Thread: How many guns do you need?

Originally Posted by AetheLove

What if a US District Court rules that conditions in your jail are grossly inadequate, unconstitutional, and jeopardize the health and safety of prisoners?


Æ

Then i think we need to revisit why we take to good of care of people that obviously didnt appreciate the rights of everyone else protected by the constitution. Really imo you should not be protected by the wording in the constitution during your stay in a prison. I already stated my position on health so no need to revisit that one. Im also pretty sure the safety of prisoners is at risk the moment we lock murderers away with gang bangers and people with assault charges. It only seems to be a reasonable conclusion that as long as they are allowed to interact with each other something is probably going to happen eventually. As for other types of safety concerns excluding where we bbq their brains in a chair i guess i would need examples of what your concerns are in a prison for safety. Are we talking little plastic covers for the electrical sockets so they dont get a boo boo? Or are we talking about someone getting butt raped like what already happens?

Im gonna add that if someone is in PRISON for pre trial there is probably a damn good reason they are.

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

Then i think we need to revisit why we take to good of care of people that obviously didnt appreciate the rights of everyone else protected by the constitution. Really imo you should not be protected by the wording in the constitution during your stay in a prison. I already stated my position on health so no need to revisit that one. Im also pretty sure the safety of prisoners is at risk the moment we lock murderers away with gang bangers and people with assault charges. It only seems to be a reasonable conclusion that as long as they are allowed to interact with each other something is probably going to happen eventually. As for other types of safety concerns excluding where we bbq their brains in a chair i guess i would need examples of what your concerns are in a prison for safety. Are we talking little plastic covers for the electrical sockets so they dont get a boo boo? Or are we talking about someone getting butt raped like what already happens?

I suppose that if you really want examples, you can look at the complaint that lead to the court ruling.

Also, we're not talking about prison. We're talking about jail. As a practical matter, it's necessary to detain people who have been arrested but not yet arraigned. Some will be unable to make bail, or be denied bail. None of the people I've so-far described have been convicted of anything. Subjecting them to treatment that doesn't even meet the standards of the prison system is itself a crime.

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

Then i think we need to revisit why we take to good of care of people that obviously didnt appreciate the rights of everyone else protected by the constitution.

We take good care of people because they have been endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. The Constitution sets the groundwork for how we go about preserving those rights, and it also sets the groundwork for how we go about dealing with people who forfeit - perhaps temporarily - some of those rights. It makes note of cruel and unusual punishment right along with guarantees of free speech.

I'd be comfortable revisiting the 'why' of how we set a standard of care for inmates. It doesn't seem like it'd be productive though. Some people in this forum are cheering for anal-rape as a special bonus for anyone who gets convicted of any crime. That's fucked up. Vengeance isn't Justice, but it still seems to be popular.

Cheers,


AetheLove

Originally Posted by Red_Lizard2

Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't most research/practical results shown rehabilitation type programs and "nicer" jails/prison to be more effective at preventing criminals from continuing to be criminals post-jail/prison?

Don't know about first time offenders, though it doesn't seem like supposedly tough Joe has exactly reduced the amount of crime in Maricopa County (in fact for a few years Maricopa County lead for most vehicle theft. Granted that is just one example and need more to really make a case).

Yeah i dont know. I do know florida does not partake in that and yet it has reached its lowest return rate just recently.

Originally Posted by AetheLove

I suppose that if you really want examples, you can look at the complaint that lead to the court ruling.

Also, we're not talking about prison. We're talking about jail. As a practical matter, it's necessary to detain people who have been arrested but not yet arraigned. Some will be unable to make bail, or be denied bail. None of the people I've so-far described have been convicted of anything. Subjecting them to treatment that doesn't even meet the standards of the prison system is itself a crime.

I can see your point and agree until someone is convicted they should retain their rights. As for the examples i could read the article to see what they think but it was your question not theirs.

Originally Posted by AetheLove

We take good care of people because they have been endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. The Constitution sets the groundwork for how we go about preserving those rights, and it also sets the groundwork for how we go about dealing with people who forfeit - perhaps temporarily - some of those rights. It makes note of cruel and unusual punishment right along with guarantees of free speech.

I'd be comfortable revisiting the 'why' of how we set a standard of care for inmates. It doesn't seem like it'd be productive though. Some people in this forum are cheering for anal-rape as a special bonus for anyone who gets convicted of any crime. That's fucked up. Vengeance isn't Justice, but it still seems to be popular.

Cheers,


AetheLove

I guess in order to make any head way with this conversation we have to see where someone thinks the line for cruel and unusual punishment is. To me i see nothing wrong with someone who is paying their debt to society for crimes they commit in a prison getting free health care, dental, housing, drink (water), and food (bologna sandwiches). I dont see anything cruel or unusual in that.

As for the butt raping i can see the up side and down side (from the victims stand point) depending on why the person went to prison. I disagree with you on vengeance not being justice. In some cases its the only real justice.

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

I already said even i think they still get to stay healthy. So what good is the link?

Cause the link I posted didn't talk about serving prisoners bologna, which you seem to have a hard-on for. It talked about a suit filed because Arpaio was feeding prisoners moldy bread, rotten fruit and shit like that, and the ACLU won the suit, thereby proving in the eyes of the law that Arpaio was feeding prisoners moldy bread and rotten fruit. That kind of goes against your "they still get to stay healthy" shtick. Oh, and he denied them healthcare and meds for serious issues too.

So basically, Arpaio is a jackass.

~Morningfrost

Originally Posted by Morningfrost

Cause the link I posted didn't talk about serving prisoners bologna, which you seem to have a hard-on for. It talked about a suit filed because Arpaio was feeding prisoners moldy bread, rotten fruit and shit like that, and the ACLU won the suit, thereby proving in the eyes of the law that Arpaio was feeding prisoners moldy bread and rotten fruit. That kind of goes against your "they still get to stay healthy" shtick. Oh, and he denied them healthcare and meds for serious issues too.

So basically, Arpaio is a jackass.

~Morningfrost

Once again. Im not supporting him im supporting the method applied. The reason i keep saying bologna sandwiches is because that was one of the items that got him in the news originally. So you can keep trying to drag it back to him all you want but i have never said i backed him.

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

Once again. Im not supporting him im supporting the method applied. The reason i keep saying bologna sandwiches is because that was one of the items that got him in the news originally. So you can keep trying to drag it back to him all you want but i have never said i backed him.

At some point though, there's a line crossed when it comes to treatment of prisoners. I agree that prisoners shouldn't be getting lavish meals, HBO, fancy gyms and shit like that....but at some point things just go a bit far. I don't have an issue with prisoners being fed nothing but bologna sandwiches, but again things went waaaay too far in this case.

There also needs to be a distinction between pre-trial detainees and convicted criminals. I think giving minimal amenities to pre-trial detainees just plain isn't right. They haven't been convicted of anything yet, haven't faced a jury of their peers, and they're still presumed innocent. So hitting them with the chain gang and bologna sandwich treatment is definitely stepping over the line there.

~Morningfrost