Can we please ban private prisons now?

The US has 264 private prisons and the first one was opened in 1852. I understand how some people like to blame everything on Bush, but this is getting ridiculous. The problem isn't private detention centers, but corrupt government officials, specifically judges in this case.

Bush aside, once again it isn't necessary to choose up sides. Both can be condemned.

I can't see how anybody could think that the whole idea of for-profit prison would lead to anything other than corruption and abuse. And the judges involved deserve life sentences.

To be fair, my understanding is that the judges put convicts in those prisons instead of punishing them in other ways. I wouldn't say the judges "destroyed" the lives of thousands of people who otherwise would've been OK.

That said, I think the judges are useless, despicable scumbags who should be put in maximum-security pound-me-in-the-ass prison for the hopefully-short rest of their miserable lives. Judges are just about the worst people in the government to be taking bribes.

I think their sentence should at least be the sum of all of the sentences they passed for those kids. If he put a girl away for three months for creating a myspace page about her assistant principal, I'm sure there were much more severe sentences for shoplifting, vandalism, etc. That should easily put him away for the rest of his life.

We have some private run prisons here and they're fucking holiday camps.

There's a brand new one opened somewhere in the West of Scotland which is so cushy the lags fake their home addresses so it's their "local" prison and they get put into it. I'm sure I read something about a touch-screen food ordering facility in the cells, I've been in 5-star hotels that didn't have that for God's sake.

In another incident, a violent prisoner chucked his HDTV over the balcony and destroyed it - he was given another one free of charge. There was also a riot because a vending machine ran out.

The guards are amateurs and apparently some of them have black eyes and limps because they've been beaten up on their shifts.

So yeah, private prisons affect us too, although in a different and much less damaging vein for the families of those on the inside.

Quote:

Original post by ukdeveloper We have some private run prisons here and they're fucking holiday camps. There's a brand new one opened somewhere in the West of Scotland which is so cushy the lags fake their home addresses so it's their "local" prison and they get put into it. I'm sure I read something about a touch-screen food ordering facility in the cells, I've been in 5-star hotels that didn't have that for God's sake. In another incident, a violent prisoner chucked his HDTV over the balcony and destroyed it - he was given another one free of charge. There was also a riot because a vending machine ran out.

That doesn't make sense. Private prisons are there to make a profit, and you expect me to believe they make a profit by providing a touch-screen food ordering facility in the cells and HDTVs? I'm sure you'll understand if I want more then your word on that issue.

Quote:

Original post by Mithrandir I warned that this would happen years ago when BushCo decided that privatizing everything was an Awesome™ idea. ...

Not to intrude on a good Bush bash, but, sadly, the trend predates him. If there's blame to be leveled, it should fall on Ronald Reagan, who convinced the nation that government was the problem, not the solution, and who ramped up the war on drugs, who inspired legions of legislators to "get tough on crime" by increasing sentences and reducing judicial discretion by making some sentences automatic.

And Bill Clinton probably deserves some blame too, for not doing enough to reverse the trend. It wasn't just Republicans who pushed private prisons. When I worked for the legislature here, one of the State Senators who's "clique" I was a part of had ties to a private prison corporation. I told his aide, who I hung out with, that private prisons were really bad public policy because they attached a profit motive to a negative social outcome. To the society at large an increase in crime is a very bad thing, but for private prisons it's a sign of pending growth and expansion. That gives the owners of private prisons an incentive to see an increase in crime, to the detriment of society. To finish out the story, the rest of the State Senate didn't see things the same way as this Senator, so his pro-private prison proposals didn't go anywhere thankfully. EDIT - His plan involved expanding the use of private prisons in California. They were introduced here before his time. //end

These two judges deserve everything they've got coming to them. I hope the children they "abused" sue them and the private prison corporations who arranged the kickbacks for all they're worth.

Here's another recent juvenile justice story that didn't get enough media coverage: Some states disregard juvenile justice law

Quote:

... Runaways are not supposed to be put in jail, let alone meet adult lawbreakers on the inside, under a 34-year-old federal law called the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. Yet year after year, some states disregard key parts of the law with little consequence, an Associated Press examination has found. Those states included Wyoming, Mississippi, South Carolina and Washington in 2006, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press under the Freedom of Information Act. ...

Remember these tragedies the next time cable news goes nuts for a story about a celebrity doing something stupid.

[Edited by - LessBread on February 16, 2009 2:35:24 PM]

yes anyone with at least 1/2 a braincell can see that private prisons are a stupid idea (like a private army/policeforce etc), yet theres now talk here in nz of them starting up

Quote:

Original post by zedz yes anyone with at least 1/2 a braincell can see that private prisons are a stupid idea (like a private army/policeforce etc), yet theres now talk here in nz of them starting up

That's a broad brush. There are certainly situations that warrant a private police force. Corporate and bank security just being one of them.

Quote:

Original post by Mithrandir I feel like screaming. I warned that this would happen years ago when BushCo decided that privatizing everything was an Awesome™ idea. It'll save the taxpayers so much money and be very efficient, the supporters said. I said it'll lead to nothing but corruption, waste, and destroyed lives. A prison, run for profit?! Bullhockle! Economies of scale necessitate that they'll do everything in their power to keep the prisons full!!! But alas, I couldn't persuade them. And so they built private prisons that operate for profit. And so two judges in Pennsylvania were given millions of dollars in kickbacks in return for keeping a private juvenile detention center full. And so thousands of lives were destroyed for the sake of profit as I was proven correct. It's times like these that make me think perhaps we should bring back drawing and quartering. Certain things should never be run for profit. Profit is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Some things turn into disasters when profit is the only concern. Hope you're proud of yourselves now.

I think back in the day we likely debated this issue on the forums and I imagine I was arguing the other side. I'll concede the argument now X years later, at least to a degree.

The idea of privately owned prisons isn't necessarily a bad one, but the problem with the implementation is that it's so tightly coupled with government that it isn't actually private, rather it's just a government based cartel like fannie mae of freddy mac.

Since I argued the contrary my understanding of cartelization, and the misnomer of private, but government backed goods has matured quite a bit.

As Less points out below, the entire issue is magnified at least ten fold by the arcane War on Drugs power grab, engineered by Reagan and then maintained by Bush, Clinton, Bush, and now likely Obama.

ahh and I wondered why US had so big prison population comparing to rest of the world... commerce at work.

Seriously, imagine if prisons were managed by special part of government, with goal to make as much money as possible for some select few officials, to spend as little as possible on well being of prisoners etc. That would be ridiculous to extreme, right? But that's what company does and should do! The whole point of management is to maximize profits, which in this case involves making government to pay as much as possible and spending as little as possible; to lobby for harsher laws to make more "demand" i.e. prisoners, and so on and so forth.
That's what private company should do, and so private company is simply a wrong tool, a tool which a: doesnt do what you want, and b: does something which you really dont want.

[Edited by - Dmytry on February 16, 2009 5:00:40 PM]

Quote:

Original post by BeanDog That said, I think the judges are useless, despicable scumbags who should be put in maximum-security pound-me-in-the-ass prison for the hopefully-short rest of their miserable lives.

Those two particular judges, yes. Their plea deal is to get 7 years in prison, various assets seized and surrendered, their pension plans revoked, and professional licenses stripped. As part of the plea they give up names, places, details, and testimony against everyone else involved.

It is relatively harsh thing to accept relative to plea deals. Individually their career is gone, their retirement and pension plans are revoked, their ill-gotten assets are gone, and the next 7.25 will be spent in a federal prison that doesn't give the option of parole.

Quote:

Judges are just about the worst people in the government to be taking bribes.

I'm not sure if you are referring to severity or to population.

I wouldn't say judges are the worst for population; I think they're the most rare. I would guess that the actual number of corrupt judges in the US is very small because they are constantly under review. Every decision is recorded, nearly every decision is a public record. Everything they do is eligible for review by the public, by the bar associations, and appellate and supreme courts. When a corrupt judge is found, every case they have tried is reviewed in an attempt to minimize the damage from the corruption.

Traffic cops and others who do patrols from their cars have a major disincentive for corruption: they have dash cameras. I remember when they were first introduced. There were many news stories about corrupt officers taking bribes for traffic offenses and then getting jailed when the tapes clearly showed their guilt. I remember seeing stats a decade or so ago about how allegations of corrupt cops dropped significantly.

The detectives who don't have cameras still have problems with corruption, obviously, but ubiquitous cameras on the accused are cutting that number. There are some people who roll their own cameras and attempt to catch cops. I have relatives in law enforcement who have told me about how strict the policies are. Corrupt cops will lose their jobs and credentials, and normally go to jail. Of course any time you have a lot of money involved (corporations, drugs, gambling, smuggling, etc.) the temptation and opportunity is there.

I'd guess The most corrupt by percentage are legislators. Legislators have a very fine distinction between "lobbying" and "bribery", and the rare ethics reviews are performed by other legislators. Depending on how you define corruption, just about every legislator is guilty.

I was talking about severity. If a cop takes a $100 bribe to let you off a speeding ticket, nobody's life gets ruined. If a judge gets bribed to let a mobster off, people are liable to get killed. If a judge gets bribed to put a kid in prison who doesn't belong there, that kid's permanent record and psyche are messed up for a long time. There's a good reason judges are so closely reviewed.

Quote:

Original post by BeanDog I was talking about severity. If a cop takes a $100 bribe to let you off a speeding ticket, nobody's life gets ruined.

That's not really a good comparison.

It could just as easily be judge bribed to dismiss a speeding ticket, and a police officer bribed to look the other way around mob proceedings or to contaminate evidence in a murder trial.

Quote:

Original post by Dreddnafious Maelstrom The idea of privately owned prisons isn't necessarily a bad one, but the problem with the implementation is that it's so tightly coupled with government that it isn't actually private, rather it's just a government based cartel like fannie mae of freddy mac.

Tell me how you suppose a privately owned prison could possibly be "decoupled" from government - which makes law - while still being guaranteed to serve its nominal purpose - to enforce law. What keeps them from imprisoning whoever they damn well feel like? It's in their best financial interest, generally speaking, after all.

Quote:

Original post by tstrimp Quote: Original post by ukdeveloper We have some private run prisons here and they're fucking holiday camps. There's a brand new one opened somewhere in the West of Scotland which is so cushy the lags fake their home addresses so it's their "local" prison and they get put into it. I'm sure I read something about a touch-screen food ordering facility in the cells, I've been in 5-star hotels that didn't have that for God's sake. In another incident, a violent prisoner chucked his HDTV over the balcony and destroyed it - he was given another one free of charge. There was also a riot because a vending machine ran out. That doesn't make sense. Private prisons are there to make a profit, and you expect me to believe they make a profit by providing a touch-screen food ordering facility in the cells and HDTVs? I'm sure you'll understand if I want more then your word on that issue.

My point isn't actually to do with private prisons making a profit. It's to do with the issue of prisons in the UK getting more and more comfortable at taxpayers' expense. Couple this with the ludicrous PC situation in the UK whereby criminals have all sorts of insane rights (on many occasions moreso than their victims, in fact) and people have been starting to get annoyed.

I'd say this is only a small symptom of larger problems the US has with imprisoning a larger percentage of it's population than any other modern nation-Prison-industrial Complex. I'm sure there's plenty a prison guard laughing all the way to the bank especially here in California with it's idiotic 3 strikes law. Just as KBR,Blackwater,etc. are laughing all the way to the bank thanks to the Military-Industrial complex. The CPOA is milking the state for the money it can get(even though the state is already out of money from what I've been hearing) and it will get it especially since people would rather have teachers out of jobs, the poor going hungry,etc that letting anyone in prison out early!
Also, I'm sure one of the reasons the prisons in California are still overcrowded is due the the powerful CPOA not allowing them to send prisoners to other states and private prisons to maintain they pay and power?
So I doubt Bush had a significant impact on any existing prison problems if anything he would help it since he was pro death penalty and would help reduce the overcrowding?

Quote:

There are certainly situations that warrant a private police force. Corporate and bank security just being one of them.

neither of those warrant the use of police at all, I would be pissed off if my tax dollars were spent doing either of those.
the problem with a commercial police force is the following will be commonplace

woman/ officer Ive just been raped
cop/ fill in the form + stick it on the pile, u may hear back from us later
(office bursts into the station) quick a cars double parked,
cop (rushes out of door)/ Im on it

actually with the police revenue gathering thats happening already somewhat this is prolly a bit to close to reality,

Quote:

Original post by Zahlman Quote: Original post by Dreddnafious Maelstrom The idea of privately owned prisons isn't necessarily a bad one, but the problem with the implementation is that it's so tightly coupled with government that it isn't actually private, rather it's just a government based cartel like fannie mae of freddy mac. Tell me how you suppose a privately owned prison could possibly be "decoupled" from government - which makes law - while still being guaranteed to serve its nominal purpose - to enforce law. What keeps them from imprisoning whoever they damn well feel like? It's in their best financial interest, generally speaking, after all.

I'm not certain to be honest. I don't consider myself to have the burden of proof on each case I point out a shortcoming. I should point out that it is in the warden and penal comissions best interest to have plenty of prisoners as well, and the distinction between supposedly private and supposedly public solutions are by and large illusory.

The alledgedly private solutions pays graft to a variety of officials while the "public" solution inflates budgets and is syphoned by higher up bureaucrats.

As has been touched upon by a few people in this thread, the War on Drugs is what is filling the prisons in America. Roughly 25% of all prisoners are non-violent drug offenders, over 50% are drug users.

When one makes the case to end the prohibition on drugs you're not just fighting the pharmaceutical lobbies, you're also fighting the bureaus of federal and state prisons. They don't want their population to drop, because they dont want their budgets cut. That's not the nature of bureaucracy.

At least the fake private solutions have to appeal to a variety of channels to purchase "access", where their efforts may be eventually exposed. The internal channels never see the light of day.