The Boston Globe: Jeff Jacoby: 'If Supreme Court Had Term Limits, Confirmations Wouldn't be So Bloody'

The Boston Globe: Opinion- Jeff Jacoby- If Supreme Court Had Term Limits, Confirmations Wouldn't be So Bloody

For the life of me I don’t understand why two of the most important jobs in America which is being a U.S. Justice and public school teacher, don’t have to deal with the same accountability and in some cases no accountability as everyone else in America. Why is it that U.S. Justice’s and public school teachers don’t have to prove they deserve to keep their jobs and are doing a good job. And have to make a case to their superior that they should continue working in that same position. With their superior saying that they either deserve to keep their job, or perhaps should be released, be promoted, given a raise, or a pay cut.

But that is how the U.S. Supreme Court and the broader Federal judiciary operates. They’re given lifetime appointments and once appointed they can only be removed through impeachment and conviction by Congress. And only through serious ethical and criminal violations. Not for simply doing a bad job. And where I agree with Jeff Jacoby (for perhaps the first time in my life) is that is a big problem. And why Congress is so partisan right now, especially in the Senate where the two parties have to work together just to run the place properly. Because the Supreme Court and judiciary is always in play every two years during the Congressional elections with both parties fighting to win back or keep control of the Senate. To appoint or block Federal judicial appointments.

My other issue with the U.S. Supreme Court is the simple size of it. We’re a huge country of three-hundred and twenty-million people, with fifty states and some states that would make big countries. Like Alaska, California, Texas and Montana. And yet we only have nine U.S. Justice’s including the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. And they have all of this power and can literally throw out laws passed by Congress and executive orders from the President with their judicial review that has become very political. And in many cases looks like laws get thrown out, because 5-9 Justice’s disagree with the laws. Instead of ruling on the constitutionality of them. Even though the Supreme Court has no one to answer to and has practically hundred-percent job security. Short of committing ethical or criminal violations.

Under the U.S. Constitution, Congress gets regulate the size and scope of the Supreme Court and broader judiciary. There’s no set limits for how large or small the court should be. You don’t need a constitutional amendment to reform the court. We need to start holding U.S. Justice’s accountable for their decisions. I’m not talking about making it democratic, but simply accountable. We need to end lifetime appointments and have Justice’s come up for renomination after their terms are up. And let the President decide if that Justice should be reappointed or not. With the Senate deciding on that reconfirmation. Or weighing in on a new appointment for that seat from a new nominee. And then expand the court to 50-52. One Justice for each state so the whole country can be represented on it.

The old phrase ‘power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely’, could have been written for the U.S. Supreme Court. This is too important of an institution for it to be unaccountable in a country this large, free, democratic and important. U.S. Justice’s and Judges in general, should have to prove their qualifications and job performance on their job just like most if not all Americans. (Except for public employees. Ha, ha!) And you do this by holding them accountable for their judgment and expanding the court so more Americans are represented there. Not with a vote, but knowing that someone who comes from their state is up there representing them and defending the U.S. Constitution. And will need to do a good job in order to keep it.

CNN: World News Special- Pelican Bay State Prison

Source: CNN- News Anchor Susan Rook-

Source:The New Democrat

First of all, just to speak of Susan Rook at CNN. I miss her, I wish she would come back. She’s so freakin cute and sweet and makes hard news worth listening to and watching just with her beautiful baby-face and sweet voice. She still looks great today from the few shots I’ve seen of her online. And works as a photographer and as an agent. She’s still pretty active, just not as a news anchor.

Now as far as Pelican Bay, maybe I should be careful how I put this, but if there’s such a thing as a human zoo it would be called Pelican Bay. Or the Colorado State Maximum Security Prison. Except that animals at zoos are able to move around in their yard and are probably outside most of the day. And can eat as much as they can handle and get plenty of exercise. As well as both human and animal contact. You get almost none of that if you’re an inmate at Pelican Bay.

I’m sure most if not all the inmates at Pelican Bay are quite frankly hard-core assholes who deserve to be at a maximum security prison. But there’s a right way to do that and the wrong way. The wrong way treats these people as if they’re wild animals like grizzly bears or tigers or something. And when you treat people like that, that is how they’re going to behave. But if you punish bad behavior while at the same time giving people incentive to improve, that is what will happen in most cases. The whole carrot and stick approach.
Bat Man-CNN: World News Special- Pelican Bay State Prison 

The Washington Post: Christopher Ingraham: The Orwellian Deception of Chuck Grassley's Leniency Industrial Complex

Source:The New Democrat

Anyone who calls them self a Conservative and especially a fiscal Conservative, but who supports the American Prison Industrial Complex and our current criminal justice system, I at the very least would question how fiscally conservative are you. I would also question how conservative you are when you have Conservative Republicans in Congress like Senators Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and Mike Lee, who oppose our Prison Industrial Complex and our criminal justice system as is. At least when it comes to sentencing non-violent offenders in America.

Seriously, what is fiscally conservative about locking non-violent drug offenders who aren’t dealers but users in prison for 3-5 years if not longer? Especially when a lot of these people are educated and productive already, or could be in college, or vocational school, or in a job training program getting the education they need to be successful and productive citizens in life. But no, the so-called Modern Conservative, Neoconservative really, says, “no, what we should do instead is have those offenders locked up in prison sitting in cells most of the time. And when they are out of their cells, they are sweeping floors or making license plates, or something.”

Is the so-called fiscal Conservative or Modern Conservative aware that locking up these productive young people who also happen to be non-violent drug users who are only guilty of possessing or using illegal drugs comes at the cost of taxpayers? That taxpayers get stuck paying for the cost of living of offenders who otherwise could support themselves on the outside? Money that government has to take from individuals through taxation to spend on people in prison who otherwise could be on the outside earning a living and paying taxes. Instead of sitting in prison and collecting taxes.

A true fiscal Conservative would say, “government should only spend what it needs to in order to perform the duties that we need to as a country. And should spend that money as fiscally responsible as possible.” And part of that is not locking people up in prison, which is the most expensive way to house people, that don’t need to be in prison. That could be in drug rehab or halfway houses at their expense by the way. Or in college, a vocational school, or a job training program, preparing for life as a productive adult.

The Smarter Sentencing Act, which is a bipartisan criminal justice reform bill in the U.S. Senate, supported by the Senators that I mentioned earlier, is not about being soft on crime. But being smart on crime and treating offenders based on the treat that they represent to society. You go hard on violent offenders and other serious offenders. But you’re more lenient on offenders who don’t represent a serious threat, if any threat to the country.

Youth Justice NC: North Carolina's School to Prison Pipeline

Source:The FreeState

If you look at our current prison inmate population, you’ll see a lot of prison inmates who didn’t finish high school before they came to prison, or barely finished high school. If you look at a lot of our juvenile inmate population, kids that should be in school, but because of their bad behavior and committing felony’s while still being juveniles, or have been expelled from high school. You see a lot of juveniles that our education system hasn’t reached yet. 

You see people who are headed down the road of starting criminal careers and entering our criminal justice system as adults. After they’ve committed crimes against society. If you look at our criminal gangs, organized crime families, you see a lot of people who dropped out of high school to become a criminals. And of course end up in jail or prison at some point in their careers.

So I believe the answers to solving the problems of overcrowded prisons and bringing down our prison population in the future are fairly simple. But hard to apply and it gets to public education. Quality public education, graduating more students from high school with good educations, so they can move on to college, vocational school, the military, law Enforcement, foreign service, to use as examples. 

So they can go down the road of becoming productive citizens in society and not becoming criminals by simply preventing crimes in the future by preventing people from becoming criminals. And that gets to a better public education system, including educating our juvenile offenders before they become career criminals. Crime prevention really is about public education. 

I would argue especially for students in low-income high crime areas. Where there may be more opportunities to get involved in organized crime. So the better we educate our students and the more students we reach, the less career criminals we’ll have in the future.

Kristen Cherye: America's Hardest Prisons- National Geographic Documentary

Source: Kristen Cherye-

Source:Kristen Cherye 

This is what happens when you house the worst of the worst together. You have all of these violent criminal inmates who see their time in prison as nothing, but survival. And making their lives as comfortable as possible. And I do not have a problem housing these people together to isolate them from inmates in other prisons who simply want to do their time and go home. Or make their life sentence or long-term prison sentence as comfortable as possible. As long as these prisons are doing whatever they can to improve the behavior of these inmates. And showing them what life can be like if they behave in prison and give them opportunities and incentives to improve their behavior so they can prepare themselves for life on the outside. Or have a productive life in prison if they are doing life sentences. But if prison is nothing more than a zoo or warehouse for the worst amongst us and it just becomes about survival for the staff there, you are going to continue to see violent outbursts

CBS News: 60 Minute Special: Mike Wallace, Pelican Bay State Prison

Source:FreeState Now

Pelican Bay State Prison houses some of the worst criminals in California. Which means some of the worst in the United States as well when you have cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco and other large cities with crime problems. But that doesn’t mean these people should be treated like animals either. And if you look at their solitary confinement unit that is essentially how those inmates are treated locked in a cage twenty-three hours a day or more. 

Inmates with nothing to do all day, but stare at walls, perhaps try to sleep and then be given what is called food. Stuff that you might serve animals instead that doesn’t fill adult men up for the most part without enough to eat. When you treat people like animals especially a violent criminal population that you see in a Pelican Bay, that is exactly what you are going to get animal behavior from people who’ve hurt and killed people in the past. 

Violent felons who won’t hesitate to hurt innocent people again in the future if they feel threatened. Because this is what they know and what they do and haven't been given help to deal with their violent anger. Which is my main problem with Pelican Bay because it makes its violent population even worst. Rather than working to improve the behavior of these inmates.

CDC's Worst Nightmare: 'Inside SuperMax'

Source:CDC's Worst Nightmare- Kids, don't end up like these guys.

"Inside Super Max- Part 1. Kern Valley State Prison." 

From CDC's Worst Nightmare

For me at least it is not a question of whether we need super max prisons or not. The answer is obvious of course we do with all of the violent inmates and criminals that we have and in a lot of cases inmates that are so violent and lack conscience so much that they can’t control their violent behavior. And even enjoy hurting people so of course we need institutions to deal with these people.

The question at least for me is how should we deal with these inmates. The status-quo would be do what we are doing as a country in most cases which is to warehouse them and hope they do not get worst and that these institutions the staff can deal with these people, or try to improve their behavior or give them an out from their destructive behavior. Incentive for them to improve their lives in prison in the time that they do. 

Rehabilitation so these inmates are easier to manage while in prison, but also for the inmates who get out an opportunity for them to be successful in prison so they can be successful on the outside and never have to come back to prison and based on the super max prisons that we have. I also believe the answer to this question is obvious as well with how hard these inmates are to manage and how violent they still are while in these prisons.

That even super max prisons with the increase in security need to be institutions where inmates have opportunities to improve themselves. If for no other reason so they can be transferred to a regular maximum security prison. And have the opportunity to get better rehabilitated with better educational and work opportunities, so they can be productive, especially if they have a release date.  

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on WordPress.

Prison Reform Movement: Rina Palta: ACLU: Counties Opting For Incarceration, Not Rehabilitation

Source: The Sacramento Bee-

Source:Prison Reform Movement

California has so many people in their corrections system as far as inmates. And so many inmates that they are now under a court order to reduce the size of their inmate population. Not by accident because they arrest too many people. Fill up their prisons with inmates, basically just warehousing them. There are some exceptions and are left to wonder what to do with them once they reach overcrowding, for a State thats apparently as blue as California, That hasn’t voted Republican for President since 1988, they have a lot of “Bad Laws”, they simple incarcerate too many people who don’t represent a major threat to society. And after they do incarcerate these people, they don’t do a lot to prepare them for once they are released from prison.

California has what I would call a non-violent offender crisis. They incarcerate way too many people for drug abuse and drug obsession, when getting these people into drug rehab and halfway houses at their expense would save California taxpayers a lot of money. California had an opportunity to repeal one of their “Bad Laws” in 2010. To decriminalize marijuana and stop arresting people for use or possession of marijuana, which would’ve save their corrections system and Law enforcement billions of dollars, but that failed. 

And California is back where they started. But they could do things like drug rehab and halfway houses at the inmates expense. For Petty Offenders, people who are in prison for dumb mistakes. Like shoplifting and Drug Crimes. California could save its corrections system and law enforcement billions of dollars just with sentencing reform, keeping a lot of their non-violent Offenders out of prison and into halfway houses or drug rehab at the offenders expense. 

This would save California a lot of prison space for people who need to be there, putting their inmates to work and paying them so they can cover their cost of living and repealing their bad laws. And they would dramatically lower the size of their inmate population and still be able to protect the state.
The Sacramento Bee: Inside California's Prisons- Video of Cell Extraction

Prison Reform Movement: Teshia Naidoo: Sane Drug Laws: How California May Finally Stop Prison OverCrowding

Source:The Free State  

California is the perfect example of why and how the War on Drugs in America is stupid. This is a State thats swamped in debt, that still has double figure unemployment. That still has a high crime rate and one of the highest inmate populations per-capita in the country as well as the largest inmate population in numbers. They are also one of the highest taxed states, so if I was a Californian I would be asking why, I’m not getting much of a bang for my tax bucks. 

And yet California has been doing the same things for the last ten years. They recalled GOV. Grey Davis partially because of its debt issues and the economy wasn’t doing very well. Ten years later they are still facing the same problems and have even more people locked up in this State. If I was a Californian, I would want my State Government to look at what its doing. Admit the obvious finally and change course. Find ways to get more out of the taxes that Californians are forced to pay every year. And its corrections system, probably the most expensive in the Union, is a great first place to start and overhaul it. 

Start with the War on Drugs, stop arresting free adults for smoking or possessing marijuana. Stop sending heroin and cocaine addicts to prison and get them in drug rehab at their expense. Stop sending non-violent offenders to prison who don’t represent a major threat to society. And get them in halfway houses at their expense. Stop sending these people to prison and save the prisons for the offenders who need to be there.

With GOV. Jerry Brown being a former Attorney General, he should know exactly how overcrowded their corrections system is and that it needs to be reformed and be more cost- effective. And hopefully he’ll put in the reforms to make that happen and save Californian Tax Payers billions of dollars.

The Daily Caller: Molly Gill: Before Creating Any More New Crimes, Congress Should Reform the Penalties it Made Decades Ago

Source: The Daily Caller-

Source:The Daily Caller

Over criminalization are the perfect two words put together to describe why America has so many people in either jail or prison. We have so many victimless crimes like anti-gambling laws, anti-prostitution laws, the War on Drugs should be first on the list. But how about some states in the union who have anti-homosexual laws and if New York City ever had its way people could be arrested for what they eat and drink as well. What is so progressive about that? I fail to see any progress there.

You eliminate victimless crime laws and you would dramatically reduce our prison population. You reform laws where there are real victims involved where a penalty needs to be imposed for the good of society like shoplifting to use as an example and people who sell or possess small amounts of illegal narcotics and you also dramatically reduce your prison population. No crime would not go up because now most of these activities and again talking about victimless crimes would now be legal.

Representative Bob Goodlatte who is Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee put together a House task force dealing with the over criminalization in America and to look at why we have so many people in  prison early in this Congress. Which is a good first step even though Representative Goodlatte also is in favor of a constitutional amendment to outlaw pornography which would just add to the problem over criminalization. But there is bipartisan support to reduce our prison population and reform some of our laws. So this is not some far-lefty or anarchist conspiracy on why we have so many people in prison.
Rutherford Institute: John Whitehead- On Target Points: Over-Criminalization of America

Constitution Daily: Lyle Denniston: 'The Constitution Outside The Courts: The U.S. Sentencing Commission'

From Constitution Daily

Making punishment fit the crime should be an obvious statement if it isn't, but if you look at our criminal justice system that of course is not always the case. We have thousands if not more people doing five years or more for simple drug possession and in a lot of times that is their first offense. Look at the War on Drugs where we have thousands of people doing long sentences again for drug possession, or selling small amounts of marijuana and other illegal narcotics. Doing long sentences for selling things that people want to buy, have and use.

And anyone still wondering why we have two-million or more people in prison in America? I sure as hell am not and by the way we have the largest prison population in the developed world. And we are supposed to be this beacon of freedom and great free society this liberal democracy that everyone else wants to be. It is hard to make the case that we are those great things when we have so many people in prison that do not represent major if any threats to society and are doing time in a lot of cases for what they did to themselves. Or providing services that others wanted from them.

I'm not a fan of illegal narcotics including marijuana even though I do support marijuana legalization. I'm not a fan of gambling or prostitution. But just because I don't like these activities doesn't mean I want to arrest people who choose to engage in them. There are much better more cost effective ways to dealing with activities that come with high risks including tobacco, junk food and soft drinks than arresting people and locking them up for engaging in those activities. It is called regulation to make sure non-adults aren't involved in them and making sure that adults who are involved in them know what they are getting into.

And I'm referring to gambling and prostitution mostly. But with lets dangerous products that people choose to use like alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, soft drinks and junk food instead of expanding the War on Drugs which is what some nanny statists on the progressive Left want to do. Again regulate them so people know exactly what they are consuming and tax them for it so Americans who choose to live healthy don't get stuck with the health care bills of people who choose not to live healthy.

But that is just one way to cut the prison population and create that free society and liberal democracy that a lot of Americans on the Left and Right do want. Another way would be to say "prison and jail are not always the answers and they aren't always the first answers either". When we are talking about low-level offenses and instead look at halfway houses, community housing, community service, probational release where offenders aren't free or in incarcerated, but living in a halfway house type environment as they are also working so they can pay their rent outside of the home. And getting treated for why they are there in the first place.

We put in policies like this and we'll have all of the jail and prison space needed for real hardcore criminals that need to be in prison. Violent offenders and organize criminals, but also white collar criminals who represent a serious threat to the economy and Americans economic wellbeing. Instead of having so many overcrowded prisons in America full of not only people that we have to have in prison, but with offenders who do not need to be there.

Sheldon Richman: Crime & Punishment in a Free Society

Source:The Future of Freedom Foundation

Before you talk about crime and punishment in a free society you should first talk about what exactly is crime and punishment and what is a free society. If you are currently confined in prison as a convict or in jail either serving a light sentence as far as time, or awaiting trial for a felony, well obviously your world or society is not free. I mean seriously what sober person in their right mind not mentally challenged in any way would choose to live in prison or jail. But what is crime and punishment? Well I'll tell you what it should be which is punishment for crimes against society and innocent people's freedom. Especially the Right to Life that jail or prison is the only option as a suitable punishment for the offender once convicted.

A free society is not the freedom to do whatever the hell you want including hurting innocent people. Which is what Neoconservatives and to a certain extent Progressives seem to think it is. Which is why I'm neither a Neoconservative or Progressive. A free society is where a society where the people have the right to mind their own business and manage their own individual affairs. As well as being held responsible for how they manage their own affairs. Where law enforcement comes in is to manage how people interact with each other. Not arrest people for what they do to themselves and try to protect people from themselves.

But that is not how crime and punishment works in America. You can be a victim of a real crime with the offender getting away with it because law enforcement, or the prosecution, or a combination of both screws up the case with the guilty walking away because their constitutional rights were violated. And you can end up doing time in jail or prison for something that is not really a crime in a true free society. But government has taken upon itself to try to protect us from ourselves. Like being arrested for gambling your own money. Or being arrested for possessing or using pot to use as examples.

We have roughly two-million Americans give or take in one form of incarceration in the United States if you add up federal, state and local government's. And a big reason for that and not the only reason is because America is truly not a free society. We are freer than most if not everyone else when it comes to individual rights and personal freedom. But a big reason why we have so many Americans in prison is because we arrest people for either their own good. Or sending people to state or federal prison when they could've been given probation, or sent to a halfway house, county jail or even rehab.

It is not just that we aren't a true free society that America has no many prisoners. But also because we over-sentence and too many times use prison as the first if not only option when it comes to felonies in America. And I'm talking about real crimes, but also things where the prison should be the last option because the only person the offender is hurting is them self. The War on Drugs comes to mind damn fast. And if you are thinking I'm not offering any solutions to this problem, think again. Because I already have, but I'll repeat them. Make America a true free society and don't use prison as the first option for lower-level felonies especially where there are better options available.

Prison Movement's Weblog: Yuram Abdullah Weiler: Profit From Prisoners: How UNICOR Capitalizes on Inmate Labor

Prison Movement's Weblog: Opinion: Yuram Abdullah Weiler: Profit From Prisoners: How UNICOR Capitalizes on Inmate Labor

The United States has a high convict recidivism rate, i.e., a large percentage of our prison inmates come back to prison after they finish their sentences.   70 % of ex-convicts return to prison. We also have a relatively large prison population.  About 1 of every 100 Americans is either in prison, on parole, or under some other type of supervised probation.

Because of these factors, we have high prison costs.  Prisons, as they are currently structured do not pay for themselves. There are a few exceptions to that among state prisons that are like family farms.  There are a few prisons in Louisiana where inmates work full-time producing food and other products for the institution but also to sell on the market and to other government agencies.

This post is about how to reduce the recidivism rate, the prison population and the associated  high costs.  The first step is educating the inmates who've decided that they want to improve themselves and end their criminal careers.  Once they have marketable skills, they can  work in prison factories and other prison business's and make a living for themselves and their families.

We should make prison industries real enterprises producing products for the prisons but also for other government agencies and the open market as well.  Local business could manage these industries  using the inmate population as their staff.  Instead of paying the inmates 20 cents or a dollar an hour, as is done now, they could pay them the local going rate for the work that they do.

Los Angeles Times: A New Way to Attack Social Programs: Pay For Performance Projects

Source:Los Angeles Times 

Here’s an area where the public sector can work with the private sector and it is in the area of self-improvement for convicted inmates. So they can build up their lives and have a real shot at succeeding on the outside making a good living legally. And never needing to go back to jail or prison. It is pretty clear that locking up prison inmates and simply just keeping them there until their sentence is over, or just simply releasing them on the outside expecting to fit back into civilized society on their own, does not work. And that we need a new approach and this is where a public/private partnership could work.

If you want to talk about what happens to ex-inmates once they get out of prison as far as empowering them to build a successful life for themselves, we should say that all ex-inmates upon release from prison would then have to serve at a halfway house at their expense. Which would be like an apartment building or hotel for ex-offenders where they would stay and get help finding a job. And whatever rehabilitation service they may need as well so they can function successfully in society. Where they would have an outside job while still staying at the halfway house. Plus having a job inside the halfway house to help keep the place running.

The way this would work would be pretty simple. A prison releases inmates and then finds a halfway house for those inmates based on applications these places send to prisons. And then they get rewarded with the contracts to manage these ex-inmates in their houses. Until they are completely ready to be independent and live completely on their own. And the beauty of this approach is that the ex-inmates would pay for these services themselves. With money they get paid from their jobs outside of these homes.

Bat Man: 60 Minutes, Corcoran State Prison (1997)

Source:FreeState Now

This is about the gladiator fights that went on at Corcoran State Prison in the California in the early and mid 1990s. That were run by Corcoran guards and set up by them. Where guards there would find inmates who didn’t like each other, or perhaps didn’t even know each other, to fight each other. And I believe put money on the fights that the inmates wouldn’t see a dime of. What happened at Corcoran is just another example of prison slave labor and perhaps the prison industrial complex as a whole. Where inmates are exploited for profits by corporations who make money from taxpayers and the inmates.

I’ve seen the MSNBC Lockup documentary on Corcoran and I’ve seen other shows about Corcoran. And to me at least it looks like a fairly efficient prison. Where some of the worst and most violent and probably evil prison inmates and criminals in America, are serving their time at Corcoran. And lot of them are their for life and doing sentences close to that. And yet what I’ve seen at least Corcoran looks like a fairly well run prison. Especially considering how tight their budget is and the lack of resources that California puts into Corcoran and how understaffed they are. And yet they generally do a pretty good job. But those gladiator fights did happen there.

Solitary Watch: Pat Nolan on Prison Fellowships

Source:FreeState Now

Former Nixon White House Counsel Chuck Colson, after he got out of prison in I believe the mid 1970s due to Watergate, started a prison fellowship program to prepare prison inmates for life on the outside. Both while they are still prison, but for ex-offenders who’ve already been released from prison. Something our prisons should be doing today, but aren’t for the most part. Which is why we have so many ex-offenders who return to prison.

If you operate a prison, then you’re doing it at taxpayer expense. Even if it is a private prison and with tax dollars being so precious and limited, the idea should be to get the best investment possible for those limited tax dollars that for the most part come from hardworking taxpayers. So if you’re going to have so many people in prison at the same time, how about give them incentive to improve their lives while in prison. But also so when they get out of prison, which most American inmates do. So they don’t come back to prison again.

CNN: NewsRoom: A Look at Rikers Island Jail

Source:FreeState Now

Rikers Island prison or jail is probably the size of a lot of prisons in big states. And part of that has to do with the fact that New York City is a city of 7.5-8M people, a size of a big state in America. Not a place any good and free person would want to go to, meaning Rikers Island, which is why we should never put ourself in a position that would land us in a jail/prison like that. 

But what Rikers is in the business to do, is to house defendants. Who are awaiting trial as well as inmates who are doing short sentences. Rikers does a very good job of. The inmates who behave themselves and have good records, are able to work and go to school as well as work on their own cases. And they can go to religious services if they choose to, as well as other rehabilitation services. 

Self-improvement services including drug treatment, which is a big reason why we have so many people in prison in this country. This is not just a jail where people are simply warehoused. But a place where they can make good use of the time that they do there, which should be purpose of jails and prisons.

Los Angeles Times: Life Without Parole is Too Harsh For Young Killers

Source:FreeState Now

When we are talking about juvenile offenders, especially violent juvenile offenders, juveniles who’ve murdered, committed manslaughter. assault and battery, leaving their victims with indefinite damage, raped people and other horrible crimes, a couple of questions have to be answered. Can we afford to give up on these minors and just lock them up and watch them become better criminals in prison? What’s the proper punishment for them, that they deserve and isn’t too harsh? I believe in the notion do the crime, you do the time.

To let juvenile offenders off the hook, just because they are juveniles, is irresponsible and sends the wrong message. Whether its intentional or unintentional. That, “if you do the crime and are a juvenile, we’ll let you get away with it.” But I also I believe in fair sentencing and I’ll explain what I mean by that. Any juvenile who commits murder and then is convicted of it, has to be given a strong sentence and I don’t care how old they are when they commit murder. Or any other violent crime. And no I’m not talking about the death penalty, at least for Convicted Murderers under 21.

But we also can’t afford to give up on these juveniles either. We simply can’t afford that as a society, financially, or anything else. If you’re 15-16 when sentenced to prison, assuming you live a normal life as far as years, if you’re sentenced to a life sentence and survive it into your senior years, or longer, you could be looking at 50-60 years in prison at taxpayers expense. Also we don’t need any other career criminals in prison. We should be moving to get these inmates past this point in their lives, proper sentences.

The proper sentence for convicted murderers who were juvenile offenders, is 25-Life. Meaning they would only be eligible for parole, if they meet some basic standards in prison during those 25 years. They take responsibility for their crime, or crimes, they apologize for it. They finish and further their education in prison. High school diploma, or GED, a college, or vocational degree. They hold a good job in prison and have a good record there. They seek and complete the proper counseling while in prison. They have a good record while in prison. And they would have to complete all of these things. Just to be eligible for parole after 25 years. They wouldn’t automatically get a parole hearing after the 25 years.

Again life without parole for juvenile offenders, even violent offenders, is too much. And we can’t afford it, but at the same time they have to be properly sentenced so they are properly punished for their crimes. So with 25-Life and then be eligible for parole after certain conditions are met, would be the proper balance we would need with juvenile violent offenders.