Pull a knife on someone, get a TV!!!!!!!

The BBQ Pit
1

This annoys me a bit.

I can appreciate the need to keep prisoners happy so they don’t riot and start killing prison workers. And I don’t believe their conditions should be inhumane. And while it’s sad that we have to bribe prisoners to behave themselves, it obviously works, and that’s good for everyone involved.

But let’s examine the guy in this article. He’s doing 70 months for assault with a knife. He apparently didn’t kill anyone but he obviously hurt someone (maybe not physically but, at the very least, mentally). And he gets to work, albeit for a very small wage, and save up enough money for a TV?

Why wasn’t he made to work and give that $300 to whoever’s life he messed up when he pulled that knife?! Not that it would make up for what he did, but sheesh. He’s apparently not too miserable being fed and clothed for almost 6 years, maybe having to hand over his hard-earned cash would drive home the point that you don’t pull a knife on someone.

That’s got to be a slap in the face if you’re his victim. Not only are you forced to pay taxes to support his sorry criminal ass, you find out that he’s allowed to have cable, at your expense, and he’s allowed to work and buy a nicer TV than yours?

I can see both sides to this but I think my sympathy lies with the victim in this case.

2

You should have never left Jack. Jack, adulterer as if he is, is a considerate and deeply ethical man. As DAs you were an excellent team, and as lovers you might have been able to heal his heart over the loss of Claire.

3

I don’t care if it’s flat screen. His 7 inch television is not better than my modest (and cheaper) television.

4

His 7 inch television is not better than my modest (and cheaper) television.

OK, fair enough. A 7 inch TV, even though it’s a flatscreen, isn’t much to write home about. It’s no plasma.

It’s the principle, though …

5

On one hand, I see where Abbie is coming from: Restitution is an important part of this. But how do you pay for ‘pain and suffering’, for one thing, and for another thing, what is the point of prison: forcing them to pay restitution or forcing them to live apart from their fellow people in a bad environment to teach them a lesson? That’s an important question.

Also, prison work programs are supposed to teach prisoners the value of labor. If you are working and seeing nothing for it, why should you keep working at all? What is the value of your labor? What motivates you to get a job outside prison? You can beat them and beat them until they work, but if you do that you might as well tear down the walls and plant a cotton field. On the other hand, if you want them to associate labor with honest gains and a lifestyle that lacks jail time, you give them profits from their work. It’s simple Skinnerian behavioralism, and it works.

6

But how do you pay for ‘pain and suffering’, for one thing,

Oh, you can never pay for it. But you can at least attempt to. I’m sure whoever he pulled a knife on could use 300 bucks. Couldn’t we all?

and for another thing, what is the point of prison: forcing them to pay restitution or forcing them to live apart from their fellow people in a bad environment to teach them a lesson?

Why can’t it be both?

Restitution isn’t used nearly enough in our criminal justice system, IMHO, especially for non-violent crimes. If someone breaks into your house while you’re at work and steals the emergency cash from your cookie jar (let’s get wild and say it was 500 bucks), which would make you happier? The perp sitting in jail, or getting your 500 bucks back? The government will garnish people’s paychecks for taxes and child support, so why not restitution? Maybe they do, correct me if I’m wrong. I do know that they won’t throw someone in jail who has been ordered to pay restitution (most who have been ordered to, don’t) as long as they have made a good faith effort to pay. I’m sure there’s a million ways of hiding money, though.

If you are working and seeing nothing for it, why should you keep working at all?

Well, in the case of a prisoner, you’re going to work whether you see anything for it or not, because they MAKE you work.

You can beat them and beat them until they work, but if you do that you might as well tear down the walls and plant a cotton field.

FWIW the Constitution doesn’t prohibit slavery for prisoners.

On the other hand, if you want them to associate labor with honest gains and a lifestyle that lacks jail time, you give them profits from their work.

No argument here. But could we also be showing them that if they commit a crime, they’ll be well provided for, given a job and have the chance to buy themselves little perks? I’m not saying prison is paradise. I am saying, though, that money wise they’re doing pretty darn good. No bills, no restitution to pay, and if they work long enough (provided they behave themselves), they can buy toys. Positive reinforcement is a great tool, but considering they are there because they have hurt somebody, I’m not sure that rewarding their hard work with something for themselves is the way to go. Maybe they need a little negative reinforcement: “you harmed someone, so you’re going to bust your ass and give them the money as long as you’re in prison just in case you haven’t gotten the point already.” Even giving their victim HALF of the money could be a start. That way they get some of what they earned, but also feel the pain of losing 50% of it.

I’m just sayin’. Criminal law is not my area of interest or expertise; I’ve hated my criminal law classes. I’m much better with civil stuff. :slight_smile: I could be wrong, who knows. Just thinking and all …

7

Yeah, it teaches work, get something of value. Behave like a jackass, you get it taken away. Valuable lessons to be learned.
It gives the guards a big hammer to hold over their heads…sounds like a good idea to me.

8

If it’s the principle of allowing prisoners certain ‘special’ items, Abbie, how about cigarettes? Many prisons allow prisoners to buy them with their small wages. Any objections?

If you’re thinking something along the lines “the principle of the thing” + “the scale of the luxury” = unacceptable, we’re still only talking about $300 of earned money here. Or say 20 - 30 packs of cigarettes.

In general:

  • Only $300
  • his own $
  • only a 7" TV anyway
  • minor security prison
  • stabbing not directly linked to TV

Hardly the scenario the title of this thread suggests, is it?

9

I’m wondering who gets the money from the sale. I mean $300 for a 7-inch flat screen? I only paid $850 and got a new 36" Toshiba flat with all the bells and whistles. And my income is a damn sight ahead of his. The crook got hosed. Which kinda makes me feel a little better.

I also wonder what the exact assault was.

10

How do they make you work? It’s illegal to beat them, or deprive them of food. They make you work by tying it to privileges. For example, oh I don’t know, a tv in your cell.

11

No I think you are confusing a 7-inch LCD flat with your 36" CRT flat, big difference. I didn’t read this particular article, but I read one elsewhere, where it stated they were made of clear plastic so things couldn’t be hidden.

I’d imagine it’s some type of specialized model just manufactured for prisons. Certainly overpriced, but not hosed.