New Yorker profiles AZ Sheriff Joe Arpaio

[Alyrium Denryle]

So when does the 2nd Amendment's magical power to prevent abusive government kick in and stop Joe Arpaio's reign of terror?

I think the Framers assumed that we would have an enlightened population, or at least civic leaders who were not as corrupt as those abusing power...

Who gives a shit what the Framers thought? They were a bunch of bigoted racist slave-owning aristocrat fuckwads with a gift for lofty rhetoric.

Well, I was countering with a joke highlighting the stupidity of Arizonans... but that works too, as it is certainly true.

[Kamakazie Sith]

If you ever wonder why I have a... skeptical... view of law enforcements goodness, Joe is why. I spent my formative years under his heel.

I would also argue that our correctional system should not be about punishment, but rehabilitation. All joe does is make the criminals WORSE

I don't have a problem with people who are skeptical with law enforcement. I do have a problem with people who are simply naive and think the world is a sugar coated version of itself and that law enforcement should handle every situation with that sugar coated point of view.

What's the re-offend ratio compared to countries that use rehabilitation over punishment? Also, is the re-offend ratio higher for Arpaio system or do they go on to be arrested for more serious crimes?

[Thanas]

What's the re-offend ratio compared to countries that use rehabilitation over punishment?

We have gone over this before Kamakazie - it is lower.

[Pablo Sanchez]

At first I like that Sheriff Arpaio was tough on crime because I do think prison/jail should be an experience that isn't enjoyable and is about hard work.

The criminal is punished because of infractions against the laws of society, and in response we isolate him from society--this appears to make sense until you realize that you're also isolating him from the normative influence of society. People who originally designed prisons and developed the concept of rehabilitative incarceration believed that isolating inmates would lead to reflection, guilt, and self-correction, but this has never actually worked in practice. Intensifying the discomfort of prison life might make you feel better but it's important to ask whether your feelings are more important than a positive utilitarian result. It's one or the other. California's state prison system is generally regarded as the toughest in the country, and it also has one of the highest recidivism rates.

Additionally, even if you want jail to be harsh, Tent City is a pretty fucking stupid way to go about it. It's open-air nature means that it lacks monitoring systems, the jail population is harder to divide up and police (no cells to be locked down), and the inmates have immediate access to materials to create improvised weapons (canvas, ropes, tent-poles, stones, and tent-pegs). A riot in Tent City would be a complete nightmare and would probably entail a large number of deaths among inmates and staff.

[Kamakazie Sith]

What's the re-offend ratio compared to countries that use rehabilitation over punishment?

We have gone over this before Kamakazie - it is lower.

Actually WE have not at least I don't recall discussing this with anyone. If you're saying that the board has then I will search for it but I do not see what the problem is with reposting facts in threads where the discussion arises again or at the very least offering a link to that thread.

[Kamakazie Sith]

The criminal is punished because of infractions against the laws of society, and in response we isolate him from society--this appears to make sense until you realize that you're also isolating him from the normative influence of society. People who originally designed prisons and developed the concept of rehabilitative incarceration believed that isolating inmates would lead to reflection, guilt, and self-correction, but this has never actually worked in practice. Intensifying the discomfort of prison life might make you feel better but it's important to ask whether your feelings are more important than a positive utilitarian result. It's one or the other. California's state prison system is generally regarded as the toughest in the country, and it also has one of the highest recidivism rates.

This reasoning appears to be flawed because prior to their incarceration they were under the normal influence of society but still committed the crime. I think it depends on the psychological profile of the offender and the decision should be based off what is most likely to have a positive impact for society. To add to this I think it's also deeper than punishment vs rehabilitation. Other factors such as poverty and poor education are huge and even if you give them an education if they still live in poverty then it's likely that they will re-offend.

Additionally, even if you want jail to be harsh, Tent City is a pretty fucking stupid way to go about it. It's open-air nature means that it lacks monitoring systems, the jail population is harder to divide up and police (no cells to be locked down), and the inmates have immediate access to materials to create improvised weapons (canvas, ropes, tent-poles, stones, and tent-pegs). A riot in Tent City would be a complete nightmare and would probably entail a large number of deaths among inmates and staff.

This tent city has chain linked fences with razor wire and a security system. It's not a boy scout tent city. However, I agree with you on your assessment of the consequeces that a riot would probably result in.

[Pablo Sanchez]

This reasoning appears to be flawed because prior to their incarceration they were under the normal influence of society but still committed the crime.

So if somebody doesn't interact with society in the prescribed fashion, placing him in a context where he'll interact only with (A) other antisocial persons and (B) agents of social authority who are directed to ensure his mistreatment (guards in a punishment-centric incarceration system) is going to have what result?

I think it depends on the psychological profile of the offender and the decision should be based off what is most likely to have a positive impact for society. To add to this I think it's also deeper than punishment vs rehabilitation. Other factors such as poverty and poor education are huge and even if you give them an education if they still live in poverty then it's likely that they will re-offend.

If this is what you think, then why are you talking about how American prisons and jails, already far harsher environments than those in any nation at an equivalent level of development, need to be made more uncomfortable?

This tent city has chain linked fences with razor wire and a security system. It's not a boy scout tent city.

I knew that already and it doesn't change my point. Separating the city into blocks is only going to help a little. Judging by the images, what you end up with is a dozen or so tents per "block", each housing what looks like at least a dozen bunks, so at capacity you might have 150 inmates per block who will have be to separated and controlled by manpower alone if a situation erupts. Also, because of the tents they have visual cover against observation from above (obstructing the towers and any cameras mounted above), and the layout means that any security system located at ground level (so as to actually see the inmates in the tents) will have to be at the perimeter of the blocks and thus their line of sight will be obstructed by the outer row of bunks. The lockdown issue is more serious, because the lack of individual or even group cells means that rather than being able to separate inmates and interact with 1, 2, or 20 at a time, during each entry into a block they have to consider all 150. This increases their response time because it necessitates all entries to be made in force with full gear, drastically increases the danger to their persons in a violent incident, and the consequent threat to their person probably means that they themselves use more force than would otherwise be necessary.

[Kamakazie Sith]

So if somebody doesn't interact with society in the prescribed fashion, placing him in a context where he'll interact only with (A) other antisocial persons and (B) agents of social authority who are directed to ensure his mistreatment (guards in a punishment-centric incarceration system) is going to have what result?

I'm not advocating beatings or anything like that just to be clear. I support hard work and basic accommodations. You talk about mistreatment as if hard work and providing only basic amenities equals mistreatment. Again, just to reiterate I use to like what Sheriff Arpaio did but when I learned about the whole picture I no longer supported him . (I said this at the beginning.)

If this is what you think, then why are you talking about how American prisons and jails, already far harsher environments than those in any nation at an equivalent level of development, need to be made more uncomfortable?

I never made such a recommendation. I stated that I support sentences that aren't enjoyable and are about hard work (something productive).

I knew that already and it doesn't change my point. Separating the city into blocks is only going to help a little. Judging by the images, what you end up with is a dozen or so tents per "block", each housing what looks like at least a dozen bunks, so at capacity you might have 150 inmates per block who will have be to separated and controlled by manpower alone if a situation erupts. Also, because of the tents they have visual cover against observation from above (obstructing the towers and any cameras mounted above), and the layout means that any security system located at ground level (so as to actually see the inmates in the tents) will have to be at the perimeter of the blocks and thus their line of sight will be obstructed by the outer row of bunks. The lockdown issue is more serious, because the lack of individual or even group cells means that rather than being able to separate inmates and interact with 1, 2, or 20 at a time, during each entry into a block they have to consider all 150. This increases their response time because it necessitates all entries to be made in force with full gear, drastically increases the danger to their persons in a violent incident, and the consequent threat to their person probably means that they themselves use more force than would otherwise be necessary.

Wow, this is a huge unnecessary response. I like how you left out the part where I said I agreed with you on your assessment of the consequences for a tent city.

[Pablo Sanchez]

I'm not advocating beatings or anything like that just to be clear. I support hard work and basic accommodations. You talk about mistreatment as if hard work and providing only basic amenities equals mistreatment. Again, just to reiterate I use to like what Sheriff Arpaio did but when I learned about the whole picture I no longer supported him . (I said this at the beginning.)

I know you said that at the beginning, which is why you're not being castigated for sympathizing with a power-mad sadist. The problem is that you're apparently only rejecting Arpaio as a matter of the degree to which he punishes inmates, while still evidently supporting the principle of making prison as uncomfortable as is legally permissible, something which is counterproductive to the purpose of the penal system, which should be rehabilitative.

I never made such a recommendation. I stated that I support sentences that aren't enjoyable and are about hard work (something productive).

Prison sentences that "aren't enjoyable"? Are you trying to say that jails and prisons that don't approach the Arpaio standard are fun? American prisons already provide only basic accommodations and oftentimes not even that (again citing the CA system, their prisons are under federal observation because of a judicial ruling that their prisoner health care constituted a civil rights violation). Punitive labor is its own can of worms, having the potential to subject inmates and staff to increased danger as well as being legally dubious because of its resemblance to slavery, especially given the disproportionate presence of ethnic minorities in the penal system. Voluntary inmate labor with a focus on skills training, however, is a good idea because it gives the prisoners something to do with their time and can assist them when they rejoin society. These programs are, of course, expensive and often cut or curtailed for budgetary reasons.

Wow, this is a huge unnecessary response.

Huge? While I know a whole paragraph of six sentences is a real chore to read, I'm kind of into completing a whole thought when I post.

I like how you left out the part where I said I agreed with you on your assessment of the consequences for a tent city.

Here's what you posted:

This tent city has chain linked fences with razor wire and a security system. It's not a boy scout tent city. However, I agree with you on your assessment of the consequeces that a riot would probably result in.

In other words, "You're theoretically wrong about something so I'm going to insinuate that you think the Tent City is a boy-scout camp, but it doesn't even matter and I agree with you anyway." Initially I thought about just being rude and asking what difference your nitpick about the fucking fence made if you actually agreed with me, but I decided that it would be nicer to explain that I was fully aware of what you were talking about and show why the fences and security systems wouldn't work effectively. Since that apparently offends you, next time I won't fucking bother.

[Kamakazie Sith]

I know you said that at the beginning, which is why you're not being castigated for sympathizing with a power-mad sadist. The problem is that you're apparently only rejecting Arpaio as a matter of the degree to which he punishes inmates, while still evidently supporting the principle of making prison as uncomfortable as is legally permissible, something which is counterproductive to the purpose of the penal system, which should be rehabilitative.

You'll have to forgive me. When I think of a convict or criminal I have a hard time of separating those who simply made a mistake out of desperation and those that simply don't care.

To clarify I would support a rehabiliative system for those that are likely to be rehabilitated and a punishment system for those that aren't. Basically, whatever is likely to work on them based on their psychological profile.

Prison sentences that "aren't enjoyable"? Are you trying to say that jails and prisons that don't approach the Arpaio standard are fun? American prisons already provide only basic accommodations and oftentimes not even that (again citing the CA system, their prisons are under federal observation because of a judicial ruling that their prisoner health care constituted a civil rights violation). Punitive labor is its own can of worms, having the potential to subject inmates and staff to increased danger as well as being legally dubious because of its resemblance to slavery, especially given the disproportionate presence of ethnic minorities in the penal system. Voluntary inmate labor with a focus on skills training, however, is a good idea because it gives the prisoners something to do with their time and can assist them when they rejoin society. These programs are, of course, expensive and often cut or curtailed for budgetary reasons.

No, I'm saying don't mix punitive and rehabilitative. Would you agree that allowing inmates in a punitive system access to education and physical training equipment is probably not a good idea? Especially when you consider the information that inmates in the current US system are likely to re-offend when released?

Huge? While I know a whole paragraph of six sentences is a real chore to read, I'm kind of into completing a whole thought when I post.

In other words, "You're theoretically wrong about something so I'm going to insinuate that you think the Tent City is a boy-scout camp, but it doesn't even matter and I agree with you anyway." Initially I thought about just being rude and asking what difference your nitpick about the fucking fence made if you actually agreed with me, but I decided that it would be nicer to explain that I was fully aware of what you were talking about and show why the fences and security systems wouldn't work effectively. Since that apparently offends you, next time I won't fucking bother.

I was under the impression that you thought tent city had no security. My mistake. However, I don't know why you think someone would agree with you without understanding why they agree.

[Kamakazie Sith]

I just got done finding and reading articles which support Alyrium Denryle claim that rehabilitation is superior to punitive. You can consider this post a concession.