Quote:
Originally Posted by mvisconte
Heard of him? Sure. Good man. Doing a good job. Prisoners under his care don't like him. He's not buddy-buddy with them, isn't for soft conditions for people who are supposed to being punished for antisocial behaviour. They hate wearing pink underwear. They hate having classical music to listen to. They hate having their Playboy magazines taken away from them because they were masturbating publicly around female guards. That man [Arpaio] is heartless! I like that. It used to be that felons went to Penitentiaries. Places where people who had done wrong would go to be penitent. How heartless could we BE to send murderers and rapists to places of punishment? I, personally, think that life imprisonment is both cruel and unusual, and I would think that everybody would be better off if we had more death sentences for those folks than life sentences. It would also clear out some of the over-crowding, and maybe give us enough room to incarcerate illegal immigrants before deporting them. Maybe we could use Mexico's laws as a shining example!
|
Don't you think it borders on cruel to do something only because someone else finds it unpleasant? Pink underwear and classical music are minor I'm not suggesting a lawsuit but at the same time a prisoner doesn't cease to be human and misery for misery's sake isn't justice it's sadism. I'm not saying make jail pleasant I'm saying that since the court didn't impose a sentence of pink underwear common sense says make the standard issue stuff whatever looks best for the budget.
Also keep in mind we're talking about jail not prison, jail being the place for petty offenders and persons awaiting trial. If you would concede that perhaps innocent persons do face trial could i get you to agree that moving from mere confinement to something unpleasant for unpleasantness' sake is doing a disservice to those who need to prepare a court defense?
Just a thought.