“One in 31 Adults”

[Serge_Tomiko]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

Disagree. A society cannot possibly be fair, a priori, if it incarcerates its citizens at such a rate.

"fairness" is as much of a fiction as "equality".

The problem is clear: a large percentage of the US population is incapable of being a part of civilized society. In the not so distant past, those humans of a biological predisposition to antisocial behavior and indolence were simply banished or killed. Now, they become clients of the ruling elite under this strange system of governance known as "democracy".

[jpatter666]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

JP666,

The issues are slightly more complex than that. I suggest you go through some of Catherinr Austin Fitts articles.

Here is a suggested reading order.

Dillon, Read & Co. Inc. and the Aristocracy of Stock Profits

Solari Rising

Narco-Dollars for Beginners - "How the Money Works" in the Illicit Drug Trade

The Myth of the Rule of Law

Another article to read

Where The Narcodollars Go

Hey Rajiv,
I realize it -- I'm certainly no expert. But I do think the status quo isn't getting us anywhere. Time for a change. Tx for the links -- will read and let you know how my upcoming illumiation went. :-)

[KGW]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

+gazillion. . .

+1

[gwynedd1]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

But Ghent12, they hate our freedom.

[Rajiv]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

Hey Rajiv,
I realize it -- I'm certainly no expert. But I do think the status quo isn't getting us anywhere. Time for a change. Tx for the links -- will read and let you know how my upcoming illumiation went. :-)

Often, the question to ask is "cui bono?" and not be distracted by the first answers that float up.

[oddlots]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

Your making a lot of assumptions about me. Your trying to paint me as someone who would want privatized prisons or some enron criminal. I am also not an anglo-saxon, I guess you dislike those people too.

As I said, the post was at points "unfair" and, furthermore, ranty. For that I apologise.

That said, I think your original post was provocative. "Another loaded" thread title? You can't meaningfully look at incarceration rates, only the merits of individual cases?

Beyond that, I think you've misconstrued my argument. My point in bringing up privatisation was simply to say, here's an aspect of the picture that you can't capture if you narrow your view down as you insisted we must: there are economic interests at play that are only too happy to see the debate about crime and what to do about it reduced to the solution of "Build more prisons!"

The drive to privatise the provision of services is often premised on the assumption that corporations will provide these services more efficiently. My point about Enron was simply that it's a good example of how business can at times be even more inefficient and value-destroying than government.

In neither case was I saying that you wanted to privatise prisons or associating you with a criminal enterprise like Enron. What I was saying was: forestalling any view that looks at things outside the narrow definition of individual crimes and individual laws also forestalls any critical inquiry into these interests. I wasn't saying you were intentionally doing this, just that, in effect, this is what taking a narrow view achieves.

I was using "Anglo-saxon" as a synonym for "english speaking" and not as a racial category. (I'm as "Anglo-saxon" as they come, "ye unto the middle ages.") I meant the power of New York-London, the world's finance centres. By "Anglo-saxon die hard" I meant someone who, despite the chaos brought about by de-regulation still insists that markets can do no wrong and there's essentially nothing wrong with the neo-liberal model.

Regarding the David Simon interview, it struck me as a brutally honest assessment: America has no use for these people. I take this to mean that the system just doesn't register their distress or concern itself with their welfare in a core way. I don't think that it can be reduced to the drug problem.

[bpr]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

JP666,

The issues are slightly more complex than that. I suggest you go through some of Catherinr Austin Fitts articles.

Here is a suggested reading order

Good stuff. Here's a relevant quote:

Prison stocks also are valued on a “per bed” basis — which is based on the number of beds provided and the profit per bed. “Per bed” is really a euphemism for people who are sentenced to be housed in their prison.
For example, in 1996, when Cornell went public, based on the financial information provided in the offering document provided to investors, its stock was valued at $24,241 per bed. This means that for every contract Cornell got to house one prisoner, at that time, their stock went up in value by an average of $24,261. According to prevailing business school philosophy, this is the stock market’s current present value of the future flow of profit flows generated through the management of each prisoner. This, for example, is why longer mandatory sentences are worth so much to private prison stocks. A prisoner in jail for twenty years has a twenty-year cash flow associated with his incarceration, as opposed to one with a shorter sentence or one eligible for an early parole.^[47] This means that we have created a significant number of private interests — investment firms, banks, attorneys, auditors, architects, construction firms, real estate developers, bankers, academics, investors among them— who have a vested interest in increasing the prison population and keeping people behind bars as long as possible.

http://www.dunwalke.com/9_Cornell_Corrections.htm

There is, however, a credibility gap throughout the entire piece. Most of the sources are from the author's own work. It's a compelling read for the conspiracy-minded, though.

[BuckarooBanzai]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

Another loaded forum post and article title. It is irrelevant what the ratio of adults in jail is besides making for a judgemental thread title. The real question is are these people deserving of being in jail? Did they commit crimes against the law? (regardless of whether the law is right on a subjective measure) and was the process fair? should be the real questions.

Was the process fair? Well, the last time I checked, the conviction rate by Federal prosecutors was approaching 99%.

Does that seem fair? What is the likelihood that Federal prosecutors are right 99% of the time?

[chr5648]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

Was the process fair? Well, the last time I checked, the conviction rate by Federal prosecutors was approaching 99%.

Does that seem fair? What is the likelihood that Federal prosecutors are right 99% of the time?

Yes that is a concern. Maybe prosecutors don't want to take the hard cases, take the easy ones. New forensic techniques and DNA have also had some impact on the rate. The 99% can be argued both ways, either a corrupt system or a legitimate system?

[bpr]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

Yes that is a concern. Maybe prosecutors don't want to take the hard cases, take the easy ones. New forensic techniques and DNA have also had some impact on the rate. The 99% can be argued both ways, either a corrupt system or a legitimate system?

As I understand it, a US attorney will not prosecute a case unless the FBI or other enforcement agency done its job and has rock solid evidence.

Now, whether that evidence was obtained legitimately or manufactured is debatable, as is whether the laws themselves are just.

[BuckarooBanzai]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

As I understand it, a US attorney will not prosecute a case unless the FBI or other enforcement agency done its job and has rock solid evidence.

Now, whether that evidence was obtained legitimately or manufactured is debatable, as is whether the laws themselves are just.

The vast majority of Federal cases are plea-bargained and never reach court. That is how they get their convictions.

Whether that is because they have "rock solid evidence", or because they are throwing their weight around, I'll leave up to you.

[nitroglycol]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

The Harper government in Canada is following the US example:

I mention all of this as context for my reaction to Stockwell Day’s press conference this week in which he explained that the government must spend $13-billion on prisons, despite statistics showing that crime is down in Canada, because of an “alarming” increase in “unreported crime.”

I'm having trouble sharing and understanding his particular personal vision. I'm not sure that prisons are a good “if you build it, they will come” investment.

Source. Gotta build prisons to house all those criminals that don't get reported to police...

[Aetius Romulous]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

I believe the relevant question to ask is why do some nations have lower crime and incarceration rates than others? Why is Iceland at the bottom?

In America, this argument always breaks down into hand wringing and speech making that completely ignores the rest of the planet (same with the guns and violence discussion as well). If we were to make a truly scientific run at tackiling the issue in America, the first place to start would be in other western industrial liberal democracies where, without exception, crime, violence, and incarceration are orders of magnitude smaller. We would want to know why that is before we then turn to America.

Inside America, there are a thousand ways to accept and rationalize this atrocity. Once you step across the border however, the entire thing appears as batshit crazy as it truly is.

My own opinion is that violence,crime, and incarceration are unavoidable outcomes of "the American way", and that for most Americans, that "way" is more important than the nasty social issues associated with it. There are Americans who would much rather have the guns, crime, and jail than be Swedish. Even the crime victims and inmates would rather be beat up and in jail than be Swedish. America is a funny place that way.

[chr5648]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

I believe the relevant question to ask is why do some nations have lower crime and incarceration rates than others? Why is Iceland at the bottom?

In America, this argument always breaks down into hand wringing and speech making that completely ignores the rest of the planet (same with the guns and violence discussion as well). If we were to make a truly scientific run at tackiling the issue in America, the first place to start would be in other western industrial liberal democracies where, without exception, crime, violence, and incarceration are orders of magnitude smaller. We would want to know why that is before we then turn to America.

Inside America, there are a thousand ways to accept and rationalize this atrocity. Once you step across the border however, the entire thing appears as batshit crazy as it truly is.

My own opinion is that violence,crime, and incarceration are unavoidable outcomes of "the American way", and that for most Americans, that "way" is more important than the nasty social issues associated with it. There are Americans who would much rather have the guns, crime, and jail than be Swedish. Even the crime victims and inmates would rather be beat up and in jail than be Swedish. America is a funny place that way.

I don't have the stat source in front of me but I believe the canada has a similar per capita gun ownership rate as the US, yet they have a fraction of per capita gun deaths as the US. This is also the case for many european countries too. The problems in the US are much bigger than the gun control/anti gun control debate. I will look for the sources.

[MarkL]

Re: “One in 31 Adults”

Certainly if the USA has the highest incarceration rate in the world, something is different and something is wrong... some number of 5 things is happening:

--1: People in the USA are doing MORE illegal things than in the rest of the world.
--2: The laws are being enforced more strictly in the USA and more are getting caught for the same crimes.
--3: America gives longer and harsher sentences than the rest of the world.
--4: The laws make more things illegal than in the rest of the world.
--5: The laws are being enforced unfairly and putting people that haven't broken the law in jail.

So fellow iTulipians... what's the percentage breakdown here behind our incremental incarceration?

I say 30% for #1. We are a money-driven society and push in every way possible to make a buck.
I say 50% for #2 and #3 particularly around Marijuana laws. There's lots of pot in this country and the sentences given can be years in the USA and a ticket in other countries.
I say 10% for #4. We have a helluva lot of laws and we have more attorney's floatin' around than all other countries too.
And 10% for #5. It's a human institution and mistakes are made... but not enough to justify a doubling or tripling of our incarceration rate.

...But I just pulled these numbers out of my bu..*cough* personal experience. Anybody have any facts?