It's a matter of necessity, not priority.
Lots of people don't need higher education, and crime will always be up in an area with a lot of cultural diversity.
No its not because of a higher crime rate. Its because we lock people up for tiny drug offenses for 10 plus years. We throw people in jail for years when it doesn't actually change anything and they just recommitt. Corrections system is extremely inefficient. It doesn't focus on helping offenders get their life back on track. Instead we let them rot in a cell and tell them they're a disgrace to society just because they had a tiny bag of pot in their pocket.
I'm majoring in criminal justice and this, along with police brutality, is one of the main topics discussed in almost every class.
What about rapists and murderers?
Abusers?
What about bangers who peddle coke to kids and crackheads who break into people's houses just to pay for their next fix?
Weed and police brutality are the cause?
In California?
Sure, why not?
Literally drug offenses make up roughly 50% of the US prison population. There are violent offenders that are incarcerated but the rate for crimes like murder are much lower than minor drug offenses. While police brutality is big in the media, there are hardly any incarcerated for it. Keep in mind the US has the highest prison population of more than 2 million
There's a documentary on Netflix called 13th that goes into depth about the mass prison incarceration, specifically in regards that it is primarily made up of african americans and hispanics, who are also primarily incarcerated due to drugs.
If you catch someone doing a drug-related crime (like transport or drug-abuse) three times, throwing them in prison isn't going to help them. They need rehabilition. Because when they get out, they'll just fall back into the same habits.
@nerdsarecool1212 and @keepsake make a good point. The war on drugs is just making the situation worse and is resulting in high incarceration rates for non-violent drug offenders (although Obama is releasing them which is great). Rapists, murderers and whatever else you named do deserve to be in prison, and people who committed a crime like theft or violence because of drugs should also get a punishment along with rehab, but throwing someone in jail for years because you found them with a bit of weed? Really?
And ffs, @famousone are you really gonna challenge the opinion of someone who majors in the subject with your uneducated one?
Another thing influencing the numbers is the privatization of the "correctional" system. Naturally there will be less focus on actually CORRECTING the behavior of inmates, cause just locking them up under the most "cost neutral" circumstances will naturally raise the number of repeat offenses.
.
The incarceration of drug users has traditionally been a way to weed out poor people who are not seen as an asset to capitalism. It used to be ethnic minorities, but today there are "enough" poor and left behind white people, so meth has become the main reason to lock up economically useless white people. Lock them up and someone can make a buck with them.
Another thing with prison privatization is that they're contracted with the government for the government to give them prisoners to house. They charge the government more money if beds aren't filled in these prisons. So there's a motive to get as many people locked up in these prisons so the government doesnt have to pay for empty beds.
I don't think it's privatization perse that's the problem, I think it has more to do with how a government handles it. If you give a company free reign, then of course they're going to try and make the most amount of money, and disregard morality. But if you properly regluate the market, it can really have a lot of benefits. Take public schools vs. private schools, as an example. If you disagree with some of the morals taught at a public school, or you want to build a school which puts the focus on a certain field of study, you can build your own school, granted it fits within certain regulations. It is good that we have this opportunity, because some of our interests are different from the norm. However, both private and public schools have score at least national average on standardized tests. This allows us to differ as we see fit, without over stepping boundaries or creating problems.
Privatization only works for the rich. They can separate themselves from the poor, enjoy top quality and service and can even invest and make a profit from it. The way _all_ privatizations are organized is to let the big companies work out the rules,because - of course -"they know best what to do". This usually makes things more expensive for everyone and the quality goes down for those who can only afford the standard. Not so long ago the quality of education in public schools was at a satisfying level. Now public school is something everyone tries to avoid, if he can afford it. Public transport got much worse literally everywhere it was privatized.
Can't say that I disagree on the public transport one. But I really think it can usher in techological change, if the government regulates it properly, and sets up a maximum price. Otherwise, companies are obviously going to abuse it.
^ this. I hate it when someone I'm debating downvotes my every comment to make themselves feel better. Debates and discussions should always be civil and calm without any hate but some people just can't grasp that and even resort to ad hominem attacks when they run out of arguments which is quite infuriating.
Actually most federal prisons are still operated by the government. Less than 10% of federal prisons are privately owned and operated. However, I can't seem to find a legit statistic on amount of private state prisons.
Well, this picture is talking about state prisons, so your factoid about federal prisons doesn't apply here. Thanks for playing, the exit's 'round back!
The post is specifically talking about California prisons. However, you mentioned "most prisons" and didn't specify federal or state. I just gave you a statistic on federal prisons. Perhaps most state prisons are private, but I can't seem to find a statistic from an accurate source on that, nor have my classes talked much about state prisons like we have federal prisons.
Didn't think I needed to clarify since I was replying to the comment about how much sense the picture makes, which would mean we were discussing this specific instance, i.e. state prisons in Calif.
This would make more sense if it was prisoners vs people enrolled in k-12 schools. Higher education an option for many and not something that you are legally obligated to attend, unlike prison or basic education. Also, in many prisons there is an option to get a basic education.
Nerdsarecool is majoring in criminal justice, but somehow the university he/she Is at teaches that crime is caused by police brutality? Maybe one of the reasons there aren't more universities built is that the ones now are teaching some pretty faulty logic in place of reality.
I didn't say crime is caused by police brutality. I said the reasons we have more prisons is because we mass incarcerate, not because we actually have a high crime rate.
The point of the post is that we built more prisons than we do universities. Famousone said that we build more prisons because we have a high crime rate. The reason we have more prisons is because we criminalize tiny drug offenses and nonviolent offenses.
Media may tell you we have a higher crime rate than before, but crime rate depends on what we criminalize. And right now, we throw people in prison for 5 plus years for small things that don't even matter.
I may not have gotten my point across clearly. I was actually waiting for class to start when I wrote my original post on my phone. So I'm sorry if you misunderstood my point.
1Reply
deleted
· 7 years ago
While I agree that there are far too many people unnecessarily imprisoned in the US, there aren't a whole lot of new universities cropping up anywhere.
If you're interested in this topic and have Netflix, look up The 13th. It's a really good documentary on prison systems/deep rooted racism. To be fair, its a fairly opinionated documentary but from my point of view it's like that for a good reason.
Lots of people don't need higher education, and crime will always be up in an area with a lot of cultural diversity.
I'm majoring in criminal justice and this, along with police brutality, is one of the main topics discussed in almost every class.
Abusers?
What about bangers who peddle coke to kids and crackheads who break into people's houses just to pay for their next fix?
Weed and police brutality are the cause?
In California?
Sure, why not?
And ffs, @famousone are you really gonna challenge the opinion of someone who majors in the subject with your uneducated one?
.
The incarceration of drug users has traditionally been a way to weed out poor people who are not seen as an asset to capitalism. It used to be ethnic minorities, but today there are "enough" poor and left behind white people, so meth has become the main reason to lock up economically useless white people. Lock them up and someone can make a buck with them.
I may not have gotten my point across clearly. I was actually waiting for class to start when I wrote my original post on my phone. So I'm sorry if you misunderstood my point.