by Hairless Kitten II » Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:25 am
by Natapoc » Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:36 am
by Hairless Kitten II » Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:41 am
Natapoc wrote:The US jails about 2% of it's population. Larger then any other country in the world. Most of these people are non violent and a very large number only committed crimes against themselves (ie drug use.) Most are also people of color at a rate not consistent with reported crimes.
The US also has high false conviction rates due to a system that rewards prosecutors for the number of cases they win rather then the number of actual guilty people they put behind bars.
I would not expect that most people in this jail tend to commit crimes much more often then the average person anyway.
Trying to humiliate them further probably won't solve anything.
by Neocaridia » Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:45 am
Cruel and unusual punishment is a statement implying that governments shall not inflict suffering or humiliation on the condemned as punishment for crimes, regardless of their degree of severity.
by Natapoc » Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:51 am
Neocaridia wrote:Cruel and unusual anyone?Cruel and unusual punishment is a statement implying that governments shall not inflict suffering or humiliation on the condemned as punishment for crimes, regardless of their degree of severity.
by Hairless Kitten II » Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:52 am
Neocaridia wrote:Cruel and unusual anyone?Cruel and unusual punishment is a statement implying that governments shall not inflict suffering or humiliation on the condemned as punishment for crimes, regardless of their degree of severity.
by Lucky Bicycle Works » Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:54 am
Neocaridia wrote:Cruel and unusual anyone?Cruel and unusual punishment is a statement implying that governments shall not inflict suffering or humiliation on the condemned as punishment for crimes, regardless of their degree of severity.
"I wanted to stop re-offenders," Low said. "They don't want to wear them. Working inmates get a choice to work outside or sit inside, and some choose to sit inside because they don't want people to see them. They would rather stay upstairs."
by Hairless Kitten II » Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:57 am
Lucky Bicycle Works wrote:Neocaridia wrote:Cruel and unusual anyone?Cruel and unusual punishment is a statement implying that governments shall not inflict suffering or humiliation on the condemned as punishment for crimes, regardless of their degree of severity.
*raises hand*
It is used as punishment, and the supervisor's smug "they're less likely to come back" shows that he knows it.
In fact, it's worse than that. Low thinks it is good that the inmates stay inside a "tiny and old" jail instead of exercising the option to go out and work."I wanted to stop re-offenders," Low said. "They don't want to wear them. Working inmates get a choice to work outside or sit inside, and some choose to sit inside because they don't want people to see them. They would rather stay upstairs."
What a fucking cowboy.
by Lucky Bicycle Works » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:01 am
by Lucky Bicycle Works » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:04 am
Hairless Kitten II wrote:Lucky Bicycle Works wrote:Neocaridia wrote:Cruel and unusual anyone?Cruel and unusual punishment is a statement implying that governments shall not inflict suffering or humiliation on the condemned as punishment for crimes, regardless of their degree of severity.
*raises hand*
It is used as punishment, and the supervisor's smug "they're less likely to come back" shows that he knows it.
In fact, it's worse than that. Low thinks it is good that the inmates stay inside a "tiny and old" jail instead of exercising the option to go out and work."I wanted to stop re-offenders," Low said. "They don't want to wear them. Working inmates get a choice to work outside or sit inside, and some choose to sit inside because they don't want people to see them. They would rather stay upstairs."
What a fucking cowboy.
You forgot to quote the interesting parts of that fucking cowboy:
Low, who was a deputy in Mason before being elected sheriff, estimated the re-offense rate in the county is down 70 percent since he switched to pink jumpsuits for the inmates. He also said there have been no fights between inmates in the jail since it was painted.
by Hairless Kitten II » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:06 am
Lucky Bicycle Works wrote:
Locking people up (in safe and decent conditions, though, and with rehabilitative and educational options) is pretty much unavoidable. Sweet reason only gets you so far, and for some people the real prospect of punishment is necessary to keep them from committing serious crimes.
Jail is meant to be punishment. Of course it is cruel. The real acid test is whether it is "unusual" ... because that points to Revenge rather than Deterrence being the reason for the treatment. We should all be suspicious when a jail governor starts getting 'creative' with punishments ... it suggests to me a Revenge agenda.
by Hairless Kitten II » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:08 am
Lucky Bicycle Works wrote:Hairless Kitten II wrote:Lucky Bicycle Works wrote:Neocaridia wrote:Cruel and unusual anyone?Cruel and unusual punishment is a statement implying that governments shall not inflict suffering or humiliation on the condemned as punishment for crimes, regardless of their degree of severity.
*raises hand*
It is used as punishment, and the supervisor's smug "they're less likely to come back" shows that he knows it.
In fact, it's worse than that. Low thinks it is good that the inmates stay inside a "tiny and old" jail instead of exercising the option to go out and work."I wanted to stop re-offenders," Low said. "They don't want to wear them. Working inmates get a choice to work outside or sit inside, and some choose to sit inside because they don't want people to see them. They would rather stay upstairs."
What a fucking cowboy.
You forgot to quote the interesting parts of that fucking cowboy:
Low, who was a deputy in Mason before being elected sheriff, estimated the re-offense rate in the county is down 70 percent since he switched to pink jumpsuits for the inmates. He also said there have been no fights between inmates in the jail since it was painted.
Executing them instead would have cut the re-offence rate by 100%.
The ends justify the means. Don't they ?
by Cerubus » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:18 am
by Lucky Bicycle Works » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:27 am
by Tubbsalot » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:29 am
Cerubus wrote:This is not cruel and unusual punishment, it is however a form of reverse psychology.
by Lucky Bicycle Works » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:33 am
Hairless Kitten II wrote:Lucky Bicycle Works wrote:Hairless Kitten II wrote:Lucky Bicycle Works wrote:Neocaridia wrote:Cruel and unusual anyone?Cruel and unusual punishment is a statement implying that governments shall not inflict suffering or humiliation on the condemned as punishment for crimes, regardless of their degree of severity.
*raises hand*
It is used as punishment, and the supervisor's smug "they're less likely to come back" shows that he knows it.
In fact, it's worse than that. Low thinks it is good that the inmates stay inside a "tiny and old" jail instead of exercising the option to go out and work."I wanted to stop re-offenders," Low said. "They don't want to wear them. Working inmates get a choice to work outside or sit inside, and some choose to sit inside because they don't want people to see them. They would rather stay upstairs."
What a fucking cowboy.
You forgot to quote the interesting parts of that fucking cowboy:
Low, who was a deputy in Mason before being elected sheriff, estimated the re-offense rate in the county is down 70 percent since he switched to pink jumpsuits for the inmates. He also said there have been no fights between inmates in the jail since it was painted.
Executing them instead would have cut the re-offence rate by 100%.
The ends justify the means. Don't they ?
I hope you smell the difference between the death penalty and wearing pink.
by Newsan » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:38 am
by Vault 10 » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:41 am
by Vault 10 » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:42 am
Newsan wrote:So...wait. After all these discussions about giving us real detterents, like public floggings, the death penalty, etc. This article comes along and suggests that all we've ever needed is a splash of pink paint?
by Hairless Kitten II » Wed Sep 02, 2009 4:07 am
Newsan wrote:So...wait. After all these discussions about giving us real detterents, like public floggings, the death penalty, etc. This article comes along and suggests that all we've ever needed is a splash of pink paint?
by Lucky Bicycle Works » Wed Sep 02, 2009 4:14 am
Vault 10 wrote:Actually I like the idea. Treating them like little gay kids can help reduce the prestige of being in prison among their colleagues.
by Lucky Bicycle Works » Wed Sep 02, 2009 4:19 am
Hairless Kitten II wrote:Newsan wrote:So...wait. After all these discussions about giving us real detterents, like public floggings, the death penalty, etc. This article comes along and suggests that all we've ever needed is a splash of pink paint?
More jails are doing a pink paint job and it seems it is working.
I'm a little interested if the former convicts really committed less crimes after their release or that they just moved to another county or state and perform their profession in the new area.
by Hairless Kitten II » Wed Sep 02, 2009 4:23 am
Lucky Bicycle Works wrote:There could be an aspect of synaesthetics in the pink theme. Colours are not just symbolic, they affect mood even without a symbolic role like "pink is for girls and gays.' Personally I find pink very unpleasant unless it is attracting attention to something which is worth looking at (a nice body) and I think it's because to me it is a flesh-tone. Being in a pink environment is distracting because from the corner of my eye, I seem to always be in the presence of naked bodies.
The principle of painting the jail a particular colour, or having coloured jail clothing, I do not reject outright. The environment should discourage violence, and encourage introspection, education, and other good habits which will help the inmates overcome the bad habits which got them in jail in the first place. If the colour scheme helps create such an environment, it is worth considering.
That doesn't seem to be the reason. It's apparently intended to humiliate and socially isolate the jail inmates. And Low's "estimate" of re-offence rates should be taken with a grain of salt, since it was based on a sample of FIVE inmates (the capacity of the jail) for EIGHT months ... that's barely even enough for the court process.
by Vault 10 » Wed Sep 02, 2009 4:31 am
Lucky Bicycle Works wrote:And you aren't awkward at all about punishment being based on their own prejudices against "looking gay" ?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Decapoleis, Google [Bot], Roman Khilafa Al Cordoba, Tarsonis, The Caleshan Valkyrie, Trump Almighty, Tungstan, Umeria
Advertisement