Quote:
Originally Posted by piece-itpete
We decided that we'd lock everyone up instead of using the community to punish or restrict criminal behavior. It actually ties into folks like Phelps, etc, and how we as free people are not allowed to handle them.
It's disgraceful, the percentage we lock up, and a serious smear on our future legacy.
And agreed, the commercial prison system is disturbing, but it's more a result of police/guard unions than an evil conspiracy methinks.
Great topic D!
Pete
|
I've seen the prison guards' contracts, and they for sure aren't getting rich. I don't think it's a good swap to spend close to the same amount contracting out the system where, instead of officers earning a decent living, a corporate system is profiting from crime. It's bad policy to delegate a fundamental responsibility of government to the private sector. For example, recidivism actually is good for the bottom line of the prison corps. That creates less incentive to run a program that has some hope of preparing an inmate for a return to society. in the long run, policy choices that affect the proper allocation of resources are made by corporate boards rather than elected public officials.
I agree that social/community pressure should play a larger role in modifying anti-social behavior. On the other hand when it gets to meting out punishment, vigilante action does not serve the communities' interests. It invites arrest, conviction and punishment imposed in short order by the mob. (It also puts lawyers out of work
)
Regards,
D-ray