|
Warchicken posted:Solitary does not have to be the awful torture it is now. Duration and ability to read or in any way stimulate the mind or body during solitary would do a lot to making it a palatable option for extreme cases such as the ones you are talking about. But nothing excuses holding people there for a month over a verbal disagreement or for thirty years because of unproven gang affiliations. Considering that prison rape is the punchline to way too many sick jokes (speaking as someone who has had to stop a prison rape) I think people are at some level "aware", what they aren't aware of is that it's worse in America than other places. And where I worked they were allowed to read in segregation and have books. Can't speak for California. But even the Super Max where they are behind super thick doors and can't speak or hear anyone they get a TV in their cell they can turn on whenever and a weekly library cart to pull books. Main Paineframe posted:I don't buy that the threat of solitary is literally the only way you have to disincentivize bad behavior. How about revoking privileges associated with good behavior? Or, since you work at a mental health prison, how about reporting the behavior to the inmate's psychologist? If he refuses to address the problem, as you've mentioned previously, then that's a problem with the system. And if punishing mentally ill inmates with psychological torture for nonviolent misconduct is standard policy in your prison because it's easier than having a functioning mental health system in a mental health prison, then your state's prison system is no doubt completely broken. I am getting the vibe that all of you are thinking of solitary as something very different from what I am thinking of. If you really think that the extreme cases you are reading in this thread are the norm for most segregation units then you are mistaken. The stuff linked from California would be considered extreme and excessive in my state. When I think of segregation I think of a 2 to 7 day trip in a building unit where they have to stay in a cell instead of roaming the building unit and the prison camp during the day and about 50 percent of segregation actually has a roommate as well. (for technical rule violation they get to have a roommate) And what privileges associated with good behavior are you talking about? Visitation? That never gets taken away, even people in Solitary get taken out and taken over to visitation if a family member comes and visits. Can't take away mail. Ability to buy store goods? They will just get some from some other inmate through the black market channels. (they will just have a family member put money on a green dot card) The favored work details (like working in the Auto Shop to learn a trade skill) aren't given to problem inmates typically to begin with so thats not an effective threat. The idea that a prison should cater to every inmates whim is laughable.And in that particular case he could have signed a statement saying he feared for his life and he would have been put in segregation. Instead he chose to go to segregation in a way that let him keep face with the other criminals. You ARE aware that prisons are mostly intended for incapacitation, deterrence, and punitive purposes in America right? Rehabilitation was found to be ineffective policy back in the 1970s and lots of crimes seem to have no effective rehabilitative treatment (like child molestation) There ARE effective targeted rehabilitation programs but they are razor focused towards stuff like drug offenses.Even then the recidivist rate is really high. The problems with crime in the US is cultural with deep deep structural and cultural problems on how criminals and poor classes are treated. (I've always bought the conflict theorist explanation) There is no rehabilitative program that a prison can enact that can fix those issues. I HAVE seen women's prisons have effective rehabilitation programs. (there are some rock solid drug programs for women who NEED to get clean) But there are very different cultural perspectives on female offenders. People are far more willing to give a second chance to the single mom than to the "deadbeat" dad in prison. anglachel fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Aug 28, 2013 |
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 18:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 10:15 |
|
|
anglachel posted:I am getting the vibe that all of you are thinking of solitary as something very different from what I am thinking of. If you really think that the extreme cases you are reading in this thread are the norm for most segregation units then you are mistaken. The stuff linked from California would be considered extreme and excessive in my state. When I think of segregation I think of a 2 to 7 day trip in a building unit where they have to stay in a cell instead of roaming the building unit and the prison camp during the day and about 50 percent of segregation actually has a roommate as well. (for technical rule violation they get to have a roommate) Whatever state you're in has a much less awful system than California. quote:Rehabilitation was found to be ineffective policy back in the 1970s Citation needed quote:There ARE effective targeted rehabilitation programs but they are razor focused towards stuff like drug offenses.Even then the recidivist rate is really high. The problems with crime in the US is cultural with deep deep structural and cultural problems on how criminals and poor classes are treated. (I've always bought the conflict theorist explanation) There is no rehabilitative program that a prison can enact that can fix those issues. I HAVE seen women's prisons have effective rehabilitation programs. (there are some rock solid drug programs for women who NEED to get clean) But there are very different cultural perspectives on female offenders. People are far more willing to give a second chance to the single mom than to the "deadbeat" dad in prison. The recidivism rate is sky-high because its intended to be that way. Unless you're one of the lucky few to have an actual support network that's not a gang, you're basically out on the street as soon as you're released, most likely have no money to your name, and may not be in possession of all of your legal rights (and effectively marked as unemployable if you have felony). How do you not turn to crime when placed in that kind of situation?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 19:11
|
|
|
redscare posted:Citation needed Round about the time that prisoners got fed up with guards being abusive assholes and started fighting back.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 19:15
|
|
|
redscare posted:
Google Robert Martinson's "Nothing Works". It's considered a influential piece of literature when it comes to shaping corrective policy. So influential the author killed himself over it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 21:30
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Round about the time that prisoners got fed up with guards being abusive assholes and started fighting back. You are thinking of the 1980s. Not the 1970s.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 21:32
|
|
|
anglachel posted:You are thinking of the 1980s. Not the 1970s. No, that was a reference to Attica, and the corrections response which was to create racial gang balkanization.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 21:35
|
|
|
-Troika- posted:I don't know why people are singling out Cold and Ugly for not magically taking over the California prison guard union. He's just a cog in the machine, and with no support (and money) he isn't getting elected president of jack poo poo. The most likely result of his efforts, if he were to be persistent enough about it, is union bosses pulling some strings and getting him transferred to a shittier job or fired. I appreciate your willingness to be reasonable about what can be expected of me. But as an aside, one of the many things CCPOA has done for us is force the implementation of the bid and post system, in which we select where we want to work and "bid" for those spots based on our seniority, and administration is unable to remove us from those spots without a good reason. So hypothetically I could attend every chapter meeting and write CCPOA sux on the white board and throw around printed pages from this thread, I could even deliver a hard copy of this thread to the warden once a week, and they couldn't really do jack poo poo to me. I don't do these things because I learned in High School that you don't make friends or influence people by being an inflexible judgmental dick, and because I don't really want my life to be a Sisyphean ordeal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 22:46
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:Cold and Ugly, are you actually a CO or are you just trying to reinforce D&D's already low opinion of COs? I am a CO. I've just been trying to contribute to the conversation and add some of what I consider reality to the proceedings. Given how some people have responded, i'm not sure it's possible to be a CO and not reinforce D&D's already low opinion of CO's without declaring that everything you all imagined about prisons is right, and subsequently shooting myself in the head.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 22:51
|
|
|
anglachel posted:Google Robert Martinson's "Nothing Works". It's considered a influential piece of literature when it comes to shaping corrective policy. So influential the author killed himself over it. How come other countries manage it? Cold and Ugly posted:I am a CO. I've just been trying to contribute to the conversation and add some of what I consider reality to the proceedings. Given how some people have responded, i'm not sure it's possible to be a CO and not reinforce D&D's already low opinion of CO's without declaring that everything you all imagined about prisons is right, and subsequently shooting myself in the head. You could actively work to change your union's horrible political positions, but you've said you're too lazy for it. So no, you don't have to shoot yourself in the head.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 23:07
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:You could actively work to change your union's horrible political positions, but you've said you're too lazy for it. So no, you don't have to shoot yourself in the head. I don't think it's fair to poo poo on him for his lack of motivation towards what would most definitely be career suicide. It would be admirable if Cold and Ugly wanted to pursue that, but there's probably a lot of folks posting in this thread who aren't out there raging against the horrible things their job does. My disagreement has always been with the posting, not the lack of a personal crusade. Maybe you'd do different? Probably you or I would never take a CO job in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 23:09
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:How come other countries manage it? Thanks. As I said, though, I do as much as I can as a person who isn't interested in union politics. I vote for people who I think are good and do my best to ensure that my area is run well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 23:12
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:I don't think it's fair to poo poo on him for his lack of motivation towards what would most definitely be career suicide. It would be admirable if Cold and Ugly wanted to pursue that, but there's probably a lot of folks posting in this thread who aren't out there raging against the horrible things their job does. I think that when you're part of a union you have a different ethical obligation than if you're not. That's the purpose of a union. And as he's said, ironically thanks to the union he wouldn't get hosed over because of doing it. It's not him working the job that I'm saying is an ill, it's the lack of effort to reform the union, because there is no way to reform a union except to have union members reform the union.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:I don't think it's fair to poo poo on him for his lack of motivation towards what would most definitely be career suicide. It would be admirable if Cold and Ugly wanted to pursue that, but there's probably a lot of folks posting in this thread who aren't out there raging against the horrible things their job does. He just admitted he could bring a printed copy of this thread to the warden and they couldn't touch him. He is  personified.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 23:14
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:I think that when you're part of a union you have a different ethical obligation than if you're not. That's the purpose of a union. And as he's said, ironically thanks to the union he wouldn't get hosed over because of doing it. It's not him working the job that I'm saying is an ill, it's the lack of effort to reform the union, because there is no way to reform a union except to have union members reform the union. I don't know that fighting to reform a union like the CO's wouldn't face blowback. Different from doing it without one, but still.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 23:22
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:He just admitted he could bring a printed copy of this thread to the warden and they couldn't touch him. He is I'd be way too embarrassed to let the warden know that I posted here. He's a serious and educated man who is way way above me in the hierarchy in which I operate. Maybe I could leave him news clippings from Harpers or something, but the futility of the gesture would probably stop me on the way to his office. And if not that, i'm certain I couldn't bear to face his secretary with my dumb bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 23:26
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:I don't know that fighting to reform a union like the CO's wouldn't face blowback. Different from doing it without one, but still. There might be some blowback, but it's probably just be people telling him to get hosed and calling him a big pansy et al. Anyway. The prison union in California is a pariah union, basically isolated from other unions. They didn't used to be a big deal but they did some really 'smart' politicking and absorbed a bunch of other unions and they are now probably the single worst political influence in California, the major impediment to the state getting over its systemic budget and social problems. And the only possible way for it to change without the government simply busting it is for union members to work to change it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 23:30
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:There might be some blowback, but it's probably just be people telling him to get hosed and calling him a big pansy et al. Anyway. The prison union in California is a pariah union, basically isolated from other unions. They didn't used to be a big deal but they did some really 'smart' politicking and absorbed a bunch of other unions and they are now probably the single worst political influence in California, the major impediment to the state getting over its systemic budget and social problems. Well I hear you, but you can't shame someone into activism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 23:31
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Well I hear you, but you can't shame someone into activism. I'm not trying to shame him, I'm explaining that, at least for me, it's not that he's a CO that's a problem for me. It is a necessary job, and it's possible to do that job ethically. It's being a member of a union that's basically one step shy of 'corrupt', one that has absolutely terrible policies, and not doing jack to address those. He seemed to be under the impression that people were against him just for being a CO. For me, that's not the case. Back away from personalizing it: Here's a great report/proposal on prisons in Connecticut and rehabilitation and recidivism. http://www.drugpolicy.org/docUploads/DiversionWorks.pdf
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 23:38
|
|
|
anglachel posted:Google Robert Martinson's "Nothing Works". It's considered a influential piece of literature when it comes to shaping corrective policy. So influential the author killed himself over it. So we're effectively basing our rehabilitative policy entirely based on an essay from 1974 that used an extremely flawed sample size (from what I can glean from quick googling)? Holy christ we're more hosed than I thought.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 23:50
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:How come other countries manage it? Same reason that other countries have effective health care. It's structural. What country manages it exactly? I'm pretty sure any country you name doesnt systematically ostracize ex cons, refuse them employment, refuse them housing, and all kind of things to make sure a prison sentence is a mark of cain. The social environment in the United States makes recidivism almost inevitable. There's not a whole lot that can be done about that by the prison though. redscare posted:So we're effectively basing our rehabilitative policy entirely based on an essay from 1974 that used an extremely flawed sample size (from what I can glean from quick googling)? Holy christ we're more hosed than I thought. Yep we are. Scary as gently caress isn't it? There is a reason the guy killed himself. Obdicut posted:Here's a great report/proposal on prisons in Connecticut and rehabilitation and recidivism. Diversionary options are always preferable. However the report seems to focus on getting people away from the prison to begin with. Not what to do with them once they hit the prison system. Once they hit the system there life is pretty much hosed. I feel very glad I got promoted out of the prison into Felony Probation where I actually CAN do rehabilitative work. The overall focus seems to pump all rehabilitative energy into Probation, and use Prison as Deterrence and Incapacitation. I saw about one good rehabilitative program, and that was a program where they got a free college education up to Masters level from a SACS accredited school, and any disciplinary action against them got them kicked out if the program director found it valid. Natural spots in that program where limited and competition was force among the inmates to get in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 00:04
|
|
|
anglachel posted:Same reason that other countries have effective health care. It's structural. What country manages it exactly? I'm pretty sure any country you name doesnt systematically ostracize ex cons, refuse them employment, refuse them housing, and all kind of things to make sure a prison sentence is a mark of cain. The social environment in the United States makes recidivism almost inevitable. There's not a whole lot that can be done about that by the prison though. I think there are things that can be done in prison, but I also agree the problem mainly stems from beforehand, which is why I've banged on about the CO union in California supporting the host of things that cause the problems-- long sentences, imprisonment and not diversion, etc. I agree that the post-prison penalties are a gigantic barrier too, which is a broad-based societal problem, but I think part of that is disguised by race; employers are more likely to hire a white ex-con than a black guy with no record in many cases. quote:Diversionary options are always preferable. However the report seems to focus on getting people away from the prison to begin with. Not what to do with them once they hit the prison system. Once they hit the system there life is pretty much hosed. I feel very glad I got promoted out of the prison into Felony Probation where I actually CAN do rehabilitative work. The overall focus seems to pump all rehabilitative energy into Probation, and use Prison as Deterrence and Incapacitation. I saw about one good rehabilitative program, and that was a program where they got a free college education up to Masters level from a SACS accredited school, and any disciplinary action against them got them kicked out if the program director found it valid. Natural spots in that program where limited and competition was force among the inmates to get in. I do think good rehabilitation in the context of our society and prison system is incredibly hard, and I also think that educational programs are some of the best places to concentrate because there are measurable results there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 00:09
|
|
|
anglachel posted:Diversionary options are always preferable. However the report seems to focus on getting people away from the prison to begin with. Not what to do with them once they hit the prison system. Once they hit the system there life is pretty much hosed. I feel very glad I got promoted out of the prison into Felony Probation where I actually CAN do rehabilitative work. The overall focus seems to pump all rehabilitative energy into Probation, and use Prison as Deterrence and Incapacitation. I saw about one good rehabilitative program, and that was a program where they got a free college education up to Masters level from a SACS accredited school, and any disciplinary action against them got them kicked out if the program director found it valid. Natural spots in that program where limited and competition was force among the inmates to get in. You;d pick up a misdemeanor and get probation. Pick up a felony, even like a robbery, and get probation. You'd violate and do some jail time. Rinse repeat until you really hosed up and went to prison. You'd probably have to have more than 1 felony on your record (unless you were a minority, another problem). Most people washed out of their criminal stuff and perhaps more importantly entered their late 20s before they'd really have a chance to go to state prison. Now I see 18-19 year olds going to prison for glorified shoplifting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 02:10
|
|
|
nm posted:The problem is that once you get to prison, it becomes much harder to change. It is way too easy to go to prison. An undiscussed element of the increase in incarceration is how probation policies changed. Used to be, you'd have to work your way though the system. Believe it or not, but a poo poo TON of people still get put on probation. I consistently get 5 or 10 people added to my own individual caseload a week. For my job with state probation I work in a county of 850,000 people, and our current probationer count is getting close to 7000. And thats just for the Felony level offenses. People going straight to prison has nothing whatsoever to do with probation. Thats all about how judges decide to sentence offenders. Tough on crime is a easy way for a judge to win an election. So it's going to continue. I have worked in the prison and currently work in probation and parole. I have NEVER seen anyone go straight to prison for "glorified shoplifting". Jail time? Yeah. Prison time? No. They go straight on to probation unless there is some other variable in play like they really pissed off the judge (which I see happen sometimes). But I think part of the problem with this conversation is that different states do things so radically different. California a supposedly liberal state seems like the 7th layer of hell when it comes to correctional policy at all levels of the system (prison, probation, and parole). While I work in a hard red state and they are trying to shut prisons down cause holy poo poo prisoners are really loving expensive on state budgets. California's Prison Union seems to be pretty much solely responsible for the horrific state of affairs over there. They get paid WAY more than I ever did, and yet seem to get away with being far less professional. And that hurts me to say because I really do support Unions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 02:34
|
|
|
anglachel posted:People going straight to prison has nothing whatsoever to do with probation. Thats all about how judges decide to sentence offenders. Tough on crime is a easy way for a judge to win an election. So it's going to continue. How much would moving to a system where judges are not elected help, in your opinion?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 02:39
|
|
|
anglachel posted:People going straight to prison has nothing whatsoever to do with probation. Thats all about how judges decide to sentence offenders. Tough on crime is a easy way for a judge to win an election. So it's going to continue. quote:I have worked in the prison and currently work in probation and parole. I have NEVER seen anyone go straight to prison for "glorified shoplifting". Jail time? Yeah. Prison time? No. They go straight on to probation unless there is some other variable in play like they really pissed off the judge (which I see happen sometimes). But I think part of the problem with this conversation is that different states do things so radically different. California a supposedly liberal state seems like the 7th layer of hell when it comes to correctional policy at all levels of the system (prison, probation, and parole). While I work in a hard red state and they are trying to shut prisons down cause holy poo poo prisoners are really loving expensive on state budgets. California's Prison Union seems to be pretty much solely responsible for the horrific state of affairs over there. They get paid WAY more than I ever did, and yet seem to get away with being far less professional. And that hurts me to say because I really do support Unions. California is often thought as a "blue state" but in terms of criminal justice we make some of the south blush. We're crazy. Torka posted:How much would moving to a system where judges are not elected help, in your opinion?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 02:47
|
|
|
Torka posted:How much would moving to a system where judges are not elected help, in your opinion? It's not a guarantee of any progress. The legislature is always free to impose harsher minimum sentencing guidelines and take the judge out of the picture. One of the saddest days of law school came in my Employment Discrimination course. The professor invited a federal district judge to talk to us about, you know, employment discrimination stuff. Instead he mostly talked in a somber and almost defeated tone about what a slog his job has become thanks to minimum sentencing. The one quote I remember (paraphrasing here) is, "80% of my job is locking up drug offenders and child pornography users. It used to be just the drugs, but ever since the PROTECT Act it's an increasing amount of child pornography." Never in my life have I seen a more  face. I can still picture it clearly.
pig slut lisa fucked around with this message at 13:34 on Aug 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 02:53
|
|
|
nm posted:Here in California (in the red counties anyhow) it happens fairly regularly and happened more and more often (I'm a criminal attorney who currently works with a post-release population). Second degree commercial burglary (meaning you entered a store with the intent to shoplift) is a wobbler and often sends people to prison. Shoplifting with priors often sends people to prison, just saw an 8 year offer for shoplifting a few months back. Estes robberies (meaning while somelifting to pushed someone who tried to stop you) are not just often prison cases, but is still a strike under our 3rd strike system meaning you can still get life for that even after our new 3 strikes reform. I've seen some of the kids I work with get anywhere from a decade to twenty seven years for a botched robbery, at least where someone isn't killed. One kid pushed a man who suffered minor injuries from a fall, he got 707 (adult) charges and eight years in prison for that. Ironically, one of the kids I work with who shot and killed a man over an iPhone will likely do less or about the same amount of time as he has juvenile charges and the maximum stay in Dept. of Juv. Justice (CYA) is up to the age of 25. The randomness of the justice system only adds to its brutality. The similarity of some crimes and the randomness of the sentencing never ceases to amaze me. Similar cases heard by the same judge, sometimes with defendants having the same attorney can have vastly different outcomes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 04:53
|
|
|
Cold and Ugly posted:Goddamn, man. I was conceding a point and inviting further discussion. Fun facts: it was the peace-loving, pious Quakers who first invented solitary confinement. The idea was that, left completely isolated, with only a Bible and his own thoughts, the criminal would of course turn to prayer and repent and emerge from the cell shamed and penitent (hence 'penitentiary'), reborn in Christ and ready to be a productive citizen. What actually happened? Well, they opened those cells to find blood all over the floor. The prisoners had apparently taken to mutilating themselves in order to break up the monotony. At first, perhaps, it was a way to pass the time. But then, when the wardens began to 'forget' to feed the inmates, it became failed means of survival. Those who were still found alive, were mentally beyond fixing. Speak their name and they'd just poo poo themselves and scream. Nowadays those prisoners at least usually don't have to worry about things like rat-bites, fleas carrying thyphoid, or being deliberately starved or chained to the wall. But anymore, we don't even leave them the Bible to read.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 05:22
|
|
|
Torka posted:How much would moving to a system where judges are not elected help, in your opinion? It wouldn't. If anything it would make things worse, because then the Governor would just appoint a poo poo ton of tough on crime judges who aren't responsive to the needs of their community at all. I have seen alot of strong reform from some judges. Things like Drug Courts, Mental Health Courts, the importance of First Offender (which means if you finish your probation successfully the record will reflect that you were tried Not Guilty), all need Judges to champion them. Appointment judges will just be lackeys of whoever won the gerrymandered State Elections, and worse you can't get rid of them and they aren't accountable to anyone. Local elections that pick judges tend to be far more democratic (in theory anyway), as at least the Judge your voting for could theoretically be the judge where you live. The thing you have to realize is that elected judges are going to be held ultimately accountable for what somebody on probation does as they are the ones who put somebody on probation to begin with. The question is always going to be "why did the judge put a person like that on probation?" when a probationer commits a new crime. Hell just a couple of weeks ago we had a guy on probation with us who had a rifle and walked into an elementary school ready to rock and roll (he was able to be talked down) Even a fairly reform minded judge is going to be hesitant to put someone on probation with things like that to worry about. If that guy had actually killed some kids that judge would not be getting reelected (assuming he does). The other problem is that there are all kinds of risk assessments, and it seems that one of the bigger indicators that you will commit future crimes is your age. Younger people are more likely to commit new crimes. That means that younger people who need a second chance the most are also the most risky to grant a second chance too. What needs to happen is that the social justice crowd needs to focus more on what is going on in their local community. If they spent half the time getting people to register to vote for more reform minded judges that they spend on internet crusading they could probably get judges that actually treat sexual assault seriously, don't tolerate crimes against LBGT people, don't gently caress over small time pot users for no reason whatsoever, and try to actually rehabilitate people. But instead they spend time being outraged on the interwebs. Local judges win by EXTREMELY small margins. Grassroots organizing to get about a 1000 people to vote could destroy some of these "Tough on Crime!" judges. I mean gently caress I saw one polling place for a local election that said they got 30 people the entire day, all of them older, all of them very conservative. anglachel fucked around with this message at 18:43 on Aug 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
anglachel posted:
Is there any existing resource for tracking the sentencing patterns of individual judges?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 07:54
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:Is there any existing resource for tracking the sentencing patterns of individual judges? No, but all the sentences are public record. If someone wanted to track sentencing patterns the data is there to grab.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 13:28
|
|
|
Directly mobilizing people to not only vote for but repeatedly vote to retain "weak on crime" judges who "let convicted criminals back out onto our streets" and "refuse to punish drug offenders for their crimes" against opponents relying on simple emotional appeals is much more difficult than than it seems, and it's unreliable over the long term. The reason tough-on-crime works so well politically is because it's far more popular than reform and rehabilitation; relying on voters to fix the system is a doomed endeavor because they're the ones who really broke things in the first place. Most importantly, even if it works a few times, it falls apart as soon as a high-profile case happens. Take, for example, the Utah Supreme Court justices who made a pro-gay ruling and then found themselves facing a large, organized, well-funded opposition campaign the next time they came up for reelection. The problem with elected judges isn't getting elected in the first place, it's the fact that they have to constantly endure retention votes or election challengers, and therefore they have to keep political considerations in mind for every single case they ever decide in that position. Appointed judges, on the other hand, are not held politically accountable for their rulings, and therefore can freely defy the interest groups and the tough-on-crime lobbies...except when they're pigeonholed by tough minimum sentencing laws passed by the legislature. Judges are just one part of the problem, and in my opinion, not a major one. There's some serious rear end in a top hat judges out there, but the executive and legislative have far more influence. For example, California's prison overcrowding has gotten so bad that the governor is spending hundreds of millions to temporarily lease space in private prisons, while at the same time fighting the California Supreme Court's order to relieve overcrowding by letting out Iow-risk offenders put there by the legislature's harsh mandatory sentencing laws. I can't see how elected judges would be helping that situation, especially considering the role that the two popularly elected branches have played.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 15:15
|
|
|
Nice Davis posted:It's not a guarantee of any progress. The legislature is always free to impose harsher minimum sentencing guidelines and take the judge out of the picture. Did he ever state why it was happening more and more? Just curious.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 16:09
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Words Appointed versus elected is a long argument. But let me it put this way using a perfect example. Athens-Clarke County is considered one of the most liberal areas in the state. The judges there will very rarely send anyone to jail or prison for a drug offense, and the judges are considered extremely liberal overall. If they had an appointed judge I feel very comfortable stating that a appointed judge would be far more harsh in sentencing drug offenders and give harsher sentences. On the other hand you might get some backwater county that elects the most batshit judge ever who tries to actually enforce sodomy laws on gay offenders and get them on sex offender registries. An appointed judge probably wouldn't do that in all likelihood (though they could). And as far as "weak on crime" judges not being able to win, that all a matter of politics and marketing. A judge who gives police a hard time and is soft on drug can easily be marketed as a libertarian on a conservative area, and less strict judges can already do well in more liberal ones. The thing that your not realizing is that the stakes on the Superior Court elections aren't going to see massive upswell like a Supreme Court state wide case would. Your not gonna see out of state money and probably not even out of county money come into play in those cases. The main contributes are wealthy individuals in the community and the state party. And it's a VERY small pool of people who actually vote in local elections anyway. Seriously, name 2 Superior Court judges and how they do typically handle cases for the County you live in. It's a small segment of the population who actually pay attention to that stuff and even realize there's a scandal to begin with. My county of 850000 people gets local laws and policy passed with sup 10000 people voter turnouts. These judges are vulnerable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 17:53
|
|
|
I'm on my phone right now, so I can't like, but Wisconsin supreme court elections are basically a case study on why this whole electing judges thing is dumb.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
nm posted:I'm on my phone right now, so I can't like
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
nm posted:I'm on my phone right now, so I can't like, but Wisconsin supreme court elections are basically a case study on why this whole electing judges thing is dumb. Electing APPELLATE judges whose job it is to overrule popularly elected judges is dumb yes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
Undead Unicorn posted:Did he ever state why it was happening more and more? Just curious. I think the Act basically created a whole new area of Federal jurisdiction than had existed before, one where the cases were super easy to close on from a prosecutorial perspective.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 02:58
|
|
|
Hey, Zeitgueist, I appreciate the fact that you were willing to defend me in a way against that guy's unreasonable demands that because I am a cop with concerns that I am worthless unless I devote my life to conquering the union, no matter how ill fitted I am for it. But I just re-read the Riker's thread and realized that you were the loving dweeb who posted: Zeitgueist posted:A simple google search indicates that CO's are murdered in prisons at a rate higher than "never". Anyone can get killed inside, if they need to be...or outside for that matter. to me. A prison guard. So, in the same spirit as those here who suggested that I feel or think the way I do out of loyalty to the union or a desire to protect myself, I posit that you pull it every night to impotent fantasies of authority figures being murdered.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 04:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 10:15 |
|
|
Cold and Ugly posted:Hey, Zeitgueist, I appreciate the fact that you were willing to defend me in a way against that guy's unreasonable demands that because I am a cop with concerns that I am worthless unless I devote my life to conquering the union, no matter how ill fitted I am for it. Not in the least bit what I said. I said that you should do something to reform the union. You said you're not going to because you're lazy. You should throw yourself a pity party. Everyone's invited.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 14:24
|
|