BS: Sentencing children to die in prison

Subject: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jack Campin
Date: 17 Sep 17 - 01:40 PM

I had no idea the US criminal justice system was THIS barbaric.

https://eji.org/reports/cruel-and-unusual

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: wysiwyg
Date: 17 Sep 17 - 02:42 PM

Thank you for posting this.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Donuel
Date: 17 Sep 17 - 03:13 PM

There are a couple of 'advanced' nations that also do this. Do you care to know who?

Jack there are times on BS when people are under a lot of stress so that topics that require more thought than gum chewing or puppies do not have much participation. I'm curious to see.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 17 Sep 17 - 03:45 PM

Most of the sentences imposed on these children were mandatory: the court could not give any consideration to the child's age or life history. Some of the children were charged with crimes that do not involve homicide or even injury; many were convicted for offenses where older teenagers or adults were involved and primarily responsible for the crime; nearly two-thirds are children of color.

This behavior is an embarrassment to many in the US, something that has needed to be resolved for years. It's part of the Reagan legacy, when legislators started pushing for stiffer mandatory sentences, giving judges no discretion.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 17 Sep 17 - 08:14 PM

I tried checking online to see exactly what the age of criminal responsibility was in USA. thie page says:
United States of America

The minimum age of criminal liability is set at the federal and state level in the United States. At the state level, 33 states set no minimum age of criminal responsibility, theoretically allowing a child to be sentenced to criminal penalties at any age [Cipriani,D. Children's Rights and the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility: A Global Perspective, Ashgate 2009, p. 221 and 222], though in most of these states a capacity related test is applied.


So, basically, in US, if you can commit a crime, you risk being punished for it. As long as the children are aware of this, it seems reasonable. Of course, there will be those who do not understand the possible consequence of their actions.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: meself
Date: 18 Sep 17 - 01:09 AM

Yeah, like those who are - what? 12 years old? 8 years old? 5 years old?

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Thompson
Date: 18 Sep 17 - 02:49 AM

The concept of "trying a child as an adult" is nonsense. A child is a child, not an adult.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 18 Sep 17 - 03:19 AM

its really odd. you meet so many nice Americans....and yet...thirty thousand gun deaths every year. a rabid president...

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 18 Sep 17 - 03:23 AM

From: Thompson - PM
Date: 18 Sep 17 - 02:49 AM

The concept of "trying a child as an adult" is nonsense. A child is a child, not an adult.

Yes, but where to draw the line? Some adults have the 'mental age' of children, and some children are exceptionally precocious.
Legislators in different countries set the cut-off age differently (and the age of consent, and age at which one can marry/drink/drive).
Once set it must be the guidance which is used, unless the law is changed.
There must be some circumstances in which criminals (of any age) must take the consequences of their own actions.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Sep 17 - 03:38 AM

Bot as bad but still GROSSLY UNJUST
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Stu
Date: 18 Sep 17 - 04:07 AM

It's quite legal to marry a 12 year old in some states in the US and over 200,000 thousand have been in the last 15 years, mostly girls to older men. When your moral compass is that corrupted, I guess to a large part of society imprisoning children doesn't seem so appalling.

It's difficult to comprehend such depravity as part of a society, and perhaps that's why some US citizens see guns and executing mentally ill people as mere trivialities.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: BobL
Date: 18 Sep 17 - 04:21 AM

What I find disturbing about the report is that the expression "sentenced to die in prison" is consistently used to describe a life sentence without parole. Personally, I find such use of loaded expressions makes it more difficult to judge an argument on its merits.

More to the point though, the report was published in January 2008 - nearly 10 years ago. I understand (thank you, Wiki) that in the USA, automatic life sentences without parole are no longer imposed on minors. So it would appear that the EJI's campaign was successful.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 18 Sep 17 - 05:23 AM

Well done Bob.
I hadn't spotted that. The copyright date at the bottom of the page is 2017. Clearly they just refresh regularly.
I see their link for donations still seems to be live though.

Cheers
Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: BobL
Date: 19 Sep 17 - 03:27 AM

Thank you, Nigel. Nice to know I have some use in this world other than being a warning to others.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jack Campin
Date: 19 Sep 17 - 07:57 AM

Congratulations to the EJI on getting some modest result, then.

What I find disturbing about the report is that the expression "sentenced to die in prison" is consistently used to describe a life sentence without parole. Personally, I find such use of loaded expressions makes it more difficult to judge an argument on its merits.

Nothing loaded about it - it accurately described what the US legal system was doing. Whereas using the language they prefer, to muddle the issues and duck responsibility, is loaded.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Thompson
Date: 19 Sep 17 - 10:01 AM

Nigel writes: Yes, but where to draw the line? Some adults have the 'mental age' of children, and some children are exceptionally precocious.

A child is a child. It is inappropriate to sentence a child as an adult.

By "trying as an adult" the suggestion is already that the person is guilty, which is against law and custom in all but the most retrograde legal systems.

Someone with the mental age of a child should be treated appropriately; there should be sentencing guidelines for this purpose.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 19 Sep 17 - 11:19 AM


By "trying as an adult" the suggestion is already that the person is guilty, which is against law and custom in all but the most retrograde legal systems.
No, "Trying as an adult" does not suggest that the person is already guilty, or you could move straight to sentencing. When someone is sent to trial there must be some evidence which points to that person being guilty, but it is then put before Magistrates, or a Jury to decide whether the evidence is sufficient.
In UK at least, there is a presumption of innocence, which continues until such time as a guilty verdict has been achieved.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jack Campin
Date: 19 Sep 17 - 11:28 AM

There is no "UK" system. The Children's Panel system in Scotland uses entirely different procedures for dealing with children which are nothing like a criminal trial of an adult.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 19 Sep 17 - 12:02 PM

Jack, read my words:
In UK at least, there is a presumption of innocence, which continues until such time as a guilty verdict has been achieved.
Despite the differences between judicial systems in England/Wales and Scotland they all agree on their being a "Presumption of innocence"
In the Scots system that presumption continues if there is no guilty verdict even if there are two different "not guilty" verdicts ("Not Guilty" & "Not proven"). This "Presumption of innocence" is the matter I referred to when I used the term UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jack Campin
Date: 19 Sep 17 - 12:11 PM

There is no trial under the children's panel system. "Guilt" and "innocence" are irrelevant.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: meself
Date: 19 Sep 17 - 12:56 PM

I've never really understood the 'tried as an adult' business. It seems to defeat the purpose of making any distinction between the criminal culpability of children and adults in the first place ... ?

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Donuel
Date: 19 Sep 17 - 06:28 PM

In the attempt to understand the immoral corruption in the American Judicial system one must view the people who boast of States Rights and whose ancestors fought to the death for slavery and today defend legal murder of blacks while making stand your ground laws (for whites only - in practice).

These people put issues like trying children as adults under the heading of 'Freedom' and safety.

You see the children sentenced to death are 66% black while only 1 in 4 Americans are black. This is a fair measure of American racism.
Americans fear black kids and falsely judge them to be 6 years older than they are.

Politicians are too chicken shit to bring up these issues because they fear losing their election. After all Trump won with real and virtual racists as the only alternative to the gridlock between Reps and Dems.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 20 Sep 17 - 06:37 AM

I would not defend racism, but, Donuel says: You see the children sentenced to death are 66% black while only 1 in 4 Americans are black. This is a fair measure of American racism.
Might the 66% be a fair and accurate figure.
I am not claiming that the black populace are any more pre-disposed to crime (that would be racist) But is it possible that they are more deprived, more likely to live in a ghetto culture where gang membership is prevalent, more likely to be living in poverty and pressured into crime?
Any of these would give a reason for a greater percentage of prosecution without that percentage actually being racist.

Claims of racism are easily made, but very difficult to refute without access to a lot more information than is provided in those very sparse statistics.
It is also very difficult to put a counter view without risking being branded a racist.

I hope I have put this point plainly without offering offence to anyone.

Cheers
Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Stu
Date: 20 Sep 17 - 10:25 AM

Given the treatment of black people by police in the US, I think its safe to assume racism is endemic in their society, as it is here.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: meself
Date: 20 Sep 17 - 10:55 AM

I feel more comfortable taking those kinds of statistics as indicating a confluence of serious social problems. Taking them collectively as one problem and putting one name on it - in this case, 'racism' - can be useful in some discussions, but when trying to figure out solutions, I fear it can lead to simplistic responses. So, for example, rather than doing the hard work of improving conditions and opportunities for certain populations in certain places, so that fewer end up in crime, a policy is made concerning the judicial treatment of the people in question, and then the matter is considered dealt with, for the time being.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: wysiwyg
Date: 21 Sep 17 - 09:27 PM

2/3 are children of color because their prison labor amounts to a re-invented form of slavery, without the messiness of bred offspring who may revolt, from the former version of chattel slavery.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: wysiwyg
Date: 21 Sep 17 - 10:09 PM

Nigel, here's some info on this for us all.

'... given our growing understanding of adolescent brain physiology, sentencing teenagers to die in prison serves no deterrent purpose, does not increase public safety, is exorbitantly costly for taxpayers, and is, indeed, cruel and unusual punishment.

But there remain over 2,000 individuals in prison today who are still serving life in prison for crimes they committed as youths. Most were handed down during the height of the "superpredator" panic in the 1990s.

>>>>>>> Philadelphia alone accounts for almost 10% of all of these sentences nationally, and 80% of youth sentenced to JLWOP sentences there are Black.

The Supreme Court has mandated that all individuals who were sentenced to mandatory LWOP sentences as juveniles receive a new hearing and an opportunity to make their case for eventual release....'

From http://fairpunishment.org/the-superpredator-myth-and-the-rise-of-jwlop/

...

Some hope for growth in national understanding:
http://fairpunishment.org/from-no-hope-to-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel-the-accelerating-national-consensus-against-jlwop/?relatedposts_hit=1&relatedposts_origin=750&relatedposts_position=1

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Joe Offer
Date: 22 Sep 17 - 12:01 AM

wysiwyg says: 2/3 are children of color because their prison labor amounts to a re-invented form of slavery

That may sound credible, but I have seen no evidence that prison labor provides any significant profit to anyone. I think rather that fear of certain races and classes of people, is the true reason for mass incarceration and for the trying of youth as adults.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Sep 17 - 01:52 AM

1: "I have seen no evidence that prison labor provides any significant profit to anyone"

Does it have to?

2: "I think rather that fear of certain races and classes of people, is the true reason for mass incarceration and for the trying of youth as adults."

Are you saying that no crimes were committed?

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Sep 17 - 07:19 AM

Might have known one of the usual suspects would be here defending the abuse of children
"Does it have to?"
If prison is not there to reform it is there to take revenge - taking revenge on children is onscene
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 22 Sep 17 - 07:43 AM

From: Jim Carroll - PM Date: 22 Sep 17 - 07:19 AM
Might have known one of the usual suspects would be here defending the abuse of children
"Does it have to?"
If prison is not there to reform it is there to take revenge - taking revenge on children is onscene
Jim Carroll

Those are not the only purposes of imprisonment.

A further important one is the protection of the law-abiding public.
It also acts as a deterrent.
Which clearly means it is not an either/or question between revenge and reform.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Sep 17 - 08:30 AM

It also acts as a deterrent."
So the longer you lock up a child the more of a deterrent it is ?
Nonsense
It has been proven beyind any doubt that prison is not a deterrent beyond the period of imprisonment
NATIONAL INSTITUTE of JUSTICE
Prison life not only remove liberty but it degrades
If the REHABILITATION SCHEMES are inadequate, a prisoner is more likely to come out of prison resentful rather than reformed - they reoffend - many schemes have been exposed as being degrading rather than reforming
God only knows what long term damage they do to adolescents
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 22 Sep 17 - 08:43 AM

Jim,
You are carefully not dealing with the points I made.
I said "Imprisonment acts as a deterrent". I did not say that extending the period makes it more of a deterrent.

The NIJ link that you give agrees with my statement.

You also ignore my first point that imprisonment of offenders protects the law-abiding majority.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Sep 17 - 09:34 AM

""Imprisonment acts as a deterrent""
It doesn't other than while the criminals are imprisoned - how can it?
Great argument for cramming more into already overcrowded prisons and building more
The same applies to yuor second point - you are only safe while the perpetrators are behind bars
The degrading system of boh the prison regime and the rehabilitation schemes guarantee that not only will they emerge bitter and resentful but the company they have kept during the duration of their sentences will guartantee that they will have become more proficient at the crimes they were locked up for - an everlasting circle.
It doesn't take a great deal of research to work that out - it's simple common sense.
Of course, many of those that go in are victims of a society that is unable to produce a decent standard of living honestly - check the statistical links between crime and poverty
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Sep 17 - 09:40 AM

LINK BETWEEN POVERTY and CRIME
JIm Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Sep 17 - 09:53 AM

Surely if imprisonment was effective as a deterrent people would not commit crimes. No one expects to be caught so any form of punishment is no deterrent at all. If people were to sit down and logically think about actions and consequences then, yes, it could work, but people don't often do that. Far better surely then to educate and rehabilitate them. There is a place for prisons but they should not be about punishment. They should be about protecting the innocent and helping the guilty back on to the straight and narrow. In my opinion.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: wysiwyg
Date: 22 Sep 17 - 09:26 PM

Joe, read Michelle Alexander. A simpler read is on the subject of peonage which you can Google.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Joe Offer
Date: 22 Sep 17 - 11:43 PM

Wizzy, I haven't finished reading the book, and I didn't get to any discussion of prison labor in Michelle Alexander's The New Jim Crow. Give me a quotation and cite chapter and verse if you want me to know what income prisons derive from the work done by inmates, especially that done by inmates who are minors.

It's clear to me from the Alexander book that the primary function of mass incarceration is to control black males, who are seen as a threat to society. However, I did find an article in The Economist (click) that shows that prison industry in the U.S. does make more money than I thought it did.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: wysiwyg
Date: 23 Sep 17 - 08:38 AM

Joe, re 'Give me a quotation and cite chapter and verse if you want me to know what income prisons derive from the work done by inmates, especially that done by inmates who are minors.'

Am away from home base/wifi and lack the time or resources to do your work for you. Follow up on learning about Peonage to find the relevant US history still at work. (Or watch Cool Hand Luke with modern eyes.)

Please don't call me Wizzy. As you know, my name is Susan.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Joe Offer
Date: 24 Sep 17 - 02:30 AM

Wizzy, you are, by nature, a manipulative person. Over the years, you have manipulated your user name in various unspellable ways. I usually honor user privacy by addressing Mudcatters by their user name, or by an abbreviation thereof if the name is too difficult to type. If you had signed your message with the name "Susan," I would have addressed you as such.
Since you didn't, live with it.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: wysiwyg
Date: 24 Sep 17 - 06:43 PM

Ad hominem attack, nice Joe. You know that I sign my name to posts usually, you have met me socially, and you are deflecting from the topic after I called you out on your not doing your own homework (and expecting a woman to do it for you). In polite circles, people of Privilege such as yourself are expected to learn about oppression for themselves. To listen to Black voices. The ones I listen to are all too familiar with jail for profit in many forms (Ferguson practiced another, and there's also Kamala Harris' current bail reform bill you can find FMI).

But here:

A federal judge in New York ruled last year that workers in a related court-supervised work program had no claim to the minimum wage. There, too, unpaid work was offered as an "alternative to incarceration" for minor violations and to ensure that "[d]efendants who do not have money to make restitution should, when practical, pay for their offense through community service."

Even if community service workers received debt reductions based on the minimum wage, this still would be tantamount to seizing 100% of their earnings. That is contrary to federal standards that cap wage garnishment to preserve for workers some gain from their labor and some basis for their subsistence. Yet in Los Angeles and elsewhere, workers even have to pay a fee out of pocket for the privilege of working for free to stay out of jail. These fees go to the courthouse referral agency that assigns defendants to specific work sites.

One final problem: When the criminal justice system supplies agencies with free labor, they have every incentive to use it instead of hiring regular employees. New York's experiment with large-scale "workfare" in the 1990s — unpaid labor to maintain welfare benefits — is instructive. Not only did that effort subject workers to unsafe conditions and harassment, but it also allowed Rudolph Giuliani's administration to cut thousands of unionized public sector jobs by subbing in workfare workers.

Debt peonage may indeed be the lesser evil relative to debtors' prison. But why accept those choices? At issue are government-manufactured debts born in part of racial profiling and "broken windows" policing. Why not change the criminal justice practices that produce these debts? Moreover, debtors' inability to pay is born of unemployment and the degradation of jobs. Only by ignoring a failing labor market can we celebrate coerced, unpaid, unprotected work just because human caging is even worse.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0408-zatz-debt-peonage-20160408-story,amp.html

If you still really don't think folks are profiting off prison labor, you are at best naive (or worse). I merely assumed you were ill read and I'm surprised that you're so biased against me personally that you can't admit when you're wrong or I'll informed.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: wysiwyg
Date: 24 Sep 17 - 06:48 PM

PS thank you, Joe, for the opportunity to document that you cannot and will not respect boundaries politely stated.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Joe Offer
Date: 25 Sep 17 - 01:05 AM

I tend to think it's a good thing for prisoners to have work to do. I've been studying our county jail for six years. The prisoners seem to prefer work over being caged up with a television all day.


P.S. to Wizzy: Bullshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Sep 17 - 03:48 AM

"I tend to think it's a good thing for prisoners to have work to do. "
Hmmm!!
Sorry Joe, sound a little "Idle hands for the Devil's workshop, idle lips are his workshop' to me
Surely it depends what work and why.
My father was incarcerated during the Spanish Civil War; he had been wounded in the fighting so he was limited in what he should have been doing, but the fascists forced him to work, 'for the good of his soul'.
He was an avid reader but the few books on offer were so heavily censored, again, 'for the good of his soul' as to be worthless
He used to tell with a deal of satisfaction how he first read Upton Sinclair's magnificent exposé on the Chicago meat industry, 'The Jungle' in prison because the authorities thought it was a travel book
MacColl told us how, during the Depression, he and many of his unemployed mates went into the Public Libraries to shelter from the rain - it was there MacColl got his live and knowledge of literature, which led him to become a playwright and actor,
Work for work's sake can be as demeaning and soul-destroying as solitary confinement and, as Wysiwyg extremely 'manipulative' and profiteering - it has little to do with rehabilitation - just the opposite
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Sep 17 - 03:51 AM

Sorry, I misquoted your bible (it's been a long time)- should read:
"Idle hands are the devil's workshop; idle lips are his mouthpiece."
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Joe Offer
Date: 25 Sep 17 - 05:26 AM

So, Jim, what do you think people should be doing when they're incarcerated? In U.S. correctional facilities, the Great Pacifier seems to be the widescreen television. I've seen inmates who spend every day locked in a cell because they are "hard to manage." The only thing they can do is watch a distant television. I don't think most modern correctional facilities in the Western world are intentionally cruel, but I think there's something cruel about locking somebody up with nothing but a televison for months on end - and usually, they don't get to choose the channel.

Our local jail has a culinary arts program which uses prisoner labor to prepare meals for the jail. Inmates seem to be eager to participate in this program, especially since the cook is such a nice person to work for. When things aren't busy, she teaches the inmates knitting. Inmates are very proud when they've completed knitting a cap they can wear when cooking instead of non-macho hairnets. They get paid about a buck an hour, and they seem to be happy with that because they know they're learning a trade. And a buck an hour is a pretty good wage when you have your food and lodging and medical expenses paid.

I know a Mudcatter who has done food service work with county jail and state prison inmates for years. She will soon be teaching a food safety certification class that will give inmates credentials that will qualify them for a good job once they're released.

Our county probation department has established a re-entry center that works to prepare inmates for employment after they're released from custody. One facet of the program gives them a high school diploma. Another teaches construction skills, including carpentry and welding. I visited that program and talked with the inmates. They were so proud of the things they had made. Others are learning to use heavy equipment like bulldozers, and they love it.

Jim, do you really think it's better for these people to spend their incarceration time watching television? It's true that they're usually paid little more than a dollar an hour - but since their room and board and medical care is provided, a dollar an hour can be spent on luxuries.

I'm president of a social justice advocacy group that has been promoting job training programs in our local jail. I really don't think this is slavery - although if it is done the wrong way, it could be. Sure beats television, though.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Joe Offer
Date: 25 Sep 17 - 05:38 AM

The original post was about trying minors as adults for certain offenses, and then sentencing them to adult prison for long periods.

Yes, there are certain states (mostly Southern states) that have done this very harshly. Most states have provisions for trying minors as adults for particularly serious offenses, but most states use those provisions only for extreme offenses. For the most part, I think that states have resolved this issue, and try minors as adults only in the most extreme situations.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Sep 17 - 06:46 AM

"So, Jim, what do you think people should be doing when they're incarcerated?"
$64,000 question Joe - you don't turn them out resentful by giving them menial tasks
Training, education, even voluntary or charity work, if possible, but it needs to be s planned out scheme to fit them for life outside and they should have some say in what they wish to do
"do you really think it's better for these people to spend their incarceration time watching television?"
The fact that you need to ask that question is proof that rehabilitation has not been built into the system - are they really the alternatives?
I know from reports that they are in British prisons, that is why we have so many recidivists.
Prison here has never moved beyond the idea of retribution - I tend to think
that goes for much of the U>S. system where, in the states that have retained the barbaric practice of capital punishment, relatives of victims are invited to watch the execution.
Now there's a thought - perhaps prisoners might be put to work preparing and packing popcorn to sell at the show.
You had (and may still have) the chain-gangs, we had the treadmills
It really is time we moved on and treated crime as something that might be cured - though that would take a change of system to even think about that
In the meantime.....!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Joe Offer
Date: 25 Sep 17 - 03:13 PM

But you didn't answer the question, Jim. What do you think people should be doing when they're incarcerated?

It seems to me that in most cases, it's better to include work assignments as part of incarceration. It's nice if prisoners can receive a stipend for their work, but I also don't see anything wrong with requiring prisoners to work to defray the cost of their incarceration. They certainly should not be treated cruelly, but I don't see anything wrong with requiring prisoners to work - even if it is menial work. I think it's iunhumane to force prisoners to do "makework" jobs that do nothing constructive, but I think there's a lot of value in constructive work. Here in California, prison inmates often volunteer to work on wildfire crews - it's a very popular work assignment.

I've been in a lot of jails and prisons. From what I've seen, it appears to me that the worst part of incarceration is being forced to be locked up with nothing to do.

It's hard to make broad statements about prison labor. I'm sure there are inhumane prison work programs, but the ones I've seen appear to be quite beneficial to the inmates who participate.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 04:58 AM

From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 25 Sep 17 - 06:46 AM
It really is time we moved on and treated crime as something that might be cured - though that would take a change of system to even think about that

As with medicine, prevention is better than cure. Crime is something to be prevented. If the threat of being caught, and imprisoned, is enough to deter even some of the potential criminals from acting on their criminal impulses, then prison is having a deterrent effect.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 05:18 AM

There has been a significant change in correctional philosophy in the U.S. over the last few years. Many state legislatures recognized that they were spending a whole heck of a lot of money on incarceration, and it didn't seem to be doing any good.

In the Reagan Era of the 1980s, the trend was away from rehabilitation and toward ever-increasing harshness in treating criminals. Nancy Reagan's "War on Drugs" led a trend toward excessive punishment for drug addicts, and then came "Three Strikes" laws that put a person in prison for life for three felonies.

Now the pendulum has swung back toward job training, addiction treatment, and behavior modification programs intended to reduce recidivism. Lots of people are angry about the radical changes in corrections that the California State Legislature has enacted, but those changes seem to be helping.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 05:32 AM

"Crime is something to be prevented."
My point exactly
You prevent the main reason for crime by removing poverty - not going to happen in our lifetimes
The threat of being caught has about the same effect as Capital punishment - in fact the opposite - those who need to steal become better at it
Becoming efficient at catching criminals increase the need for more prisons
Society needs to examine alternatives to prison - is locking up criminals together where they can teach each other their various skills really the best way to handle it?
Harden discipline and you create resentment
Bit of Catch 22 really
The "three strikes" rule is probably the most barbaric pices of legislation ever dreamed up - life for picking pockets - come-on!
I have little doubt that, in a hundred years time people will regard todays practices as they do the stock and branding
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 06:33 AM

From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 05:32 AM

"Crime is something to be prevented."
My point exactly
You prevent the main reason for crime by removing poverty - not going to happen in our lifetimes

No, your point exactly was that crime could be 'cured'.
'Prevention' was my point.

As to the idea that "you can prevent the main reason for crime by removing poverty". Do you seriously believe that only the poor can be criminals?

Possibly only the poor turn to 'petty' theft. But there are enough who grow rich on crime and its proceeds that your argument is worthless.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 07:15 AM

"Do you seriously believe that only the poor can be criminals?"
Of course I don't but I believe it is the poor that fill the jaild - in America predominantly the black ones
We tend not to jail crooked bankers or politicians or businessmen, or major tax evaders
As for the lesser crimes of the rich - an expensive lawyer usually sorts that one out.
Those who grow rich - on crime or anything else, buy themselves above the law
Our jails are places where we send the poor to be chastened
You've had my arguments Nigel - address them
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 08:04 AM

Of course I don't but I believe it is the poor that fill the jaild - in America predominantly the black ones
We tend not to jail crooked bankers or politicians or businessmen, or major tax evaders
As for the lesser crimes of the rich - an expensive lawyer usually sorts that one out.
Those who grow rich - on crime or anything else, buy themselves above the law
Our jails are places where we send the poor to be chastened
You've had my arguments Nigel - address them

I've seen your arguments, but I can't address them as they come from such an ill-conceived world view that I see little if any points of congruency with reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 08:16 AM

Fine by me
If you are not prepared to put up your alternative facts we have no grounds of conversion
" ill-conceived world view"
Unqualified dismissal of arguments such as this is usually the response
I suggest you look at the reality of how the world is not sharply divided into haves and have-nots and then count reality of the number of haves occupying prison cells - that should do the trick
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 08:17 AM

CORPORATE CRIME
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 08:48 AM

Fine by me
If you are not prepared to put up your alternative facts we have no grounds of conversion
" ill-conceived world view"
Unqualified dismissal of arguments such as this is usually the response
I suggest you look at the reality of how the world is not sharply divided into haves and have-nots and then count reality of the number of haves occupying prison cells - that should do the trick

I'll try that again, a line at a time:
If you are not prepared to put up your alternative facts we have no grounds of conversion
I'm guessing you mean 'conversation' not 'conversion'. But with your normal posts it is difficult to tell. I do not put up alternative facts because:
a. Some people would equate the term "alternative facts" with "fake news".
b. I can't give alternative facts to the post I responded to as it contained no facts, merely broad-brush strokes of your view of how the world is.
Unqualified dismissal of arguments such as this is usually the response
Again, no argument was put forward to be dismissed.
I suggest you look at the reality of how the world is not sharply divided into haves and have-nots and then count reality of the number of haves occupying prison cells
If there is, as you claim, no sharp delineation between haves and have-nots, why do you then try to use that delineation in your comments?

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 09:09 AM

"We tend not to jail crooked bankers"
See Here

"Two former HBOS bankers are among six people who have today been jailed for almost 50 years between them for a scheme which ran businesses into the ground for their own personal gain, generating losses of around £250m for the now collapsed bank.

Lynden Scourfield, 54, once head of the HBOS department responsible for businesses in financial difficulty, has been sentenced at Southwark Crown Court to 11 years and three months in jail. He pleaded guilty in August 2016.

Meanwhile, David Mills, 60, has been jailed for 15 years, having been found guilty earlier this week after a five-month trial."

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 09:22 AM

For details of another 3 UK bankers jailed see The Guardian

It does go on to comment:
("Why don't bankers go to jail?")
Kenneth Peasnell, distinguished professor of accounting at Lancaster University management school, suggests that this question "is driven by a sense of unfairness, there being one rule for the rich and powerful and another for the rest of us … The wealthy seem to get a slap on the wrist for not paying their taxes while the single mother gets locked up for cheating on benefits".

Sound familiar?

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 09:28 AM

"See Here"
Two bankers - that's going to create chaos in our overcrowded prisons
Any chance of a list of those who bought themselves out of trouble, or those never followed up
Another three
That should sort out all the problems of unemployment in the bulding trade
C'mon Nigel, you can to better than that
How about a few politicians who were fiddling taxpayers money to build duck palaces?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 09:38 AM

I was responding to your comment "We tend not to jail crooked bankers".
Five examples should be sufficient for that.

As for those (bankers) that "bought themselves out of trouble". Any facts on that?

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 09:45 AM

Jailed Politicians Including some who were jailed for fiddling their expenses.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 10:06 AM

You have just been given a list of the extent of the problem Nigel - dredging the web for off examples is hardly taking that seriously
"Five examples should be sufficient for that.
"After the banking scandal that sent the world economy crashing around our ears - are you serious?
"Any facts on that?"
Dredge though those who have employed expensive lawyers to talk their clients that the poorer among us couldn't dream of affording
That should do the trick

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 10:10 AM

Then you might try al the Masons who gave their funny handshake to policemen and judiciary fellow trouser-roller-uppers and drowned their misdemeanours in a glass of whiskey and soda in the lodge bar

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 10:26 AM

You have just been given a list of the extent of the problem Nigel - dredging the web for off examples is hardly taking that seriously,
I provided a list of MP imprisoned for fiddling their expenses. Wasn't that what you wanted?

Perhaps you need to write with greater clarity, and without using such a scattershot approach if you wish to get specific answers to specific questions.

As it is I feel I have given more than you requested, and more than your approach deserves.

I will not be 'guilt-tripped' into further responses on this.

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 10:26 AM

THere's one phrase that unashamedly sums up our justice system perfectly Nigel "the best lawyer money can buy"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sentencing children to die in prison
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Sep 17 - 12:05 PM

Sam Larner had a lovely little rhyme which applies to every aspect of out society

If life was a thing that money could buy
The rich would live and the poor would die

Can't say fairer than that
Jim Carrol