Incarceration Nation

[KC]

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/22/zakaria-incarceration-nation/

By Fareed Zakaria, originally printed in Newsweek

"...The U.S. has 760 prisoners per 100,000 citizens. That’s not just many more than in most other developed countries but seven to 10 times as many. Japan has 63 per 100,000, Germany has 90, France has 96, South Korea has 97, and *Britain - with a rate among the *highest - has 153....
This wide gap between the U.S. and the rest of the world is relatively recent. In 1980 the U.S.’s prison population was about 150 per 100,000 adults. It has more than quadrupled since then. So something has happened in the past 30 years to push millions of Americans into prison.


That something, of course, is the war on drugs. Drug convictions went from 15 inmates per 100,000 adults in 1980 to 148 in 1996, an almost tenfold increase. More than half of America’s federal inmates today are in prison on drug convictions. In 2009 alone, 1.66 million Americans were arrested on drug charges, more than were arrested on assault or larceny charges. And 4 of 5 of those arrests were simply for possession...."

He goes on, before anyone start pointing across the aisle...

"Bipartisan forces have created the trend that we see. Conservatives and liberals love to sound tough on crime, and both sides agreed in the 1990s to a wide range of new federal infractions, many of them carrying mandatory sentences for time in state or federal prison. And as always in American politics, there is the money trail. Many state prisons are now run by private companies that have powerful lobbyists in state capitals. These firms can create jobs in places where steady work is rare; in many states, they have also helped create a conveyor belt of cash for prisons from treasuries to outlying counties."

[Peter1469]

And a lot of the incarceration is for crimes that largely don't harm society.

[KC]

Arrests for possession of drugs need to stop. Create a legal and regulated market for harder drugs and deal with black markets that arise using law enforcement.

[nic34]

This where our ideologies and agreement converge

[Ivan88]

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/22/zakaria-incarceration-nation/

By Fareed Zakaria, originally printed in Newsweek

"...The U.S. has 760 prisoners per 100,000 citizens. That’s not just many more than in most other developed countries but seven to 10 times as many. Japan has 63 per 100,000, Germany has 90, France has 96, South Korea has 97, and *Britain - with a rate among the *highest - has 153....
Many state prisons are now run by private companies that have powerful lobbyists in state capitals. These firms can create jobs in places where steady work is rare; in many states, they have also helped create a conveyor belt of cash for prisons from treasuries to outlying counties."

Which countries have enslaved so many Americans?

[Micketto]

Arrests for possession of drugs need to stop

Always makes me laugh when you people say this.

Never do you say "breaking very publicly known laws should stop".

[jillian]

And a lot of the incarceration is for crimes that largely don't harm society.

agreed 100%

we need to stop ruining lives for drug crimes.... particularly when we're talking about possession and not sale.

[jillian]

Always makes me laugh when you people say this.

Never do you say "breaking very publicly known laws should stop".

or maybe society needs to stop legislating things that are stupid

most drugs used to be legal.

no one has ever yet expressed a sentient reason as to why pot should be illegal but alcohol isn't.

[Peter1469]

agreed 100%

we need to stop ruining lives for drug crimes.... particularly when we're talking about possession and not sale.

Right. We have finite resources, and are wasting them on the "war" on drugs.

[jillian]

Right. We have finite resources, and are wasting them on the "war" on drugs.

bazinga!

if we really want to save money, we prosecute for violent crimes and crimes against others.

some guy smoking a joint in his house isn't exactly a menace to society.

there are also additional costs to our "war on drugs".... particularly in minority communities.

we spend a fortune on drug enforcement. those laws are largely enforced against young black males. those young black males are then moved through the system... taken out of schools... taken away from any opportunity to move beyond their youthful indiscretions into a successful adulthood.

also, if you are a kid arrested for a drug crime and your family lives in public housing, your family can't allow you to live with them any more or they get evicted. so the most at risk youths are then moved away from their family moorings.

you also lose opportunities for schools and jobs and job training and every other opportunity that would allow you to better yourself.

talk about the cycle of poverty... and it leaves a trail of broken families behind it.

it's horrible

[KC]

Always makes me laugh when you people say this.

Never do you say "breaking very publicly known laws should stop".

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/32646439.jpg

[Micketto]

And a lot of the incarceration is for crimes that largely don't harm society.

But a lot of those that you are referring to are repeat offenders (Three Strikes Law, etc).

People break a law that doesn't hurt anyone, and are rarely incarcerated for it. These aren't people that had a bag of weed and were caught once or twice. After the third time, or more, they are.

I can't say I feel bad for those people, no matter how harmless the crime is. They're either stupid, or rebellious... and neither will be missed for the short time they are put away.

I couldn't care less if pot is legal or not, but to act like it's a huge cost to the public or ruining lives of those incarcerated, are pretty lame reasons.

But not as lame as blaming the law instead of the lawbreaker.

[KC]

But a lot of those that you are referring to are repeat offenders (Three Strikes Law, etc).

People break a law that doesn't hurt anyone, and are rarely incarcerated for it. These aren't people that had a bag of weed and were caught once or twice. After the third time, or more, they are.

I can't say I feel bad for those people, no matter how harmless the crime is. They're either stupid, or rebellious... and neither will be missed for the short time they are put away.

I couldn't care less if pot is legal or not, but to act like it's a huge cost to the public or ruining lives of those incarcerated, are pretty lame reasons.

But not as lame as blaming the law instead of the lawbreaker.

There is simply no reason why there should be laws against using or possessing marijuana. Prohibition of pot is just as grand a failure as the prohibition of alcohol was.

[Peter1469]

But a lot of those that you are referring to are repeat offenders (Three Strikes Law, etc).

People break a law that doesn't hurt anyone, and are rarely incarcerated for it. These aren't people that had a bag of weed and were caught once or twice. After the third time, or more, they are.

I can't say I feel bad for those people, no matter how harmless the crime is. They're either stupid, or rebellious... and neither will be missed for the short time they are put away.

I couldn't care less if pot is legal or not, but to act like it's a huge cost to the public or ruining lives of those incarcerated, are pretty lame reasons.

But not as lame as blaming the law instead of the lawbreaker.

But it is a waste of tax payer dollars......

[Micketto]

There is simply no reason why there should be laws against using or possessing marijuana. Prohibition of pot is just as grand a failure as the prohibition of alcohol was.

Understood. You can't, and won't stop it.

But there are laws... and because there are... they should be enforced.

Was it you that created this thread by saying people shouldn't be arrested for breaking drug laws ?

What other laws should people be allowed to break and get away with ?


Getting caught with pot is pretty hard to do unless you're dealing pretty heavily, or just stupid.
If more dumb people are off the streets for those short terms.... better for all of us.

[jillian]

But it is a waste of tax payer dollars......

and that is why most of us don't believe them when they say that the size of government is the issue for them.

they are perfectly happy with big government when it legislates morality.

[KC]

Understood. You can't, and won't stop it.

But there are laws... and because there are... they should be enforced.

Was it you that created this thread by saying people shouldn't be arrested for breaking drug laws ?

What other laws should people be allowed to break and get away with ?


Getting caught with pot is pretty hard to do unless you're dealing pretty heavily, or just stupid.
If more dumb people are off the streets for those short terms.... better for all of us.

The laws should absolutely be enforced as they exist, but they should not exist to begin with. That is why people should not be arrested for it, I want to remove the legal basis for such arrests.

[KC]

and that is why most of us don't believe them when they say that the size of government is the issue for them.

they are perfectly happy with big government when it legislates morality.

Who is they?

Statists, or anyone who wants to increase the power of the state, exist in both parties. It is not unique to the Republican or Democratic Party.

[Micketto]

But it is a waste of tax payer dollars......

Yes, but there are so many other bigger wastes of taxpayer dollars. Why is this one so important ?

$44 billion a year to pay for all of our incarcerated..... now take the percentage of those incarcerated for pot.... how small is that cost ? (that's a lot less than the government hands out to fake clean energy companies).

And if you want to say "but the cost of the police looking for these people...."
Well are you then saying that dealers/suppliers should just be able to run free? That's how these small time4rs get busted. And again... they aren't busted just once. These are repeats... and if the first or second time wasn't enough to make you be more careful... I really don't see where the problem with incarceration is.

Make it legal and the government will want to regulate it... and the cost of ridding the country of the law-breaking dealers and suppliers will skyrocket. Sure... less smokers are locked up, but the cost for them isn't very high anyway. Where is the savings?

Whatever happened to people just buying their dope in small amounts and smoking it in private ?!

[jillian]

Who is they?

Statists, or anyone who wants to increase the power of the state, exist in both parties. It is not unique to the Republican or Democratic Party.

i'm talkikng about the people on the far right who shriek about the budget.

as for the term 'statist', i think you already know that i don't use that term. i see it as hyperbole.

[KC]

i'm talkikng about the people on the far right who shriek about the budget.

Some of them likely do want increased government, others do not. I certainly don't when it comes to drug laws.

[Micketto]

The laws should absolutely be enforced as they exist, but they should not exist to begin with. That is why people should not be arrested for it, I want to remove the legal basis for such arrests.

Based on the title of the thread I thought the problem was incarceration.

I guess the title should have been "drugs should be legal", instead.

Silly me.

[KC]

Based on the title of the thread I thought the problem was incarceration.

I guess the title should have been "drugs should be legal", instead.

Silly me.

Incarceration Nation is the name of the article by Fareed Zakaria that I quoted in the OP.

[Peter1469]

No, the topic concerns the question of why the US has so many people in jail.

The failed "war" on drugs is a big part of that.

[Micketto]

Incarceration Nation is the name of the article by Fareed Zakaria that I quoted in the OP.

I saw what you quoted.
And when you finally commented on it, it was about stopping arrests..... for a crime.

[KC]

I saw what you quoted.
And when you finally commented on it, it was about stopping arrests..... for a crime.

But the legal basis for it being a crime should be removed. It's not more complicated than that.

[jillian]

No, the topic concerns the question of why the US has so many people in jail.

The failed "war" on drugs is a big part of that.


I saw what you quoted.
And when you finally commented on it, it was about stopping arrests..... for a crime.

You seem to be missing the fact that:

a) we incarcerate a greater percentage of our populous than any other country;
b) the monetary and societal cost of those incarcerations is something we can no longer afford;
c) the basis for our excessive rate of incarceration is irrational as drugs like pot should no more be illegal than alcohol.

[simpsonofpg]

And a lot of the incarceration is for crimes that largely don't harm society.
How do we decide which ones will harm and those that want, it can get pretty complex. I thank maybe it is not a big deal if you are the one who is wronged but if it is me it is a real big deal.

How about this. Build 1 prison, 1000 beds, when 1001 shows up make room. It is low cost and absolutley garanteed to eliminate repeat offenders.

[Dr. Who]

Always makes me laugh when you people say this.

Never do you say "breaking very publicly known laws should stop".

Why jail people for drug addiction? Why not spend far less money and help them overcome addiction?

[zelmo1234]

Weather drugs should be legal or not is a question for the people to decide!

However the cost of prison can and should be cut and it is easy to do!

They do not need cable TV, state of the art gyms, and every comfort of home!

Most prisions are on large plots of land, have then start raising their own food, for some of these drug offenders have them run cattle farms and work from dawn to dusk! More violent offenders can work inside the prisons making the cloths, and cleanding them!

If you think that I am suggesting the chain gangs well yes I am! WE have people that know just what crime to comit to get the winter in the country jail, and then get back on the streets for summer! I have a relative that spent 15 years for Importing drugs, and said that it would be a great place to live if they allowed women!

Turn them into work camps and make it a place that you are dead tired at the end of everyday, and they might just find it in their heart to stay out of prison!

[jillian]

How do we decide which ones will harm and those that want, it can get pretty complex. I thank maybe it is not a big deal if you are the one who is wronged but if it is me it is a real big deal.

How about this. Build 1 prison, 1000 beds, when 1001 shows up make room. It is low cost and absolutley garanteed to eliminate repeat offenders.

it's not really that difficult. if its something that wouldn't be your business if you're someone's neighbor, it isn't hurting society and shouldn't be a crime.

if it hurts another person or potentially hurts another person or their property like driving drunk; or embezzlement, or vandalism (i assume it goes without saying that we're not talking about violent crimes b/c those are unacceptable in any event) then it SHOULD be charged as a crime.

the other stuff really is no one's business.... certainly not government's... and it enforcing people's private morality really shouldn't be a basis for us bankrupting ourselves keeping ridiculous numbers of people in prison.

[Micketto]

No, the topic concerns the question of why the US has so many people in jail.

Strange... the OP says it's about legalizing drugs.


The failed "war" on drugs is a big part of that.

A way bigger part of it is that we have so many people willing to break laws.

[jillian]

Strange... the OP says it's about legalizing drugs.



A way bigger part of it is that we have so many people willing to break laws.

are you one of those people who makes citizens arrests for jaywalking?

it's always funny to see anti-government types who are so authoritarian....

when it comes to everyone else.

and it seems the o/p is intended to start a discussion on whether drugs *should* be legalized... or at least decriminalized.

you keep refusing to address the actual issue.

[zelmo1234]

I have little problem withlegalizing drugs,

I have a huge problem with anyone using drugs or alcohol and recieveing govenrment benifits!

In my experence as an employer, Pot can give you a case of the Fuckit's and if you loose your job because of that, then you are on your own in my opnion!

[jillian]

I have little problem withlegalizing drugs,

I have a huge problem with anyone using drugs or alcohol and recieveing govenrment benifits!

In my experence as an employer, Pot can give you a case of the Fuckit's and if you loose your job because of that, then you are on your own in my opnion!

how do you distinguish between an addict (whether it's to alcohol or drugs) from the casual user?

and wouldn't the better idea then be to get those people, whether drunks or drug addicts, into rehab?

it's not like cutting off their benefits would stop the drug use.

and then you get starving and homeless addicts who ... who have to steal things to survive.. and live in hopelessness... and end up incarcerated...

which costs us a lot more than giving them the teeny bit of money it might cost us in relative terms.

and i'm talking about 'even if' someone is an addict.

i don't believe in humiliating people because they need some help. and it always seems to me that's what a lot of these demands are for.

[Micketto]

I have little problem withlegalizing drugs,

I have a huge problem with anyone using drugs or alcohol and recieveing govenrment benifits!

In my experence as an employer, Pot can give you a case of the Fuckit's and if you loose your job because of that, then you are on your own in my opnion!

As I have said many times, I couldn't care less if it is legal or not. It doesn't affect me. If I want to smoke I will smoke regardless of the laws. It doesn't cost as much to incarcerate people as they are claiming in this forum... so that's moot, and the ones it does incarcerate are not the casual users who get busted with a few joints or a bag of weed. The majority of drug users.

People incarcerated for "Drug Crimes" are those that commit other crimes to support a habit and more so, dealers and traffickers.
People we don't need anyway. People I will gladly pay for locking up.

As far as how it will affect the lives of the average employee, you have to remember they are already smoking. They either have a good work ethic despite that, or they don't. Driving while high is another problem altogether.

The problem for me lies with those people losing jobs, getting on unemployment, and being rewarded with food stamps, welfare, etc.
All on our dime.

Sure, legalizing will make people feel more comfortable trying it, and then moving onto bigger and better drugs... and then crime or death or 'free' healthcare (we're going to pay for them one way or another)... but that's not at all the majority.

I totally agree with you that if you choose to do these things you should be off assistance. Drugs and alcohol are luxuries for their users, and if we are paying for your food and children... you shouldn't be using your money to buy drugs.

I know the left will jump on me for that though....

[simpsonofpg]

It is really stupid to keep all the people in jail, since they can't seem to get along lets just send them on their way. I am tired of paying room and board. In my jail they would grow their own food or starve to death, either way we win;

[jillian]

It is really stupid to keep all the people in jail, since they can't seem to get along lets just send them on their way. I am tired of paying room and board. In my jail they would grow their own food or starve to death, either way we win;

except that there's that whole eighth amendment thing




Amendment VIIIExcessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/eighth_amendment

[Dr. Who]

Yes, but there are so many other bigger wastes of taxpayer dollars. Why is this one so important ?

$44 billion a year to pay for all of our incarcerated..... now take the percentage of those incarcerated for pot.... how small is that cost ? (that's a lot less than the government hands out to fake clean energy companies).

And if you want to say "but the cost of the police looking for these people...."
Well are you then saying that dealers/suppliers should just be able to run free? That's how these small time4rs get busted. And again... they aren't busted just once. These are repeats... and if the first or second time wasn't enough to make you be more careful... I really don't see where the problem with incarceration is.

Make it legal and the government will want to regulate it... and the cost of ridding the country of the law-breaking dealers and suppliers will skyrocket. Sure... less smokers are locked up, but the cost for them isn't very high anyway. Where is the savings?

Whatever happened to people just buying their dope in small amounts and smoking it in private ?!

If you make pot legal, like alcohol, the illegal market will dry up.

[Micketto]

If you make pot legal, like alcohol, the illegal market will dry up.

You really think that if the government decides to say pot is legal, that suddenly growing crops of it, transporting it from state to state, or bringing the good stuff in from out of the country will suddenly be OK too ?

You have a lot more faith in your government than anyone I know.

They can't even make sure abortions are done responsibly or legally.
I realize that's only human life, and not as important as alcohol.... but it's just one of many examples.

[jillian]

You really think that if the government decides to say pot is legal, that suddenly growing crops of it, transporting it from state to state, or bringing the good stuff in from out of the country will suddenly be OK too ?

You have a lot more faith in your government than anyone I know.

They can't even make sure abortions are done responsibly or legally.
I realize that's only human life, and not as important as alcohol.... but it's just one of many examples.

growing it wouldn't be illegal.

transporting it wouldn't be illegal

i assume that people would be able to grow their own and take it with them when they crossed state lines.

so yes, all of the need for criminal activity would dry up... just like it did after prohibition.

as for the non sequitur re abortion... yes, they can... that's why the butcher was convicted.

[Micketto]

growing it wouldn't be illegal.

transporting it wouldn't be illegal

i assume that people would be able to grow their own and take it with them when they crossed state lines.

so yes, all of the need for criminal activity would dry up... just like it did after prohibition.

As soon as you have anything of substance backing this up, feel free to post it.

Because the sht you are typing is nothing but assumption.

[jillian]

Some of them likely do want increased government, others do not. I certainly don't when it comes to drug laws.

i would agree with you on that subject. but then again, i don't like laws that seek to enforce personal morality.

[jillian]

As soon as you have anything of substance backing this up, feel free to post it.

Because the sht you are typing is nothing but assumption.

thanks for your input.

feel free to state why you think it is government's job to interfere with private morality.

further, feel free to state why legalization of pot would have any effect different from lifting prohibition on alcohol.

i have history on my side.

what do you have?

[Micketto]

thanks for your input.

feel free to state why you think it is government's job to interfere with private morality.

If the morals of the creep next door allow him to rape your son.... remind the government to stay out of it.




further, feel free to state why legalization of pot would have any effect different from lifting prohibition on alcohol.

i have history on my side.

what do you have?

The fact that the law doesn't even exist yet.

(Despite your apparent ability it read it to us).

[jillian]

If the morals of the creep next door allow him to rape your son.... remind the government to stay out of it.

lovely. but meaningless in a discussion about something that has nothing to do with anyone but the person and his own private actions. don't you find it a bit silly to talk about rape of my son in the midst of such a discussion?

do you think it's compelling or convincing or even illustrates your concerns about the legalization of something as benign as pot?




The fact that the law doesn't even exist yet.

(Despite your apparent ability it read it to us).

i have read no proposed federal legislation ... i am making assumptions. (although you already know that)

could it be that government controls manufacture and sale of pot like they do alcohol? sure.

but that wasn't really the important part of the discussion.

the important part was that there would be no need for illegality surrounding pot.... same as what happened at the end of prohibition.

and for that, i rely on history.

and human reality.

you are free to disagree, but what basis would you have to think there would be any need for such illegality?

[Micketto]

lovely. but meaningless in a discussion about something that has nothing to do with anyone but the person and his own private actions. don't you find it a bit silly to talk about rape of my son in the midst of such a discussion?
do you think it's compelling or convincing or even illustrates your concerns about the legalization of something as benign as pot?
You asked for a reason that government should interfere with private morality.
I gave you a whopper.
If you want a specific answer, ask a specific question next time.
You mentioned "morality".... not "legalizing weed".
Simple.






i have read no proposed federal legislation

Ohhhhhh....

[junie]

If the morals of the creep next door allow him to rape your son.... remind the government to stay out of it.





The fact that the law doesn't even exist yet.

(Despite your apparent ability it read it to us).




for fuck sake, mick... you have a lot of nerve going around calling other people dumb. :rollseyes:



is that selective comprehension on your part or just deliberate assholery syndrome...?


let's review:





bazinga!

if we really want to save money, we prosecute for violent crimes and crimes against others.

some guy smoking a joint in his house isn't exactly a menace to society.

there are also additional costs to our "war on drugs".... particularly in minority communities.

we spend a fortune on drug enforcement. those laws are largely enforced against young black males. those young black males are then moved through the system... taken out of schools... taken away from any opportunity to move beyond their youthful indiscretions into a successful adulthood.

also, if you are a kid arrested for a drug crime and your family lives in public housing, your family can't allow you to live with them any more or they get evicted. so the most at risk youths are then moved away from their family moorings.

you also lose opportunities for schools and jobs and job training and every other opportunity that would allow you to better yourself.

talk about the cycle of poverty... and it leaves a trail of broken families behind it.

it's horrible

btw, great post jill. ^






it's not really that difficult. if its something that wouldn't be your business if you're someone's neighbor, it isn't hurting society and shouldn't be a crime.

if it hurts another person or potentially hurts another person or their property like driving drunk; or embezzlement, or vandalism (i assume it goes without saying that we're not talking about violent crimes b/c those are unacceptable in any event) then it SHOULD be charged as a crime.


the other stuff really is no one's business.... certainly not government's... and it enforcing people's private morality really shouldn't be a basis for us bankrupting ourselves keeping ridiculous numbers of people in prison.