In what is commonly called “pay-to-stay” or “private jail,” a constellation of small city jails — at least 26 of them in Los Angeles and Orange counties — open their doors to defendants who can afford the option.
I hate everything about this, but the part I hate more than everything else is how ‘normal’ jails being rife with violence and abuse is just treated as a matter of fact, not as something that needs to be fixed.
“They tried to tell me he was afraid of the general population … but that’s part of jail,” he said in a recent interview. “That’s what makes you not want to go back, it being such a horrible experience.”
No it fucking shouldn’t be, what the hell is wrong with these people?
Yeah the reason you don’t want to go back is that you aren’t allowed to leave for an extended period of time. We need to be fostering jails that leave people capable of reintegration to society.
Yeah, prison reform is very badly needed in this country.
Essentially torturing people and subjecting them horrific conditions has never left a person better off than they were before.
This is why we need educated, qualified, and ethically motivated people to make decisions about how places like prisons are run. Not greedy, soulless, corporate husks who exist purely to accumulate money.
The for profit prison system needs to be abolished.
In Australia we don’t have the slave workhouses you have in the states, but our justice system is still focused on retribution rather than rehabilitation.
No, I haven’t. I don’t see how that has any relevance, but if you have and disagree with me, please explain why?
To be clear (and head off one potential objection), I’m not saying all jails are actually as awful as they make them sound (as I really don’t know), I’m referring specifically to the tone of the article, which definitely paints a very specific picture and then normalizes it.
Well, you’re completely missing the point of the comment you were originally replying to, so this is really another topic entirely. I don’t have all the answers, but there are other countries who seem to have it closer to figured out than we do, so we could start by taking notes from them. Acting like this is an unsolvable problem isn’t helping anything.
What was the point of your comment then? I’m sorry I missed it.
Tangentially then, I’d suggest to you that while it is useful to adopt more therapeutic models of inmate care through a rehabilitation focused correctional centre, ultimately the effort required to change behaviour at the point of incarceration is inordinate. (Take a read: https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.3.081806.112833)
Crime (and violence) is and remains a social problem and directing funding and effort near the end of a criminal episode (at the point of incarceration) is not as effective as providing a decent social safety net that provides for a stable household and gives children a chance denied to their parents. (Old paper but gives you an idea as to the complexity and unreliability of solving this: https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles/171676.pdf)
If I have given the impression that I think this is unsolvable I apologise, that’s not at all my position.
The original comment was really just intended to point out the shit take in the article. It spends a lot of time talking about how bad people can pay money to get jail accommodations that are less awful, but its tone is overwhelmingly that the problem is that nicer accommodations are available for people who pay (which I do agree should not be a thing), but its implication is that everyone should have to be subject to the same awful conditions, not that the conditions should be improved for everyone regardless of their economic position. It sounds like they’re saying, ‘Some criminals are able to spend their time in jail in conditions that aren’t awful and dangerous, isn’t that terrible? You should be angry about that.’
The stance I was taking is that if we’re going to be mad about something, it should be that jails are so awful by default.
This seems to suggest that low-effort, generic solutions don’t work, but that more personalized, targeted solutions tailored to the individual are effective. That tracks with what I think we all would assume to be true.
I think it’s also worth noting that the article is talking about jails, not prisons. In theory, criminals sentenced to time in jail, rather than prison, would be the prime candidates for a focus on reducing recidivism, rehabilitation, and re-integration into society.
I hate everything about this, but the part I hate more than everything else is how ‘normal’ jails being rife with violence and abuse is just treated as a matter of fact, not as something that needs to be fixed.
No it fucking shouldn’t be, what the hell is wrong with these people?
Yeah the reason you don’t want to go back is that you aren’t allowed to leave for an extended period of time. We need to be fostering jails that leave people capable of reintegration to society.
Yeah, prison reform is very badly needed in this country.
Essentially torturing people and subjecting them horrific conditions has never left a person better off than they were before.
This is why we need educated, qualified, and ethically motivated people to make decisions about how places like prisons are run. Not greedy, soulless, corporate husks who exist purely to accumulate money.
The for profit prison system needs to be abolished.
we dont have a justice system. we have a revenge system. it all makes sense when you view it from its reality.
Well if we had reform oriented prisons we would run out of slave labor, duh. That’s why it’s in the constitution 🦅🦅
In Australia we don’t have the slave workhouses you have in the states, but our justice system is still focused on retribution rather than rehabilitation.
Unsurprisingly, both countries started in part as British penal colonies for debtors and convicts.
Hurt people hurt people on a cultural scale
…stop being right!
You ever been to jail?
GOOD point.
They forgot the part where only people who have been in jail can comment on it.
I’d like to gauge how informed someone is on a topic before taking them too seriously.
EXACTLY. And only former prisoners can be informed on the topic of jails/prisons.
No, I haven’t. I don’t see how that has any relevance, but if you have and disagree with me, please explain why?
To be clear (and head off one potential objection), I’m not saying all jails are actually as awful as they make them sound (as I really don’t know), I’m referring specifically to the tone of the article, which definitely paints a very specific picture and then normalizes it.
Well it’s fine to have the sentiment you have (no violence in jails) but I’m really interested in how you’d propose to achieve that?
Well, you’re completely missing the point of the comment you were originally replying to, so this is really another topic entirely. I don’t have all the answers, but there are other countries who seem to have it closer to figured out than we do, so we could start by taking notes from them. Acting like this is an unsolvable problem isn’t helping anything.
What was the point of your comment then? I’m sorry I missed it.
Tangentially then, I’d suggest to you that while it is useful to adopt more therapeutic models of inmate care through a rehabilitation focused correctional centre, ultimately the effort required to change behaviour at the point of incarceration is inordinate. (Take a read: https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.3.081806.112833)
Crime (and violence) is and remains a social problem and directing funding and effort near the end of a criminal episode (at the point of incarceration) is not as effective as providing a decent social safety net that provides for a stable household and gives children a chance denied to their parents. (Old paper but gives you an idea as to the complexity and unreliability of solving this: https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles/171676.pdf)
If I have given the impression that I think this is unsolvable I apologise, that’s not at all my position.
The original comment was really just intended to point out the shit take in the article. It spends a lot of time talking about how bad people can pay money to get jail accommodations that are less awful, but its tone is overwhelmingly that the problem is that nicer accommodations are available for people who pay (which I do agree should not be a thing), but its implication is that everyone should have to be subject to the same awful conditions, not that the conditions should be improved for everyone regardless of their economic position. It sounds like they’re saying, ‘Some criminals are able to spend their time in jail in conditions that aren’t awful and dangerous, isn’t that terrible? You should be angry about that.’
The stance I was taking is that if we’re going to be mad about something, it should be that jails are so awful by default.
I don’t have access to this journal, unfortunately.
This seems to suggest that low-effort, generic solutions don’t work, but that more personalized, targeted solutions tailored to the individual are effective. That tracks with what I think we all would assume to be true.
I think it’s also worth noting that the article is talking about jails, not prisons. In theory, criminals sentenced to time in jail, rather than prison, would be the prime candidates for a focus on reducing recidivism, rehabilitation, and re-integration into society.
What kind of question is that?
See This comment