What's Justice Worth?Follow

I don't know, that was a pretty brilliant response. I'll bet it was tons of fun to write.

We could spend less on guards if we just went with the panopticon route.

Fuck off, Firefox, it's a word. I wasn't trying to say "optician".

Starving prisoners start eating each other until the problem has fixed itself?

Ideally, I would prefer the latter. However, if money is an issue, then the two should be separated but present. If one of the two has to go, it should be the rehabilitation and not the prison time.

Edited, May 19th 2012 12:53pm by Almalieque

Simplistic solutions are always the bestest.

Better that ten guilty persons escape than one innocent suffer.

Which is why you'd be disqualified from a jury about a similar crime. Your objectivity is compromised.

[:loony:]

Gees, who's been guarding the door around here?

No, my solution would be to reduce incarceration.

My solution is to the problem of reducing the amount of money spent in incarceration. Reducing the amount of incarcerations doesn't justify the amount of money spent on them. Once again, these are two different scenarios.



What? Spend what money? I was against the US wasting money on politically driven bogus studies. This is consistent to my previous claim. I'm not suggesting the US to make any specific changes, I'm merely pointing out that there are obvious things available to cut. I don't know the effects nor am I demanding what to cut. You just can't say that there aren't room for cuts.

Unless I'm mistaken, the concern was releasing people from jail to prevent spending the money to house them. It's simply a problem of justice vs money, hence the title of the thread. It's not about the lack of space or lack of money. If anything, spending less per prisoner would allow you to house more prisoners under the same budget.

I don't consider not having flat screen televisions, weights, etc as a "dungeon". As children, we have access to less than that under punishment from our parents. I do not have any sympathy for the lack of entertainment for prisoners.

If there's a percentage of prisoners who are "negro street-loiters in hoodies" and "illegal immigrant look-alikes", then yet again, that's an entire different issue. That has no bearing on the quality of prison of life because the prisons weren't made for the innocent. If the innocent are being thrown in jail, then that's another social issue that needs to be addressed.

You're the one who made this about the 'quality of life' in prison. You sound jealous of the prisoners. The OP was simply a discussion about releasing some of the longtime low-risk prisoners as a cost saving measure.

If the powers that be are debating this one-time release of prisoners, then it should be acknowledged that perhaps they were sentenced too long to begin with or that perhaps incarceration isn't getting us the best bang for our corrections buck, and ergo a policy review is in order.





Edited, Jun 4th 2012 7:55pm by Elinda