| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
KwarK
United States43212 Posts
On August 15 2019 02:28 Jockmcplop wrote: That's ok because then when they reoffend you end up having more manual workers, right? One private prison went so far as to promote their low rehabilitation rate is shareholder materials as evidence of their secure revenue stream. Some accidental honesty there. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On August 15 2019 00:00 Pangpootata wrote: I think that correlation =/= causation in this case when comparing the effects of correction vs punishment. Different systems work better for different societies. Correction and rehabilitation work very well in high-trust societies with a relatively law abiding culture. For an extreme example, if you go to a country in sub-saharan africa with high violence and try to implement a corrective prison system with comfy rooms, people are just going to take advantage of niceness. In places where cultural violence is high, punishment as a deterrent and death sentences to permanently remove unrepentant recidivists works best. edit: It is possibly because developed societies have lower crime rates, that's why they can afford to stop using harsh punishments and have a corrective system where people are treated nicely. Not the other way around Your hypothetical is insulting. With a handful of exceptions prisons are some of the most dangerous places on earth. you have to face dehumanizing stressful conditions, have to dodge violence from not only other prisoners but also from guards, you have to literally fear rape every day. One statistic I read was that being in prison under certain conditions takes on average 15 years off your live. To worry about prisons being too nice and comfy is essentially to advocate for the continuous brutalization of your fellow humans under inhumane prison regimes. Do you think people will ever give up everything to take advantage of the niceness of prisons? Jc | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On August 15 2019 00:17 Velr wrote: That is not what happens in the US Prison system. Yes, inmates have to work.. Unskilled work that don't teach shit. Yes, inmates do get paid for it.. RIDICULOUSLY low amounts. Your basically defending the US Prison System that uses it's inmates as Slaves. The stuff that you propose is actually what a decent prison system would do, but this is clearly not the case in the US. And this is just one of the miriads of issues. I recall that prisoners were used as firefighters in the perpetual West Coast forest fires couldn't get jobs at the fire department upon release putting their skills to use because of their status as offenders. And Kamala Harris' office argued for holding back on the release of prisoners lest they lose a critical supply of | ||
|
Muliphein
49 Posts
On August 14 2019 23:24 Pangpootata wrote: That being said, the other extreme is not good as well - western european comfy hotel rooms for serial killers to live out the rest of their lives peacefully on taxpayer money. wtf is this? First off, prison is prison. It being comfortable or not doesn't matter. Second, in proper western European prisons, prisoners aren't in control of the prison. In the US, mob and gang leaders lead their gang from prison. Third, calling them 'comfy hotel rooms' is just right wing rhetoric devoid of reality. Fourth, why do you think it is a good thing to imprison criminals and give them a horrible treatment? Why do you imprison people in the first place? Fifth, how do you think it feels to be imprisoned in even a super luxurious hotel room? What do you think that does with a person? Sixth, who do you think pays for the prison industrial complex in the US? | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7917 Posts
On August 15 2019 02:30 KwarK wrote: One private prison went so far as to promote their low rehabilitation rate is shareholder materials as evidence of their secure revenue stream. Some accidental honesty there. I am always amazed by how corporate culture manages to completely strip people of any trace of morals or humanity. It’s just remarquable. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
On August 15 2019 02:25 KwarK wrote: Skills they can’t use because the prison slave labour industry has no outside competitors. If you’re great at making the thing that slaves make then freedom is the opposite of job security. Also society doesn’t hire ex cons so the entire exercise is futile, they go back to crime because it’s the only source of income we allow them. Society really doesn't hire ex cons. I've tried to hire ex cons in two different companies I've worked for. Got push back from HR and upper management in each of those companies. People really don't believe in redemption, generally. All i needed is bodies who can show up to work every time they're scheduled and can move boxes around at a brisk pace. One of those times we had a real labor shortage and were desperate for people... | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On August 15 2019 07:09 semantics wrote: Society really doesn't hire ex cons. I've tried to hire ex cons in two different companies I've worked for. Got push back from HR and upper management in each of those companies. People really don't believe in redemption, generally. All i needed is bodies who can show up to work every time they're scheduled and can move boxes around at a brisk pace. One of those times we had a real labor shortage and were desperate for people... That's really disappointing and seems ridiculous. I understand that the hiring process should be mostly bottom-line motivated but for that kind of work it seems really low risk to hire ex felons. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43212 Posts
On August 15 2019 08:04 JimmiC wrote: Do companies in the states have any liability if they hire a some with a record and he does somethign at work. Like if my employer hired someone with an assault conviction and he beat me up? Also does it impact insurance rates at all? Not an expert but I can't imagine they do beyond normal negligence which they would be exposed to even if they weren't a felon. If someone complains to HR they're obligated to provide a safe working environment, regardless of whether the problem is a felon. Obviously there are jobs where a felony for the wrong thing is an issue, like a rapist at a school or a thief at a bank, but there are plenty of non violent pot smokers who should be able to get jobs. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9245 Posts
Non violent pot smoker convicts make it complicated because I just can't imagine sending people to prison after catching them smoking pot once. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11629 Posts
On August 15 2019 08:54 Sent. wrote: I wouldn't hire an ex con to move boxes around for me even if that meant paying slightly more to a normal citizen. Not having to deal with an ex con would make it worth it. And at that point, you have basically condemned people who were criminal once to be criminal forever. If they cannot get a job, how are they supposed to pay rent and feed themselves? Also, an "ex-con" is a normal citizen. The whole point of the justice system is to enable criminals to reenter society as a productive member. But if society doesn't want them, what is it that is left there for them? In the US, you can end up at this spot for having been caught with a bit of weed at the wrong spot. Do people really deserve to have the rest of their live ruined for smoking weed once? Or any other number of crimes? Society should do its best to reintegrate previous criminals who have served their sentence. Both for the good of them, and for the good of society. It is really pointless to condemn them to an eternal live of crime simply because you deprive them of any other way of existing in society due to the stigma of being an "ex-con" and not a "normal citizen". | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35162 Posts
| ||
|
Sent.
Poland9245 Posts
I also didnt say say that I would never hire an ex con. I would consider hiring one if the state offered me some kind of a reward. I'm aware it sounds harsh but it's not my problem how they are supposed to pay rent and feed themselves. That's on them and the state. I paid my taxes and I'm okay with the state using that money to encourage employers to hire ex cons. I just mean that I personally don't feel an obligation to ignore someone being ex convicnt when choosing who I am going to hire. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18838 Posts
| ||
|
Fleetfeet
Canada2603 Posts
And sure, implicit bias, replace "ex-con" with "person of X or Y race" and you're in the same spot - except you can examine your implicit bias regarding race or physical characteristics and determine that your bias is actually shitty and unfair. Less so for a bias regarding "This person was convicted of committing this crime, and has gone through a system that is allegedly designed not to correct, but to punish". Perhaps the weight of the stigma is heavier than it should be, but it is certainly a more justified bias than a lot of others, and others are even more readily accepted. To be clear, I agree with Sent.'s sentiment with the understanding that his position is "It isn't that I'd never hire an ex-con, it's that I don't require myself to pretend "ex-con" isn't a negative. The person can still succeed or fail based on their merits, but their past does factor in." Apologies if I'm off the mark, there, Sent. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9005 Posts
On August 15 2019 09:19 Sent. wrote: Not forever. I don't know how it's called in English or German but you stop being an ex-convict after some specific period of time in European laws. The state is supposed to "forget" you were one and erase that data from most of its registries. I also didnt say say that I would never hire an ex con. I would consider hiring one if the state offered me some kind of a reward. I'm aware it sounds harsh but it's not my problem how they are supposed to pay rent and feed themselves. That's on them and the state. I paid my taxes and I'm okay with the state using that money to encourage employers to hire ex cons. I just mean that I personally don't feel an obligation to ignore someone being ex convicnt when choosing who I am going to hire. There have been some ignorant shit posted on these boards, but this is close to being at the top. Being a felon is something that can be brought on by low level crimes, and the judge/state deciding to give you a felony instead of a misdemeanor. You not hiring them because they were a felon and not knowing why or the circumstances, just perpetuates the cycle. Most of the felons you'll meet were doing one thing, trying to feed themselves/family. And to be honest, some are probably more intelligent and more equipped to do your job, than you are. The system is unforgiving, especially to POC, and one strike is enough to derail a potential entrepreneur or inventor. Hiring them to move boxes is as low level as it gets. Minimum wage, benefits, and they don't have to resort to crime. You're acting like if someone robbed a food truck to feed their child is going to be a threat to your bottom line. Not even taking into account the biggest criminals are white collar and never get caught or can bribe/buy their way out. Gilded cages and all that. Edit: To fleet, if they demonstrate they can perform whatever job to a satisfactory point, and you even place them on a "probationary period" that is longer than usual, and nothing bad happens, then they are worth the time and effort. You don't know what people are capable of if given an honest chance. A lot of people didn't get those when they got the felony. It's hard to live an honest and law-abiding life when all the chips are stacked against you. People find the easiest way to survive and sometimes it isn't the best choice. FWIW, I'd hire a, ex-con in a heartbeat after a trial period. These people don't want to go back into the system so you can bet they will do their damndest to get and keep that job. Edit 2: For comparison, look up the story of one black kid getting arrested for selling water and another story about a kid getting years in prison for stealing shoes. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
I guess the interpretation of this message depends a lot on what you imagine Trump means with 'quickly and humanely solve' | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
OSC
Kung Fu Cup
Classic vs Solar
herO vs Cure
Reynor vs GuMiho
ByuN vs ShoWTimE
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
RSL Revival
Solar vs Zoun
MaxPax vs Bunny
Kung Fu Cup
WardiTV Korean Royale
PiGosaur Monday
RSL Revival
Classic vs Creator
Cure vs TriGGeR
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
