+- The Lurker Lounge Forums (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums)
+-- Forum: The Lurker Lounge (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The Lounge (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-12.html)
+--- Thread: California Law (/thread-3977.html)
California Law - kandrathe - 08-25-2006
Cuz... We think cell MATE is a good idea? Why not have new inmate mixers, date nights, and romantic getaways for two to solitary? It seems just a bit unfair to the straight guys. Maybe we could just separate the HIV infected ones to a different cell block, and quarantine the new inmates until their blood tests came back?
:blink:
Washington Post
California Law - Doc - 08-25-2006
WTF?!
California Law - LemmingofGlory - 08-25-2006
Quote:Cuz... We think cell MATE is a good idea? Why not have new inmate mixers, date nights, and romantic getaways for two to solitary? It seems just a bit unfair to the straight guys. Maybe we could just separate the HIV infected ones to a different cell block, and quarantine the new inmates until their blood tests came back?
Your joke would make more sense if free condoms actually made it easier for gay inmates to find that special guy to live out the rest of their life sentence with. The fact is, prison sex is far removed from courtship sex, and (don't be surprised now) prison sex does not necessarily involve homosexual participants (in fact most of the time, both are probably straight). The more apt comment would be "If they're going to pass out condoms, they may as well pass out clean needles, too." (as that might also help curb rates of hepatitis).
So why not quarantine HIV+ inmates? Space, probably. My understanding is HIV can be undetectable for up to 6 months, so the quarantine would need to last awhile for any inmate who initially tests negative. And during that time, you'd need to make sure they had no access to non-sexual forms of transmission, such as intravenous drugs.
To me, throwing condoms at the situation is a form of flailing helplessly. Will it help curb the HIV rate? I kinda doubt it.
-Lemmy
California Law - Occhidiangela - 08-25-2006
Quote:Cuz... We think cell MATE is a good idea? Why not have new inmate mixers, date nights, and romantic getaways for two to solitary? It seems just a bit unfair to the straight guys. Maybe we could just separate the HIV infected ones to a different cell block, and quarantine the new inmates until their blood tests came back?Wonderful, a request to officially condone anal rape in American Prisons. Somehow, it does not surprise me that California, the land of "not quite right" is once again forging ahead, where no one with common sense has ever gone before.
:blink:
Washington Post
How's this for an idea: anyone committing assault on another person in prison -- sexual assault and battery is a serious offense, as is rape -- gets put in solitary for a year. Please note that everytime someone rapes a woman or man out in the regular world, and is caught at it, the sentences are pretty severe. How about we apply that same standard to inmates?
I really have to ask why continuing to break the law with crimes against persons has become acceptable behavior for inmates.
Three strikes and you are dead would be my next recommendation.
Here is the progression.
Jake holds up a bank.
Jake some months later participates in anal rape of another inmate. DNA/forensic evidence from victim not all that hard to match. Where's he gonna go? Jake did it.
Jake does a year in solitary starting the next morning.
Jake does it again.
Jake does another year in solitary.
Jake does it again
Jake gets a gun put to his head, trigger is pulled, and he is dead.
That's justice.
Occhi
California Law - Munkay - 08-25-2006
Quote:How's this for an idea: anyone committing assault on another person in prison -- sexual assault and battery is a serious offense, as is rape -- gets put in solitary for a year. Please note that everytime someone rapes a woman or man out in the regular world, and is caught at it, the sentences are pretty severe. How about we apply that same standard to inmates?
Sounds great. Now vote in the legislation to increase taxes to pay for new solitary confinement rooms/facilities. Don't forget to include the increase in staff, as well as local legislations to increase the size of jails into surrounding areas.
Granted, this could happen in certain places where the voting populous cares enough to make a change. But the problem is that most people don't believe in making this change. The high frequency of rape cases in jails have been known for a long time, and have somehow morphed in the public eye from being "a crime" to being "something they deserve." Anal rape is accepted by society as usual practice in prisons. Its by no means a small majority that believes this is part of being in jail, that everyone there is a bad guy, and this kind of behavior - while in itself very bad - is deserved punishment for inmates.
For this exact reason I doubt very much any legislation will pass in the foreseeable future.
The mentality that prevails is simply, stay out of jail or you're f*cked - no pun intended.
Cheers,
Munk
California Law - gekko - 08-26-2006
Quote:Wonderful, a request to officially condone anal rape in American Prisons. Somehow, it does not surprise me that California, the land of "not quite right" is once again forging ahead, where no one with common sense has ever gone before.
Occhi
I would think that most inmates who sexually assault other inmates wouldn't be likely to pause and use a condom. Using a condom requires some thought and some concern over your partner's welfare. Someone sexually assaulting another inmate isn't likely to bother with either.
I don't think this type of law would make much, if any, difference in the rate of sexual assaults in prisons. It would be more similar to the clean drug clinics that have been tried in Vancouver and a few countries around the world - the rate of transmitted diseases and overdosing in the area goes down dramatically.
There comes a point when legislating or punishing behaviour, no matter how severly, stops having an impact. Taking steps to make that behaviour safer, on the other hand, can make a real, significant, measurable difference.
gekko
California Law - Occhidiangela - 08-26-2006
Quote:I would think that most inmates who sexually assault other inmates wouldn't be likely to pause and use a condom. Using a condom requires some thought and some concern over your partner's welfare. Someone sexually assaulting another inmate isn't likely to bother with either.As soon as the above "Jake" gets out of prison, we'll make sure to send him to your house with a condom. I am sure you and your rectum won't mind.
I don't think this type of law would make much, if any, difference in the rate of sexual assaults in prisons. It would be more similar to the clean drug clinics that have been tried in Vancouver and a few countries around the world - the rate of transmitted diseases and overdosing in the area goes down dramatically.
There comes a point when legislating or punishing behaviour, no matter how severly, stops having an impact. Taking steps to make that behaviour safer, on the other hand, can make a real, significant, measurable difference.
gekko
Occhi
California Law - Munkay - 08-26-2006
Quote:As soon as the above "Jake" gets out of prison, we'll make sure to send him to your house with a condom. I am sure you and your rectum won't mind.
Occhi
First off, I disagree with your use of the word "condone". Sometimes an action has to be done, which can't solve the problem but can make it better. Wearing a bullet proof vest in a firefight doesn't stop the battle, but it does make it safer. Practicing "safe sex" can't destroy the HIV virus, but it can make it safer. I find it hard to swallow that either of these is "condoning" the situation. Reacting to a situation is not the same as condoning it.
Now, as it pertains to this instance. Handing out condoms isn't going to make a difference in the frequency of anal rape. Instead, it's a reaction to rising issues of HIV spread in our prison systems - at best there is the slight chance of reducing the spread of HIV virus if condoms are made available. It's foolish to think of this as an action meant to change the frequency of anal rape/assault.
Does there need to be a change in policy towards correcting the problem of rape/assault? There is no doubt of that. And I personally agree that this type of reform should be the focus, not on ways to stop sexually transmitted diseases. But condeming preventative actions pertaining to the spread of STD's because they do nothing to prevent assault/rape, is foolish at best. Certainly they are connected issues, but they are seperate issues. Of course this goes both ways - if the legislation is stupid enough to think condoms makes a difference outside of spreading STD's, they should be dragged out into the street.
Cheers,
Munk
California Law - eppie - 08-26-2006
Quote:Here is the progression.
Jake holds up a bank.
Jake some months later participates in anal rape of another inmate. DNA/forensic evidence from victim not all that hard to match. Where's he gonna go? Jake did it.
Jake does a year in solitary starting the next morning.
Jake does it again.
Jake does another year in solitary.
Jake does it again
Jake gets a gun put to his head, trigger is pulled, and he is dead.
That's justice.
Occhi
But here is what came before;
Jake a normal hardworking american smokes some mariuana.
Police start bothering him and while getting beat up Jake uses some swear words.
Jake gets sentenced to 5 years in prison.
In prison Jake gets raped, beaten up, and starts doing the same things to other people as well after 4 years of mental abuse by both wardens and fellow inmates.
Jake get released but of course cannot go back to his reasonably paid job he had before.
Jake, mentally completely messed up after 5 years of prison decides to rob a bank.
and this is where your story started.
As in Docs numerous death sentence threads. Using punishment as revenge might give us a good feeling for a while, but in the end will come back at us. Harsh punishments are OK, but at least make sure prisons are fair and do not make thinsg worse.
California Law - Tal - 08-26-2006
Quote:But here is what came before;
Jake a normal hardworking american smokes some mariuana.
One of the problems with your scenario is that it does begin with an illegal act before you teeter into fantasy.
Quote:Police start bothering him and while getting beat up Jake uses some swear words.
Jake gets sentenced to 5 years in prison.
In prison Jake gets raped, beaten up, and starts doing the same things to other people as well after 4 years of mental abuse by both wardens and fellow inmates.
Jake get released but of course cannot go back to his reasonably paid job he had before.
Jake, mentally completely messed up after 5 years of prison decides to rob a bank.
and this is where your story started.
This kind of line of argument belongs with the same assinine assumptions as "She wanted it - she shouldn't have been in that area of town - shouldn't have dressed that way" and "he did it because he was black".
California Law - gekko - 08-26-2006
Quote:As soon as the above "Jake" gets out of prison, we'll make sure to send him to your house with a condom. I am sure you and your rectum won't mind.
Occhi
I'm sorry Occhi, but I missed the part where I said that anal rape was fine as long as a condom was used.
If I were sexually active with "Jake," I would appreciate him using a condom both while in and after he got out of jail. Or can you give me a reason why condom use, sexual assault in prison and consentual sodomy must be inexplicably linked. I'm allowed to be in favour of distributing condoms in prison without supporting sexual assault anywhere.
As I already stated, most people who sexually assault others are not likely to care if they use a condom or not. But responsible couples looking to prevent the spread of STD's do.
gekko
California Law - Archon_Wing - 08-26-2006
Quote:But here is what came before;
Jake a normal hardworking american smokes some mariuana.
Police start bothering him and while getting beat up Jake uses some swear words.
Jake gets sentenced to 5 years in prison.
In prison Jake gets raped, beaten up, and starts doing the same things to other people as well after 4 years of mental abuse by both wardens and fellow inmates.
Jake get released but of course cannot go back to his reasonably paid job he had before.
Jake, mentally completely messed up after 5 years of prison decides to rob a bank.
and this is where your story started.
As in Docs numerous death sentence threads. Using punishment as revenge might give us a good feeling for a while, but in the end will come back at us. Harsh punishments are OK, but at least make sure prisons are fair and do not make thinsg worse.
Ah, but you see... if Jake didn't get raped and beaten up by other immates, because there was an active attempt to stop them from commiting those crimes in prison, most of it wouldn't happen, eh?
California Law - kandrathe - 08-27-2006
Quote:...I'd say the only hope of preventing HIV infection in a prison population is to quarantine newcomers, then separate the sick from the well. But, then it gets to my point that they are really giving a nod and a wink to homosexual sex between inmates which is denied to the heterosexual population. But, the trend has been to molly coddle our prison populations and simultaneously exponentially swell the numbers. Masked tyranny. I'd rather the reverse were true, prison is hell on Earth, reserved for hardened criminals and no one gets any sex or condoms.
Now, as it pertains to this instance. Handing out condoms isn't going to make a difference in the frequency of anal rape. Instead, it's a reaction to rising issues of HIV spread in our prison systems - at best there is the slight chance of reducing the spread of HIV virus if condoms are made available. It's foolish to think of this as an action meant to change the frequency of anal rape/assault.
...
California Law - eppie - 08-27-2006
Quote:One of the problems with your scenario is that it does begin with an illegal act before you teeter into fantasy.
This kind of line of argument belongs with the same assinine assumptions as "She wanted it - she shouldn't have been in that area of town - shouldn't have dressed that way" and "he did it because he was black".
You really don´t get the point he?
Anyway, because this is probably because of my non perfect english, I will explain it a bit better.
Your government has chosen that smoking mariuana is illegal (I probably don't have to explain that this law has been made solely to make drug dealers rich, and for that reason is stupid) but has difficulties in finding the right punishment.
For a biljonair who lives in a mansion or ranch, protected by security guards etc. it does not really matter what comes of prisoners...for the normal american however it is quite important.
I will not say that someone cannot be blamed because............ The point is however that your government creates large quantities of violent criminals by giving poor idiots that got caught for a (very) minor offence.
Maybe you can find it fair that the get put in prison for an absurd time, that's fine with me, everybody has right on his own opinion, however it will in no way contribute to safer streets.
California Law - Tal - 08-27-2006
Quote:You really don´t get the point he?
Anyway, because this is probably because of my non perfect english, I will explain it a bit better.
Your government has chosen that smoking mariuana is illegal (I probably don't have to explain that this law has been made solely to make drug dealers rich, and for that reason is stupid) but has difficulties in finding the right punishment.
For a biljonair who lives in a mansion or ranch, protected by security guards etc. it does not really matter what comes of prisoners...for the normal american however it is quite important.
I will not say that someone cannot be blamed because............ The point is however that your government creates large quantities of violent criminals by giving poor idiots that got caught for a (very) minor offence.
Maybe you can find it fair that the get put in prison for an absurd time, that's fine with me, everybody has right on his own opinion, however it will in no way contribute to safer streets.
I believe it is your own ignorance that is at fault here not my comprehension. I've worked law enforcement - the times that I have had to use force to restrain a prisoner can be counted on one hand - hell one finger (not the middle one Occhi;)) and in that case an officer walked away with stitches in his head.
You assume the man was innocent, you assume that the police are going to beat him into submission and that they will be parties to watching a prisoner get raped and abused. Your assumptions make you look like an ass. The world is not divided into black and white. Not everyone who goes to jail is guilty just like not everyone who works in law enforcement is corrupt and brutal. You do a disservice to those who voluntarily risk their lives on a daily basis to enforce the laws.
California Law - Occhidiangela - 08-27-2006
Quote:I'm sorry Occhi, but I missed the part where I said that anal rape was fine as long as a condom was used.OK, here it was.
Quote:There comes a point when legislating or punishing behaviour, no matter how severly, stops having an impact. Taking steps to make that behaviour safer, on the other hand, can make a real, significant, measurable difference.That says to me that you don't think you can stop anal rape in prison, so you want to condone it, even though it is a felonious crime against persons, and then your remark seems to say that all is well so long as the evolution is made safer.
Hell, gekko, why stop at rape? Make murder safer. Ensure people hold their heads still so the gunman can get the nice, clean, humane head shot. Makes it safer, ya see, since the gunman only has to shoot once and there is less likelihood of collateral injury to bystanders. Starting now, make sure you hold your head still, to ensure that if someone wants to shoot you, it is a nice, safe evolution.
Back to the original scenario: If you were "sexually active" with the mythical "Jake" in this little vignette, the details would most likely include his forcing his loving, carnal attentions on your backside. For some reason, I don't think you integrated that contextual clue into your response to my rather cynical remark.
Occhi
California Law - gekko - 08-27-2006
Quote:OK, here it was.
That says to me that you don't think you can stop anal rape in prison, so you want to condone it, even though it is a felonious crime against persons, and then your remark seems to say that all is well so long as the evolution is made safer.
Hell, gekko, why stop at rape? Make murder safer. Ensure people hold their heads still so the gunman can get the nice, clean, humane head shot. Makes it safer, ya see, since the gunman only has to shoot once and there is less likelihood of collateral injury to bystanders. Starting now, make sure you hold your head still, to ensure that if someone wants to shoot you, it is a nice, safe evolution.
Back to the original scenario: If you were "sexually active" with the mythical "Jake" in this little vignette, the details would most likely include his forcing his loving, carnal attentions on your backside. For some reason, I don't think you integrated that contextual clue into your response to my rather cynical remark.
Occhi
So, what, are you going to claim there is no consentual homosexual sex or sexual activity in prisons? I don't think this has anything to do with rape in prisons. I think this has to do with people who can and will take an interest in their partner's well-being. Rapists generally don't fit that mould.
Though I didn't think this should be neccessary, for the record, I'm against rape. I simply don't think rape and sexual activity in prisons are inherently linked or equal. So when I condone passing out condoms in prisons, I'm not making any judgement call whatsoever about rape.
I think that many things are made illegal that shouldn't be, or needn't be, or are simply not properly understood when laws are made. I also think that the punishment for many crimes are far disproportionate to their crimes. But that's neither here nor here in this discussion.
I think that consentual homosexual sex can and does happen in prisons, and that condom use in such situations can help prevent the spread of diseases. That's all. Rape and other forms of sexual assault are a completely different matter. And as I've said several times, I don't see how they are applicable in this case anyways, since a criminal busy raping someone isn't likely to care if he/she uses a condom. But a concerned sexual partner should and should have the option.
gekko
California Law - kandrathe - 08-27-2006
Quote:...My idea would be that when you go to prison, you are too tired from breaking rocks all day to even think about sex. Rip out the TV's, and the jaccuzi's. If you are giving away condoms for the minority of prisoners that feel romantically inclined, you got to ask, why are these people treated like they're on a little vacation? Anyone caught having that much extra energy should pull a double work shift the next day.
I think that consentual homosexual sex can and does happen in prisons, and that condom use in such situations can help prevent the spread of diseases. That's all.
...
{My wife is out buying a replacement keyboard for the one she bathed in coffee this morning. I'm typing with the voice recognition, and on-screen keyboard. It's slow, but I still have better punctuation than seas. :-) }
California Law - LemmingofGlory - 08-27-2006
Quote:If you are giving away condoms for the minority of prisoners that feel romantically inclined, you got to ask, why are these people treated like they're on a little vacation?
Prison "protector"/"bitch" relationships sound romantic to you? Tell me more of your notions of same-sex courtship.
-Lem
California Law - kandrathe - 08-28-2006
Quote:Prison "protector"/"bitch" relationships sound romantic to you? Tell me more of your notions of same-sex courtship.That probably happens, maybe even brutal as it is portrayed in movies like "Shawshank Redemption". It doesn't mean it's preferred, or the status quo. Something doesn't just happen to prisoners where they decide upon passing into their cells "Am I bull queer protector, or bitch?" Now granted, I have zero experience inside prisons, so it might just be that everyone pairs off and goes at it. I just don't believe that is the norm, nor does the bull/bitch relationship need to become a sanctioned institution within the institution.
-Lem