I don’t have a problem with the worst offenders/recidivists getting decent treatment.*
The overriding goal should be to keep them separated from society, not fulfilling revenge fantasies.
The more they enjoy or at least tolerate prison life, the less likely they’ll be to escape or kill/maim the guards and other prison staff.
*feeding them lutefisk and other Norwegian “delicacies” might violate civilized standards.
Norwegian style prison? My God, man, the food would be torture!! 
I just watched Breaking the Cycle because of your post. I’m a bleeding heart liberal who believes that our justice system and prison system are both inhumane and doing a grave disservice to our society in the sense that it doesn’t reduce crime or make us safer, but also that it contributes to a general decline in the humanity with which we treat others. IOW, it makes us less compassionate, more base in our morality toward one another and more authoritarian and repressive. I am very pro-Norwegian model and disgusted by our own system. The worst aspect of it is the public acceptance that other humans can and should be treated with a lack of human dignity. There is little thought to how to the ramifications of systematically dehumanizing an entire population of people and then releasing them back into society largely in worse shape – emotionally, physically, intellectually and functionally – than when they entered into the system. There is no moral high ground in revenge, torture or degradation of others. To what extent, I wonder, are we on a carousel of debased behavior followed by debased treatment? Revenge is built into the system but what kind of society does that create? How many steps away from wanting someone to suffer to finding a justification for suffering to actually making someone suffer? Can we really afford to accept justifiable brutality and inhumanity from law enforcement and correctional personnel? It seems like Norway believes their society cannot and they are truly in the corrections and rehabilitation business whereas we are in the punishment and revenge business. The results of each philosophy seem pretty clearcut.
The correctional officer from North Dakota addressed your concern about convicted rapists and murderers having an “easy life” when she talked about the question she got from a trainee who’d just watch a video about Halden. She said she’d be pissed, but reminded them that they are not in the business of emotion, they are in the business of correction and rehabilitation. Emotion should not factor into it, but why aren’t we angry that our system breeds recidivism? Why aren’t we angry that our society creates such a pervasive lack of opportunity to drive certain populations into criminal activity? Or that mental healthcare is chronically underfunded and mental health issues are criminalized by our justice system instead of treated as a health crisis?
If horrible prisons are the answer, why are so many coming back? It sounds like you missed the point of that documentary. The answer to your question seems to be, for Norway anyway, that what keeps them from coming back is reintegrating them into society with counseling, job training, and preserving (or instilling, maybe) their sense of humanity toward one another. They are leaving the system, presumably, with the ability to become law-abiding, productive members of society. Whereas, the U.S. alternative is to throw them out with no skills or prospects, even directly from segregation after being treated inhumanely. But yeah, you might be onto something, prison – even the ones we have – does beat living on the street. The question we should probably be asking is if we’ve had them in the system why didn’t we give them all (or any) of the tools they needed to successfully reintegrate into society?
Very good points.
In regards to you being liberal (and I’m conservative) I have high hopes this is one issue we can come together on. I get that because of years ago people of all stripes worked together to work on ending or at least reducing prison rape which at that time was epidemic.
I’d like to add to this discussion is how to deal with the issue of prison gangs. Our prisons are their breeding grounds and ex cons are inducted tightly into gangs and become tightly allied with them even when they leave prison.
Notice, the Norway system didnt seem to have them. Granted, their system has little or no racial divides.
Agreed about racial divides. What do gangs offer prisoners that they are lacking? Safety, perhaps. It’s was mentioned that in effect weak prisoners without connections are preyed upon, so having a gang in your corner may provide the security that the prison structure itself is not providing. Outside of prisons, gangs offer acceptance and community as well as the opportunity to earn money and respect that is typically out of reach of impoverished and poorly educated young people lacking mainstream, legal opportunities of the middle class. Further, any minor brushes with the law in youth can quickly lead to a long-term integration with the justice system that invariably changes that young person’s outlook and potential permanently by subjecting them to more extreme criminal element and reducing their opportunities to work, vote, and mature out of their misbehavior. The fact is that the justice and prison systems are profit centers for private industry and it’s their interest to keep their customers coming back, not rehabilitate them or to mete out justice relative to the severity of the crime.
The problem is multi-pronged and the state of our prisons is only one aspect of the greater failure for society. But it seems to me that the easy part is restoring human dignity of inmates and providing those programs that provide them with tools to turn their lives around if they so desire (and I believe many of them will at some point given the incentive to do so). Attend to the mental health and substance abuse needs as health issues, take more care to segregate offenders based on the level of programs needed to rehabilitate. Identify those prisoners who can benefit from less restrictive conditions regardless of their crime, but by their positive behavior and participation in their own recovery. Give them the opportunity for education that provides more than just low-wage opportunities and give them back their voting rights and protections from workplace and housing discrimination once they’ve paid their debt to society.
I respect you for engaging with me on this topic despite our political differences. I hope we can all come to some kind of agreement that our current societal attitudes toward crime, justice, and how to treat criminals are not doing any of us any favors. ETA: Although in the Cult of Bully Trump, I don’t have high hope that we’ll get there anytime soon.
Lastly, I was so impressed with those Attica prisoners who presented their ideal prison system and with the corrections officials who listened to them and acknowledged that they were onto something that Norway has already figured out. It was discouraging to me, though, that the warden’s first question for them was how they thought society would react to their ideal prison. Society has got it wrong and very few people in the system seem to be willing to advocate for the dignity of our prisoners and the demonstrable positive outcomes of reforming it into a Halden model. I do hope that the North Dakota prison can demonstrate success to the extent that the public changes its tendency to seek revenge and accept human suffering of prisoners.
Neither did the Spanish system until 20 years ago or so, but back then one of the arguments put forth to avoid sending people to prison on a first offense already was “they usually come out worse and having become part of a gang”. The gangs in question were rarely organized along racial lines as there were few racial lines to be used that way, that’s all.
You should think carefully about why you feel one way about one set of people, and a different way about a different set of people. And how best to resolve the apparent contradiction.
To me one of the strangest things about the US system is felony disenfranchisment. Depending on where they live, Americans can lose their right to vote forever because… they got a felony DUI when they were 19, for example. OK, OK, you shouldn’t drink if you’re underage. And you shouldn’t drink and drive. And other drivers would appreciate it if you didn’t hit them; they would very much appreciate it; even more so if you didn’t send them or their passengers to the hospital (one of the items that can make DUI a felony is bodily harm; the age of the driver isn’t in the list linked). But still, losing the right to vote because you used to be an imbecile when you were in your teens? Hot damn, that would recuse most of humanity!
It is is a system where people literally don’t have the chance to go from convict to citizen; once you’re a criminal, there’s fundamental aspects of citizenship where that’s all you’ll ever be. How does something like that fit the crime?
There are other countries where imprisoned citizens lose their right to vote; it can be automatic, or it can be a specific aspect of the specific sentence, but it is never for life. It’s a fundamental difference, to me.
Almost anything one does when they are young and stupid. How about people who commit murder? Often that is an equal mistake like the gun going off or whatever but the point is now we have a 19 year old who is looking at 30 years to life. I remember watching “Scared Straight” years ago where one young man only 24 years old was saying how his life was “over”. All because he did something stupid.
But thats the point. Treat these convicts like people who have made a mistake, not like they ARE the mistake.
I think we ought to try what was suggested “international transfers”. We could send over a couple of our prisoners and see how they do.
BUT, not the model prisoners. Send over some hard cases and see if it changes them.
As for North Dakota, it helps that that state has the room and small numbers to do that. I’m hoping my state of Kansas could try the same. I doubt big states like California could.
Prison in the US is less about controlling felons, and far more about controlling the rest of the population.
You have to ask why there are so many offenders in the first place - that’s a question for you to answer - but I suggest the huge wealth disparity, opportunity disparity and extremes of health, education and inculcated expectations of every US citizen are all likely to be contributors.
Once you have some sort of handle on why there are so many offenders then maybe you have some way to decide how to prevent young offenders joining.
In effect what you have is an underclass, they have little expectation of a regular life - but they do know they should have all the benefits they see advertised on TV.
I expect the US culture of individualism, and especially the worship of the bad boy image are both contributors - lets face it, gangsters are all utter scumbags - but they seem to be worshipped through rap music, and its an old tradition dating back to the war of independence - scumbags who rob and raid and murder being idolised as ‘good old boys’.
We have tv shows idolising moonshiners, smugglers, and marijuana growers. It really does not matter what your personal views are on these things - the damaging thing is the worship of criminals, decriminalisation is simply a fig leaf for those who wish to take part in the bad boy values of these scum.
When offenders are released, do they have mental health support, do they have the trade skills and work ethic? Nope, many need support for addiction issues, and almost all will return exactly to the same circumstances prior to their incarceration - is it any surprise that they return to prison?
Rehabilitation is extremely expensive, this is because it requires extensive supervision in society, it requires employment, housing, counselling, training, it requires former offenders to kill their former lives and never associate with former friends, often their criminal minded families and this needs incredibly close supervision, did I say it needs close supervision? This is extremely expensive, did I say it was expensive?, Oh Yes - but is far less expensive that the current situation, where each generation of criminals inspires and trains the next generation of criminals.
Also, do not forget that in terms of economic output - these individuals who contribute nothing to society actually consume resources that would be better directed elsewhere.
No politician in the US is likely to stand on a ticket of spending more on rehabilitation per offender, nope, that’s a waste of tax dollars. Why do you suppose this is the case? Could it be that you have a revenge culture? Could it be that the political argument is how to appear macho?
Maybe its also because the majority of offenders are from black and Hispanic communities - and who cares about them? Little Johhny white boy gets his and that’s all that matters.
I agree with almost everything else you wrote, but I’m having trouble understanding what you mean by this, at least as it pertains to marijuana. People want it to be decriminalized because it’s a benevolent plant with multiple useful properties, full stop. I don’t know what you’re trying to say by saying that decriminalization is a “fig leaf for those who wish to take part in the bad boy values of these scum.” I think most cannabis advocates would just prefer that people can grow this plant in their garden without being penalized…“bad boy values” and “scum” doesn’t really enter into the equation. 
You are correct in your general assessment of the American penal system, though. Americans in the main are unsympathetic to prisoners and would prefer to not think about them at all. Out of sight, out of mind. The private prison industry is out of control, and half of the country LIKES the idea of criminals being punished with harsh conditions as a form of revenge, and the other half mostly just doesn’t really think about the issue very much. Bernie Sanders was the only one who I can remember even bringing up the issue of the prison-industrial complex and the need to reform it, during the last election. I don’t think either Trump or Hillary talked about it at all.
Don’t get me wrong, there are some really dangerous people who need to be imprisoned. It’s not like they’re all in there for growing weed. There are a lot of very vicious robbers, rapists, and murderers in this country; they need to be contained; I just think the important thing is that society is safe from them. They should be given humane conditions in prison. I think they should have decent rooms to live in, they should have access to the internet [perhaps in a limited or monitored capacity, but I see no reason why they shouldn’t be able to have personal computers and use them to browse the internet and, for instance, post on boards like this one.] They should be physically isolated from society, but there’s no reason for them to be mentally cut off from communication with the outside world. They should have decent food, they should have access to whatever entertainment or media they want, and if they are going to have jobs, they should be paid a normal wage equivalent to what a non-imprisoned person doing the same job would make.
There’s no point in society taking “revenge” on convicts. Revenge is a totally abstract concept that exists only as an idea in peoples’ minds.
From what I’ve read, Breivik is basically going barking mad in there. I will try to find a link for you, but, does this information make you feel better?
Oh, he already was. But he seems to be the kind of person who doesn’t understand kindness at all; a system which refuses to answer barks with louder barks is incomprehensible to people with that mindset.
Of all the ways in which American media puts criminals on an altar (beginning with not-quite-cops who not being quite cops don’t have to worry about legality or procedures, and btw torture totally works), all that popped up to you was the MJ?
Poor Anders went on a hunger strike because those meanie guards wouldn’t upgrade his Playstation 2 to a PS3.
I really have no idea if American media “puts criminals on an altar.” I am fairly certain, though, that if it does, the amount of actual crime caused by this is minimal. Crime doesn’t happen because the media glorifies crime, it happens because people choose to commit crimes. Their reason for doing so is usually economic. Blaming the media doesn’t make sense to me.
The loss of the right to vote, while unfortunate, is actually the least relevant lifetime handicap you face after a felony conviction.
I have a felony for trespassing - a stupid mistake and the only offense I’ve had my entire life. I now find it is effectively impossible to rent an apartment. 6 months of searching lead me to the conclusion that everywhere in my city disqualifies you from renting if you have any felony conviction, regardless of circumstance. So as a middle-aged person, my only option for housing for the rest of my life will probably be living with roommates who don’t require that I get added to their lease.
I’m also locked-in to my current job, since most jobs in the U.S. require a background check in which you are disqualified for any felony, and a lot of misdemeanors as well. I happen to be one of the lucky ones - as previously noted, recidivism is high for a reason. Getting released and being homeless with no significant work prospects - and this being the condition you can reasonably expect to be the case for the foreseeable future - doesn’t naturally lead most people into lives as productive, happy members of society. It usually leads right back to jail.
^ Very good example of the horrific dehumanization of people with felony records (and non-violent ones at that) making it hard for them to adapt to normal life and likelier to return to crime. Either you’ve paid your debt to society, or you’re sufficiently dangerous that you should remain in prison. Once the sentence is over, it shouldn’t be a permanent albatross around your neck. The only restriction that makes sense to me is the one on firearms, and I do think that one should be VERY strictly enforced. But then only in the case of violent felonies.
Edit - this also takes on a racial dimension when you consider that blacks are disproportionately sentenced for drug related crime…and then smug white people say “black culture needs to fix itself, blah blah blah.” How can they fix a system that treats so many of them as second class citizens? Again, the VIOLENT criminals, by all means, throw the book at them, but everything else…they really need to reform the system.
Jacquernagy
The fact that some folk feel that use of cannabis should be legalised is not the issue - I personally don’t care one way or the other - but I do have personal observations that cannabis use does lead to mental health problems which in turn leads to suicide and self harm - this I have seen first hand and far more frequently than a person should ever see.
No, its not the legal status I object to - its the glorifying of a culture that I see MJ ‘memorabilia’ such as baccy boxes and pouches, MJ t-shirts, MJ ashtrays, posters bumper stickers and all sorts.
None of these are directly part of a political campaign to legalise MJ as such, its just a signal that some youthful idiot is ‘sticking it to the man’ - its a crap form of anti-authoritarianism but a bunch of rabble who care not one jot about society and its rights and principles - its just mindless glorification of it only for the vicarious buzz they get of being a ‘rebel’.
In short there is no real intention to change society, its merely ‘look at me and look at me being edgy’ - as such its just a glorification of a criminal outlook.
The true rebels I have met are those who put themselves at risk, people who actually could choose to conform and have a quiet and prosperous life, these are often people who are committed to a principal, who want to change society. People who may work for decades to bring some justice to those less able.
So perhaps a campaign to enable released felons a vote might not be popular - and anyone advocating such a position would likely be looked upon as a rebel and a subversive - but these people are also social reformers - contrast this to the childish MJ badge wearing inactivists.
This is what I mean about lauding the wrong things.
The US population seems to enjoy the criminal - at a distance, but folk such as Jesse James, Tom Horn, or the 30’s mobsters were all utterly despicable arsewipes - so why does US society seem to have this attitude toward them that makes them famous and ‘interesting’ ?- your society needs to come to terms with what criminality is and was instead of glorifying crime.
The problem is that this tolerance of criminals is a tacit endorsement, we rightly view pedophilia as socially unacceptable - when oh when will US society as a whole see that gangs and gang culture are just as socially unacceptable - meanwhile big corp international is busy marketising gang culture through rap culture, think of all the shit that goes with it, from clothing, through to language, videos, music - it is simply adding to the allure of crime.
Do you have a cite that a majority of offenders are black or Hispanic in the US?
Gets his what? Rehabilitation? Do you have a cite that white offenders are more likely to be rehabilitated that black or Hispanics, all other things being equal?
Regards,
Shodan