On 2/20/2020 9:16 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 20:16:32 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 2/20/2020 6:55 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 05:30:10 -0800, sms
wrote:

On 2/20/2020 12:16 AM, John B. wrote:

snip

Wasn't California a state that instituted the "3 strikes and you're
out" thing where habitual criminals were kept in jail?
--
cheers,

John B.

Like many laws, it was a poorly thought out, feel-good law. It created
tremendous prison over-crowding, keeping many people in prison that were
no threat. One person received a life sentence for his third
strike--stealing a piece of pizza from a group at a birthday party in a
pizza place, even though he asked one of the kids for a slice and the
kid nodded yes. The kid said that he was scared and prosecutors said
that it was "robbery by intimidation."

The 3 strikes law resulted in another poorly thought out law, Prop 47,
that allowed habitual criminals to not go to prison in an effort to
comply with federal mandates to reduce prison over-crowding. It has led
to a wave of retail theft and car break-ins
https://www.independent.org/news/news_detail.asp?newsID=1247.

Go to a department store or a drug store these days and it's almost like
back in the olden days where a shop employee has to get you the
merchandise. And we're not just talking about liquor or smart phones,
we're talking about Tide detergent, bicycle accessories, ibuprofen,
sometimes even candy. It's locked up
https://sacobserver.com/2018/01/shoplifting-is-to-blame-for-locked-up-items-not-walmart/.

England, in the 1800's, and I'm sure other countries, have tried to
solve the problems of habitual criminals. England, at least partially
solved the problem, by shipping the miscreants off to Australia, but
what can be done today?

One might try branding a big "T" or "R" on the evildoer's cheek or
forehead but that might start a new fashion trend like the ripped
jeans and the four day growth of beard,

Or perhaps the "Prison Farm" solution as was used in Mississippi,
among other states. That could, if managed properly, turn out to be a
profit making establishment.

Or is working now deemed to be a cruel and unusual punishment?


The precedent is a branded face with an "F" for "fugitus",
which was effective because giving food or shelter to a
branded fugitive was a capital crime. We're not ready for
that here. Yet.

While of course there are exceptions I do read that a rather large
percentage of those imprisoned commit further felonies after being
released, as many as 70% in some instances. It would seem that a
certain percent of the population are criminally inclined and
unfortunately this percentage appears to be increasing as in 1976
incarcerated amounted to some 232/100,000 in the U.S. while in 2018 it
was 655/100,000, an increase of 280% in 42 years (unless I got my
numbers wrong). Scary!
--
cheers,

John B.


Many aspects of our culture have changed over that time, not
the least being the demise of casual (cash) labor and
draconian barriers to entry (minimum wage, reporting, ID
cards, endless capricious liability resulting in 'background
checks' and such) into labor markets. This is pernicious as
regards young and unskilled since no 'first job' often means
no job whatsoever. But it's fatal to the formerly incarcerated.

When I was young, one might easily travel the country,
always confident of finding a day or two of work everywhere
and anywhere (As I did. Everywhere.) . This is no longer
true, to the greater loss of the nation's wealth and
productivity, no more painfully felt than at the bottom of
society, those who suffer most.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971