prison rape

I also disagree with the idea that "the proles" wouldn't support prison reform aimed at eliminating rape. I suspect that the majority of voters would support such reform, so long as the issue was framed properly. I admit that the distance between here and there is vast. Still, if the citizen activists who pushed for civil rights reform in the 40s and 50s had been deterred by the seeming impossibility of the task, or if they had waited for altruistic politicians to do the heavy lifting, then we might still have colored drinking fountains in Selma.

American prisons will continue to be a sickening national shame only as long as "we the people" continue to stand for it.

***

"there are things about going to prison that are WAY WORSE than being raped."
-- bell labs

??? Please to explain.

these things would be way worse than rape.

Frequent, brutal, AIDS-loaded anal rape + getting to do what you want + getting to see friends & fam = bad.

No rape + imprisonment + no friends & fam = bad.

I think any attempt to portray one of these as "WAY WORSE" than the other is kinda silly. Bad = bad.

but, it's not at the top of the list of things that worry me, my family, or my father, who is going to jail. maybe this is because he will most likely end up in a medium or min security federal prison where it's not much of a problem, but, i don't know, he's much sadder about the fact that he will probably be in his 70s when he gets out and have missed a big chunk of his life.

My two-part solution:

1. Emprisonment should not be punitive, but pragmatic. Only incarcerate people who pose a real danger to society. A mere handful would require incarceration, which would be lifelong, of course, unless a remedy was found for their dangerousness. Prison should be comfortable. Unkindness, even to intractable child-molesters, is unnecessary and corrosive to the morale of society.

2. Hire police and corrections officers by lottery, the way we appoint citizens for jury duty. A two year term of service?
Anyone who WANTS to carry a gun and boss others around IS AUTOMATICALLY DISQUALIFIED.

THERE. WHEN I AM QUEEN THAT IS HOW IT SHALL BE.

that's terrible, i'm really sorry.

rape in prisons shouldn't happen, rape outside of prisons shouldn't happen, etc. i'm not opposed to anyone championing this as their cause, i just think things like there are other things to talk about reforming first (i.e. mandatory minimum sentencing for non-violent criminals)

Back to runningthe world:

ALSO, forget about the "problem" of gays inthe military. THE MILITARY SHOULD BE ALL DRAG QUEENS.
I also have a really great idea about power plants that would be run by stationary-bicycles, pedaled by addicts. To get a dose of their drug/drink of choice, they need only pedal. They would live there. It would be a comfy place.
THERE!!!!
TERRIBLE PROBLEM OF ADDICTION SOLVED
ALSO TERRIBLE PROBLEM OF FOREIGN OIL, NUKE PLANTS, ETC ETC.

This is how I pass my insomniac hours.

I don't think it has to be an either/or situation. Those things all go together.

ILE can still sometimes surprise you.

OTM.

And weird. I've been saying this - in more-or-less exactly those words - for years. The whole problem with cops & copping is that the attraction-points for the job (unquestioned authority, ability to cause fear in others, gun carrying, supertuff macho/hetero image, permission to use threats & even violence) pretty much guarantee that most people who will want the job shouldn't be allowed anywhere near it.

But as true as that might seem, it's too simplistic. Law enforment officers sometimes need to to communicate threat (a willingness to do real harm) in order to overcome the belligerence of others without actually resorting to violence. And unfortunately, the best way to communicate threat is to be legitimately threatening - i.e., cops have to mean it when they get tough. Therefore, there's a legitimate need for a "thuggish" tendency in certain police officers. Catch-22.

How do you balance the need for genuinely threatening cops (as a violence deterrent) with the simple fact that most genuinely threatening people can't be trusted to montitor and control their own behavior?

That doesn't even begin to speak to the mentally unwell or mentally incompetent. Yes, having a system of asylums tended toward the "One Flew over the Cuckoos Nest" complex, but many people who would have been there are now either medicated, in jail, or on the street. If you don't have money or the right background, one of the latter two. Finding someone mentally incompetent is seen as letting them off easy, which is ridiculous since being sent to a mental health facility tends on average to result in longer stays than most jail sentences, and it's a form of rehabilitation.

So encapsulating it with "prison rape is bad, huh" and drawing attention by highlighting the anal rape accounts diverts from the real issue -- prisons aren't making anything better, they're just getting more full and destroying lives. Sometimes through inmate-on-inmate violence, sometimes just because it's the wrong place to send people.

(I thieved from you ;___;)

-- bell labs (lindsay...), February 14th, 2007. (bell_labs)

maybe you and i are talking about different things, but the supreme court just recently deemed unconstitutional the mandatory sentencing guidelines. it happened about 6 months before my date. had it not, i was pretty much surely destined for prison. i don't want to make this thread about me, but damn, that fact still astounds me.

a proposed bill in washington state to basically test for HIV in prisons.

here's some wa state conservative blog that is outraged by these "felon friendly" bills by democrats:
http://soundpolitics.com/archives/007997.html

Baldock says he faces an uphill battle in trying to win a conviction against Francis. He's certain many jurors seated before him this week will wonder why they should even care what happens to prison inmates.