Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!
Rock on Joe Arpaio!!
A2597
Fanboy
in Zocalo v2.0
TO THOSE OF YOU NOT FAMILIAR WITH JOE ARPAIO
HE IS THE MARICOPA ARIZONA COUNTY SHERIFF
AND HE KEEPS GETTING ELECTED OVER AND OVER.
THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY:
Sheriff Joe Arpaio (in Arizona) who created the "tent city jail":
He has jail meals down to 40 cents a serving and charges the inmates for them.
He stopped smoking and porno magazines in the jails. Took away their weights. Cut off all but "G" movies.
He started chain gangs so the inmates could do free work on county and city projects.
Then he started chain gangs for women so he wouldn't get sued for discrimination.
He took away cable TV until he found out there was a federal court order that required cable TV for jails. So he hooked up the cable TV again only let in the Disney channel and the weather channel.
When asked why the weather channel he replied, so they will know how hot it's gonna be while they are working on my chain gangs.
He cut off coffee since it has zero nutritional value.
When the inmates complained, he told them, "This isn't the Ritz/Carlton. If you don't like it, don't come back."
He bought Newt Gingrich' lecture series on videotape that he pipes into the jails.
When asked by a reporter if he had any lecture series by a Democrat, he replied that a democratic lecture series might explain why a lot of the inmates were in his jails in the first place.
More on the Arizona Sheriff:
With temperatures being even hotter than usual in Phoenix (116 degrees just set a new record), the Associated Press reports: About 2,000 inmates living in a barbed-wire-surrounded tent encampment at the Maricopa County Jail have been given permission to strip down to their government-issued pink boxer shorts.
On Wednesday, hundreds of men wearing boxers were either curled up on their bunk beds or chatted in the tents, which reached 138 degrees inside the week before.
Many were also swathed in wet, pink towels as sweat collected on their chests and dripped down to their pink socks.
"It feels like we are in a furnace," said James Zanzot, an inmate who has lived in the tents for 1 year. "It's inhumane."
Joe Arpaio, the tough-guy sheriff who created the tent city and long ago started making his prisoners wear pink, and eat bologna sandwiches, is not one bit sympathetic He said Wednesday that he told all of the inmates: "It's 120 degrees in Iraq and our soldiers are living in tents too, and they have to wear full battle gear, but they didn't commit any crimes, so shut your damned mouths!"
Way to go, Sheriff! Maybe if all prisons were like this one there would be a lot less crime and/or repeat offenders. Criminals should be punished for their crimes - not live in luxury until it's time for their parole, only to go out and commit another crime so they can get back in to live on taxpayers money and enjoy things taxpayers can't afford to have for themselves.
----------------------------------
Wish all our nations Sherifs were like this guy, would cut the prison problem in half!
HE IS THE MARICOPA ARIZONA COUNTY SHERIFF
AND HE KEEPS GETTING ELECTED OVER AND OVER.
THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY:
Sheriff Joe Arpaio (in Arizona) who created the "tent city jail":
He has jail meals down to 40 cents a serving and charges the inmates for them.
He stopped smoking and porno magazines in the jails. Took away their weights. Cut off all but "G" movies.
He started chain gangs so the inmates could do free work on county and city projects.
Then he started chain gangs for women so he wouldn't get sued for discrimination.
He took away cable TV until he found out there was a federal court order that required cable TV for jails. So he hooked up the cable TV again only let in the Disney channel and the weather channel.
When asked why the weather channel he replied, so they will know how hot it's gonna be while they are working on my chain gangs.
He cut off coffee since it has zero nutritional value.
When the inmates complained, he told them, "This isn't the Ritz/Carlton. If you don't like it, don't come back."
He bought Newt Gingrich' lecture series on videotape that he pipes into the jails.
When asked by a reporter if he had any lecture series by a Democrat, he replied that a democratic lecture series might explain why a lot of the inmates were in his jails in the first place.
More on the Arizona Sheriff:
With temperatures being even hotter than usual in Phoenix (116 degrees just set a new record), the Associated Press reports: About 2,000 inmates living in a barbed-wire-surrounded tent encampment at the Maricopa County Jail have been given permission to strip down to their government-issued pink boxer shorts.
On Wednesday, hundreds of men wearing boxers were either curled up on their bunk beds or chatted in the tents, which reached 138 degrees inside the week before.
Many were also swathed in wet, pink towels as sweat collected on their chests and dripped down to their pink socks.
"It feels like we are in a furnace," said James Zanzot, an inmate who has lived in the tents for 1 year. "It's inhumane."
Joe Arpaio, the tough-guy sheriff who created the tent city and long ago started making his prisoners wear pink, and eat bologna sandwiches, is not one bit sympathetic He said Wednesday that he told all of the inmates: "It's 120 degrees in Iraq and our soldiers are living in tents too, and they have to wear full battle gear, but they didn't commit any crimes, so shut your damned mouths!"
Way to go, Sheriff! Maybe if all prisons were like this one there would be a lot less crime and/or repeat offenders. Criminals should be punished for their crimes - not live in luxury until it's time for their parole, only to go out and commit another crime so they can get back in to live on taxpayers money and enjoy things taxpayers can't afford to have for themselves.
----------------------------------
Wish all our nations Sherifs were like this guy, would cut the prison problem in half!
Comments
hard cores would relish it and get harder
and the softies will whimper and never return
which I guess is a good thing. Much easier to keep a small bunch of hard boiled arseholes than a large bunch of wannabes.
Supporters of deterrants to crime are forgetting one thing when they say that harsh punishments will make criminals learn their lesson, and that is that [b]people are stupid[/b]. People don't accept the consequences of their actions, they blame their circumstances on other people, and all that sticking such a person in a chain gang is going to accomplish is deepening their contempt for the system.
[B]From a sociological perspective, dumbass kids who earn their first substantial stay behind bars will [i]become[/i] hardened and almost certainly wind up back behind bars soon after they get out.
Supporters of deterrants to crime are forgetting one thing when they say that harsh punishments will make criminals learn their lesson, and that is that [b]people are stupid[/b]. People don't accept the consequences of their actions, they blame their circumstances on other people, and all that sticking such a person in a chain gang is going to accomplish is deepening their contempt for the system. [/B][/QUOTE] Absolutely, no one thanks the system for putting them in jail sure you learn a lesson but its not going to lessen your will to to do what you want. You can't teach all gangstas the value of life or the value of a book either.
Certainly though everything I have been through has increased my resolve but Im not looking fot those situations anymore. Not deliberately at least.
These people are either in holding awaiting trial on a felony charge, after which they will be transfered to a state institution, or they are guilty of mistermeaner violations, thinks like a certain friend of mine who ended up in jail on a charge of "criminal mischief" Alot of the pranksters, jokers and amature criminals WILL be detered by such things.
secondly
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by the_exile [/i]
[B]From a sociological perspective, dumbass kids who earn their first substantial stay behind bars will [i]become[/i] hardened and almost certainly wind up back behind bars soon after they get out.
Supporters of deterrants to crime are forgetting one thing when they say that harsh punishments will make criminals learn their lesson, and that is that [b]people are stupid[/b]. People don't accept the consequences of their actions, they blame their circumstances on other people, and all that sticking such a person in a chain gang is going to accomplish is deepening their contempt for the system. [/B][/QUOTE]
Exile, by your own logic then rehabilitation is most likely going to fail also.
Which leaves you with one solution to hardend crimials , you shoot them in the head and bury them. Is that what your going to argue for?
[B]Just a couple months ago I visited the country jail for Sociology and talked to three prisoners, two former drug addicts and a murderer, who had, after having spent as much as two of the last three decades in prison, earned Associate's degrees. There were other prisoners, those who had not elected to partake in the education programs, who were the reason that the females in my class were required to wear sweatshirts. [/B][/QUOTE]
So for a certain small percentage rehabilitation works, just like for a certain percentage deterance works, and the rest we are going to have to shoot them?
Honestly the only reason why _Z_ here at the lair isnt a criminal is that after his one stint in county lockup he decided it wasnt worth it. So is that a valid counter example?
Im personaly big on shooting certain people, but we all know I am an old school lex talionus retributive type. Deterence nor rehabilitation is what motivates my beliefs, just that certain actions earn certain reciprocal actions.
For them, there is nothing we can really do until they wise up.
For the rest, this deterant approch will work. Get them BEFORE they are a hardend criminal.
Not going to happen, but it should. Alcohol is debatable, though I fail to see any benifit of it's consuption, and lots of negatives of it's consuption. But of course, then we have to take in Soda and then where does it end?
But I don't think we should legalize pot.
I've never touched the stuff, but I can't think of any real downsides to its legalization. In terms of physical and mental health, marijuana is no worse than tobacco.
[B]wrong... Hooch is not good for mental health, it will fugg you up faster than tobacco or booze [/B][/QUOTE] Hooch? Uhhh hey hoochie is good i donno what your talking bout...
[B]If it's recent, then perhaps I haven't heard of it. However, pretty much everything you learn in DARE (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) and programs like it is 100% bullshit. [/B][/QUOTE]
Its still up in the air, because the samples of the studies are fairly small, and they are looking at schizophrenia in particular.
Its could be that cannibis is working as a trigger for those with a partial genetic predisposition towards schizophrenia, meaning those who carry genes linked to schizophrenia but wouldnt normaly develop it, run the risk of developing it if they use cannabis as teenagers.
Secondly Cannibis does cause lung cancer, in fact smoking ANYTHING will contribute to the development of lung cancer. Be it cloves, tobbaco or what ever.
The way it [i]should[/i] work is that you have a hard time in jail, bad food, lots of community service (like chain gangs) etc. And then when you get out, youre almost guaranteed a job because of what youve done in jail (education? etc.)
pisses me off.
[B]Ya, the way it wors in Sweden now is that you get sent to jail, where you spend your time eating good food, watching TV, generally getting off light. Then when your 'punishment' is through, you cant get a job because youve been in jail.
The way it [i]should[/i] work is that you have a hard time in jail, bad food, lots of community service (like chain gangs) etc. And then when you get out, youre almost guaranteed a job because of what youve done in jail (education? etc.)
pisses me off. [/B][/QUOTE]
Prisons over here are, as far as i know, also pretty "comfortable". So much, that it seems we have "jail tourists" that come here because it's better in our jails than where they came from...
[B]Its still up in the air, because the samples of the studies are fairly small, and they are looking at schizophrenia in particular.
Its could be that cannibis is working as a trigger for those with a partial genetic predisposition towards schizophrenia, meaning those who carry genes linked to schizophrenia but wouldnt normaly develop it, run the risk of developing it if they use cannabis as teenagers.
[/B][/QUOTE] what?
apparently, the definition of 'psychosis' used in the study was broad enough to include "millions of people who've never touched a spliff":eek:
Bad food will induce riots putting inmates and cell people at unwarrented risk.
More US grant money will be funded for studies that insted to find bad things with pot than good.
If you think about it, nothing on this planet is good for you. Hell even cellular resperation increases your risk of cancer, but I don't see many health freaks holding their breath.
Pot is not physiologically addicting, while nicotine and alcohol. In fact withdrawl symptoms from alcohol addiction can eb fatal.
By legalizing pot you can put taxes on it (which is why cigs will never be criminalized, if the nicotine was just taken out things would greatly improve, hell I smoked one pack of cigs over about a month and I *still* get cravings)
-- Unless the alternative places other people in danger... nobody should be detained in conditions which are difficult to tolerate.
-- Difficult-to-tolerate conditions (like freezing or scorching temperature) may endager health, reqiring medical treatment to be offered, which is complicated when the person is being detained against their wishes.
-- Likewise, depending on situation (especially in case of mild offenses)... making life difficult for the person being detained... may obstruct the person from considering and realizing that *they* behaved unreasonably, and society may be *justified* in demanding them to change.
If representatives of society start severely inconveniencing detained people... a person who committed a *mild* offense may *not* recover from a criminal mindset... but instead start carrying a severe grudge towards the system... which took retribution *beyond* the reasonable.
But the goal of jail (generally prescribed for harming other people's property -- as opposed to prison, generally prescribed for harming people) is them recovering... becoming productive citizens... is it not?
So perhaps, one should *not* deliberately annoy them. I say... that one should definitely not play speeches from a slimeball like Newt Gingrich... unless the prisoners *choose* to listen to him.
-- If detained individuals agree to work for free... that is fine. However, incentives (like a wider selection of meals, or access to books from library) might result in more of them opting to work...
...and I think working to receive benefits *would* contribute to their rehabilitation (especially in case of those who stole). Finding non-harmful sources of sustenance is, after all... what society expects from them later on.
[B]i was just reading in a New Scientist editorial that a new study of the effects of cannabis that seemed to show that there was a link to schizophrenia was based on a study of [I]3[/I] individuals, and the UK health secretary wants to use this as a basis for reclassifying it.
apparently, the definition of 'psychosis' used in the study was broad enough to include "millions of people who've never touched a spliff":eek: [/B][/QUOTE]
The editorial is a little misleading, if you find the actual article you will find mention of other studies on the schizophernia links
But again, so far all it seems to be doing is activating damaged genes in those who already posses them.
[B]
-- Likewise, depending on situation (especially in case of mild offenses)... making life difficult for the person being detained... may obstruct the person from considering and realizing that *they* behaved unreasonably, and society may be *justified* in demanding them to change.
If representatives of society start severely inconveniencing detained people... a person who committed a *mild* offense may *not* recover from a criminal mindset... but instead start carrying a severe grudge towards the system... which took retribution *beyond* the reasonable.
But the goal of jail (generally prescribed for harming other people's property -- as opposed to prison, generally prescribed for harming people) is them recovering... becoming productive citizens... is it not?
[/B][/QUOTE]
Personaly I have found little proof in my own studies of punishment theory to support the rehabilitation theories.
Again, criminality and recitivism rates seem to depend on cultural contexts, not the structure of the judicial system itself.