Patterico's Pontifications

8/5/2009

Judges: California Must Form Plan to Release 43,000 Prisoners

Filed under: Dog Trainer — Patterico @ 7:18 am

What could go wrong?

California must shrink the population of its teeming prisons by nearly 43,000 inmates over the next two years to meet constitutional standards, a panel of three federal judges ruled Tuesday, ordering the state to come up with a reduction plan by mid-September.

. . . .

The 185-page opinion follows a trial last year and nearly 14 years of deliberations over lawsuits brought by inmates alleging cruel and unusual punishment, which moved the state case into federal jurisdiction. The opinion accuses the state of fostering “criminogenic” conditions that lead prisoners and parolees to commit more crimes, feeding a cycle of recidivism.

Build a camp next to Stephen Reinhardt’s house and release them there. Maybe Ramona can help them out.

P.S. In the article, the L.A. Times continues its longstanding tradition of failing to tell you who appointed the the judges who rendered this decision.

You’ll be shocked to learn they were all appointed by Democrats.

86 Responses to “Judges: California Must Form Plan to Release 43,000 Prisoners”

  1. Wait a minute. The Times told us that Charles Samuels would not have murdered had the three strikes law been properly enforced. I’m so confused.

    Alta Bob (cd787f)

  2. Bye-bye, California.

    The Golden State has turned to dust.

    Patricia (48ec63)

  3. My heart goes out to all the probation, counselors, and the rest of the overworked State of Califonia Criminal Justice system that has to deal with this direct threat to their families and friends

    EricPWJohnson (a7d970)

  4. I post this link every time the subject comes up because I lived through it.

    http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/3565992.html

    It is a must-read.

    Last year, the city’s judges were forced to release defendants in 15,000 cases. Thanks to the court order, the city now has 50,000 fugitives from justice—defendants who have been charged with a crime but do not even bother to show up for trial. Philadelphia police arrest the same criminals over and over again, only to see them immediately released. In the nine years since the order was approved by Judge Norma Shapiro, of the U.S. District Court, defendants released under federal court order have gone on to commit tens of thousands of crimes—including thousands of violent crimes such as murder, rape, and robbery.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  5. I would defy the judges. Force them to decide which particular inmates must be released. Force them to give the order.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  6. I think what you should do is provide each released criminal the HOME ADDRESS of the Judges along with a brief description of any money or women in the home.

    HeavenSent (01a566)

  7. I like that, disclosing the Judges’ Home Address to released criminals.

    I actually am starting to believe that FORCING GOV.T EMPLOYEES AND OFFICIALS to eat their cooking is the only non-violent solution.

    You want Kervorkian Care — you must be enrolled in Medicaid.

    You want to free criminals — you should be prepared to expose yourself to the criminals.

    HeavenSent (01a566)

  8. After what I went through in Philadelphia, I would provoke a constitutional crisis before I let that happen to my community. This is not a game.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  9. Exactly write @ 7.

    If they’re forced to expose themselves to the toxins they foist upon us on a daily basis, they’d change their tune pretty quick.

    KingShamus (4fabb2)

  10. It’s not just that they “were appointed by Democrats” but that two of the three judges (Reinhardt and Henderson) are radical leftists and the third (Karlton) is very far left himself.

    Reinhardt struck down the Pledge of Allegiance, claiming “God” may not be uttered at school, Henderson struck down Prop 209, claiming the Constitution requires good racial discrimination, and Karlton is known for the number of his clerks who go into public-interest law.

    Also, see my rant at the Jury Strikes Back.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  11. Did you know that, in the decision, the judges claim that prison overcrowding is the prime cause of recidivism and that by releasing these 44,000 felons, we would be REDUCING crime? Yup, starting at page 131 of the decision.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  12. oops, “Jury Talks Back.” Feel like striking something I guess.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  13. If a consent decree is offered, make sure it has an expiration date. Do not consent to unlimited prison caps under any circumstances. Force the issue to be continually reevaluated.

    They are trying to hold California accountable for the bad treatment of prisoners, in their opinion. Hold the Federal Courts accountable for the effect their decision has on the community. This is absolutely vital.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  14. Well, one bright spot in the release of 43K prisoners:
    A huge reduction in the number of Correctional Officers.
    Of course, they could transfer into the various Probation Dept’s to keep track of their ex-charges.

    This is part and parcel with the thinking of the Left to close GITMO, and extend LE onto the battlefield.
    The unintended counsequence of both is that the Courts’ caseloads will decrease as more and more bad guys are sent to the morgue instead of jail!

    This will really spur the movement to revise CCW in CA to “shall issue” from “may issue”,
    especially after a couple of legislators (or high-profile media-types) are the victims of recidivists.

    AD - RtR/OS! (dcbe30)

  15. Alternately, we could build more prisons so that our prisoners are housed properly. But that would require successfully passing a bond measure or using a new tax to pay for them, neither of which stand a chance of passing.

    aphrael (9e8ccd)

  16. If these same federal courts would clear their dockets of death penalty cases, instead of sitting on them for a decade, we’d have about 1000 fewer inmates.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  17. How long has this been going on? The article says 2006. So what has California done to avoid this during the past three years?

    nk (977e07)

  18. What could possibly go wrong?

    JD (e62f40)

  19. What if your doctor told you that you had a cancerous tumor that could be successfully removed? The catch, he said, is that the operation is going to cost a lot of money.

    Obviously, if you had the money, you would pay for the operation. I mean, it beats dying … right?

    I feel the same way about prisons. As much as I hate taxes, I understand why my hard-earned dollars are needed to build and staff prisons. (There are THREE state prisons in the rural Georgia county where I was born and raised.)

    It goes without saying that I wished we lived in a Utopia where prisons were not necessary, but, unfortunately, our society is filled with various and sundry thugs. So, I say: build as many prisons as are needed to keep law-abiding citizens safe.

    Bubba Maximus (456175)

  20. To repeat: the people making these decisions are immune from their direct consequences. I would love to see the judges held financially responsible for the costs of future misdeeds by the released prisoners.

    Not possible, of course, but I believe that judges are FAR too personally insulated from the results of their own decision making. Unlike the people in the community, who do get to deal with those results, directly.

    Eric Blair (204104)

  21. The state has better uses for its funds than spending more on those animals. The Governor should force a show down with the courts and flat refuse to implement this ruling. Indeed he should have the AG issue orders to arrest any federal agent attempting to enforce the 9th’s ruling. Indeed he he should up the ante and pull CA’s national Guard out the active Army and have the state department of revenue impound all federal tax collections and net out all of the mandates imposed on the state before releasing the funds to the feds. The Supreme Court would back out of the 9th’s ruling at the speed of light. And so would Congress and Obama. The implications are obvious and most of the states would follow through. Federalism has its limits and Obama and the congressional communists are right at the edge of its limits.

    In my opinion the one ballot initiative CA needs is to eliminate gerrymandering for local, state and federal districts. Ideally it would also incorporate a restriction on voting for the house in both state and federal elections to net taxpayers and the equivalent for local bodies. While there is no perfect solution to any problem, this one would curb the excess on both the left and the right and bring back spending and taxing to the levels that those who actually have to pay the bills are willing to spend.

    cubanbob (409ac2)

  22. Even by Ninth Circuit standards, that panel is a leftist litigant’s dream (Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit proper, plus District Judges Thelton Henderson and Lawrence Karlton of the Northern and Eastern Districts, respectively).

    Ripe for en banc reconsideration. Or is that not how these special panels’ decisions get reviewed? (Is it strictly a matter of SCOTUS-cert-or-not, in other words, at this point?)

    Mitch (890cbf)

  23. On the other hand, ordering the release of 43,000 inmates into the general population has a way of focusing the public’s attention on the judicial system and the ideology of the judges and the people who support them in a way other liberal rulings do not.

    California had a big brouhaha about a decade ago from smaller communities in the state, who were seeing criminals released from prisons for crimes committed in other parts of the state getting dumped in their areas. Now try to imagine what the reaction is going to be with an average of 1,900 criminals per month for the next two years being released.

    As with the health care bill, Porkulus and Cash for Clunkers, sometime you can’t focus people’s attention on the results of liberal ideology except to allow them to experience it themselves. Californians’ focus on the consequences of who they vote for might be burned into their brains a little better if they fear the outcomes could get them robbed, raped or murdered.

    John (f82202)

  24. Hopefully this will help take some pressure off the tight labor market.

    If there was ever a time to buy stock in California, Inc. it is so now. Things are going great, and they’re only getting better.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  25. Comment by aphrael — 8/5/2009 @ 8:44 am

    I know you’ll correct me if I’m wrong, but I have no recollection of any bond issue for prison construction having been voted down by the voters of CA.
    On almost every occassion, the voters have expressed their opinion dramatically that they want dangerous criminals incarcerated for as long as possible, with the exception of murderers, who should be executed with far fewer super-proceedural delays – we don’t want to deny them a legitimate review/appeal, but think that one-bite at the apple is sufficient.

    AD - RtR/OS! (dcbe30)

  26. …the nine years since the order was approved by Judge Norma Shapiro, of the U.S. District Court, defendants released under federal court order have gone on to commit tens of thousands of crimes—including thousands of violent crimes such as murder, rape, and robbery. Comment by Amphipolis — 8/5/2009 @ 7:57 am

    Oh, surprise, surprise! Another person in our judicial system who’s an idiot is of the (ta-da!!) left. One more jurist who’s a prime example that Jimmy Carter’s brilliance of over 30 years still is a gift that keeps on giving.

    Shapiro, Norma Levy
    Born 1928 in Philadelphia, PA

    Federal Judicial Service:

    Judge, U. S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania

    Nominated by Jimmy Carter on August 1, 1978, to a seat vacated by James H. Gorbey; Confirmed by the Senate on August 11, 1978, and received commission on August 11, 1978. Assumed senior status on December 31, 1998.

    Build a camp next to Stephen Reinhardt’s house and release them there. Maybe Ramona can help them out.

    People like that, because their decisionmaking is so deluded, deranged and even dangerous, really end up being as much a threat, if not an even greater one, to the well-being of our society as are the criminals behind bars.

    And imagine how much more idiocy and irresponsibility are going to be coming down the pike over the next few years with Obama in the White House, Eric Holder in the Justice Department, etc, etc, etc.

    Even more gifts that will keep on giving, well after 2009.

    Mark (411533)

  27. It’s as if the Lily Burk murder hadn’t just happened.

    Ira (28a423)

  28. Easy, before the convicts are released, tear down the protective walls around all Judges properties, issue concealed carry permits to non-felons, sell confiscated guns to law abiding citizens just like the government sells confiscated cars, and pass “Make My Day” laws authorizing people to protect themselves and their property without qualifications.

    Make the public MORE dangerous to the criminals, and they’ll either behave or die.

    PCD (02f8c1)

  29. No salary would be high enough to entice me to move to California. This is just the latest of many reasons.

    voiceofreason2 (10af7e)

  30. a restriction on voting for the house in both state and federal elections to net taxpayers

    it’s not clear to me that such a restriction would be constitutional. among other things, it seems to me that it could be interpreted to violate the prohibition on poll taxes, and it’s also highly likely that such a rule would in effect be racially discriminatory.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  31. Supporters of the court action need to show how releasing criminals, together with the ensuing consequences we have reason to expect (see above), is an appropriate remedy for prison overcrowding.

    It’s not good enough to say prisons are bad. We know that. You have to show how doing this would be a good thing.

    I’m sure the court has many options available to it to deal with the situation. This should not be one of them under any circumstances.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  32. “…It’s not good enough to say prisons are bad…”

    Prisons are supposed to be bad, so bad that only the Dogs of Hell could drag you back to one.
    That’s the problem, we’ve (well, at least the Leftists) tried to make them into Summer Camp.

    Just think of the possibilities if Joe Arpaio was the Director of Corrections in CA?

    AD - RtR/OS! (dcbe30)

  33. Comment by Amphipolis — 8/5/2009 @ 10:47 am

    It’s already been shown that the state isn’t interested in building their way out of the problem. Perhaps the specter to close to 50k convicts released will be enough to motivate a building spree, but I doubt it.

    At some point constitutional violations have to be remedied, no matter how much pain it causes everyone else. California has managed to keep punting this issue down the block for years, but at some point the bill will come due and there will be no more evasion possible.

    Soronel Haetir (869810)

  34. It’s as if the Lily Burk murder hadn’t just happened.

    According to these judges, either Lily Burke’s killer was forced back into a life of crime by the trauma of prison overcrowding, or her death is just one of the little sacrifices we have to make to ensure our Liberty (or at least the liberty of 44,000 felons).

    Kevin Murphy (805c5b)

  35. I’d comment except I’m headed out the door to buy several more guns and stock up on ammo.

    Stan Switek (b2907a)

  36. That shouldn’t be too hard, take all the illegals that are locked up and give them a one way bus ticket back to Mexico.

    k (f427f7)

  37. no matter how much pain it causes everyone else

    Do you really mean that? Read my link. The judges think the constitution has been violated, so they decree that we burn LA to the ground. AD would support that? Why don’t we spell it out: no matter how much rape and murder and…you obviously have not seen it in practice.

    Surely there is a limit, surely there is some form of proportionality, surely you don’t support the burning villages in order to save them.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  38. no matter how much pain it causes everyone else

    Do you really mean that? Read my link. The judges think the constitution has been violated, so they decree that we burn LA to the ground. You would support that? Why don’t we spell it out: no matter how much rape and murder and…you obviously have not seen it in practice.

    Surely there is a limit, surely there is some form of proportionality, surely you don’t support the burning of villages in order to save them.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  39. oops

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  40. The last time we voted on a prison bond issue was Prop. 205 in 1996; it was defeated 41-59.

    Proposition 120, in 1990, passed 56-44.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  41. I’m sure the court has many options available to it to deal with the situation. This should not be one of them under any circumstances.

    I doubt there are ‘many’ options. As is the case in many other areas in California, we’ve basically already overdrawn our options by delaying for too long.

    At this point the options are: release prisoners or build new prisons.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  42. The same federal law which requires a three-judge panel to order the release of prisoners forbids federal judges from ordering the state to spend more money on prisons. All the judges have is the threat of prisoner release.

    This has been discussed before, here. Initially, California’s prison system was put into federal receivership due to civil rights suits. Then, as the court saw that the receiver was spinning his wheels, a three-judge panel was appointed. A three-judge panel is a shot across the bow. It means prisoner release is a reality. California ignored it and now it got a broadside.

    nk (977e07)

  43. Releasing prisoners is NOT an option because the remedy is worse than the disease. They will have to come up with other options.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  44. execute everyone currently in prison for murder, rape, child molestation and 3 strikes then ship all illegals off to federal facilities.

    if we’re still short, take the balance and put them on a w*rk release program doing housekeeping in government buildings, especially federal ones and legislative branches.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  45. Think about what you are saying.

    Prisons are overcrowded, so we will have our citizens raped and murdered until they pay higher taxes.

    That’s what you want.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  46. Women and minorities hardest hit.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  47. This is the kind of daftness that makes me have to resist acquiring a visceral hatred of liberalism.

    We are told it is all about spending money on prisons. But if the man on the street believed that committing a crime would likely result in harsh and unpleasant consequences we would not have developed this problem. This is proven by the Philadelphia experience. As consequences were withdrawn crime surged.

    Following the Federal prison cap order, the number of fugitives in Philadelphia nearly tripled. Outstanding bench warrants skyrocketed from 18,000 to over 50,000. That is the equivalent of a year’s worth of prosecutions in Philadelphia, a year’s worth of crime victims with no justice. In one 18-month period, Philadelphia rearrested for new crimes 9,732 defendants released by the Federal court order. Their crimes included 79 murders, 959 robberies, over 2,200 drug-dealing cases, over 700 burglaries, 90 rapes, 14 kidnappings, over 1,000 assaults, and over 200 gun crimes. This also included the murder of rookie police officer Daniel Boyle, who was shot by a prisoner repeatedly released by the Federal prison cap.
    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-110hhrg11041903/html/CHRG-110hhrg11041903.htm

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  48. #47

    Excellent well thought out comment. Sure to drive the usual suspects wild.

    Thomas Jackson (8ffd46)

  49. Easy problem to solve. Turn the illegals over to the federal prison system.

    TakeFive (7c6fd5)


  50. Releasing prisoners is NOT an option because the remedy is worse than the disease. They will have to come up with other options.

    The thing is, there is no federal law saying this.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  51. What could go wrong?

    Those 43,000 prisoners are all first time drug offenders according to the libertarians, incarcerated by unfair laws by a bunch of boot licking authoritarians.

    It should all be good. Maybe Balko can take a few hundred of them in to show his sincerity.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  52. #51

    Most first time drug offenders who spend time in jail are convicted because they have massive amounts of drugs. But that aside, would someone give special consideration to a first time rapist?

    Thomas Jackson (8ffd46)

  53. And why exactly has Phillu not increased their confinement capacity? That seems to be the true disfunction of that story. It’s as if they are trying to get by in 2009 with a lockup built to 1950s capacity expecations.

    Soronel Haetir (869810)

  54. Initially, California’s prison system was put into federal receivership due to civil rights suits. Then, as the court saw that the receiver was spinning his wheels, a three-judge panel was appointed. A three-judge panel is a shot across the bow. It means prisoner release is a reality. California ignored it and now it got a broadside.

    I think you mean the following:

    Initially, California’s prison system was put into federal receivership due Thelton (“Moe”) Henderson being appointed to deal with a nuisance suit. Moe ordered everyone to do things his way, and when they refused he called in his buddies, Judges “Larry” Karlton and “Curly” Reinhardt. A three-judge panel is like fingers in your eyes. It means all the clowns are now loose. California ignored the stooges and so it got a piano dropped on its head.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  55. The thing is, there is no federal law saying this.

    There is no federal law against making all the prisoners schoolteachers, either, but I bet you the Supreme Court would stay that order.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  56. Matter of fact, there is no federal law mandating any particular lever of medical care in prisons. The judges just made one up. There is state law barring random releases of prisoners. Seems to me there’s plenty of room for lengthy litigation.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  57. At this point the options are: release prisoners or build new prisons.

    The better option would be to squeeze out of the judicial system all the idiotic leftist judges like the ones who handed down the ruling on the prisons in California. The judges who think that when it comes to humanity and compassion, their shit don’t stink because they’re more worried about the way that prison life treats inmates than the way those inmates treated their victims.

    And nothing more disgusting than limousine-liberal jurists enacting irresponsible and even flat-out dangerous decisions and then, at the end of the day, running off to their protected houses in the better part of town.

    Mark (411533)

  58. TJ – #51 was a joke. Lighten up.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  59. I’ll tell them where to start: How many inmates are on Death Row?

    You can clear that many out pretty quickly.

    Hoystory (08dea2)

  60. While I believe this to be a states right issue, the governator should tell the feds to go pound sand. I’m sure he won’t, he’s a girly man.
    Kevin Murphy you are too funny

    Marty Cherrie (0158cb)

  61. Lighten up

    Sometimes dark humor is our only outlet. But I urge Californians to take this issue very, very seriously.

    Forget Obamacare. You should all be demonstrating over this. Now.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  62. Turn the 57,000 loose in San Francisco and Marin County.

    Blacque Jacques Shellacque (1641e7)

  63. Point of Personal Privilege:
    “…so they decree that we burn LA to the ground. AD would support that?…”
    Comment by Amphipolis — 8/5/2009 @ 12:15 pm

    Pardon Me! But where did I say anything remotely like that?

    AD - RtR/OS! (17ce54)

  64. What could possibly go wrong ?

    JD (28e6e6)

  65. No – pardon me, AD!

    My redundant posts 37 & 38 ought to have been directed to Soronel Haetir. Sorry.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  66. Amphipolis,

    I do mean it, yes. California has had years to build more capacity knowing that this ruling was coming down the pipe, yet chose (likely for reasons of state disfunction, sure) not to do so. Just like I see the fed bailouts eventually leading to something worse than we would have had without the bailouts, this bill is coming due and it’s going to be an expensive one.

    Californians chose their three strikes law and other measures but did not plan for the predictable long term consequences of that choice. So yes, I don’t care about the pain it causes the law abiding in this situation.

    I would love to see the issue solved through capacity increase, but I don’t see that happening, and without a firm commitment from the state I would in fact rather see prisoner releases.

    Soronel Haetir (869810)

  67. The release of 43K Felons prematurely onto the streets of CA can only be a positive influence on the sale of personal security products and services.
    Many will be disappointed (and angry) when they discover the shortages (and government restrictions) in the market-place of firearms and ammo.
    This could be a good time to buy stock in security providers.

    AD - RtR/OS! (17ce54)

  68. Soronel,

    these voters and politicians who have taken the vast opportunity of california and turned it into a complete mess certainly are at fault.

    but releasing these criminals is wrong. It’s a death penalty lottery for those voters (many of whom advocated responsibility and lost the election, which is happening more and more lately), and I don’t think that’s a fair punishment for their idiotic handling of their policy matters.

    Surely if California fired the vast majority of their employees and paid only for essential things like road maintenance and law enforcement, this problem and many others would be fixed. Taxes wouldn’t go down right away, but eventually, california would be the best place in the world to have a business, and all these government jobs would be replaced with private jobs.

    but that’s a start to something good.

    Letting more prisoners out of prison is a start to something bad. I know you agree with that. I think giving up on California is a bad move. The USA is headed in the same direction. We can give up and hole up in Texas and hope disaster falls to our kids instead of us, or we can refuse to surrender California to liberalism.

    Juan (bd4b30)

  69. Oh wow. You guys are too much. I used to think like you, then I realized that the world of objective reality, you know, the one that exists outside your front doors and Armageddon bunkers, doesn’t work like you seem to think it does. Your hatred for “leftists” and “Democrats” blinds you to the possibility that you may ever be wrong, that facts may ever disagree with you, and you go so far as to wish death on innocents because your dream boy didn’t handle the prison overcrowding situation. Half of our prisoners in this country are non-violent offenders, a good number are in for crimes no more dangerous than simple possession, and our incarceration rate is closing fast on Stalin’s. Yet you mouth-breathing pseudo-intellectual hatemongers focus all your efforts on saying “those damn liberals” are the cause of all the problems, instead of your barbaric beliefs that you’re somehow doing society one bit of good by locking people up for insane amounts of time. Conservatives and their punitive mindset are directly responsible for at least one of the largest and most dangerous gangs in America. Oh and hey, let’s not forget how well you guys did with the old prohibition and temperance days, where you helped put organized crime into power. The War on Drugs is doing just fine too, making it so that PLANTS are being controlled by armed cartels. I hope some day even one of you wakes up, reads a study, learns about the horrors of your “correction” system, and realizes what a fool and a brute you’ve been. Until then, I am only saddened that I have to share my oxygen with people who harbor so much hatred for mankind.

    Oh, last thought – the closeted racism in this comment thread is ADORABLE. Like most of us don’t know that when you talk about “thugs” and “monsters” and “animals” you usually mean “negros”.

    Ex-Con(servative) (4376de)

  70. Racism?

    Ex con, I actually thought you have a valuable comment until you threw in the race card. now I know you were just blindly throwing in random accusations you didn’t understand.

    If you want to turn this into a war on drugs issue, you might actually get somewhere. but it’s not racist to call a thug a thug, even if a lot of those thugs aren’t white. White thugs get no love here either.

    Juan (bd4b30)

  71. I don’t know why this guy describes himself as “Ex-Con”; as far as I can see, he’s completey Curren Con, as in con-job.
    Just another Liberwhakaterian/Leftist Moby.

    AD - RtR/OS! (17ce54)

  72. I think Ex-Con is one of Obama’s kool-aid drinking liars who wouldn’t know truth and reality if they tag teamed him into submission.

    (I’m not apologizing for the rasslin’ allusions today.)

    PCD (02f8c1)

  73. Fact is, there aren’t that many people in prison just for having personal use drugs in their pocket.

    And drugs kill people and ruin minds. Even little old Mary Jane. I have no problem with adults killing themselves and ruining their minds, except that it’s pretty expensive to society. If we have public healthcare, then I think the case for punishing drugs is bolstered in the extreme (I guess this isn’t much of a complaint against libertarianism, though).

    If there are any prisoners in California whose only offense was having a couple of doobies in their pocket, I pray they are released first. A nice weekend slave labor camp, or hefty fine, would be a great solution for these people.

    Dealers are murderers. Just amend the murder statute to make this clear for selling meth, cocaine, crack, opiates, or hard hallucinogens.

    Juan (bd4b30)

  74. Juan – What about that comment, prior to the gratuitous RACISM charge, did you find valuable?

    JD (1762b4)

  75. JD, while I don’t agree with ending the drug war, it’s at least a rational thing to complain about when discussing crowded prisons.

    Prohibition of Alcohol indeed did have a counterproductive effect, creating huge crime organizations, including the Kennedy family, which exists today in some form in the democrat party, their mafia oriented union fronts, etc. The drug war has some bad effects too, though I think it’s worth it.

    If ex con had discussed overcrowded prisons by talking about legalizing a lot of crimes, at least I could make sense of it. Instead, he thinks anyone criticizing criminals is a racist, since a lot of criminals are not white. It’s probably designed to avoid discussion of the other points, I guess.

    Juan (bd4b30)

  76. Juan – I could tell that it was a Moby-ish POS from the point where it claimed it used to think like us, and proceeded to show that what it thinks we think is nothing other than an imaginary voice in his head. The objective reality crap was kind of a giveaway too.

    JD (979402)

  77. “Moby-ish POS”

    No argument here. It’s a lazy way to make a point, though. I think we’d all be better off if people would just own up to their opinions.

    Juan (bd4b30)

  78. Soronel Haetir:
    I don’t care about the pain it causes the law abiding

    You also don’t care about justice. This is a recipe for vigilantism.

    Ex-Con:
    “Negros” are murdered six times more frequently than whites. It is “negros” who will disproportionately suffer from this, just like they did in Philadelphia.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  79. Plus, it threw a codeword argument in there, which is an immediate EPIC FAIL.

    JD (979402)

  80. Kevin, at 55: ah, but my point is that declaring something to not be an option because it is politically unpalatable and then expecting a judge to abide by that rule, without a law directing them to, is silly.

    Juan, at 68: according to this website, the total payroll paid by the State of California monthly is $1,477,572,195. That amounts to an annual total of $17,730,866,340. That’s a smaller amount than this year’s budget gap was. So no, if the state fired everyone, it wouldn’t solve the problem.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  81. aphrael,

    I bet I could house all these prisoners for 17 billion dollars.

    so yes, it would solve the problem.

    bear in mind that salary is probably a small fraction of the savings of ending the departments employing these people, as I’m sure you already realized.

    So to say it wouldn’t solve the problem seems absurd to me. It’s not complicated… they are spending their money on programs, employees, and benefits that should go away. They should do essential tasks like road repair, law enforcement, and completely end all programs that Texas or Oklahoma don’t offer.

    Juan (bd4b30)

  82. expecting a judge to abide by that rule, without a law directing them to, is silly.

    I think this is an argument that also cuts the other way. This is beyond the mandate a federal judge should have. It’s silly for them to make up laws like this that are undemocratic in the extreme, immoral and contrary to the basic administration of justice.

    These judges should be in prison for their reckless disregard for human life.

    Juan (bd4b30)

  83. This is statutory, not judge-made law. Civil Rights Act of 1871, now knows as Section 1983, and also 18 U.S.C. 3626(a)(3) and 28 U.S.C. 2284.

    nk (3e2246)

  84. Yeah, I guess that’s true. I honestly can’t stand it anyway. This is clearly none of the federal government’s business. It’s not cruel and unusual to not provide mental health care you can’t afford to provide.

    Juan (bd4b30)

  85. Are all prisoners in prison for murder, rape, or armed robbery?

    I somehow doubt Scott Peterson and Richard Allen Davis will be released.

    Michael Ejercito (833607)

  86. [...] a message for this panel of federal judges — which the L.A. Times doesn’t say and will never, ever say are all Democrat [...]

    Patterico’s Pontifications » Dumbass Federal Judges Push Release of Criminals Who Are Bunked ALMOST As Tight As Sailors in a Submarine (e4ab32)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5249 secs.