Supreme Court orders CA to release 46,000 prisoners | INFJ Forum

Supreme Court orders CA to release 46,000 prisoners

Nixie

Nixie

Resurrected
Aug 23, 2010
9,405
3,796
976
Oregon
MBTI
ENTP
Okay, so California has to release thousands of prisoners because the Supreme Court has ruled that the overcrowded conditions constitute "cruel and unusual" punishment. To be exact, 46,000 felons.


So who would you release? Perhaps those incarcerated for non-violent drug offenses? White collar criminals or those who commited property theft?

I am glad I don't live in California. Some are saying that this will cause a spike in crimes. Some are saying that the Supreme Court should not have made what amounts to an adminstrative decision about a state's penal system (how it is run) and the Court has overstepped it's bounds. Thoughts?
 
I don't see how this really falls in to the supreme court's hands, I guess they should build more prisons to house felons.


With that being said, first on the list for release are those whose sentences are close to being up followed by the consistently well behaved for non-violent crimes.
 
Well those who are released early under this mandate will probably face house arrest.

I heard that prisons for people serving sentences under 2 years are like college dorms anyways. Minimum security.... because people just want to do their time and get out so are generally well behaved.
 
I don't know much about how things work over in the USA, but if prisons are really that crowded then pretty much agree with the decision.

those who committed non-violent drug crime for the most part tend to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and are very small in the world of drug dealing in any case.

but cramped and crowded conditions might well produce violence in people who may not usually be violent.
 
Prison is a lot like middle school and if anything middle school is cruel and unusual punishment for any child.
 
NDN NT said:
Okay, so California has to release thousands of prisoners because the Supreme Court has ruled that the overcrowded conditions constitute "cruel and unusual" punishment. To be exact, 46,000 felons.


So who would you release? Perhaps those incarcerated for non-violent drug offenses? White collar criminals or those who commited property theft?

I am glad I don't live in California. Some are saying that this will cause a spike in crimes. Some are saying that the Supreme Court should not have made what amounts to an adminstrative decision about a state's penal system (how it is run) and the Court has overstepped it's bounds. Thoughts?
Click to expand...


White collar and corporate criminals do the most damage to society. I would let out non-violent drug offenders first.

The Supreme Court has incorporated the 8th Amendment already, so this decision is not a deviation from their previous track record. There are people who always complain whenever the court reinforces the power of the federal government, but that is in The Constitution also (supremacy clause).

Yes it will probably cause a spike in crimes, but they did it to themselves. California has been known to do stupid things (i.e. their indiscriminate 3 strikes law, the way they handled public education during part of the 90s by allowing anyone with a bachelors to teach [not to mention severely overcrowded schools], and in general being uppity about their supposed environmental superiority, also .... the governator).

I realize their state government has no money because the housing market, which composes at least 25% of their state's economy, has collapsed. But just because times are supposedly tough doesn't mean that what they are doing is acceptable.
 
I'd release ENRON
 
NDN NT said:
Some are saying that this will cause a spike in crimes.
Click to expand...
And because of the current economic crisis there have been statewide layoffs in law enforcement, so it's an understatement if I say that the whole situation is a mess. :rolleyes:
 
I came to believe that the prison system makes criminals hate laws and police even more, merely what it does it contains them and in the long run makes for them things worse. Like some kid who grew six marijuana plants in his closet and got 15-20 years in prison, does he really need to stay there? No. I think it's possible to find 40+k of people in every country in the prison system that shouldn't be there in the first place. I wouldn't say that the crime rates will jump. But for sure it will be hard for them to find jobs, still everything is better than rotting in prisons. F**k the prison system.
 
One thing it will definitely do is make the job market in the area more competitive.
 
Dragon said:
One thing it will definitely do is make the job market in the area more competitive.
Click to expand...

I think that you are right on with this assertion! :)
 
I think that imprisonment for white collar criminals is mostly for deterrence. It's relatively easy to monitor and restrict their activity such that they would be at a very low risk to re-offend.
 
Hmm. Under the assumption that they get out free or go to a halfway house or something along those lines. First I would give a bonus to individual who have served a majority of the time they were supposed to while in jail. Then I would look at individuals who self harmed such as DUI, smoking illegal drugs, etc, etc. After that, I would release criminals that did small time white collar crimes. Then, after that, the more violent an individual was, the less likely they would be to get out of jail.
 
Turn death row convicts into gladiators.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back