America's Fourth Largest City

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

4th Largest U.S. City is Prison, USA

Published on 10/08/07 at 14:55:33 MST by Gary

Announcementsby Gary Wood
© October 8, 2007

Do you think we’re free? Every day we hear that is the reason for fighting wars, to protect our freedom. Ask 100 people why we are fighting any war and the majority will answer in a single word, freedom. We believe this because our leaders and mainstream media continue to tell us we must fight to protect our freedom and win the freedom of others who desire to be free yet are not strong enough to stand on their own in defense of their freedom. Remember then Mayor Rudy Giuliani, on November 11th, 2001 telling us why we were attacked. “They attack us because we’re free.” On September 20th, 2001 President Bush had this impassioned statement before Congress and the country, “Tonight we are a country awakened to danger and called to defend freedom.” It rings well to the ear, we are free, they hate our freedom, we must defend our freedom against the hate so we may continue to remain free and war is a small price to pay in defense of freedom. I will not attempt to deny the importance of defending our land from those attacking us, what I will attempt to do is raise a serious question, are we really free?

I’m not going to tackle, in this brief article, the more illusive ideas of our freedom under attack from the many demands and requirements we face to use the private property we think we own. Nor, will I look into the debate over recent invasions on our personal freedom as a direct result of such heinous acts as ‘The Patriot Act’ or the ‘Military Commissions Act’ which combined place our basic right of habeas corpus in jeopardy. This article will not address the many attacks we face daily on our 4th Amendment violations, just dare be a veteran entering a VA Hospital for a small sample of this. Among the many directions I could take my focus for now will be on the prison population and the reasons it has reached the levels it has.

With all the wars we’ve entered in defense of freedom it became quite alarming for me to realize the United States of America has more of its population locked away in prisons than any other country in the world today. In the recess of my mind I knew this but to hear it confirmed on Sunday as a part of the promotion for an upcoming documentary by Ted Koppel it raised the reality to my conscious level once again.

I had to do a bit of research and what I found proved amazing. Based on 2005 population figures for both our prisons and U.S. cities the prison population would rank as the 4th largest city behind New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago while beating Houston out by over 200,000 people. I’ve been to Houston, have family in Houston, Houston is huge! Yet, it would be relegated to fifth place if we considered the population of our prisons.

Not only that, population growth shows the prison population outpacing the top cities’ growth figures which means it will only continue to rise in rankings and within a few years can pass the population of Chicago! Taking the 2005 prison population and comparing it against the 2005 U.S. population figures we see that nearly 1% of the population is locked up! 1 of every 100 citizens, according to our justice system, must be incarcerated. This does not begin to look at the numbers which are arrested, on probation, face charges which result in something other then confinement, this is just those incarcerated.

Well, I said to myself, these are the violent criminal minds among us that deserve to be locked away so they don’t interfere with my family or my personal freedom by harming us. The violent criminals need to be incarcerated, right?

So I further dug into the Bureau of Justice Statistics provided by the U.S. Department of Justice. It was not pretty; the numbers are too large to be comforting but the number of violent criminals’ incarcerated represent 52% of the total population. Just over half are violent criminals that have harmed another of our neighbors in the criminal conduct they pursued which led them to being incarcerated. This would mean the violent population represents the 10th largest city but it also meant there were enough non-violent criminals incarcerated to also represent the 11th largest city.

In researching raw numbers of prisoners I noticed an inordinate number of those serving time were non-violent offenders incarcerated for drug violations, property violations, tax violations, and more. Within the drug numbers lie the bulk of those who are categorized by ethnic race. Are Hispanic or African American citizens, by human nature, worse humans than those classified as white? Or are these segments of categorized society merely tempted into the non-violent economic opportunities created by prohibition laws attempting to regulate morality on all citizens.

We know the dangers created by prohibiting acts which violate a majority view of what is and is not moral. History taught us the lessons of prohibiting alcohol as this attempt gave significant rise to underground mobs preying on the desires of all members of society. The temptation was too great, the violation too many, to deny the fact our attempts to police morals simply fails. Yet we as a society continue to attempt to control the lives of citizens through the failed, expensive, and dangerous war on drugs.

No matter what race classification is assigned to humans, there is no race worse or better than any other. We are equal in our propensity toward good and toward what society may deem to be not good. By judicially enacting constraints on human behavior, by attempting to regulate morality, the creation of underground economic gain surpasses the good of a law. Any and every time we enact such moral restriction we fail; whether the restriction is on alcohol, drugs, prostitution, or any other aspect of human behavior desired and sought by humans. The only result is the laying of a trap for those in an economic position willing to risk now illegal activities to satisfy the demands of mankind. Is it a question of nature or is it a question of failed focus in our judicial desires to control the non-violent activities of our neighbors?

In the Koppel report the focus is on the California prison system. It was designed to hold a maximum of 100,000 inmates yet is strained with the overcrowded number of 178,000. The cost per prisoner for one year of incarceration is $43,000.00 (compared to a Harvard education costing $43,200.00) and there is no relief in sight for eliminating this strain. There is no wonder why the criminal justice system and prisons are among the fastest growing segment of our economy today. We are building more prisons to house more non-violent criminals every day.

Let us assume there are 52% of the California prison populations incarcerated for violent crimes, crimes that harm people. The population drops to 92,560, not comforting yet below the threshold of the maximum numbers California prisons are prepared for. By altering the laws to focus on the violent criminals not only does the State of California have the room for the prisoners it would save over $3 billion dollars in direct costs associated with housing those prisoners. Extrapolated out to all 50 States and the savings and benefits become much clearer to the eye.

More important is the question, are we free? Freedom’s definition is easily debated. The fact is we incarcerate more of our citizens than any other country. Is the root cause because our citizens are just worst among world citizenry? Or, rather, is it possible our judicial system and law making system is out of control and busy enacting laws that limit freedom? Are we, as a people, actually less free than the many countries we occupy, defend, and fight today?

We are entering the heart of yet another election year. There are voices on the Federal, State, and local level who understand we are not the free society we claim to be. There are voices of reason among the candidates who understand the root of our problem is not a larger number of bad people but a larger number of bad laws. I encourage each voter to seek out and vote for the candidates who recognize the root causes of our challenges and will work to reverse this assault on the very freedom we are so proud of. We need legislature focused on the needs of society and not focused on the greed of enacting laws which ultimately bind and incarcerate our freedom, which most of us will willingly die to defend.

[K. A. Pital]

U.S. has the highest number of incarcerated in the world, IIRC.

[Xisiqomelir]

Thanks, War on Drugs!

Don't bother fixing the national telecommunications infrastructure or anything, keep locking up those evil potheads!

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

U.S. has the highest number of incarcerated in the world, IIRC.

I believe both in total and per capita, possibly all throughout history.

[K. A. Pital]

Things that are on the same order are Soviet 1930s incarcerations and Japanese american incarcerations in 1940s. Probably penal colonies of Britain in Imperial era could also boast high numbers, but I'm not that informed about their penal system.

[MKSheppard]

95% of the people who are in our correctional instututions are there for good reasons. I should know, because I heard way too many "sob stories" while doing my time.

[K. A. Pital]

95% of the people who are in our correctional instututions are there for good reasons.

Then the logical outcome is that you live in a very criminalized society, which isn't a good indicator too.

Besides, what is "good reason"? Poverty stricken low-level drug dealers? Mobsters from poor ghetto sites which have little perspectives at employment? Those people have been at the bottom of the society, and because the American penal system is devouring the very lowest of the low, no one cares.

If American prisons devoured a significant part of the white middle and upper class, it would not be long before this system would be branded totally evil in all corners of society. It's only un-resonant as long as it metes punishment against low and petty criminals from the bottom, which no one cares about.

[Superman]

There was a time when the United States declared soviet Russia guilty of violating the most basic rights of people, and one of our main issues with the commie state was its massive prison (gulag) population. How times have changed...

[Phantasee]

I remember when I was at my cousin's wedding in LA, I was joking to some of the guys I met that their state had the same population as my whole country. Then some guy piped up and said his country had the same number in prison (India).

Which of course is ridiculous, but this is much more ridiculous because it's real.

[K. A. Pital]

In absolute terms, the United States currently has the largest inmate population in the world, with more than 2 1/2 million[13] in prison and jails, even though violent crime and property crime have been declining since the 1990s according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics.[14] Although the United States represents less than 5% of the world's population, over 25% of the people incarcerated around the world are housed in the American prison system. Pulitzer Prize winning author Joseph T. Hallinan wrote in his book Going Up the River: Travels in a Prison Nation, "so common is the prison experience that the federal government predicts one in eleven men will be incarcerated in his lifetime, one in four if he is black." In 2002, both Russia and China also had prison populations in excess of 1 million.[15] By October 2006, Russian prison population was decreased to 869,814 which translated into 611 prisoners per 100,000 population.

As a percentage of total population, the United States also has the largest imprisoned population, with 738 people per 100,000 serving time, awaiting trial or otherwise detained.[16]

In fact, Russia has been steadily progressing on the same road as the US.

Note how incarcerations rise massively in latest Soviet and post-Soviet times.

[Stark]

95% of the people who are in our correctional instututions are there for good reasons. I should know, because I heard way too many "sob stories" while doing my time.

Judging the US prison population solely by your personal experience is either utterly worthless or completely retarded, take your pick. I met a guy in jail once who was a great guy, my worthless anecdote beats your worthless anecote!

[Ender]

95% of the people who are in our correctional instututions are there for good reasons. I should know, because I heard way too many "sob stories" while doing my time.

Judging the US prison population solely by your personal experience is either utterly worthless or completely retarded, take your pick. I met a guy in jail once who was a great guy, my worthless anecdote beats your worthless anecote!

Yet it still trumps your empty rhetoric. If you want to counter him, how about you actually go and provide counter evidence to his claim.

[Stark]

What? He says 'I talked to some guys in jail and they sucked, this means 95% of people in jail 'deserve to be there''? That's not evidence, it's a worthless anecdote. Clearly all jails are the same, all prisoners are like him and the people he spoke to, and there's no difference between violent and non-violent crimes, right?

[Ender]

What? He says 'I talked to some guys in jail and they sucked, this means 95% of people in jail 'deserve to be there''? That's not evidence, it's a worthless anecdote. Clearly all jails are the same, all prisoners are like him and the people he spoke to, and there's no difference between violent and non-violent crimes, right?

No, it is a first hand experience related, just the same as if I were to speak about what it is like in the Navy. That is a valid form of evidence. Whether it validates his viewpoint or not is a seperate question. If you want to counter his point, dig up some evidence of your own, because simply complaining is not a rebuttal.

[Stark]

It's also an absurd generalisation. Why is it okay to argue judging an entire Texas police department by the actions of one cop is stupid, but it's fine to judge 2.5M prisoners (well, 95% of 2.5M) by the guys Shep met in his one prison for guys who shoot at other people?

[K. A. Pital]

First hand experience does not allow for generalization. Statistics exist for such purposes.

[Ender]

It's also an absurd generalisation.

And still more evidence then you have provided. You want to counter his point? Do some damn research. Simply bitching and complaining does not substitute for an actual argument.

[Ender]

First hand experience does not allow for generalization. Statistics exist for such purposes.

True, and that is why I have repeatedly told him to dig some up. But when the options are anecdotal evidence or no evidence, anecdotal evidence is superior.

[K. A. Pital]

But when the options are anecdotal evidence or no evidence, anecdotal evidence is superior.

As far as I recall, there is statistical evidence that a majority of the incarcerated have the following key characteristics:
a) lowest-income classes of society
b) non-white nationalities
c) non-violent crimes

[Ender]

But when the options are anecdotal evidence or no evidence, anecdotal evidence is superior.

As far as I recall, there is statistical evidence that a majority of the incarcerated have the following key characteristics:
a) lowest-income classes of society
b) non-white nationalities
c) non-violent crimes

In which case it should be presented, and a coherent argument made, not just empty rhetoric.

I honestly don't give a damn about the positions taken, its the idea that "if I shriek loud enough at the forum pariah I don't need to present evidence" that I object to.

[K. A. Pital]

Shep isn't a pariah, he's a longstanding member. Anecdotal evidence is better than none, but I have already outlined the problems with asserting and generalizing that people are in prison "for a good reason", since "good reason" might be caused by circumstances of a person's economic and social conditions. In which case, one needs to look for roots of the problem rather than avoid it and claim that it's just effective correctional work.

[Stark]

In which case it should be presented, and a coherent argument made, not just empty rhetoric.

I honestly don't give a damn about the positions taken, its the idea that "if I shriek loud enough at the forum pariah I don't need to present evidence" that I object to.

Are you saying I can't point out fallacious reasoning by Shep without countering his zero-facts with actual facts? Since all I'm arguing with is the utility of such massive generalisations, and not his conclusion, what should I do, grab some statistics about how many generalisations survive being stretched to 10,000 scale?

The implicit idea that I'm picking on Shep is utterly absurd. If I said '95% of people who go to arcades are of asian descent, because I went to AN arcade ONCE and I saw SOME asian guys', I would expect to have people laugh at me out of hand. Is this wrong? He said something stupid, and I mocked him. Case closed.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Wasn't Shep in Prison, and not just jail?

[Ender]

Are you saying I can't point out fallacious reasoning by Shep without countering his zero-facts with actual facts?

No. Problem is that is not what happened. Shep related first hand evidence based from his experience. Anecdotal evidence is entirely valid, and must be countered by other evidence. You would not have dared tried this if me or one of the other members of the Mess had made such statements about what it is like in the military.

Since all I'm arguing with is the utility of such massive generalisations, and not his conclusion, what should I do, grab some statistics about how many generalisations survive being stretched to 10,000 scale?

No, you dismissed what he had to say out of hand rather then countering it. You know damn well that is not how things are done here.

The implicit idea that I'm picking on Shep is utterly absurd.

Hardly. His extreme views mean he rarely gets any support in a position he takes, which results in that tactic being quite common when he says something.

If I said '95% of people who go to arcades are of asian descent, because I went to AN arcade ONCE and I saw SOME asian guys', I would expect to have people laugh at me out of hand. Is this wrong? He said something stupid, and I mocked him. Case closed.

Not even remotely the same and you know it. The makeup of people at public places is based on any number of random factors, including local population numbers, breakdown, time of day, day of the week, and local business practices. The makeup of people in a place as a result the government placing them there is dependent on their interaction with the government.

[Illuminatus Primus]

You're wrong. Saying that "95% of all of them deserve it" (implicitly including all the ones he hasn't met) in a discussion about the nationwide prison population and its social/demographic implications because of a personal experience in one state's incarceration system IS a hasty generalization, and hasty generalizations are always logical fallacies. He doesn't need to post evidence to criticize a hasty generalization. IF all Shep had said was, "all the inmates I met belonged there" that'd be anecdotal evidence and while not immediately pertinent, would not be a hasty generalization and therefore logical fallacy in of itself, which is what you're arguing. But he DID go from "the ones I met were bad" (anecdotal evidence) -> "therefore 95% deserve it" (hasty generalization and thus logical fallacy).