It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


10 Years in Solitary For Refusing to Cut Hair

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 08:23 PM

Like most of the Rastafarian's in segregation, Gibson did not become a believer until after he entered prison. He was 18 and had a long time to do, sentenced to 47 years on robbery, abduction and gun charges.

Do Rastafarian's also believe in robbing people at gunpoint and abducting people against their will? This fellow is no saint nor is he likely to be a real Rastafarian.

People should pick their battles more carefully. Had he been a REAL Rastafarian and had his crime been victimless and non-violent I'd side with him. This though is a whole other matter.

Those who guard dangerous people like this man deserve a fighting chance to defend themselves from them. The law makes absolute sense and the whole religious thing is pure fabricated crap.

posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 09:11 PM
Setting aside the freedom of religion aspects of this episode, and even the "cruel and unusual punishment" component to a degree, I wonder about the legalities involved with administrators who are allowed to create rules, and severe punishment regimes.

How is it that prison officials can create a rule (in this case about hair length), and then impose an open-ended, never-ending punishment for disobeying that rule? In particular, how can the violation of an administrative decision be allowed to result in a 10-year (and counting) punishment that will result in the likely permanent disability of the rule-breaker?

As previous posters have mentioned, this inmate is now almost certainly suffering from mental disorders...from which he may not now be able to recover.

Because he refuses to get a haircut? How is this reasonable - or more importantly, how can this be permitted under the law?

Administrative rulings (like Company policies) are not laws. And the consequences decided for breaking rules must have reasonable bounds.

Surely there must (or should be) some kind of maximum time a person can be subjected to solitary confinement punishment before the matter is taken in front of a judge, or some other review body, to determine what alternative measures can be taken.

Speaking for myself, I would have cut my hair pretty early in this game...religious beliefs or not (which probably means I would not make a very good zealot of any kind).

But at what point does society (represented in this instance by the penal system), say...ok, that's not working as a deterrent...what do we do now...'cause we really can't torture this guy ad infinitum over the length of his hair...

Strange, strange situation.

[edit on 5-6-2010 by mobiusmale]

new topics
<< 1   >>

log in