On Wed, 4 Jul 2001, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
Or the many instants where prisoners are put on parole en masse to cut costs and/or to free up prison real estate?
That's really a separate problem having to do with our insane mandatory sentencing laws (primarily for drug-related offenses). When they do release folks, they are usually the ones convicted of really vicious crimes.
I agree that that too has a part in it, and that mandatory sentencing is a genuinely braindead idea. However, it has a lot more to do with who gets to walk than with somebody having to be let out in the first place. The primary reason is that the society simply isn't willing to invest enough in prisons to carry the load, contrary to what you originally claimed.
One way is to make it possible for inmates to sue for damage due to overcrowding and the violence it causes. [...]
Well that would be nice, but why not focus in on the real problem, too many laws? Forget suing, leave parole alone, just get rid of the myriad of laws.
That's just the point -- you can't. The political machine simply does not work that way, which is seen by the proportion of new laws passed to old ones stricken. The reasons are well known (one common way to lump the reasons is to call them "political suicide"), and are pretty difficult to get around without resorting to the kind of ass-backwards trickery we've been describing.
From the standpoint of individual freedom, one might argue that more people are now hurting.
Than what, Utopia?
Than anywhere else in the world. Especially note that, even if it clearly doesn't lead to the most effective disincentive on crime, Europeans' fairly humane attitudes towards prison inmates largely serve the purpose Tim and I are after with the cost talk. The mechanism isn't nearly as important as the underlying necessity of imposing a real cost on governments' harmful activities. That is the only way that really works; goodwill simply does not get things done.
That isn't the choice now. It's between getting out or staying in a hell-hole prison.
Not true. The same argument you use, i.e. that habitual restrictions on freedom can be traded for at least /some/ freedom, can be used to argue that you can always sacrifice your freedom in order to stay out of jail in the first place. Just obey the law, however senseless it might be. It's /certainly/ better than being hauled into the hellhole.
Nobody is hurt by parole.
I hope that was meant as a joke.
Get rid of the laws and the parole issue goes away by itself.
Talk about Utopia... Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy, mailto:decoy@iki.fi, gsm: +358-50-5756111 student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front