Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So I'm a big fan of John Oliver's show, but recently he did a bit that touched on something I absolutely despise.




Been calling bullgak on this crap for a while now. If you can't afford to pay for your government without entrapping and fining your citizens, then you need to shrink your government, not make new fines and ways to strip money from the people. Libertarian or not this is the most egregious form of government abuse that we ignore everyday. For the record, this is not saying all LEOs/LEAs are like this, or cops are bad. I am focusing on a specific series of problems, monetizing the justice system. gak like this is why I'm a minarchist instead of some of the more extreme libertarian positions. Some things should not be privatized and the Justice System is one of them. (Cops can be privatized though, but the actual apparatus of judgement/punishment should be kept governmental.)

The privatization of prisons is why the American prison system is so massive. Each prisoner is worth some good money to someone, and that someone is more than happy to chip into some campaign funds. So there's an incentive to put people away, even for something minor like a dimebag of pot. It's why we haven't ended the war on drugs yet, and our prisons are filled with millions of non-violent offenders. The government, state, federal and local along with the corps don't want to end the war on drugs because they'll be losing hundreds of millions of dollars.

Meanwhile the cops pursue drug cases because they're big money. Rape, assault, murder, robberies, those crimes go barely investigated and unsolved for a large number of cases. RICO seizures from drug suspects are much more lucrative. When they're not doing that, they have quotas to hit for nonsense citations out the ass, which, the prosecutor is going to be more than happy to cut you a deal on, we'll make the points and criminal record go away, you just pay your fine, plus court costs and this will go away. Because it's not about justice or public safety. They just want the pay out.

This needs to go away. It's what's best for our citizens, it's what's best for our LEOs, letting them focus on REAL crime and public safety. Making them safer by defusing a fair amount of the violent gang conflicts and police confrontations. Sure they might be moving pot, but it's legal, no real cause to try and hold territory when you can buy a couple joints at a dispensary down the block When your budget is only floating because you collect 66% or whatever amount of it in fines, you have a FUNDAMENTAL flaw in your government and you need to either raise taxes, or, better idea, shrink your government. Taxation is theft, that's a 100% true fact, but this is more armed robbery than theft.

Does any one have a positive side to this? Something that makes any of this gak better? I really do try to see the other side, but I'm just not seeing it.

I can't load the vid, so I'm going by your summary.

That, in a nutshell, is the root cause of places like Ferguson, MO.

For-profit-Prisons need to be baned in all forms. If we can't afford to incarcerate our prison population... maybe it's time to overhaul the judicial system.

We need a local government "reboot", where everything is on the table and reorganized.

Private Companies, worth billions, reorganize to adapt to shifting environment... why can't the government?

It's hurting other people, not me, so it's fine?

Nah, I got nothing. No upside here, and you won't see me argue with you on your analysis of it.

My personal opinion is that there are certain public functions that the government should not contract out. And the justice system is one of them - justice cannot be blind if it is run as a commercial venture. This should be painfully apparent for those municipalities the video mentions where 66% of their revenue comes from fines.
What the video shows is that for many of those on lower paying jobs the most basic fine can be the perfect storm;
- person in low paying job fined
- cannot pay fine
- goes to court to have fine adjusted
- still struggles
- license revoked
- person cannot easily get to work
- loss of job
- person is now in an even more difficult position financially
- prison

In some cases this happens over a $41 fine. I'm not going to argue that there should be no punishment for breaking the law, just that the punishment that is proscribed be reasonable and appropriate. If a person is unable to pay a fine further financial penalties are not effective. Perhaps diversionary sentences like community service are more appropriate (provided that we are actually concerned more about justice than profit).

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
My personal opinion is that there are certain public functions that the government should not contract out. And the justice system is one of them - justice cannot be blind if it is run as a commercial venture.

Yes, this. No one should be making money off someone going to jail.

 Ouze wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
My personal opinion is that there are certain public functions that the government should not contract out. And the justice system is one of them - justice cannot be blind if it is run as a commercial venture.

Yes, this. No one should be making money off someone going to jail.

Wasn't that what caused the horror show in PA where the judge was taking kickbacks for sending as many kids to detention centers as possbile, no matter what they'd _actually_ done?

Yes. More background for anyone not aware of the reference.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, while the OP's subject matter is no laughing matter, "The F---barrel" is still cracking me up.

Whembly you need to watch this when you get home (assuming you can't see the video because you're at work).

For profit prisons are the thing that really get to me. Being for profit they want a high prison population. With that being the case, they have to incentive to rehabilitate. Someone in the NY senate (or possibly assembly) worked out that it was cheaper to get prisoners a college degree then to just let them go in and out of prison again and again, because the re-incarceration rate is so high. We don't rehabilitate at all.



After writing that, I see that it is slightly different then the issue at hand, but it's certainly related.

 Ouze wrote:
Yes, this. No one should be making money off someone going to jail.

In fact, prisons should cost society a lot of money. That way the only people who end up in prison are the serious offenders who are so bad that society is willing to pay a ton of money to keep them locked up. There should never be a point where sending people to prison is a cheap and easy decision.

Not going to be much of an OT thread if no one pops up to support for-profit prisons :(

Indeed. not really much to argue about :/

I'm surprised that no one did the "they shouldn't commit crime in the first place" thing. That always makes me laugh.

From the video "Ferguson Police promotions are based on their citation revenue."

feth a duck. That should NEVER be used as a benchmark for promotions. Never.

 Ouze wrote:
Not going to be much of an OT thread if no one pops up to support for-profit prisons :(

Well, supporting for-profit prisons would be like being a modern Holocaust denier.

"Why don't people just pay the tickets before they get out of hand??? Maybe if people paid off their tickets instead of buying a new TV or Iphone they wouldn't be in that situation. #Personalresponsibility #47percent."

You're welcome, Dakka.

Good one!

Except personal repsonsbility doesn't help you against made up tickets which will cost you even more money to try and fight!

What a strange game. The only winning move is not to play...

Tic tact toe?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I'm surprised that no one did the "they shouldn't commit crime in the first place" thing. .

As the link above showed, being innocent was no protection against being thrown in prison.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
"Why don't people just pay the tickets before they get out of hand??? Maybe if people paid off their tickets instead of buying a new TV or Iphone they wouldn't be in that situation. #Personalresponsibility #47percent."

You're welcome, Dakka.

I was trying to be subtle and keep escalating until someone finally flipped, but nooo. You HAD to turn it up to 11.

 Bookwrack wrote:
Good one!

Except personal repsonsbility doesn't help you against made up tickets which will cost you even more money to try and fight!

What a strange game. The only winning move is not to play...

Tic tact toe?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I'm surprised that no one did the "they shouldn't commit crime in the first place" thing. .

As the link above showed, being innocent was no protection against being thrown in prison.

Did reality ever stop anybody?

Okay, here we go:

The privatized prison system allows for job creation and expansion. The fact that the system appears to be domineering and designed to maximize repeat offenders as some liberals would claim is nonsense. It's not a broken system abusing people, it's just job creators showing their God-given abundance of enthusiasm for capitalism.

Heh heh. "But the private sector creates moar jerbs" was gonna be my next appeal. Well played.

My first job when I left the Army was a state corrections officer. What misery. The prison I worked at was brand new but no amount of fresh paint can remove the dread of such a place. Prison CREATES criminals from many who are not otherwise hardened offenders. I am a firm believer in liberal capitalism, but not in the justice system. It sets up too much of a incentive to incarcerate for even the most petty crimes. Even though the vast majority of cases are settled with limited or no jail time, we in the US are far too addicted to throwing people in the slammer as a cure to social/economic ills.

 Ouze wrote:

Whembly you need to watch this when you get home (assuming you can't see the video because you're at work).

You ain't kidding... good video.

And it hits close to home for me man...

Did someone put you in a fethbarrel?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
definitely my new favorite phrase.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
My personal opinion is that there are certain public functions that the government should not contract out. And the justice system is one of them - justice cannot be blind if it is run as a commercial venture. This should be painfully apparent for those municipalities the video mentions where 66% of their revenue comes from fines.
What the video shows is that for many of those on lower paying jobs the most basic fine can be the perfect storm;
- person in low paying job fined
- cannot pay fine
- goes to court to have fine adjusted
- still struggles
- license revoked
- person cannot easily get to work
- loss of job
- person is now in an even more difficult position financially
- prison

In some cases this happens over a $41 fine. I'm not going to argue that there should be no punishment for breaking the law, just that the punishment that is proscribed be reasonable and appropriate. If a person is unable to pay a fine further financial penalties are not effective. Perhaps diversionary sentences like community service are more appropriate (provided that we are actually concerned more about justice than profit).

One of the things they are doing in Oklahoma (I don't know how many other states do this as well) is that the state will no longer issue/renew any professional licenses for you. So let's say you are a nurse making $60,000 a year and you owe $2,000 in back taxes, they you will lose your license the next time it expires. Because when you couldn't /didn't pay your taxes while making $60,000 a year, you are totally going to pay your taxes on $30,000 a year.

 Ouze wrote:
Did someone put you in a fethbarrel?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
definitely my new favorite phrase.

Hehehehe... That was funnyz for sure.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
For profit prisons are the thing that really get to me. Being for profit they want a high prison population. With that being the case, they have to incentive to rehabilitate. Someone in the NY senate (or possibly assembly) worked out that it was cheaper to get prisoners a college degree then to just let them go in and out of prison again and again, because the re-incarceration rate is so high. We don't rehabilitate at all.

After writing that, I see that it is slightly different then the issue at hand, but it's certainly related.

I think it's very closely related. For profit prisons are privatization gone wrong, because you want the private organization to have a financial incentive for improving society, e.g. finishing a project on time and budget. When companies make more money for each person they put behind bars, they have every incentive to escalate prosecutions, criminalize minor infractions, and keep prisoners behind bars through harsh sentences. Oliver covered the insane system where many judges have to campaign as tough-on-crime for judicial elections and get donations from for profit prison companies, it's an insane system that crushes human rights.

Despite claiming to be the most free country on the planet, we actually have the highest incarceration rate in the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate) next to the 92,000 person nation of Seychelles. Either we produce criminals at an astonishingly disproportionate rate or we are putting innocent people and petty criminals in prison as if they were violent offenders.

The endless municipal violation f-barrel that Oliver discusses is just another side of the coin, with cities trying to make up budget falls and companies stepping into the jail-bonds racket. This is the problem when people refuse to pay taxes that match the services they demand and when we vote for tough-on-crime politicians without considering what that actually means (lots of kids in jail on drug charges and poor folks that can't afford lawyers). No matter how lenient the judge or jury, it's easy to put a violent offender behind bars, when we have this sort of tough-on-crime racket it's the poor and powerless who end up paying in $$ and years.

John Oliver tends to be very good. He's definitely liberal, but he focus on a lot of stuff that everyone should be angry at.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheSilo wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
For profit prisons are the thing that really get to me. Being for profit they want a high prison population. With that being the case, they have to incentive to rehabilitate. Someone in the NY senate (or possibly assembly) worked out that it was cheaper to get prisoners a college degree then to just let them go in and out of prison again and again, because the re-incarceration rate is so high. We don't rehabilitate at all.

After writing that, I see that it is slightly different then the issue at hand, but it's certainly related.

I think it's very closely related. For profit prisons are privatization gone wrong, because you want the private organization to have a financial incentive for improving society, e.g. finishing a project on time and budget. When companies make more money for each person they put behind bars, they have every incentive to escalate prosecutions, criminalize minor infractions, and keep prisoners behind bars through harsh sentences. Oliver covered the insane system where many judges have to campaign as tough-on-crime for judicial elections and get donations from for profit prison companies, it's an insane system that crushes human rights.

Despite claiming to be the most free country on the planet, we actually have the highest incarceration rate in the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate) next to the 92,000 person nation of Seychelles. Either we produce criminals at an astonishingly disproportionate rate or we are putting innocent people and petty criminals in prison as if they were violent offenders.

The endless municipal violation f-barrel that Oliver discusses is just another side of the coin, with cities trying to make up budget falls and companies stepping into the jail-bonds racket. This is the problem when people refuse to pay taxes that match the services they demand and when we vote for tough-on-crime politicians without considering what that actually means (lots of kids in jail on drug charges and poor folks that can't afford lawyers). No matter how lenient the judge or jury, it's easy to put a violent offender behind bars, when we have this sort of tough-on-crime racket it's the poor and powerless who end up paying in $$ and years.

Recidivism rates are scarcely high.. According to the NIJ

Bureau of Justice Statistics studies have found high rates of recidivism among released prisoners. One study tracked 404,638 prisoners in 30 states after their release from prison in 2005.[1] The researchers found that:
Within three years of release, about two-thirds (67.8 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
Of those prisoners who were rearrested, more than half (56.7 percent) were arrested by the end of the first year.
Property offenders were the most likely to be rearrested, with 82.1 percent of released property offenders arrested for a new crime compared with 76.9 percent of drug offenders, 73.6 percent of public order offenders and 71.3 percent of violent offenders.

http://www.nij.gov/topics/corrections/recidivism/Pages/welcome.aspx

The upside is, because of all the revenue from fines they don't have to raise taxes on the rich who can't afford to pay taxes without having to fire a bunch of employees.

It's sacrificing the few for the good of the many

I like John Oliver's show, he does great stuff. He should have tied it in with his other video about cops who pull you over and if they can't find anything to ticket you for, just rob you of the money you have on hand.

Justice, health care, military.

3 things whose privatization should be 100% nixed. I know people like to crow about "smaller government!" and all that, but there are certain things that the government is supposed to provide for its people. Things which should not have profit associated with them. To me, those three things fit that bill.

You should not be above the law, no matter how much money you have or who you know.
No one in this great country should be forced to decide "Can I really afford to go to the doctor?". Not when we have some of the top hospitals in the world.
And no one should turn a profit from wars that cost human lives. Certainly no one should be in the business of making sure two sides want to kill each other.

 d-usa wrote:
One of the things they are doing in Oklahoma (I don't know how many other states do this as well) is that the state will no longer issue/renew any professional licenses for you. So let's say you are a nurse making $60,000 a year and you owe $2,000 in back taxes, they you will lose your license the next time it expires. Because when you couldn't /didn't pay your taxes while making $60,000 a year, you are totally going to pay your taxes on $30,000 a year.

Mandelogic at it's finest