize were crimes and being punished for them, those crimes in general don't come with long prison terms. The people who are ending up serving time are generally doing it for crimes they knew were crimes (drug dealing, theft, etc.). There are certainly exceptions, especially, right now, around sex crimes--I know a woman whose 19 year old son was sentenced to 8-10 years in prison for possession of child porn after downloading files on Limewire, most of which were of young women just a few years younger than he was--but in general most of the people in our prisons are there for things they knew were crimes.

 

One issue is how long our prison sentences are. They are MUCH longer than sentences in many other nations.

 

I think another issue is our lack of real interest in helping people released from prison reintegrate into society. Instead, they are ostracized and, because of their record, often unable to find employment, and that leaves little room to actually become productive members of society. People with drug arrests are unable to receive federal aid to attend college, which makes that out of reach for them. What are we doing to help them become functioning, law-abiding citizens?

 

And I do think some of it is just lack of opportunities for young men in their late teens and early twenties. If you look at ages when people are incarcerated, men in their late teens to mid-twenties are vastly over-represented. We know that people's frontal lobes aren't fully developed until their mid-twenties, and poor decision making before that is common. Couple that with lack of opportunities--for many poor and particularly poor minority young men, both college and steady employment are out of reach--and lack of responsibility--people getting married at later ages and having few or no family responsibilities that might moderate their impulses a bit--and it just seems like a recipe for engagement in anti-social and sometimes criminal activity.

 

It's certainly a complicated problem. But I think what we need to do first is admit that it IS a problem. There is something wrong with having as many people locked up as we do, and it's certainly not leading to what I assume is the desired result (less crime).

 

Although, maybe that isn't the desired result. If the result is a reduction in crime, then we're failing. If the result is something else, maybe we're succeeding at whatever that agenda is. I would highly, highly recommend reading The New Jim Crow. It's one of those paradigm-shifting books. The author argues that, basically, the way drug laws have been written and enforced has allowed prisons to replace legal segregation as the means of social control of racial minorities.

Edited October 13, 2011 by twoforjoy

[Little Nyssa]

I would like to know if the higher incarceration makes any difference to how much crime there is. I would think that the US is much safer than most of the rest of the world. But I don't have any stats to prove it.

[twoforjoy]

I would like to know if the higher incarceration makes any difference to how much crime there is. I would think that the US is much safer than most of the rest of the world. But I don't have any stats to prove it.

 

From stats I've seen, the U.S. tends to have lower rates of certain property crimes but higher (often very significantly higher) rates of violent crimes than other industrialized Western nations.

[TheReader]

You think our every moves aren't monitored? We have cameras on our streets. I'm sure people can read my e-mails and listen to my phone calls (in the name of national security...*cough*). I might see a video of myself using a public restroom on youtube someday. I have to get felt up to go to a concert or fly on a plane. I hardly feel like I have privacy.

 

Not quite to the extent that it is in China, Iran or North Korea, no.

 

Do I agree with ALL that's been done in the US in the name of safety? No. Not at all, and that's not what I meant.

 

 

Prisons might be hell holes, but honestly I think some people's lives are hell holes. At least in prison you have the comfort of knowing what you will be doing each day and that you have a meal and a place to sleep for the night. You won't freeze to death. You won't be alone. You will have your medical needs attended to.

 

Granted, none of that sounds attractive to me, but I can see how it would appeal to some people who don't have a lot going for them.

 

That's in North America. I'm thinking of other countries that prisoners aren't always fed, medically tended to, warm...but are abused, tortured, etc.

 

Those are the prisons I'm thinking of when I use the term 'h*ll holes', not what we have in North America.

 

In fact, according to an article I read many years ago, prisoners have a better standard of living than a single parent on welfare. I know the women's shelter I was involved with had a far lesser budget for food than what was budgeted for the average prisoner. How is that right? I'm talking strictly food budget, not all the other costs involved w/incarceration.

 

People are abused in prisons here as well. I worked with a woman whose son went to prison for a year (he just go involved with the wrong people, but otherwise not really a bad guy). He was beaten up by guards and raped by a cell mate.

 

I basically agree with what you are saying. Some people don't want to make sure that everyone has access to medical care in the US, but inmates have access to it (I'm sure those same people wouldn't care if they did away with that too).

 

re: prisons --- the US or N. American system is a 4 star hotel compared to the prisons in 3rd world countries. Imp's got it right; there's a vast difference. VAST.

 

Wendy, you talk about abuse -- the stories hear, which I've heard from first hand accounts, people who experienced &/or witnessed the attrocities associated with the police here -- are of boys taken off the streets, raped, tortured, beaten, and then given over to gang members. That's before they even get to jail. Not raped by cell mates, but we're talking young boys -- 10 & under -- picked up for the crime of sleeping in a doorway or sidewalk somewhere and tortured. One young man saw his friend set on fire.

 

Corruption like that, which certainly keeps the incarceration rates low in this country, is what I'm talking about and why I say that the steady enforcement of laws is one of the key differences between the US and other places, the reason the US has more folks in jail.

 

Because in the US they actually make it to the jail alive, not set on fire in an alley while a crowd of police officers watch. Not prostituted out by the police as a bargain, a way to keep from suffering the same physical torture. Not used and abused by the gang leaders who protect the slums, but turn the children of the slums into their couriers (drug runners), thieves (pick pockets, etc.), and prime source of income in exchange for protection, and the police take home their cut, look the other way and help discipline the boys if the gang leaders ask them to.

 

Not by taking them to jail, but through beatings, rapes, torture, kidnappings, and a general rain of terror that keeps the poor, poor, and the crime more or less limited to the slums. And, of course, the number of incarcerated relatively low compared with the good ole USA.

 

Sorry, but yes, I'd rather have the policing style of the US over the corruption of Brazil or the dictatorship of China or Iran or N Korea or even Venezuela. I'd rather see and read about high numbers of people in jail than see the high numbers of missing children signs that pop up daily and know that rather than police helping to find them, more than likely if the child is missing from a slum, it's the police who kidnapped him or her in the first place (or beat her, tortured her, etc).

[twoforjoy]

Sorry, but yes, I'd rather have the policing style of the US over the corruption of Brazil or the dictatorship of China or Iran or N Korea or even Venezuela. I'd rather see and read about high numbers of people in jail than see the high numbers of missing children signs that pop up daily and know that rather than police helping to find them, more than likely if the child is missing from a slum, it's the police who kidnapped him or her in the first place (or beat her, tortured her, etc).

 

What do you make of industrialized Western nations (Europe, some of Asia) that has both lower rates of crime than we do AND vastly lower rates of incarceration? What are they doing right that we're not doing?

[Paige]

We have too many laws that people can be imprisoned for breaking.

 

We imprison many people for far too long.

 

We have a system that prefers punishment over rehabilitation.

 

Maybe, and I am not 100% on this one, but I think we have not done a good job teaching children impulse control and delayed gratification. The number 1 predictor for criminal or deviant behavior is low impulse control and poor planning. Maybe it is a learned behavior or maybe our diets and the constant stream of media and electronics are messing up our brains, but the fact is that if we could teach people better impulse control and executive planning skills, then crime would decrease.

 

Those are the main factors, IMO. I do not believe it is because people are poor or because Americans are more antisocial.

Edited October 13, 2011 by Paige

[twoforjoy]

Maybe, and I am not 100% on this one, but I think we have not done a good job teaching children impulse control and delayed gratification. The number 1 predictor for criminal or deviant behavior is low impulse control and poor planning. Maybe it is a learned behavior or maybe our diets and the constant stream of media and electronics are messing up our brains, but the fact is that if we could teach people better impulse control and executive planning skills, then crime would decrease.

 

To some extent, though, impulse control is developed rather than learned; it's largely a function of the frontal lobe, which isn't fully developed until your mid-20s.

 

So I wonder if the issue is more environment than teaching. I think part of the issue in the U.S. might be that we don't have many checks on the very negative influences on children who do lack impulse control. For example, there's the huge amount of advertising aimed at children and particularly teens and young adults, often for stuff they can't afford. Other countries have laws around advertising aimed at minors; we don't. I do wonder if inundating young people--who developmentally lack the kind of impulse control adults have the capacity for--with advertisements for things they can't readily afford might be an impetus for antisocial behavior. I'm sure there are many others, as well.

[TheReader]

What do you make of industrialized Western nations (Europe, some of Asia) that has both lower rates of crime than we do AND vastly lower rates of incarceration? What are they doing right that we're not doing?

 

That, I do not have the answer to.

 

I think like others have said, we (the US) incarcerate for offenses that really don't need it. (see my original thoughts, where I mentioned the unpaid parking or traffic tickets that turn into an arrest warrant, court dates, x number of days in jail, etc, etc, etc. -- why burden the system with something like that?)

 

I think that maybe the US is *too* efficient in making arrests, putting people in jail when they want to, etc. Trigger happy, if you will. Lock 'em up, put 'em away, let's not deal with the criminals, shall we?

 

I really don't know, though.

[JudoMom]

I think it says something when you see that the US incarcerates more than China, Iran, or North Korea.

 

Do you think we actually have good, legitimate, oh, sure, we'll be honest stats from these countries? I doubt it.

[FaithManor]

I think there are a lot of factors from how we go about enforcing laws, an overly complicated legal code, and lack of sentencing leeway for judges, to the three strikes laws that many states have which result in relatively harmless individuals being incarcerated for 20 years while dangerous felons convicted of only one crime, walk the streets after five years and good behavior.

 

We do not have any reasonable plan for re-integrating offenders into society (though when it comes to pedophiles - those, the prison system can keep; let's NOT reintegrate them).

 

Additionally, the Federal War on Drugs has done nothing but cost the US taxpayer an extraordinary, mind-boggling pile of money that could have been used to help people, pay for re-hab and mental health services, job training, etc. and in the end has done nothing but fill prisons. It's NUTS! It has not reduced drug use; it has not reduced the flow of drugs across our borders; it has not reduced gang related crime. It has done nothing but ravage our treasury with no long term positive results except keeping a lot of law enforcement officers employed in a field that isn't aiding the general peace of the nation. We should have those officers doing something else.

 

I'd be happy to let the guy down the street smoking weed, stay on his porch smoking weed, if it meant that a murderer didn't get out for "good behavior" in order to make room for mister "three strikes". I'd be far more willing to see taxes go to pay for re-hab and job training for a heroin addict than jail time unless they've killed someone or robbed a bank to support the habit and I'd still be supportive of re-habilitative services so they won't do it again.

 

I'm all for locking up perverts and throwing away the keys!

 

I also agree that the elimination of long term care for the mentally ill, mentally handicapped, has left us with a vulnerable segment of the population unable to care for themselves and victims of their uncontrolled impulses through no fault of their own. It's got be to be a better use of funds to support decent mental hospitals with caring staffs, than continue to incarcerate mentally damaged individuals who will end up being prey within the prison population.

 

Faith

[twoforjoy]

It's got be to be a better use of funds to support decent mental hospitals with caring staffs, than continue to incarcerate mentally damaged individuals who will end up being prey within the prison population.

 

Faith

 

I think this is a significant part of it. I also imagine it would be not just a better use of funds, but a more efficient one--because each time a person is processed through the criminal justice system, that costs money at every step--as well as more humane.

 

In general I'm not in favor of involuntary institutionalization. But for people with extremely serious mental illnesses, especially those who won't/can't comply with medication routines or lack family support to help them do so, I really don't think there's a better alternative. Certainly leaving them to fend for themselves on the street and in prisons isn't it.

[ElizabethB]

There are a lot of factors, like people have said.

 

One overlooked factor (not saying it's the main thing, just that it plays a part) is literacy. I hope to eventually finish up my DVDs of my phonics lessons (working on it, 5 of 6 DVDs done!) and start getting them into prisons.

 

Here are some stats from Mike Brunner, the author of "Retarding America, The Imprisonment of Potential" (very interesting book.) From the book, page 26,

 

"The Juvenile Justice Literacy Project (1989) in California provided reading instruction for incarcerated juvenile delinquents in two settings....Every dollar invested in reading saved $1.75 as a result of reduced recidivism." [A good OG based phonics program was used, the control group actually got whole language type reading.]

 

Mike Brunner has a website which has a good graph about drop out rates and some interesting links about literacy.

 

http://www.literacyalert.org/

 

He's a big homeschooling fan, if anyone is in Idaho, he does cheap or free clinics for homeschoolers.

[Mimm]

Additionally, the Federal War on Drugs has done nothing but cost the US taxpayer an extraordinary, mind-boggling pile of money that could have been used to help people, pay for re-hab and mental health services, job training, etc. and in the end has done nothing but fill prisons. It's NUTS! It has not reduced drug use; it has not reduced the flow of drugs across our borders; it has not reduced gang related crime. It has done nothing but ravage our treasury with no long term positive results except keeping a lot of law enforcement officers employed in a field that isn't aiding the general peace of the nation. We should have those officers doing something else.

 

Faith

 

:iagree: I think our war on drugs is totally insane.

[tntgoodwin]

I would venture to guess not really.

 

And if you look at states who have the death penalty (and use it frequently) verses those who either don't or don't use it frequently, the crime rates are generally not lower. So even the prospect of being put to death doesn't prove to act as a deterrent.

 

Somebody on death row is more likely to die prior to execution by the state, I think the entire death penalty system needs to be revamped.

 

Capital punishment in my system would have one shot at an appeal, require unanimous juries for both guilt determination and sentencing. After the only chance at appeal, the convicted is shot in the head. Quick and cheap. And it would be an available option for murder and most cases of rape.

Also though, I would legalize or decriminalize most, if not all, drugs. Legalize prostitution, and get rid of gun control laws. Get rid of mandatory minimum sentences as well as mandatory three strikes laws.

[Jennifer3141]

:iagree: I think our war on drugs is totally insane.

 

 

And a GIANT waste of money. :glare:

 

I was watching an old George Carlin monlogue last night and he thought the "War on Drugs" is one of those things we've done to make stupid white people think that the government is keeping us safe. I couldn't help nodding at him.

[Slartibartfast]

I see what you're saying...All I'm getting at is if ppl weren't committing crimes to be convicted of, then obviously incarceration wouldn't be an issue, kwim?

 

Apparently that is not the case

 

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2011/10/13/2011-10-13_excop_we_fabricated_drug_raps_for_quotas.html?google_editors_picks=true

 

A former NYPD narcotics detective snared in a corruption scandal testified it was common practice to fabricate drug charges against innocent people to meet arrest quotas.

Edited October 13, 2011 by Sis