Right, but racial segregation by the government wasn’t done because overbearing tyrants wanted to force this segregation on an unwilling population. The segregation in law was simply a reflection of what society already had. Blacks and whites lived apart, went to different churches and schools, so the law provided for a continuation of this in the public sphere.
But 40 years ago, we decided that we weren’t going to do this anymore. That personal preference be damned, we had to move toward a society where we don’t categorize based on race. The result of this is that most people pretend that race doesn’t matter and accept integration as the right thing to do.
Now, the OP is stating that these prisoners hate each other, would rather be apart, so we should have segregation. We don’t do that anymore in America, nor should we…
Sure it was. There was a sizable part of the population being segregated that was unwilling and knew it was getting the raw end of the deal. But the other part of the population didn’t count their opinions.
I’ll state that I agree segregation is wrong, but how is the sentiment in your post different than any other matter that is decided by a democratic vote?
Try using the right words next time. Most people don’t assume you’re watching documentaries when you say you’re watching “those prison shows” - the assumption’s going to be you’re forming your opinions from Prison Break and Oz reruns. And don’t think that documentaries show reality any more than openly fictional TV series do (especially when most TV “documentaries” about prison have titles like America’s Most Shocking Prison Riots and Violence Behind Bars. Any documentary filmmaker can invent his own reality in the editing room.
If you’d read the OP, you’d know I was referring to the real life prison shows (the documentaries flooding MSNBC and such) that inspired this thread. And no, we’re not talking about When Gay Black Jewish Dwarf Clown Prisoners Attack! on FOX.
If folks want to give more credence to information from TV documentaries than to first-hand accounts from folks who work in and are knowledgeable about the situations, that’s their right.
The worst inmate on inmate violence I’ve seen perpetrated has been between members of the same ethnic group: Two guys both used to getting their way having a dispute about who got to use the sink first. One got the drop on the other, and when it was done, one guy’s knee bent 90 degrees the wrong way.
I think a much more rational system would be a three-tiered system: [ol]
[li]An all-first timers prison. And I mean real first timers, people who’ve never been in trouble with the law. Not someone who has just committed their first adult felony after a seven year record of juvenile detention and probation; “sealed juvenile record” be damned.[/li][li]Repeat offenders with sentences short enough that their rehabilitation (or lack thereof) matters.[/li][li]Lifers. People who will either get out of prison when they are retirement age, or never.[/ol][/li]The first tier would be predicated on the supposition that some otherwise upstanding citizens made a one-time error, and will mostly want to mend their ways.
The second tier would cover people who appear to be career criminals or incorrigible. Who might be rehabilitated but who have to clear a much higher bar.
The third tier would be those whom it practically doesn’t matter if they reform or not; exile in confinement basically.
This would make a lot more sense than our “one size fits all” system, which throws cherries in with hardened cons.
We do that already. We actually have a lot more than three different tiers and the breakdown’s a lot more sophisticated than the one you’ve described.
When a prisoner first arrives in prison in New York state, he’s sent to a reception facility. We review his criminal history (not only the crimes he’s currently serving for but past crimes as well). We also have psychologists and doctors examine him to determine if he has any physical or mental health problems. We check into his educational and occupational history. We determine if he’s likely to need protective custody. We even take into consideration what part of the state his family members live in. All of these are factors when we decide what facility to send him (or her) to.
Keep in mind that we want to prevent problems. Our main interest is keeping the prisons nice and peaceful. And we know that mixing together the wrong prisoners will create trouble.
Keep in mind that most people like this don’t go to prison. In most cases, if it’s your first crime, you’re going to get probation. The only way a “real first timer” is likely to be in prison is if his first crime was something like premeditated murder. He’s more of a security problem than some guy who’s doing his fifth bid for burglary.