America's out of control justice, and prison system

Here in America we value the principles of justice and revenge over community and reformation. We choose to go to war, defund school programs and build bigger prisons rather than feed the homeless, educate our youth, and pay for each others health and well being. Here is a snapshot into one of the biggest problems we face as a nation as our communities continue to degrad into generational poverty and the modern American caste system.

Here is a flyer I made to hand out and post locally that highlights the main issues I would like to address in this thread.



Here is a snapshot of how I believe the following issues affect YOU the consumer directly...

Salve.edu

The costs associated with incarceration and recidivism are not just financial. The toll on prisoners and their families is impossible to calculate. Loved ones can suffer from economic strain, psychological and emotional distress, and social stigma. Prisoners endure isolation from their families and the community.

Ostracizing people from the community will impact the local economy and the safety of your community. Not allowing people to become financially independent is also drain on your tax dollars.

Also, prisoners in the United States are often incarcerated for a lot longer than in other countries. For instance, burglars in the United States serve an average of 16 months in prison compared with 5 months in Canada and 7 months in England. 2 With an emphasis on punishment rather than rehabilitation, U.S. prisoners are often released with no better skills to cope in society and are offered little support after their release, increasing the chances of re- offending.

Another issue is harsh sentencing for non violent crimes putting people who are otherwise non violent into a system where gangs and violence rule. Prisoners will leave the system with more problems then they went in with.

It’s a good start, but more needs to be done. The U.S. criminal justice system needs to continue to shift its focus from punishment to rehabilitation, particularly for non-violent offenders. We can learn from other countries like Norway, Germany and the Netherlands that advocate the principle of normalization and also effective approaches to incarceration.

I believe the solution already exist and is out there being implement in other westernized countries successfully. We can look to our neighbors for guidance.

Lets take Germany for example...

Who's Legal

When background checks are being carried out, the principle of direct acquisition of data via the applicant takes priority. Background checks with the help of third parties are therefore only admissible if the reliability of the applicant is of particular relevance, eg, in finance and childcare, or where special information is essential for the employment relationship. The applicant’s knowledge and consent will always be required.

Background checks are a MAJOR obstacle for many people who want to reform their lives and enter the workforce. Most companies in the US have now adopted policies within their company's that totally reject all criminal backgrounds regardless of relevancy due to the current economic climate. This contributes to the problem by forcing people to choose between government subsidies or a life of crime further exacerbating the problem and creating a situation where you communities are no longer safe and economically productive.

Please set aside your judgements and take a serious look at how we handle this issue in the US.

15e.) Recruitment/Solicitation: i) You will not use your membership in the Websites for any type of recruitment to any causes whatsoever. You will not Post, use the chat feature, use videos, or use the private message system to disseminate advertisements, chain letters, petitions, pyramid schemes, or any kind of solicitation for political action, social action, letter campaigns, or related online and/or offline coordinated actions of any kind

a reply to: onequestion

I can whole heartedly agree about the background checks. I think more employers should look at what the actual infraction was and not just let the background company/agency have the final broad stroke of a decision that then won't allow to get that job. If its a low misdemeanor crime.

a reply to: onequestion

S&F

It is an intentionally controlled cycle to keep prison beds full. Background checks should be limited to 3 years maximum and sealed after that probationary period. If someone has the intent to turn back to crime it will show within 3 years after release.

Only the truly sick should be put in cages, but should be made to be comfortable away from society. I know lets start a new Australia on mars for the too far gone crowd and force therapy on lesser criminals.

What is also not good is were using the prison system as a defacto house for the mentally ill, which is not good.

What is also not good is were using the prison system as a defacto house for the mentally ill, which is not good.

You're looking for Utopia. Good luck with that.

originally posted by: onequestion

It’s a good start, but more needs to be done. The U.S. criminal justice system needs to continue to shift its focus from punishment to rehabilitation, particularly for non-violent offenders. We can learn from other countries like Norway, Germany and the Netherlands that advocate the principle of normalization and also effective approaches to incarceration.

I believe the solution already exist and is out there being implement in other westernized countries successfully. We can look to our neighbors for guidance.

We can learn from the states that have tried to implement viable programs, but they get thwarted because government does not feel they are cost effective. Texas opened approximately 8 separate units called Substance Abuse Felony Punishment Facilities, (SAFPF's), that the sole purpose was to rehabilitate those who had committed State Jail Felonies involving substance abuse.

In addition, In-Patient Therapeutic Communities, (IPTC's) were opened at existing State Jail facilities, on a smaller scale. Both of these programs had a marked result on the recidivism rate, compared to traditional prison's. The recidivism rate in Texas' prison system were roughly 72 - 74%. The IPTC's had a rate of roughly 25 - 35%, with the SAFPF's having a rate of 5% over a 5 year period. That's a 95% success rate.

Can you guess which program got cut on a very large scale? SAFPF's, because they cost 3 time the average daily rate traditional prison's cost. IPTC's were limited, so there goes the rehabilitation part. It's just not cost effective, so we get rid of it and return to the old cheap solution.

When background checks are being carried out, the principle of direct acquisition of data via the applicant takes priority. Background checks with the help of third parties are therefore only admissible if the reliability of the applicant is of particular relevance, eg, in finance and childcare, or where special information is essential for the employment relationship. The applicant’s knowledge and consent will always be required.

Background checks are a MAJOR obstacle for many people who want to reform their lives and enter the workforce. Most companies in the US have now adopted policies within their company's that totally reject all criminal backgrounds regardless of relevancy due to the current economic climate. This contributes to the problem by forcing people to choose between government subsidies or a life of crime further exacerbating the problem and creating a situation where you communities are no longer safe and economically productive.

Background check's can be a touchy subject. They can have a very adverse effect on those who have any convictions, and some who were only arrested for some things, convicted or not. Sometimes, it's a crock that people are effected by a simple thing from the past. But, there are times it is necessary to protect a company and even it's customers.

Example: Because we live in such a litigious society, the slightest thing can trigger massive lawsuits for both big and small companies. A Medical Supply company Hires someone with a previous record and relies on self reporting by the new employee. Many of these companies are required to interact on a monthly basis with patient's in their home. Just say the patient notices some of his/her pain meds missing. The only thing they know is the technician was in their home 2 days ago. They call the company and express their concerns.

Regardless if the technician is guilty or not, the suspicion has been raised. To protect their interests, the small company now does a background check, and discovers the person they hired left out a few points about their past. What to do? If the patient finds out about this, lawsuits a plenty. Worse yet, if the insurance companies, and Medicare and Medicaid find out, their business is done for. And this can be a recurring problem for many businesses that are a part of the service industry.

I don't know how to overcome these obstacles, or if they can be overcome.

originally posted by: Obsrvr
You're looking for Utopia. Good luck with that.

Utopia..?

Sure, ending background checks and for profit prison systems is a clear indicator of Utopia......not.

Utopia is a surplus of Social Capital, Community activism (I.e. onequestion) and most of all Macallan Scotch...

Supporting far fetched paradigms is much more gratifying than watered down rhetoric - give it a try champ.

a reply to: retiredTxn
If you read the information regarding her manies background check system that I post you'll find a response to the second half of your response.


The reason why drug rehabilitation programs don't work mostly is because the addict had to want to change in order for a program to work ie they need to be voluntary. We would cut this problem down by more than half of we just stop putting people in prison for drugs.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: retiredTxn
If you read the information regarding her manies background check system that I post you'll find a response to the second half of your response.

I did read and understand the link you posted. I agree Germany has a good system in some ways, but for instance, what if the employer has no inkling the possible employee has been nothing but truthful? There are folks who can get references from a multitude of businesses, without uncovering their past. Anytime someone applies for a job here in Texas that requires references, and that person is a former state employee, it's not easy to get much information from any state agency. Agencies have a printed script they can answer from. If the question is not on the script, you can't answer the question. What option does the new employer have? A background check, good or bad.

The reason why drug rehabilitation programs don't work mostly is because the addict had to want to change in order for a program to work ie they need to be voluntary. We would cut this problem down by more than half of we just stop putting people in prison for drugs.

If you read the numbers I gave you, do you think a 95% success rate is not working? I agree drug laws need to be changed or eliminated, but until they are, which program would you choose? If a person is going to be sent to prison for 2 years, but has the option to complete their sentence in a program requiring only 9 months, in a program boasting a 95% success rate. I'm gonna get serious and do the program that may help me get past my problems. As an added bonus, if I complete the program, and the aftercare program, I no longer have a conviction on my record. I then am not worried about a background check stopping me from doing whatever I want.

a reply to: retiredTxn

What did companies do in the 90's and before then to screen their employees records?

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: retiredTxn

What did companies do in the 90's and before then to screen their employees records?

Credit checks, and check references. A background check was unheard of, save for larger companies and government agencies. But, we are talking about now aren't we?

originally posted by: onequestion

We would cut this problem down by more than half of we just stop putting people in prison for drugs.

I would love to see all drugs legalized. They would become safer and cheaper, and addicts wouldn't have to spend so much of their time looking for their next fix.

The problem I foresee though, is that under our current economic system, what's gonna happen when you put the petty drug dealers out of business? I personally think violent crime would go through the roof.

I agree with everything you're saying here except perhaps #1 - ending generational poverty.
Sounds nice but I'm not sure of the premise or solution to it.
Because someone comes from a poor family does that mean society must do more for them to break the cycle?
Again, not sure of the meaning or intent there.

Any change would be good about now, none one of it seems to be working.

Some issues....

1. The Government can't solve these issues, society needs to solve them. Under Government control people lose their individual identities and become statistics, as in you lose your name and become only a number...

2. You can't fix what people do not want fixing....The old "you can lead a horse to water" thing...

3. It all starts in the home, and if that is screwed up it is a lifetime of failures...

4. Do not underestimate how crappy people are willing to live and still have no desire to do better...

a reply to: retiredTxn

Just making the point that this has been a very recent development in the past few years and that up until now we've been fine.

a reply to: onequestion

Justice and prison system in US is a for profit business.

Any questions ?

Want it changed, then do something about it.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: retiredTxn

Just making the point that this has been a very recent development in the past few years and that up until now we've been fine.

In 1992, Leonard Sena, a long-time Kirby distributor, hired Mickey Carter to be a dealer. On his application, Carter listed three prior places of employment and three personal references. Sena did not call Carter's references or prior employers. In fact, Sena did nothing to check Carter's background or any of the information on his application. If Sena had contacted Carter's prior employers, he would have discovered that women who had worked with Carter at those jobs had complained that he engaged in inappropriate sexual conversations and made unwanted obscene telephone calls. In addition, at the time he applied to sell Kirby vacuums door-to-door, Carter had been arrested and had received deferred adjudication for an incident in which he exposed himself to two young girls. One of the previous employers listed on Carter's application had fired him because of that indecent-exposure incident.

In March 1993, after having been allowed into Dena Kristi Read's home to perform a Kirby demonstration, Mickey Carter sexually assaulted Read while her children were taking an afternoon nap. Read and her husband sued Kirby, Sena, and Carter.

Source

Instances like the one above are the reason background checks have become so common. The instance above cost Kirby Co. and the distributor $1,500,000! More important, a young mother was raped in the privacy of her home, where she should have felt safe from such a horrible incident.

No. Up until now, we have not been fine.

a reply to: retiredTxn

Has there been any evidence to prove thT they have actually stopped crime?

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: retiredTxn

Has there been any evidence to prove thT they have actually stopped crime?

I gave you one where it would have. As for others, I have no other proof, just as you have no proof as well. We could go back and forth all week, but ultimately, there will still be that question or another.

I am not saying they are good or bad, but in some instances they will work, and we don't know much about the others. Unfortunately, some are likely to get hurt in the process, and I don't have the answer.