Afraid Of Rape in Prison? Don't Commit theCrime

I made no generalisation. I said murderers and rapists should be locked up for ever.

That's disgusting. 80% were rapists you think? They should be hanged.

Fine, let me add something to those three classifications (although I'm sure you actually realised this anyway).
1 & 2) Time served based on damage done.
3) Lock them up for ever.
There, nice and separate now.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I'm all for helping out the non-violent offenders, provided they show some measure of desire to live afterward without committing more crimes. I believe I made that clear in the post I quoted above.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Jerry Dewayne Williams
3rd Strike Theft of a slice of pizza
Sentence: 25 years to life, reduced to 6
On a warm evening in July 1994 Jerry Williams was having a few drinks and relaxing on the Redondo Beach pier. After he and a friend had bought some slices of pizza, they noticed a group of kids dining on an extra-large pepperoni pie and demanded some of theirs. The oldest child refused, but Williams and his friend each took a piece anyway. The friend got away, but Williams was arrested in a nearby arcade after the pizza shop owner called the police. The Los Angeles District Attorney charged Williams with robbery, saying he used intimidation to scare the kids. In the end, the jury hung on the robbery charge but convicted Williams of petty theft with priors, netting him a 25 years to life sentence. Deputy Public Defender Arnold T. Lester filed a defense motion that argued the sentence constituted cruel and unusual punishment. Superior Court Judge Donald F. Pitts denied the motion but later, after Romero, reduced the sentence to six years. People v Williams, Cr No.YA 020612-01.
The Prosecution: "I didn't think the judge would do it," says prosecutor Bill Gravlin, referring to the sentence reduction. "Three strikes," he says, "is supposed to deal with recidivist criminals." And Williams had earlier charges for robbery, attempted robbery, unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, and possession of a controlled substance. "[Williams] ripped off four defenseless little kids," adds Gravlin. "The youngest was only seven." During the trial Gravlin asked the seven-year-old to stand next to the six-foot five-inch Williams to try to prove the robbery charge that didn't stick. "This was his fifth adult conviction and the second time he'd gotten caught using the threat of force," says Gravlin. But even though the pizza thievery was bad enough, Gravlin says, "It's wrong to focus just on the last offense. [Williams] was only 27 and had 14 years of criminal history. He is a habitual criminal. Some young people make mistakes and get better," adds Gravlin. "He just got worse."


If he was so concerned about going to jail, why did he commit such a stupid crime? He was a bully, a crackhead, a theif - and those are just the things he got caught for - and you guys are whining becuase he is spending 6 years in prison?
There are people that dont deserve to be in prison, but the majority of people in prison - deserve to be there. The three strikes law - alot of the people had horrible records and then they went and did something so stupid and got in trouble for - now everyone is yelling - "Cruel and unusual punishment!" I just dont get it. We shouldnt put inmates together based on the time they received for sentencing. We should put them together based on the crimes they committed. Murders get to bunk with murders, rapists with rapists, petty theifs with petty theifs, etc. Like I said before - if you dont want to go to prison - dont commit the crime. (with the exception of the "few" who are innocent)


Groove on

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Just a little editorializing there, with the "crackhead" comment? There is no mention of that in your quote. :bugeye:

And I'm not sure anyone is whining about his incarceration. This thread has somewhat devolved from the intent of the OP, which is not surprising or a problem, but all of these threads that address a specific issue seem to slide into this type of argument.

Peace.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Goofy

I was assuming it was crack. Sorry. I use that term alot, since I live around tons of em. But people in here are arguing points about 3 strike law and such. I was just defending it.

I promise not to get off of the subject again

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Groove on

 

80% of your classmates from high school were rapists, Tiassa? Where on god's green earth did you attend?

I find it hard to believe that most men are rapists or would be. The national average, in the US, is 32 incidences of violent rape per 100,000 inhabitants. Now of course, this is reported, so it may be a bit higher, but seeing as the number of reported rapes has risen steadily (presumably due to better reporting, less stigma attatched to the victim, yadda yadda), I think this is a fair number to work with. source

My state, Michigan, has a slightly higher number of 50.6 per 100,000.

So, I don't think we would have anything like a 1:100 male/female ratio.

*Adopts 'Dr.Strangelove' voice*

I hasten to add that since each man will be required to do prodigious... service along these lines, they will have to be selected for their sexual characteristics which will have to be of a highly stimulating nature....

Right, I'll stop.

 

Um ... I went to a Catholic school

There's a reason I'm not worried about the priests. I went to a Catholic school, where obsession with sexual purity had a ridiculous impact.

Friday morning, kneel for absolution. Friday night, kneel for ...?

thanx,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Aaaaah. That explains a bit.

 

Well, Adam

Well, let's see ... you were addressing the question of what prisons are for, and gave a generalized answer that seems to indicate that protecting ourselves from rapists and murderers is their sole point. Presently, those classifications of prisoners constitute a minority of the American prison population, at least.

Thus, it's an easy answer, a general and political slogan. It really doesn't have much bearing on the issue.

And of those rapists ... I do know a guy who did time for rape. He met a woman in a tavern, bought her a few drinks, took her back to his place where they engaged in consensual intercourse. Shortly thereafter, her father prosecuted the guy. Turns out she was sixteen and drinking on a fake ID. Of course, it's only coincidental that neither the tavern nor the bartender weren't prosecuted for aiding the delinquency of a minor. After all, she had ID--how were they supposed to know?

The problem with generalizations, Adam, is that they are generalizations. Not every crime is the same, and so long as we continue to treat crime in such a general manner and with such righteous tones, the problems will only get worse.

thanx,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Counterbalance ...

"Somebody tinkle in your Wheaties this morning, Chagur?"

Hell yes! The initiator of this thread who also started the thread in which
the 'crapola' referred to, "I know some homophobes for who I think it
would be 'educational'

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

to be sent to prison. hehehehe", was posted and
didn't think it warranted comment at the time.

"Or, be a well-mannered dragon and let the folks sort through it unscorched... "

Why oh why do you wish to deny me one of the few pleasures left to me
in life? Do you have a thing against senior citizens who still dream of
being a fire belching dragon at times?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Take care

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Chagur

Given that we've clashed before on subjects like drugs & justice, I'm curious about your opinion:

You and I both know that some people ... you just can't change the evil they will commit. Among these are often murderers and rapists, but also the white-collar criminals who steal people's life savings and so forth through embezzlement, fraud, and other means. Of course, these white-collar criminals often learned that their actions are right because of social demands. When the profiteers of the 1980s started dropping like flies for their crimes (I reiterate that, in the end, over 100 of Reagan's people served prison time for their actions), Trudeau noted in Doonesbury, through the voice of the senior Slackmeyer, "Hell, most of the time we didn't know we were breaking the law." What, I wonder, are we teaching people in business school? When I was at the University of Oregon, it was Sun-Tzu. Of course, this brand of criminal gets the tennis court and the spa in prison, and such factors are used to decry the luxury of other prisons.

But then I stop to consider a young boy (kindergarten or first grade) in the northwest who brought a gun to school and killed a little girl. The investigation of how it happened turned stomachs. He lived in a crack-house, surrounded by crackheads and guns, and one need not even be inundated with a certain archetype in order to accept its propriety. Thus, whatever the dispute was between the boy and his classmate, his only known solution was to take one of the many guns around the house to school and shoot her dead. It is a little extreme of an example, but bear with me, I beg you.

What is a young boy living in relative poverty supposed to think? When I was in high school a local druglord/pimp/gun-runner died in a shooting at a Nendel's Inn motel. It was apparently a drug-related accidental suicide, though the ballistics were sketchy toward that end. Nonetheless, this known druglord, pimp, and gun-runner packed a church with thousands, packed the streets with thousands, and had thousands outside the cemetery as he was laid to rest. That is, despite the fact that he was a scumlord, he was looked up to by a good portion of the community because he had found a way to material success.

Sounds twisted, eh? But it is true. I've even seen the attitude on HBO in the last couple of years; a number of interviews with pimps and the young men in their community pretty much demonstrated that, with nobody else to look up to in the neighborhood, pimps, drug dealers, and gun-runners can become role models.

Quite sick, I agree. But enter Midnight Basketball. As silly as it sounds, making basketball courts available to youths in gang-risk zones in the middle of the night had the effect of reducing gang-related crime by 1/3. Now, I'm not going to engage the argument of whether the federal government should be paying for it, but since I agree with paying for performance art ... well ... but yeah, I do understand Newt's point on that one.

So away went the late-night basketball games and up went the gang-related crime numbers.

What we're looking at, then, are rising generation in poverty, with no clear role models, moving toward the money and the glamour in that all-American way, with nothing else to do with their lives. I am curious about the fact that people would rather spend their tax money locking up criminals instead of figuring out how to reduce the number of criminals operating in society.

And to make a point about the drug war itself: here is where prisons breed criminals. With the rate of possession-related incarcerations skyrocketing, and many of these nonviolent criminals being housed among violent criminals, the prisons do breed new criminals. So Johnny gets busted with a rock of crack and gets five years. At this point, his only known crime is possessing cocaine. After his hard-time five years, Johnny emerges a lean, mean crime machine, having done nothing but lift weights, seethe with anger, and fight off every threat that comes his way. With a crack conviction, no education, no rehabilitation, and a serious, serious attitude problem, this druggie who might have been diverted to more useful endeavors is now holding up convenience stores, beating women in order to get laid, and very possibly landing a stolen Cadillac in your front yard as he runs away from the police.

With nothing else to learn in prison, then, this possession convict learns the way of the hardened criminal, and emerges with skills related to such endeavors.

In many cases, the no-good-sons-of-bitches had much help and encouragement toward making their poor decisions. In some cases, they never understood they had a choice. And this is not just stupidity on their parts, but a lack of any apparent alternatives.

I mean, really ... take a guy and throw him in prison for possessing dope and a single Tylox; lock him away for a decade if you want, twenty-five years as some sentencing structures have it. Are we gambling that he will die in prison? Or, if he survives long enough to be released into society, what kind of person are we releasing?

But, you know, we can always throw them back in prison, or gun them down on the streets. After the Dorismond shooting in New York (a black man, 26, killed by police for not having any drugs on him), Hizzoner Rudy Giuliani went before the press to defend the NYPD as having dealt with a career criminal. In order to establish that, though, Giuliani opened and released (illegally) juvenile court records showing Dorsimond's crime career: a single petty shoplifting charge at age 13, never prosecuted.

It sounds nice to condemn criminals with a broad stroke, but reality doesn't reflect that portrait.

thanx much,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Sorry, tiassa ...

This time we're not going to clash even though I, at times, feel you go
out of you way to 'create' a poor, poor victim.

My quoted comment was a feeble attempt at irony, an irony that made
it somewhat difficult for me to do my job 'by the book' at times.

The system is unfair, corrupt in many ways, and a waste of enormous
amounts of money.

I guess my rude awakening came a couple of years after I became a
'Keeper' ... The old title for a 'Prison' guard ... and I had the first hand
experience seeing how society handles its 'problems'.

Western NY is not known for its mild Winters and among the 'street
people' of the time, mostly alcoholics since the mentally ill still were
'treated' in psychiatric hospitals, it was an established routine for them
to spend four months of a six month sentence for 'Public Intoxication'
at the Penitentiary. In in the Fall; out in the Spring ... usually in far better
shape than we received them.

And then the 'good, caring people' decided that 'public intoxication' only
warranted a 15 day sentence, out in ten days, since it really wasn't a
'crime'. Within a couple of years appoximately two thirds of the older
alcoholics were dead thanks to the 'good, kind, caring people' who didn't
carry through with setting up adequate shelters for the poor bastards.

Forty years later I can still remember 'Panama', Martin Alger, a guy who
normally was a problem free and trust worthy inmate who I liked as a
person (after he had 'dried out') coming in with an 'attitude'. It took about
a week and a half for him to 'open up' and tell me what was bothering
him. Seems "They made a criminal out of me, kid. The only way I could get
six months was to throw a brick through a store window. So I did. Damned
if I was going to die in some hallway like those other dumb bastards."

The Correctional System's problems are, for the most part, in my opinion,
problems society creates. And not that much different from the problems
society creates that require incarceration.

Enough of my running off at the mouth.

Take care

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Tiassa

You know, I agree with alot of what you said but the above statement. My dad used to manufacture drugs, he got 4 years. He did time, got out, was at the wrong place at the wrong time, did 4 more years. He received an education in prison and got out to start a family and own his own business. You DONT have to come out with an attitude problem. If a person with no previous known record gets caught with 1 rock and no other circumstances - he is not going to get 5 years. He would most likely receive a diversion. If "Johnny" or whoever had a previous record and other circumstances involved - then yes he would might get 5 years. Okay, Im getting off point again.

Look, I grew up in the straight ghetto, have witnessed murders and watched my mom throw her life away to drugs - and almost watched my dad. Ive been sexually, mentally and physically abused up until I was old enough to leave home. Ive pretty much seen it all. Im not a druggie (except for bud), Im not a criminal either, and anyone who uses the excuse of having a hard life for committing crimes - is feeling sorry for themselves - plain and simple. A person chooses the actions they make for themselves. True, the way you grow up affects your decision making - to an extent - but you know right from wrong - and there aint no excuses for that.


Groove on

 

Chagur, stRgrl

Chagur

Interesting, and I thank you. It wasn't my intention to clash, but I was aware that this has been a very touchy area 'twixt us before.

stRgrl

It is worth noting that people complain about the idea of educating convicts these days. At least they did in Oregon to the point of it being part of a prisons vote in '95 as I recall, though I think it was a mandatory minimum/prison construction measure that was the actual issue. In Washington, such complaints made the news as late as last year. It's apparently now undermining the economy to train convicts with job skills--I never really understood what people were talking about on that one; well, I did, but I was too busy gloating about the fact that Emma Goldman was right. The stupidity of the complaining business owners is what didn't quite make sense.

By which statute? I'm referring to a federal statute that was enforced 2,400 times in 1995, and has been around since the late 1980s. It's a mandatory minimum, and judges have often apologized to their defendants, claiming that their hands were tied.

Of your testament, I shan't argue with you. For you are correct. The only issue I would wonder about is what resources you were able to employ on your behalf that may not be there uniformly? That, however, is merely academic.

I thank you deeply for your testament, however. It is valuable perspective, not only in this issue, but in broader concepts of life.

thanx much,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

A whole lotta concrete goin' on

How long will this link last? At any rate, it's a Reuters' story which well pertains to the idea of murderers and rapists and concrete boxes. So, just for the heck of it, the Yahoo! capsule:

Let's see ... 70,000 at $55,000 a year, by however long? That works out to $3,850,000,000 a year on keeping the rapists in concrete boxes? And that's just the college students? (Yes, I'm still too lazy to look up the American number. But if you feel like getting it, 70,000 is the number by whatever term you think is appropriate.)

Just a happy note on concrete boxes.

thanx,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

So shoot the little cretins! I'll help, sheesh, I'll even pay for bullets.

*Shrugs*

Finals week. I'm in a testy mood. I am in my happy place, I am in my happy place, okay! Rational contribution!

The problem with shooting them proves to be that [strike]Xev's hands would become sore[/strike] rape is hard to prove conclusivly.

 

Re: Well, Adam

I doubt very much that prisons were invented to hold people who stole slices of bread. I think I explained quite clearly in previous posts how I think prisons should work, and why, including reasons concerning different types of criminals.

Covered, pointless.

I believe this was also covered. That would be in the first or second class of prison. Such laws (statutory rape laws) are there for a reason, to protect easily influenced young people. This guy you know has as his excuse before the judge "Sorry, I was horny. I didn't really want to think about age, propriety, diseases, whether it was even vaguely a good diea or not. I forgot all ethics and such, because I was horny. Can I go now?"

 

Sixteen is of age in most states of the US. I think we go as low as fourteen in some of the soulthern states....

I believe it is fifteen in Michigan.

 

Wow Adam, in addition to being offensive, you're missing the point

Whatever. In addition to what you think being quite irrelevant to the reality of the situation, you have yet to address what to do about the fact that we are, indeed, breeding criminals with prisons. The cruelty of your proposed solution means we ought to just expand the application of capital punishment. Of course, you're quite flippant toward that, as well, so ....

Whatever.

What do you recommend we do, then, about the criminals we have to let out? Just ... uh ... hang them instead of letting them out?

So here's a great question for you, What do you do with the ones you let out of prison?

And while you're at it, would you like to hang the people with a human conscience, as well?

That's not an answer but an admission that you have none. You demonstrate your failure to grasp the situation:

What, pray tell, does this have to do with anything?

What is it? Are you afraid to actually address the example you cited?

Nice show, Adam. You absolutely, positively whiffed on that one. Perhaps an explanation about taverns in the US: the bartender served her. The waitress served her. She got through the door at all and this isn't supposed to happen. You have to be 21 to enter the establishment in many states, and you cannot buy alcohol at all if you're not 21. So, uh ... what, would you like every guy to have their laptop networked with the department of licensing to validate the ID of every woman they come across before sleeping with her? Excuse me, but would you submit a blood sample so I can get a genetic test to determine that you are the person your ID says you are so that I can't be prosecuted for believing that you are, in fact, of age, since everyone under the sun seems to think you're 22?

Would you like another swing at it?

And, yes, you can go now.

Whiffffff ....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Xev--re: consent

There actually exists an old question between my first lover and I whether or not I have committed the crime of statutory rape. Something about my age (17) related to her age (15) at the time seems to prevent that. If, however, I was, say, a Libra and not a Gemini, I might have been in serious, serious trouble, as the difference 'twixt 17 and 18 would have been huge. It's not like she's going to complain, and it's not like she hasn't actually violated a different statute. Having, in her 20s, once taken a lover who was 16, she is definitely in violation of the law, but then again, it's not like her partner on that occasion is going to complain.

But there are laws which, despite the age of consent being 16, forbid sexual contact between adults and minors.

Sure, the age of consent is 16, but I'm presently 28, and I guarantee you I can get at least five years for having sex with a 16 year-old. At least, in Washington. I always wondered, then, what would happen if I left the country, took a child bride of 10 or 11, and returned to the United States.

Of course, that in itself is a digression that we need not follow at the moment.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And since I'm climbing down Adam's throat for flippancy, it's worth pointing out that at the University of Oregon, when I was there, a group called Men Against Rape (whose organizing body and membership consisted entirely of two gay men) proposed some insidious rules against date rape inspired by rules enacted elsewhere in the country. Under such a rule, the woman must answer affirmatively. Thus:

• May I kiss you?
--Yes.
• May I touch your breasts?
--Yes.
• Would you mind if I unhook your bra?
--No, I wouldn't mind.

At this point, I would be sexually assaulting you because the answer was not phrased in the affirmative. (This I would find hilarious if it wasn't so morbid and the impact so severe.)

Or the he-said/she-saids of date rape ... oh, wait ... you're definitely already in on that point. Rape is difficult to prove conclusively, and I shan't hound the point.

thanx,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Tiassa:

I find it both morbid, horrible, and utterly hilarious. Perhaps both parties could sign a contract?

"The promisee agrees to swallow in consideration of the promisor's cooking breakfast, with the understanding that neither party will partially breach said contract out of a sudden sense of shyness..."

Has been a while since I studied contract law. We could also get into a legalistic debate over whether a low, wordless moan constitutes a promise in se....drat, even my Latin is rusty.

As for the age of consent, another factor comes into play:
In many states, the age of consent is higher for homosexual acts.

Not only that, but statutory rape laws are rather confusing. Can a fourteen year old properly consent? It really does depend on the fourteen year old. I probably could have, but many women could not have given meaningfull consent at that age.

Re: Date rape, I never understood the distinction. I imagine it would be just as devastating to be raped no matter who the perpetrator was. And if it is a matter of "I did not really want to, but went along with him just the same", that cannot constitute rape.

Indeed, even a case of rape that left physical evidence could be explained away.