# Slavery In The Prison System



## MJS (Apr 6, 2007)

Prison seems to be a hot topic around here lately, so I thought I'd start yet another related topic.  In other threads, the slavery subject was brought up.  I wanted to have a set place for it, so we don't sidetrack other threads.

So...is this an issue in the prison system?


----------



## kempo-vjj (Apr 6, 2007)

I do not know if slavery is the word for it, but can't think of anything else. The prison system is ridiculous. How large can these things get. There is from watching the shows on TLC, a lot that goes on that the gaurds seem blind to. I think they should start a show like the movie Runningman. Entertainment and we could widdle down some of that population. If you have 20 years plus to do then your qualified. Your reward, staying alive and being out of your cell for the competition.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 6, 2007)

Eventualy as new prison are built and large tracks of land are preserved for prisoners to farm and work on. There will be no real pressure to ever release "problem" people again. There is sort of an indutured servitude vibe; and, when you consider racial misproportions and no effort to right the situation...
Sean


----------



## michaeledward (Apr 6, 2007)

One needs wonder why the 'minimum wage' laws in our society do not have effect with prison labor. If prison labor is not mandated by the state (and may not be possible under the 'Cruel and Unusual' clause), why should laborers be exempt of the laws that protect other laborers? 

Does not a suppressed wage system offer a competitive advantage to those industries that secure contracts utilizing prison labor?


----------



## jetboatdeath (Apr 6, 2007)

Because as a prisoner they are no longer members of society. You gave up your rites when you committed the crime. We need to make the prison system more of a crime deterrent rather than a punishment. I know a few x-cons they said all they learnt in the pen was how to be a better criminal.


----------



## Dave Leverich (Apr 6, 2007)

Stiffer punishments work for me. Although there would have to be some pretty set criteria. 

As far as slavery in the system? Sure, is it a problem? Hm, it depends on what level of criminals are put with what other levels. If a tax evader is being kept with a murderer, yeah I see an issue. But there are levels of incarceration and they vary greatly, based upon the crime severity.

One thing I'd like to see is castration for sexual offenders (perhaps repeat offenders), statutory withstanding, some kid shouldn't lose it because his 17 year old girlfriend is a year younger etc. But violent rapists, pedophiles etc. Hey, I grew up on a farm, there's these really nice rubber bands that are quite cheap and do the trick.


----------



## Shuto (Apr 6, 2007)

I think prison labor can only be compared to slavery if/when the "system" profits from their forced work.  I don't think that is true in the US.  It may be true in China.  

What's the issue in requiring prisoners to help support themselves?  We ask it of our model citizens.


----------



## Dave Leverich (Apr 6, 2007)

Actually, I guess I need clarification.

Was the original question about Billy being a slave to Bubba? Aka, force to be his servant while in prison etc.

Or was it in regards to being forced to do labor while incarcerated?


----------



## michaeledward (Apr 6, 2007)

jetboatdeath said:


> Because as a prisoner they are no longer members of society. You gave up your rites when you committed the crime. We need to make the prison system more of a crime deterrent rather than a punishment. I know a few x-cons they said all they learnt in the pen was how to be a better criminal.


 
They most certainly are members of the society.

And how those outside the prison system treat those inside the prison system speaks more about the former than the latter.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 6, 2007)

Dave Leverich said:


> Actually, I guess I need clarification.
> 
> Was the original question about Billy being a slave to Bubba? Aka, force to be his servant while in prison etc.
> 
> Or was it in regards to being forced to do labor while incarcerated?


Both forced labor and foreced rape happen under the State's Care.
Sean


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Apr 6, 2007)

Maybe we should send them to summer camp with boondoggle making and sing alongs? Wish there was such concern for the VICTIMS of crime as for the victimizers. Whats the point here?


----------



## michaeledward (Apr 6, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> Whats the point here?


 
What a wonderful question. I'm curious if you would care to take a shot at answering it, with a bit of thoughtfulness.

What is the point of incarceration?


----------



## Dave Leverich (Apr 6, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> What a wonderful question. I'm curious if you would care to take a shot at answering it, with a bit of thoughtfulness.
> 
> What is the point of incarceration?




A very excellent question. I think often the crime doesn't warrant execution, those people we lock up.

Although, if you'd rather we didn't have incarceration, would you rather that the rapists, murderers, drug dealers and such, bought next door to you?

Or perhaps we simply said 'bad dog' swatted them on the head with a newspaper and told them not to do it again?

Or... we spend hundreds of thousands on attempted rehabilitation when often these thought patterns were formed before they learned right and wrong. These people who've done these crimes since they were pre-teens and continue to do so until they die.

Or we could just spend about $.50, and a pine box.


----------



## michaeledward (Apr 6, 2007)

Dave Leverich said:


> A very excellent question. I think often the crime doesn't warrant execution, those people we lock up.
> 
> Although, if you'd rather we didn't have incarceration, would you rather that the rapists, murderers, drug dealers and such, bought next door to you?
> 
> ...


 
Am I correct in interpreting this response in this manner:
*you are saying:*

*The purpose of prison is to keep the law breaker out of society, forever.*

*Rehabilitation is a false promise that will never be achieved.*

*The cost of keeping law breakers ostracized from the rest of society is an inequal propsition for a summary execution.*​


----------



## Cryozombie (Apr 6, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> What a wonderful question. I'm curious if you would care to take a shot at answering it, with a bit of thoughtfulness.
> 
> What is the point of incarceration?



Ideally?  It is to isolate people who are a danger to society and the people in general from those they are a danger to, And to rehabilitate the people who can be rehabilitated and then released back into the Society at large.

What it SHOULDN'T be used for is punishment and imprisonment of people who do not pose a danger to society or people in general... 

And while under the care of said facility the prisoners should not be provided freely what the rest of society has to pay for, otherwise you make the idea of a prison sentence *almost* lucrative.   They should be made to work for their keep.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Apr 7, 2007)

Cryozombie said:


> Ideally? It is to isolate people who are a danger to society and the people in general from those they are a danger to, And to rehabilitate the people who can be rehabilitated and then released back into the Society at large.
> 
> What it SHOULDN'T be used for is punishment and imprisonment of people who do not pose a danger to society or people in general...
> 
> And while under the care of said facility the prisoners should not be provided freely what the rest of society has to pay for, otherwise you make the idea of a prison sentence *almost* lucrative. They should be made to work for their keep.


 
I can agree with that. 

But as devils advocate, with the way our system keeps allowing plea deals, reduction in sentence, early parole/probation to keep people OUT of jail (when theres plenty of people out there that SHOULD be in prison but are not), how much of an issue is this? I thing the argument that theres too many people loose who shouldnt be is a counter argument here.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 7, 2007)

Shuto said:


> I think prison labor can only be compared to slavery if/when the "system" profits from their forced work. I don't think that is true in the US. It may be true in China.
> 
> What's the issue in requiring prisoners to help support themselves? We ask it of our model citizens.


Of course they profit.
Sean


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 7, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> I can agree with that.
> 
> But as devils advocate, with the way our system keeps allowing plea deals, reduction in sentence, early parole/probation to keep people OUT of jail (when theres plenty of people out there that SHOULD be in prison but are not), how much of an issue is this? I thing the argument that theres too many people loose who shouldnt be is a counter argument here.


The more slaves the better?
Sean


----------



## Shuto (Apr 7, 2007)

Touch Of Death said:


> Of course they profit.
> Sean



link

This speech by Anthony M. Kennedy, Associate Justice of th Supreme Court of the United States, states something different.  

The cost of housing, feeding and caring for the inmate population in the United States is over 40 billion dollars per year. In the State of California alone, the cost of maintaining each inmate in the correctional system is about $26,000 per year.

That doesn't look like a profit to me, but I'll grant you that it might not be the total picture.  Do you have any statistics to back up your claim?


----------



## MJS (Apr 7, 2007)

In this thread, there was a few comments made that slavery is happening in the prison system.  I started this thread to discuss that.  In this thread I've seen a few posts that mention it, but I'm looking for more detailed examples of how it exists, if in fact it does.  Simply saying, "Yes, prisoners are treated like slaves!" IMHO, is not a good example.  

So..as I said in my OP...does it exist and if so, please site some examples.

Thanks. 

Mike


----------



## crushing (Apr 7, 2007)

Seems to me that prisoners could be considered slaves without them even lifting a finger to help pay for the $26,000 a year (or more).

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/prisoner
1. a person who is confined in prison or kept in custody, esp. as the result of legal process.  

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/slave
*2. a person entirely under the domination of some influence or person*
3. a drudge 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/drudge
1. a person who does menial, distasteful, dull, or hard work.  
2. a person who works in a routine, unimaginative way.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Apr 7, 2007)

Touch Of Death said:


> The more slaves the better?
> Sean


 
Probably the only contribution (vs. TAKING) most of those people have ever done in their lives.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Apr 7, 2007)

You think jail is slavery, try enlisting.


----------



## kenpotroop (Apr 7, 2007)

Touch Of Death said:


> The more slaves the better?
> Sean



Sean what is your agenda behind all the prison stuff.

Personally I've seen what these people do and I don't feel sorry for them


----------



## MJS (Apr 7, 2007)

crushing said:


> Seems to me that prisoners could be considered slaves without them even lifting a finger to help pay for the $26,000 a year (or more).
> 
> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/prisoner
> 1. a person who is confined in prison or kept in custody, esp. as the result of legal process.
> ...


 
Thanks for the links.   So, it seems like they could be considered a slave, as you said.  So, is this illegal?  I mean, if slavery is not allowed, why have a prison?  What do we do with people that murder, rape, etc.?  

This is just a general question to everyone.  I'm not targetting anything you said. 

Mike


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 7, 2007)

kenpotroop said:


> Sean what is your agenda behind all the prison stuff.
> 
> Personally I've seen what these people do and I don't feel sorry for them


My agenda is to get people to recognize what the prison system is, what it does, how voters always vote counter to what they really want (less crime) and vote for punishment as a reaction to cause of their actions. They want to see killers fry but they hate death row, they want kids tried as adults, but they can't figure out why they get released as super criminals, they want to eliminate early release and parole, but they don't want to hire more guards to deal with the lack of incentive to do well. The list goes on. I'm not saying workers in the criminal justice system aren't doing a good job, I am saying the voters have great people dealing with problems their votes have created. Being that criminals eventualy get used to the system and thrive, the only real punishment that occurs is seperation from society. Its a time out. Its seems more time out is where the votes are going and will go in the future. So, we are creating a slave class with very few advocates.
Sean


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 7, 2007)

MJS said:


> Thanks for the links.  So, it seems like they could be considered a slave, as you said. So, is this illegal? I mean, if slavery is not allowed, why have a prison? What do we do with people that murder, rape, etc.?
> 
> This is just a general question to everyone. I'm not targetting anything you said.
> 
> Mike


Slavery exists in many palatable forms.
Sean


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 7, 2007)

Dearest negative reper,
Explain to me how the prison system is productive, beside the government job angle, and then we can address how changing it is "unproductive".
Sean


----------



## MJS (Apr 7, 2007)

Touch Of Death said:


> My agenda is to get people to recognize what the prison system is, what it does, how voters always vote counter to what they really want (less crime) and vote for punishment as a reaction to cause of their actions. They want to see killers fry but they hate death row,


 
I'm confused.  The people that want to see people put to death hate death row??  If anything, I'd say that what they hate is how long the process takes.  




> they want kids tried as adults,


 
I read not too long ago that in CT, the lawmakers are working on getting an age set for what determines if a child is tried as an adult.




> but they can't figure out why they get released as super criminals, they want to eliminate early release and parole, but they don't want to hire more guards to deal with the lack of incentive to do well. The list goes on. I'm not saying workers in the criminal justice system aren't doing a good job, I am saying the voters have great people dealing with problems their votes have created. Being that criminals eventualy get used to the system and thrive, the only real punishment that occurs is seperation from society. Its a time out. Its seems more time out is where the votes are going and will go in the future. So, we are creating a slave class with very few advocates.
> Sean


 
So IMO, what changes would you make?  I'm not saying anything negative against your post, just trying to get a better feel as to what people think the best system is.

Mike


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 7, 2007)

MJS said:


> I'm confused. The people that want to see people put to death hate death row?? If anything, I'd say that what they hate is how long the process takes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm running out of today's internet time, but I'll part with a one liner. The cheaper the better; we need to teach the general public what is inexpensive and what is expensive, rather than let politions play on everyone's emotions. To educate everybody, would be a good start.
Sean


----------



## MJS (Apr 7, 2007)

Touch Of Death said:


> I'm running out of today's internet time, but I'll part with a one liner. The cheaper the better; we need to teach the general public what is inexpensive and what is expensive, rather than let politions play on everyone's emotions. To educate everybody, would be a good start.
> Sean


 
Looking forward to hearing more when you can reply next. 

Mike


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Apr 7, 2007)

Touch Of Death said:


> I'm running out of today's internet time, but I'll part with a one liner. The cheaper the better; we need to teach the general public what is inexpensive and what is expensive, rather than let politions play on everyone's emotions. To educate everybody, would be a good start.
> Sean


 
To educate everybody? We live in a country where you can be charged with endangering the welfare of a child if you DONT send him to a free public school. Whos fault does it become when somebody doesnt take an opportunity when its given them? The "system", the child, the parent or the culture that prefers and glorifies criminal activity. A clerk working in a bank office may not make as much as a high level drug dealer, but both are as easily attainable if you put your mind to it.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 9, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> To educate everybody? We live in a country where you can be charged with endangering the welfare of a child if you DONT send him to a free public school. Whos fault does it become when somebody doesnt take an opportunity when its given them? The "system", the child, the parent or the culture that prefers and glorifies criminal activity. A clerk working in a bank office may not make as much as a high level drug dealer, but both are as easily attainable if you put your mind to it.


The system, as it were, allows everyone to turn their back on children. The Children, being offspring of people we don't like, deserve no better. Right?
Sean


----------



## Monadnock (Apr 9, 2007)

This is some info on my State's Incarceration program:

*



Programs

Education - The Granite State High School is recognized by the New Hampshire Department of Education as its own school district. Inmates can obtain their diploma or their GED.
Vocational Education - Information Technology, auto mechanics, small engine repair, auto body repair technology, horticulture, food service management, business education, and building trades.
Life Skills - Peer Exchange group, anger management, parenting, domestic violence, alternatives to violence, mediation, stress control, AA/NA, aid to incarcerated marriages, and cognitive problem solving.
Hobbycraft
Religious/Chaplain services
Victim IMPACT Program -- strives to improve offender empathy toward crime victims/survivors and understanding about the many impacts of crime. It teaches inmates how crime harms real people -- physically, emotionally, and financially.
Industries Shops on premises - For more details click: New Hampshire Correctional Industries Website Homepage

License plate shop
Sign Shop
Print Shop
Wood Shop
Information Technology Department
Farm
Tailor Shop
Electronic Shop
Furniture Shop
Correctional Industries provides inmates the opportunity to learn job skills and develop good work habits. Each Industry shop has a training component that covers such topics as safety, quality control, and skill development. Opportunities are available to offenders at the New Hampshire State Prison for Men, New Hampshire State Prison for Women, and the Northern New Hampshire Correctional Facility.
		
Click to expand...

* 
Things have come a long way since Cool Hand Luke, but really, I could care less which way things go as long as the bad guy is locked up.

Sounds like the Dems are just looking for more voters in 08.


----------



## michaeledward (Apr 9, 2007)

Monadnock said:


> Sounds like the Dems are just looking for more voters in 08.


 
Duke Cunningham
Bob Ney
Jack Abramoff

'nuff said, eh?


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Apr 9, 2007)

Touch Of Death said:


> The system, as it were, allows everyone to turn their back on children. The Children, being offspring of people we don't like, deserve no better. Right?
> Sean


 
Turn their backs? Theres programs, schools and halfway houses everywhere you turn. 

You can lead a horse to water.


----------



## MJS (Apr 10, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> Turn their backs? Theres programs, schools and halfway houses everywhere you turn.
> 
> You can lead a horse to water.


 
I have to agree with your post.  If people want to make an attempt to bring people back on track, great.  However, like you said, we can't work magic.  The other person has to have the desire to want to make a change in their life.

Mike


----------



## michaeledward (Apr 10, 2007)

MJS said:


> I have to agree with your post. If people want to make an attempt to bring people back on track, great. However, like you said, we can't work magic. The other person has to have the desire to want to make a change in their life.
> 
> Mike


 
Isn't that freedom? 

I have mentioned this earlier ...in this, or the other post. If a person decides to not participate in society, isn't that OK. Right up to the point where they break the law. 

If someone wants to live hand to mouth, with no job, begging for the good will of their fellow citizens, isn't that OK. Isn't that a choice? 

Why must we demand that someone make the choice to be 'productive' in society?


----------



## MJS (Apr 10, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Isn't that freedom?
> 
> I have mentioned this earlier ...in this, or the other post. If a person decides to not participate in society, isn't that OK. Right up to the point where they break the law.
> 
> ...


 
Well, you know, I think that no matter what anyone suggests, the odds of it happening seem pretty slim.  Unless we all signed petitions, called congressmen, etc., things will stay the way they are.  

Personally, depending on the situation, I see nothing wrong with offering a second chance.  IMHO, the 2nd chance should be proof to the courts that this person wants to make something of themselves.  Offer them help and if they choose to take it, they have to go out and find a job or take the assistance that is offered to them. If they're gonna go back out and possibly committ the same crime that got them in jail in the first place, then that tells me that they don't want help, they just don't want to be in jail and would rather be on the streets.  How is that help?


----------



## shesulsa (Apr 10, 2007)

Hard Labor was often part and parcel of criminal punishment and incarceration with the idea that if we work prison inmates darn near to death they won't ever want to come back.

I could not quickly find on the net easy to interpret stats on the history of recidivism and punishment methodology.

Let's start this exploration by listing some things we need to consider outside of politics:

* Crime-appropriate punishment
* Potential success of rehabilitation according to crime and criminal history
* Socioeconomic need
* Reintegration solutions
* Realistic environmental and sociological controls inside facilities
* Funding
* Definition of "Slavery" as it relates to punishment, labor, environment, need and funding


So  how *exactly* are we defining the slavery of incarcerated persons?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 10, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Isn't that freedom?
> 
> I have mentioned this earlier ...in this, or the other post. If a person decides to not participate in society, isn't that OK. Right up to the point where they break the law.
> 
> ...


 The welfare mentality is generational. Kids are being taught to feed off the system as we speak. What is so wrong with trying to right that situation?
Sean


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 10, 2007)

shesulsa said:


> Hard Labor was often part and parcel of criminal punishment and incarceration with the idea that if we work prison inmates darn near to death they won't ever want to come back.
> 
> I could not quickly find on the net easy to interpret stats on the history of recidivism and punishment methodology.
> 
> ...


My "Slavery" angle is as it pertains to which sections of the population are most heavily hit by the prison system. Some kids are just destined for the penitentary.
Sean


----------



## jks9199 (Apr 10, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Isn't that freedom?
> 
> I have mentioned this earlier ...in this, or the other post. If a person decides to not participate in society, isn't that OK. Right up to the point where they break the law.
> 
> ...


You do have the right to live on the streets, hoping strangers will decide to give you food or shelter.

That "right" stops when you interfere with my right to move freely about, when you demand that I provide you with food, money, or shelter (rather than accept what is offered), or when your actions violate the law (trespass, public urination, public drunkenness, etc.).


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 10, 2007)

jks9199 said:


> You do have the right to live on the streets, hoping strangers will decide to give you food or shelter.
> 
> That "right" stops when you interfere with my right to move freely about, when you demand that I provide you with food, money, or shelter (rather than accept what is offered), or when your actions violate the law (trespass, public urination, public drunkenness, etc.).


Exactly, being unproductive is not neutral. This is yin or yang.
Sean


----------



## michaeledward (Apr 10, 2007)

Touch Of Death said:


> The welfare mentality is generational. Kids are being taught to feed off the system as we speak. What is so wrong with trying to right that situation?
> Sean


 
I make no claims about welfare.

I make claims about personal choice to not participate in the system. If I do not want to pay income taxes, one certain way to accomplish that is to have no income... to be a bum. Is being poor illegal? Why must someone meet another's standard of productivity? 

I am not advocating breaking the law. I am not advocating cheating the system. (look back to the post).

jks9199 ... is intimating that if a person chooses not to play in societies rules, they are breaking the law. That is not what I said.  I am not advocating a person interfering with anyone else's rights. 

But, if you are not able to visualize one, without the other, than having a meaningful conversation becomes a challenge.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Apr 10, 2007)

So where do we, as the "productive citizens" who fund welfare programs get to draw the line? Like jks9199 stated (and was ignored):

"...when you *demand that I provide you *with food, money, or shelter (rather than accept what is offered)"

Yes, you are FREE to be poor and homeless, but then are you not FREE to starve to death and expect no help? I have no problem with assisting the poor/homeless. I have a BIG problem with the mentality that its societally acceptable to have the mindest that "Im free to be a nonproductive ball and chain on society and YOU have to support me".

They are not "living off my goodwill"...I HAVE NO CHOICE, my taxes pay for them regardless of my "goodwill". Am I not as free to deny them my aid?


----------



## michaeledward (Apr 10, 2007)

And if the person who chooses to be non-productive makes no demands upon you, via any social structures. It seems that several here can't even come to grips with this premise. 

And ... no you do not get to choose, on a program by program basis. If society puts in a social net, you don't get to choose not participate. I don't get to choose that my taxes don't pay for the Department of War. 




As a society, we create laws. We impose punishments on those who violate those laws; either in loss of property (fines, repossession) or loss of freedom for some period of time (prison, execution). 

Once the terms of those punishments are imposed ... why does society have any say in what comes next ... terms used in this thread ... (halfway house, second chance, they don't want help).

The arguments I am seeing here is that penalties imposed for breaking laws are not severe enough, and we should never have an end to the penalty. The person, once having paid the physical penalties of law-breaking by paying the fine or serving time in prison, must continue to pay for the crime with labels, such as 'ex-convict', loss of voting rights, et al. 

The argument I am seeing is that there is no end to the penalty phase of jurisprudence. No price is high enough to satisfy. Never forget. Never forgive. Never absolve.

That is not a society I want to live in.


----------



## michaeledward (Apr 10, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> So where do we, as the "productive citizens" who fund welfare programs get to draw the line? Like jks9199 stated (and was ignored):


 
His comment was not ignored. He superimposed his own supposition into my argument. He did not address my comments, but rather his own interpretation of my comments. 

However, from your question ... any person who is not *as productive as you*, does not get to step across the line. The standard you are putting forth is that "everyone in society must be as productive as you". 

Those unable, or unwilling, to meet that standard will always be seen as 'less than' from your argument. 

I wonder what the social construct that imposed a single standard of 'productivity' onto its citizens is called? Whatever it may be, I am quite certain it is not a 'Free Society'.


----------



## jks9199 (Apr 10, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> I
> 
> jks9199 ... is intimating that if a person chooses not to play in societies rules, they are breaking the law. That is not what I said.  I am not advocating a person interfering with anyone else's rights.
> 
> But, if you are not able to visualize one, without the other, than having a meaningful conversation becomes a challenge.



That's not at all what I wrote; it's what you read into it.  I said that anyone who so chooses doesn't have to work, doesn't have to be part of the system, and doesn't have to contribute to society.  But I also said that it's not the duty of society to see that they are safe, sheltered and fed.

You don't want to play by everyone else's rules -- you don't get to make them play by yours, either.  You don't want to work; you don't get a guarantee that you'll eat.  



michaeledward said:


> And if the person who chooses to be non-productive makes no demands upon you, via any social structures. It seems that several here can't even come to grips with this premise.
> 
> And ... no you do not get to choose, on a program by program basis. If society puts in a social net, you don't get to choose not participate. I don't get to choose that my taxes don't pay for the Department of War.
> 
> ...



Somehow, I'm not surprised that you're only finding what you want people to be saying in what they write.  It's been a long practice that certain offenses are punished in ways beyond mere incarceration; we no longer practice corruption of the blood -- but that doesn't mean that a given felon gets a clean slate after they've done their time, either.  Guess what?  You violate society's trust -- society just may not trust you fully.  That's life.   You break the rules that badly, you don't get to vote.  Hell -- the fact is that so many people here today take the right to vote for granted that I'm really becoming more and more in favor of Heinlein's model from *Starship Troopers* where only people who have chosen to "pay" a franchise tax of public service get to vote.

I defy you to find a single point where I said that a felon should never be given any chance to move beyond being a felon.  I think you'll find that I've said the opposite; that one of the greatest problems with the current penal model is that we dump the ex-con back into the same place and same environment, often with little or no tools or support, that led him to make the choice to commit a felony.  I support prison education -- but I don't think that a convicted felon should get a free ride through college when I had to work my butt off and am still paying for the education I completed nearly 10 years ago.  They can work, and their work can pay towards their education.  Nor do I see a reason why a prisoner isn't compelled to contribute to the costs of his imprisonment through labor.  To point to an extreme example -- there's no reason I can see on Earth why Martha Stewart shouldn't have had to pay 100% of the costs of her imprisonment and house arrest.  She'd barely have noticed it!

I'm in favor of making better use of drug rehab programs for addicts who commit crimes -- and I'm not even 100% in favor of treating simple possession with the seriousness we do.  I just can't figure a better way to fight drug abuse.  

But -- despite all of that -- I'm absolutely in favor of personal responsibility.  A felony is a personal choice, whether that felony is forming a gang or committing a crime for the benefit of the gang, smoking crack cocaine, beating someone within an inch of their life, shoplifting, or murder.  You make a choice -- you have to take the lumps for it.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 10, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> I make no claims about welfare.
> 
> I make claims about personal choice to not participate in the system. If I do not want to pay income taxes, one certain way to accomplish that is to have no income... to be a bum. Is being poor illegal? Why must someone meet another's standard of productivity?
> 
> ...


I am not saying there is no difference but it is the type most likely to be convicted by a jury.
Sean


----------



## MJS (Apr 10, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> And if the person who chooses to be non-productive makes no demands upon you, via any social structures. It seems that several here can't even come to grips with this premise.
> 
> And ... no you do not get to choose, on a program by program basis. If society puts in a social net, you don't get to choose not participate. I don't get to choose that my taxes don't pay for the Department of War.
> 
> ...


 
Well, this IMHO, is where the laws are in need of fixing.  Hey, if someone loses their job, and ends up on welfare, at least they're getting some source of money, food stamps, etc., to survive.  But, I don't feel that this should be the solution.  It should be a hold over and they should be going out to find a job.  I think what the others are saying, is that we should not have to support a free ride for people.  

Mike


----------



## michaeledward (Apr 10, 2007)

MJS said:


> Well, this IMHO, is where the laws are in need of fixing. Hey, if someone loses their job, and ends up on welfare, at least they're getting some source of money, food stamps, etc., to survive. But, I don't feel that this should be the solution. It should be a hold over and they should be going out to find a job. I think what the others are saying, is that we should not have to support a free ride for people.
> 
> Mike


 
Mike ... there is a big discrepency occurring. I am not arguing for a 'free ride' for anyone. But others are saying that the prisoner *must become a productive *member of society. If we are unable to separate concepts such as imprisonment, productivity, and welfare, then how can we ever have a clear conversation. 

Several times on this thread, posters have intimated that going to prison to get free education is unjust. It would be nice if *one of those persons would actually sign up to go to jail* for that education. Quit bitchin about how unfair it is, and go to jail. 

Who's going to be first? 

Give up the freedom to eat when you want to eat; to sleep when you want to sleep; to have a prison guard strip you naked and force you to indignify yourself; to work in a kitchen for 15 hours a day; to be restricted to 1 hour of exercise a week. 

And in exchange, this person will be able to participate in a CAD/CAM class for no charge. 

If it was such a great deal ... why aren't more people taking advantage of it?


----------



## Flatlander (Apr 10, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> They are not "living off my goodwill"...I HAVE NO CHOICE, my taxes pay for them regardless of my "goodwill".


And you are thus enslaved.  

It seems to me that the proposition of "prison labour" equating to slavery is not justifiable.  In my definition of slavery, the slave has no choice in the matter.  They are "enslaved" by circumstances quite beyond their own control.

In the prison system, the prisoner chooses to be there.  The choice is made when the crime is committed.  Thus, their lot in prison is that which they've brought upon themselves.  So, if they knew, or had access to the knowledge previously that there is mandated work in prison, I do not consider them as having been "enslaved".


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Apr 10, 2007)

Flatlander said:


> And you are thus enslaved.
> 
> It seems to me that the proposition of "prison labour" equating to slavery is not justifiable. In my definition of slavery, the slave has no choice in the matter. They are "enslaved" by circumstances quite beyond their own control.
> 
> In the prison system, the prisoner chooses to be there. The choice is made when the crime is committed. Thus, their lot in prison is that which they've brought upon themselves. So, if they knew, or had access to the knowledge previously that there is mandated work in prison, I do not consider them as having been "enslaved".


 
Excellent post, I only wish I could rep. you for it!


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Apr 10, 2007)

Flatlander said:


> And you are thus enslaved.
> 
> It seems to me that the proposition of "prison labour" equating to slavery is not justifiable. In my definition of slavery, the slave has no choice in the matter. They are "enslaved" by circumstances quite beyond their own control.
> 
> In the prison system, the prisoner chooses to be there. The choice is made when the crime is committed. Thus, their lot in prison is that which they've brought upon themselves. So, if they knew, or had access to the knowledge previously that there is mandated work in prison, I do not consider them as having been "enslaved".


 
Exactly. Worth replying to just to see it again.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Apr 10, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Mike ... there is a big discrepency occurring. I am not arguing for a 'free ride' for anyone. But others are saying that the prisoner *must become a productive *member of society. If we are unable to separate concepts such as imprisonment, productivity, and welfare, then how can we ever have a clear conversation.
> 
> Several times on this thread, posters have intimated that going to prison to get free education is unjust. It would be nice if *one of those persons would actually sign up to go to jail* for that education. Quit bitchin about how unfair it is, and go to jail.
> 
> ...


 
Where do I sign? Try enlisting.

My GI bill didnt even cover the whole shot.


----------



## MJS (Apr 10, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Mike ... there is a big discrepency occurring. I am not arguing for a 'free ride' for anyone. But others are saying that the prisoner *must become a productive *member of society. If we are unable to separate concepts such as imprisonment, productivity, and welfare, then how can we ever have a clear conversation.


 
But is it that hard to make the seperation?  I'm not saying they have to go out and find a 6 figure job, as long as they're doing something other than sitting at home collecting a welfare check.  Work at Walmart, Kmart, Burger King, McDonalds, go to a temp agency...something.  



> Several times on this thread, posters have intimated that going to prison to get free education is unjust. It would be nice if *one of those persons would actually sign up to go to jail* for that education. Quit bitchin about how unfair it is, and go to jail.


 
Maybe I was one of those people.  I have said that it amazes me how someone could not seem to give a rats behind about their alcohol or drug problem before they land in prison, but let them land in jail and look out...they're looking to enroll in every program available.  Why?  Why are they waiting to get help?  Get the help before you land in prison.




> Give up the freedom to eat when you want to eat; to sleep when you want to sleep; to have a prison guard strip you naked and force you to indignify yourself; to work in a kitchen for 15 hours a day; to be restricted to 1 hour of exercise a week.


 
They get 3 meals a day at set times, however, they're free to purchase food thru the prison and eat whenever they want.  They get more sleep than you'd imagine.  Not all of them have prison jobs.  Strip searches are not happening as often as people think.  They get more rec time/workout time than you think.


----------



## MJS (Apr 10, 2007)

Flatlander said:


> And you are thus enslaved.
> 
> It seems to me that the proposition of "prison labour" equating to slavery is not justifiable. In my definition of slavery, the slave has no choice in the matter. They are "enslaved" by circumstances quite beyond their own control.
> 
> In the prison system, the prisoner chooses to be there. The choice is made when the crime is committed. Thus, their lot in prison is that which they've brought upon themselves. So, if they knew, or had access to the knowledge previously that there is mandated work in prison, I do not consider them as having been "enslaved".


 
I agree!!  Like I've said in other posts...don't do the crime if ya can't do the time. 

Mike


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 11, 2007)

I don't know about your prison system but ours contains a great number of mentally ill people who should not be in prison but a secure hospital. they are in prison simply because they are a danger to themselves or others and there are no hospitals now to take them.it is not their fault they are ill but are now forced to live in a prison system that is not equiped to handle them. prison officers are not trained medical staff. Over here to we have people who are in prison for not paying court fines, the irony being we end up paying for them. We also have many women in prison who if they'd been men would not have been imprisoned. The judges who are almost invariably very old and male still have the idea that women who commit crimes are worse than men who do the same thing. One old male judge recently ruled that a peadolphile had to buy a 'nice bicycle' for his young victim as recompense for his crimes.No prison time of course.
Here at least we need to look at who is being incarcerated and for what before we decide how to treat prisoners.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 11, 2007)

MJS said:


> They get more rec time/workout time than you think.


They get charged about $35 dollars a month to use the exercise equipment. If they don't work, they don't work out.
Sean


----------



## jks9199 (Apr 11, 2007)

Touch Of Death said:


> They get charged about $35 dollars a month to use the exercise equipment. If they don't work, they don't work out.
> Sean


Nothing prevents them from doing pushups, sit-ups, etc.  (In fact, several prison gangs do quite regimented calisthenics; I've seen video out of the prisons of this that's downright scary...)  And I pay about $40 a month for the gym I belong to.

In other words -- that prisoner's in no different a situation than I am, assuming that your statement is accurate.  (I suspect that a more accurate phrasing would be that they need to pay $35 from their Canteen Fund/Prisoner Account, whether they get it by work or outside deposits.)


----------



## MJS (Apr 11, 2007)

Touch Of Death said:


> They get charged about $35 dollars a month to use the exercise equipment. If they don't work, they don't work out.
> Sean


 
Maybe in the prisons in your area, but not here.  In the dorms, there is a universal weight which is available for them to use.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Apr 11, 2007)

Touch Of Death said:


> They get charged about $35 dollars a month to use the exercise equipment. If they don't work, they don't work out.
> Sean


 
I have to pay $50 a month to use mine. The point?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 11, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> I have to pay $50 a month to use mine. The point?


Read the next thing I said.
Sean


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Apr 11, 2007)

"if they dont work they dont workout"?

Neither will I.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 11, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> "if they dont work they dont workout"?
> 
> Neither will I.


Right on.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 12, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> "if they dont work they dont workout"?
> 
> Neither will I.


Ok what would you have them spend their money on, potato chips?
Sean


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Apr 12, 2007)

Touch Of Death said:


> Ok what would you have them spend their money on, potato chips?
> Sean


 
Sure. Why make recidivist offenders stronger when they come out?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 12, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> Sure. Why make recidivist offenders stronger when they come out?


That happens when you take away thier drugs anyway. Should we institute a no work out policy?
Sean


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Apr 12, 2007)

If you think they are not getting drugs in prison, I think you are mistaken.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 12, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> If you think they are not getting drugs in prison, I think you are mistaken.


I didn't mean to imply it wasn't happening. What non-strengthening activities for recreation do you suggest.
Sean


----------

