What should Calif. do about their crowded prison system?

Oh, ok, thanks.

Sorry, Sis - I forgot this was your poll. I'll stop posting here.

well said marcie!

Thanks.

Should keep pack'in em in. They start in on each other and who knows? Maybe people will start to say, heck no I don't want no part of that. If you get caught you could go to prison and it's dangerous in prison.

...they should release persons convicted of "victimless" crimes.

agree

need to keep it a priority. The public probably puts their safety as a priority.

Build more prisons.

Prisons drop crime and are cost effective.

The biggest way to reduce the costs is to outlaw prison guard unions.

Liberals want to set criminals free so they can make tens of thousands of new victims.

This is why the most crime-ridden areas of the USA are under the control of liberal politicians.

My only problems with that are that "dropping crime" and "rising crime" are often just a political tool for the re-election of those using a "tough on crime" stance for political gain. This is just like "false inflation" in the commercial sector. Many crimes resulting in incarceration today would not have even been prosecuted 10 or 20 years ago; another reason for the rising crime rates. I would like to see more stringent punishments for the "Hard Core" criminals and a recall of the punishment of Exile for certain crimes. Exile on pain of death, specifically. Other crimes can more effectively be deterred by so-called "Alternate Sentencing" because the fact is that most criminals come out of prisons as "better trained criminals". A simple car thief may come out and decide, from education received inside, to branch out into Burglary and Home Invasion. While I do not support car theft, I would prefer to lose my car than to come home and find a rookie Burglar in my home. A pro would run and count on not being caught, a rookie is more likely to hurt me or my family. Punishment , in any Criminal Justice system, must be a deterrent or it has no meaning at all. Rehabilitation is no good if every former convict is unable to re-enter society by reason of a conviction on their records. Giving them tools they cannot use is a waste of resources.

"Many crimes resulting in incarceration today would not have even been prosecuted 10 or 20 years ago;"

Give me 3. In California there is almost zero enforcement of hard drug possession any more and marijuana is not even worth the paperwork.

Can't say for California, I was actually speaking of PA, where I currently reside. 1. Back fines result in incarceration 2. Child support, same 3. Gambling, same there are others that fit the bill but they are crimes that I, personally, feel should be prosecuted. I think CA should up enforcement of hard drugs and just leave marijuana alone. Rape was almost non prosecuted. Domestic violence, another. Drunk driving, drunk and disorderly, these were usually handlede by a night "in the Tank' followed by release in the morning.

Well the question is about California.

And I'm sure that some things are different in CA, but not all, and the main idea in my post remains, regardless. Also, the problem is quickly becoming more widespread than just CA. Statistically, what is the rationalization in using prison as a deterrant for some crimes when it obviously isn't working. Insanity is often defined as "repeating the same actions over and over, and expecting a different result". If it is a serious/violent crime and prison isn't working, more severe penalties should be considered. If a less serious/non-violent/victimless crime, alternatives to incarceration seem more than viable considering the current population problems in prisons. BTW, your avatar lists you being from NV. Can you conclusivly say that the examples I gave DO NOT apply to CA as well?

No actually your point is wrong.

I know a little of California law and you apparently do not.

They are releasing tens of thousands of prisoners, not the other way around.

http://www.reuters.com/articl...

1 How exactly (in your own words) is my point wrong? different than yours perhaps, but wrong. 2. Knowing a little of CA law is not the point, (I do BTW, know a little) CA jurisprudence ( the way they handle the law) is. And if they are releasing that many prisoners; either they are overusing incarceration or CA is just chock full of criminals.

No, you did not read the decision or even a synopsis.

It is judicial fiat...as a person who knows 'juris prudence' you know that an activist judge is like a dictator.

In which case, you are entitled to remove said judge from office using the legally approved system (in this case elect a President who will appoint the type of justice you prefer). incidently, I refuse to take anothers viewpoint as yours if you cannot be troubled to explain. That seems, to me, to be the path of sheep. I may cite law upon occaision but will always add my views or interpretation. The original question is not what the Supreme Court should do, but what should CA do. It is well known that the Supreme Court is a political body and as such, the "interpretation" of law is therefore subject to which way the Court is "stacked". Activist judge? They are all Activist Judges there, each having their own agendas, either liberal, moderate, or conservative. And, having read the article, I still say my point is valid. If the prisons were run as deterrents to criminal behaviour instead of up and coming business ventures, or simply places to dump the mentally ill, perhaps the High Court would not have felt obliged to step in. Regardless of that, the question was still What should CA do? Aside from obeying the SC ruling, the rest is open to opinion. And all judges are dictators to some degree, with the SC justices being the worst because of the awesome amount of power accorded to them.

flooding my post

You think the debate wasted, dear heart? I am truly sorry if that is the case but sometimes the answers are not simple and require some discussion. If you wish me to retire from this one, I will do so because of my regard for you. You need only say so.

there is e mail here

I WANTED my opinion read (and possibly challenged) I learned some things and hopefully taught some. My offer to retire still holds.

They should ship all the illegals out of the counrty, and let the non violent people out on probation

They should stop privatizing prisons and allowing corporations to use prisoners for slave labor. That would keep the judges from jailing people on minor crimes like marijuana possession and prostitution. This is also one of the reasons for our country's high rate of unemployment.

The war on drugs has been a TOTAL failure. People need treatment not prison. Decriminalize most drugs. Liquor and Tobacco are the biggest killers and they are legal.

The "war on drugs" was a financial boon to prison companies, and they are fighting hard to keep them full.



Take a guess as to which plan was initiated in the early eighties, that now has the United States of America as the nation that incarcerates more of a percentage of their population than ANY OTHER country on the planet Earth...



There are vast numbers of non-violent people in American prisons today.

A question on the "Incarcerated Americans" chart...does this number include illegal aliens?

When you combine state and federal prisons, non-citizens (some legal, some illegal) make up 6.8%... less than their general population proportion. The United States has 6.9% non-citizens living in it. I suspect their incarceration rate is lower due to the fear of being deported, or having their visa revoked, etc...

Of course, this changes from state to state. Arizona, 14%... for reasons we may all be aware of.

But, it hardly matters. If we removed all of them from the statistics, the US is still #1 in the world.

hear hear!
I wish I could rave this more than once!

Well stated. I have heard that prisons are the largest growing part of our economy and that, since they are being privatized at an alarming rate, of course the companies running them wish to keep them full. It is all "bottom line" to them and NOT about law, justice, or keeping our communities safe. It is happening all over the US and no-one worries about it until they are tagged as the new convicts. Once that happens, of course , they are not listened to as they are previous convicts and untrustworthy.