It seems in societies best interest to rehabilitate criminals does it not? If you educate prisoners and help them overcome the issues that brought them to commit crime, they’re less likely to offend again on release.
@guest_, I definitely agree about rehabilitation. I was simply adding to the list of what they receive in prison that they do not, and have no way of, paying for. Doing work exchange seems perfectly reasonable.
@famousone, couldn't agree more.
I’m on the three hot and a cot train. If the system says they need to be in there then they messed up an should be lucky they are gettin paid at all. An I’m not sayin the system is not jacked up by no means. But if ya rape, kill someone just for fun or sell drugs to a minor then by all means ya ass needs to be in there an doing somethin to pay back the tax payers. Just my .000000000001 of thought.
How do you pay back the tax payer though? What is a human life worth in money? And even if you just need to pay back the cost of your incarceration- wouldn’t prudent mitigation of that debt be to minimize the time incarcerated by giving someone every opportunity to reform and lead a productive life? Despite 80’s cartoons, most street dealers aren’t evil. They sell drugs for money. They can make more that way than working. Since the average street dealer makes $20-40k a year- that isn’t a hard salary to beat with minor skills or education. Wouldn’t it be just as prudent to prevent crimes by offering decent wages and opportunity for employment to people to start? Why is it ok to treat them as garbage for breaking the law when doing the same to others is what got them locked up? If we say “it isn’t a crime if we do it to a criminal” what stops private prisons from broader lanes of criminal for free labor? If crime makes you “open game” then isn’t the one retaliating then open game too?
But if these inmate workers end up competing for government contracts, they end up hurting legitimate companies. We need an old road removed. Inmates can do it for $34. Joe's Construction will do it for $15,000. Joe and his guys are going to lose out.
They never said it was the first thing they noticed.
I noticed it, too, though mind you only after my second viewing of the pic. And if you don't notice when a picture puts exclusively black people overtop of the word "slavery," you have probably not been paying attention to anything going on in terms of race relations, ever. Especially when said picture looks oddly outdated, and has an agenda to push. I imagine if you added a white prison guard to the pic you could start a full scale riot in the comments section
Pretty sure chain gangs are a thing of the past, so here's some examples of what prisoners do today:
1. Texas license plates are (I believe exclusively) made by inmates
2. Community service. Police in my hometown used to hire inmates to clean up their training facility. It was the most popular detail apparently, because the cops would throw them a barbeque after.
3. Cleaning the jails/prisons (janitors).
Those are the ones I can say with confidence, but I'm sure there are more. The reasons they do this are
1. Education. Establish a work ethic, familiarity with equipment, and get experience for when they get out.
2. Money. To buy things from the prison commissary. Maybe save some for later idk.
3. "Good time." To accumulate "Good time," to get out early.
I'm assuming they can do this for the same reason that it is legal to not pay interns: because the experience is the payment. Because that meme about unpaid interns being illegal slave labor is (at least in Texas) false.
6Reply
deleted
· 6 years ago
Isn’t this kind of like community service? Maybe they get their sentence reduced if they work a lot or something, or they can use the money to kind of buy time off their sentence
If this is like anything the rest of the country this isn't mandatory its by choice. You can get an education, you can work at various jobs, assuming you qualify, or you can do the basic prison work (laundry, kitchen work, cleaning, etc.), which you still get paid for, but only have to do the bare minimum before you get something like free time. To get the chance to leave the prison, get outside, merely have a change of scenery, is something alot of inmates try to do. Of course the $0.04 per hour is normal. The extraordinary part of this the working on State construction projects. Regardless this is more like Indentured Servitude rather than Slavery. You only have until your sentence is complete and then you go your way. Slavery was permanent unless you were freed or escaped.
There are two issues here. The first is that we can call anything “by choice.” North Korea, soviet Russia, communist China- all are recorded as saying that as a peapoles government- the laws and ways and doctrines of the regime are followed by choice of the people. In fact- it’s a concept of law that duress can negate choice in a contract. For instance- if bill gates was drowning and promised you all his money to save him- he could void that contract after being saved as in that situation anyone would do anything. When you take a persons freedom and offer them little bits back for shows of good behavior- you motivate them to do good. When you profit off of a person with no reasonable relief otherwise though that is exploitation. The same is true of war profiteering or many other things. The second is corruption. The fact that a prison can underbid other contractors bound by law to fair wage. That individuals and especially private prisons can abuse this for great gain.
While I do completely understand your point. Prisoners, specifically lawfully incarcerated prisoners in the US, have lost there right to freedom. Hence why they can be legally incarcerated. They haven't lost all there human rights but as a penalty for breaking the law their freedom and some of the basic rights law abiding citizens are given have been temporarily stripped away. Now you raised the point about the private industry being unable to compete. In that you are correct but something to consider. It's the governments job to use taxpayers money as frugally and as efficiently as possible. Now if it cost say 2 million to contract a private construction company just to perform maintenance and upkeep on public roads, which is the governments job, that leaves less money for other improvements. If the State, being Louisiana not the nation, can do it for a 1/4 of the price more money can go to other things like say the school systems then it's their responsiblity to do so.
As far as making choices under duress I don't think you understand exactly how US prisoners are placed in jobs. First they don't have the right to refuse to work if that work is to the betterment of the society in which they violated the laws. Second they have very, very strict guidelines for how long and how intense they can work. They have 100% health care coverage while incarcerated. They have all food, shelter, and transportation needs met without their need to supply any of it. Third, the type of job is almost entirely the prisoners choice. Fourth if they meet certain criteria they can be exempt from work altogether. Some of those criteria are furthering their education, taking a course of technical training, and of course physical inability. I'm not saying this couldn't be abused but up front it is a rather good and beneficial system.
I like the IDEA of having prisoners do something useful. But below the surface it gets ugly. I’ll leave arguments of exploitation asides. There’s lots of those in this thread. But here’s the thing- John wants to build a factory. It will take 3,000 labor hours to do this. The cheapest construction company in his area pays federal minimum wage ($7.25 and hour.) that’s a bid of $21,750 without materials. The prison can do it for $1200. How long before the other contractors can’t get work? Small local businesses? Maybe the warden knows this. Maybe he tells The contractor that his crew might be too busy to bid that job if someone were to leave some cash out for him? How long until the warden is one of the richest most powerful men in town? Maybe he puts more guys on the job and doesn’t pay them- cuts his guards in to stay quiet. They’re convicts. Who’s watching their rights? People are happy they’re “getting what they deserve.” There’s always a hidden cost to anything.
2
deleted
· 6 years ago
At $21 an hour, it would cost $63,000 for a single prison guard to overlook the prisoners doing the work for 3,000 hours. I doubt they'd stop at one for a large project. I've yet to hear of prisoners going into the construction business, though to be fair I haven't checked. Maybe small time projects, but large projects that require carpenters, builders, architects, electricians, engineers, plumbers, who know how to use the equipment? I kinda doubt it. Plus, you'd be the company that chose to hire a bunch prisoners. Communities may not appreciate that.
@somespanishguy- I’m very curious where it says that. Amendment XIV has stipulations that precinct size can be reduced by population including male prisoners over 21- however much of this is negated by later laws and amendments (women being able to vote, voting age becoming 18, so on.) New York recently passed laws counting prisoners in their home districts and not the districts of incarceration, so we may want to let them know ASAP that prisoners aren’t citezens and don’t count at all. We should also notify the Supreme Court who have spent the last 40-50 years defining what rights apply to prisoners and in which ways through cases like Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 555. And if they aren’t terrorists, and they aren’t US citizens... we should let the UN know as the US has limited power to incarcerate non US citizens long term. In all seriousness though- I’m not sure where your information comes from, but prisoners do not stop being citizens. They lose certain rights as required.
I watched a documentary called 13, coming from the thirteen amendment to the US Constitution which reads: Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. It means that any person committed of a crime can basically become a slave, as said by the Constitution
That is in fact text from the 13th amendment. But we need to look a little deeper. The first thing we need to consider- US law allows the government to seize land and property for almost any reason. If they even suspect it was involved in a crime, if it is in the government interest, so on. It happens but not often. Why? The fact that you theoretically CAN be held to something- doesn’t mean that you must or will. Next we need to understand that the constitution isn’t THE law. It is a basis and component of law. In our above example the constitution prohibits unreasonable search or siezure. The key is in the legal definition of “reasonable” and who makes that determination. The same constitution outlines certain protections to criminals- including prohibition of “cruel and unusual punishment.” The Supreme Court and legislature carries many cases and rulings helping define what those things are. Slavery is safely within “cruel” and easily “unusual” as a form of punishment. So nah. Nope.
Slavery outside of prison is illegal, but this amendment to the Constitution makes it legal as long as you're inside the prison system.
Also, you're talking about lands as a way to refer treatment for humans? How is that even close to slavery? But to keep using the land use you mentioned, you're saying it has to be reasonable to take it, but does the Thirteen Amendment say anything about reasonable treatment for prisoners.
It's true that the Constitution isn't THE law, but most laws are based of these, which is a reason why after the civil war many African-Americans were thrown into jail. Southern politicians made laws to throw African-Americans really easily into jails.
I’m talking about rights, not land. The constitution makes many broad statements about basic rights which are often given more detail through other amendments, additional laws, or interpretation by courts. I gave an example of where the constitution stipulates what CAN be done, not what SHOULD be done, one possible solution and not a requirement. While “slavery” is allowed in the form of prison labor, it is not unrestricted. For instance the chain gangs of the past were deemed to be unjust and made illegal due to conditions suffered by inmates. I never said slavery wasn’t technically legal- I said that it isn’t the best way. My original qualm with your argument had nothing to do with slavery- it was with the eronious statement that prisoners were no longer citizens- which you never supported or rebutted. The system in use today makes closer parallel to the clause in the amendment for indentured servitude anyway. The reason so many African Americans were thrown in jail is a mixture...
They maybe are citizens, but they don't always have the same rights that normal citizens do. In Europe, after going to jail, they don't have to check if they were criminals once, but in America they do. They are citizens, yet don't hold the same rights as citizens that have never gone to jail. Also, even though African-Americans make only about thirteen percent of the American population, in prison they are about 40% of the inmates.
... of economic and racial issues. The clause for slavery and servitude of prisoners exists in part due to realities of the civil war era and the reconstruction of the south as well as attempts to ease the reunion of the north and south. Prison labor quickly became a profitable industry that made many wealthy and powerful, and in the modern for profit corporate prison industrial complex is more about benefiting personal gain than having prisoners pay back any debt. People are easily duped into supporting these laws out of a desire to punish criminals, but it’s obvious that administrative support comes from people with personal financial interest in seeing them continue. It’s a big trick playing peoples emotional desire for “justice” that’s really all about money.
Yes. The number of African Americans and other people of color is highly disproportionate in US prisons. The US prison population in general is highly disproportionate to the world at large. It’s a mess. While I don’t believe that every solution that works in every country can just be used in another due to cultural, geographic, economic, and other differences- I do believe that US prisons could adapt many techniques from other countries and that our justice system could be improved. We have a punitive model in which our prisons are designed either as life long homes or to make prisoners stays unpleasant, but we need to put asides the primitive desire for revenge and look at how to create a system designed to prevent crime through fixing its simplest causes, and rehabilitate prisoners into productive citizens capable of integration to society and not institutionalized career criminals for life. The moment we made prison a profitable business we ensured abuse.
To be fair, Daniel's comment doesn't disprove the slavery argument. Most slaves were also provided with housing, food, and healthcare because a sick/tired/hungry slave couldn't do as much work. And the point is that if the government sanctions dirt cheap labor for state projects, it would be in the government's interest to keep that labor source going to reap the economic benefits. Which could lead to longer sentences, more arrests, etc.
Yeah, but a slave was property of his master, could be sold, whipped, branded and remained shackled for his life (in particular when performing outdoor work). I'm also pretty sure the type of food and garments they are afforded doesn't really compare to prison life. Food was whatever they could scrounge or what the master afforded them (varied greatly) and forget medical or anything.
Prisoners, on the other hand, are (in theory) getting 3 hot meals, warm clothing, medical (&dental) treatment, and hopefully studying so they get a life outside jail, afterwards.
They are paying back to society the crimes they committed. Unfortunately, if they aren't put to use, they won't really learn anything (work discipline, respecting hierarchy/authority, learning new skills). They are also a burden on the State for the length of their prison sentence. A costly burden, and as far as I know, the US is far from being a socialist state where taxpayers pay for other people's "social security".
Some prisons treat their prisoners better than students get treated in high school. They made the choices that got them in prison. If you account for the monetary requirements for housing, feeding, etc that tiny pay is far more than fair. Someone on minimum wage would have to choose between the things prisoners get for free.
And some terrorists are great guys, some jobs give you unlimited vacation, and some parents are amazing. That doesn’t mean that because some exist that abuses do not occur. Trying to compare directly between slavery and incarceration- separated by hundreds of years in which the standards free people lived under were very different than our own- and under great variance by master, location, etc. isn’t going to work. However comparing the concept of slavery and not the historical incidence in America may work a little better. The litmus test in prisoner rights is if the treatment is the bare minimum infringement on the rights they would have as free people in order to safely and effectively incarcerate them. The true test of a society and it’s value of human rights isn’t how we treat our neighbor and those we see as “like us” but in how we treat those we see as the lowest in society. If our virtues disappear for convenience or anger they are paper virtues.
The problem is that a lot of these are for profit prisons, where the corporations that own the prisons are using the inmates as slave labor. They have contracts with the State that the prisons must remain full and lobby for bullshit laws to make that easier. Private prisons are part of why the drug war has continued so long. And now they're being used to hold illegal immigrants without charges pending deportation like makeshift concentration camps.
Well- let’s not sell the problem short. It’s a not so secret that private prisons and judges in their pockets push for convictions and harsh sentences where otherwise they wouldn’t be used. The prison makes money that way- you mention this. But legitimizing the use of prisoners as a labor force which not only is not bound by laws on wage or other work place benefits and protections, but lacks basic constitutional rights. They lack the legal rights and access to make “waves” or protest conditions, their entire life is in the companies hands as are their daily comforts and protections from abuse, and no one to oversee that except the company itself. The government is paying for these prisoners to be housed and then paying for them to do work- all to a private company. And as this thread indicates- many would take any legitimate complaint of abuse and say “they’re criminals and deserve it.” Locking people up gives you free money- no possible abuse there right?
There are laws covering minimum wages for labor, and what an employer may deduct for providing employees food, lodging, and other care. These people broke the law, but that doesn’t mean society gets to break its own laws in how you treat humans.
They are in prison which means they are not covered by all the same laws. Also @bethorien, minimum wage wouldn't come room, board, medical as well as other special circumstances such as security ect. Which means that by being paid anything they are already making more than minimum wage.
No. They are in fact held to the same laws as anyone else. Certain rights are suspended as an effect of being incarcerated. Being a prisoner does not suspend all laws or rights one has, only those required by the act of safe incarceration.
Making them pay for everything also makes them choose what they want. Just like anyone else on minimum wage on the outside. They shouldn't get to go to prison and have a better life style.
The Best Buy workers of America have yet to take to the streets in waves trying to get sent to prison because they see free bologna, rape, and having to shit on command in front of strangers as better than minimum wage and student loan debt. Yet. We do need to improve the ability and ease of everyone to have basic things like a place to live and food to eat. We should be working to elevate the quality of life for everyone in society. The two are separate issues of course. The fact we should treat prisoners as best to actually rehabilitate them and prepare them to prevent recidivism (saving money) doesn’t mean we also shouldn’t better the situation of those on the outside. It’s the free house problem. It’s been shown time again that the cheapest and best solution for homelessness is subsidized government housing. But people cry outrage! They worked for their home! Why reward failure?! Because it is cheaper than allowing failure and as a nice side makes another humans life better.
It not only solves a problem- but it prevents more- AND it takes someone who would have essentially been a drain on society and allows them the opportunity to give back to the economy and be a productive human. So elevating the people most likely to be in and out of jail- those at the bottom of the socio economic ladder- we start to help prevent crime. By lifting up criminals who commit certain types of crimes we help them by repeat offend. That lessens the future damage of their crimes, as well as the costs of apprehension, prosecution, incarceration, appeals, care, parole, follow up, and reappear over and over. It’s cheaper to give criminals a way out than to keep them in a revolving door of crime. Some people will never reform no matter what. Most will.
@famousone, couldn't agree more.
I noticed it, too, though mind you only after my second viewing of the pic. And if you don't notice when a picture puts exclusively black people overtop of the word "slavery," you have probably not been paying attention to anything going on in terms of race relations, ever. Especially when said picture looks oddly outdated, and has an agenda to push. I imagine if you added a white prison guard to the pic you could start a full scale riot in the comments section
1. Texas license plates are (I believe exclusively) made by inmates
2. Community service. Police in my hometown used to hire inmates to clean up their training facility. It was the most popular detail apparently, because the cops would throw them a barbeque after.
3. Cleaning the jails/prisons (janitors).
Those are the ones I can say with confidence, but I'm sure there are more. The reasons they do this are
1. Education. Establish a work ethic, familiarity with equipment, and get experience for when they get out.
2. Money. To buy things from the prison commissary. Maybe save some for later idk.
3. "Good time." To accumulate "Good time," to get out early.
I'm assuming they can do this for the same reason that it is legal to not pay interns: because the experience is the payment. Because that meme about unpaid interns being illegal slave labor is (at least in Texas) false.
Also, you're talking about lands as a way to refer treatment for humans? How is that even close to slavery? But to keep using the land use you mentioned, you're saying it has to be reasonable to take it, but does the Thirteen Amendment say anything about reasonable treatment for prisoners.
It's true that the Constitution isn't THE law, but most laws are based of these, which is a reason why after the civil war many African-Americans were thrown into jail. Southern politicians made laws to throw African-Americans really easily into jails.
Prisoners, on the other hand, are (in theory) getting 3 hot meals, warm clothing, medical (&dental) treatment, and hopefully studying so they get a life outside jail, afterwards.
They are paying back to society the crimes they committed. Unfortunately, if they aren't put to use, they won't really learn anything (work discipline, respecting hierarchy/authority, learning new skills). They are also a burden on the State for the length of their prison sentence. A costly burden, and as far as I know, the US is far from being a socialist state where taxpayers pay for other people's "social security".