For Profit Prisons should be illegal

Pressure

Pressure

#PanthersPosse
Supporter
Joined
Nov 19, 2016
Messages
47,219
Reputation
7,216
Daps
150,142
Reppin
CookoutGang
BrownSkin Intellect said:
Abolish ICE.
But..... how private are private prisons if publicly funded?
Click to expand...
They aren't adhering to the same standards and transparency.

They currently are not required to follow foia laws.

And unlike state and federal prisons they have the ability to lobby the government they are a sub contractor of. :hhh:
 
North of Death

North of Death

All Star
Bushed
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
4,286
Reputation
-540
Daps
11,831
∆y = f(∆x) said:
:obamasuccess:

Obama administration to phase out some private prison use

:TrollTrump:

U.S. reverses Obama-era move to phase out private prisons | Reuters

:camroncmon:

Private prison industry sees boon under Trump - CNNPolitics

:MichelleOsideeye:
Click to expand...

The war on drugs would of had to be ended first before private prisons have any type of possibility to be weakened...But this begs the question, why didnt Obama end the war of drugs? He could of did it by executive order and/or directed the agencies in the executive branch not to enforce it:francis:

Obama Is Letting the Drug War Rage on Pointlessly
This week the Obama Administration rejected the application of a pair of governors who asked the federal government to lower the federal restrictions on marijuana. The administration concluded that marijuana should remain a “Schedule I” controlled substance under federal law. Schedule I is the most restricted category of illicit drugs, which the government considers to have a high potential for abuse and no legitimate value.

This ruling flies in the face of President Obama’s previous statementsindicating that he would allow science, rather than drug war ideology, to determine the legal status of marijuana. It is virtually impossible to overdose on marijuana, and despite centuries of recreational use, the harm caused by marijuana is infinitesimal compared to much harder, yet legal, drugs like alcohol.

The dangers the government insists on associating with marijuana are, in fact, dangers caused by prohibition itself.

Regardless of its legal status, there remains a substantial demand in the U.S. for marijuana. That market will either be served by legal businesses or illegal ones. There is no “none of the above.”

When drugs are illegal, that money goes to the cartels. When drugs become legal, that money stays in local economies and governments.

The data bears this out. In the last few years, several states have legalized recreational marijuana. As a result, marijuana seizures at the border have plummeted as the necessity of importing marijuana from abroad has begun to collapse. The free market is doing what billions of wasted dollars and millions of wasted lives under drug prohibition could not.

The administration’s decision this week suppresses that fantastic development, and instead guarantees more violence.

Unlike legal disputes in a free market, black-market disputes often involve violence because most peaceful means of dispute resolution are unavailable.

In 2016 if two alcohol distributors have a dispute, they settle it in court with lawyers. When two alcohol distributors had a dispute in 1928, they settled it on the street corner with Tommy Guns and Molotov Cocktails. Prohibition demands it. The murder rate spiked under alcohol prohibition, and dropped every year for a decade after prohibition ended.

The same was true for killings of police officers.

Prohibition doesn’t just increase violence against police officers, it also increases violence by the police against the citizenry. There are now an estimated 80,000 SWAT raids annually in the U.S., the vast majority of which are serving mere search warrants, usually for drugs. A paramilitary institution that was developed to answer hostage situations and active shooters has become a routine, yet potentially violent tool for keeping people from smoking pot. Far too many harmless Americans have died as a result.

President Obama, whose administration has seen an explosion of national concern about street violence, as well as violence by and against police officers, has repeatedly vowed to find answers to these problems while continually ignoring the obvious solution staring him in the face.

The administration’s ruling also represents the continuation of a bizarre federalism problem.

Under our constitution, criminal law has historically been left to state and local governments, not Congress. That is why, when the misguided government opted to prohibit the manufacture and distribution of alcohol in the 1920s, prohibitionists sought a Constitutional amendment granting the federal government the authority to ban alcohol. Alcohol prohibition ended, after years of corruption and unnecessary bloodshed, when the constitution was amended again to correct the mistake of the earlier amendment.

When the federal government wanted to ban drugs, however, it merely passed a federal law banning drugs, creating an obvious tension between the federal government and the states that have traditionally made their own decisions about what substances to permit or prohibit.

The result is a legal quagmire in which 42 states and the District of Columbiaallow either medicinal or recreational use of marijuana, while the federal government insists that a nationwide prohibition remains in effect.

It is immensely disappointing that President Obama, who ran as an advocate of “common sense” justice reforms, has again decided to shoot down a desperately needed reform to federal drug law. This ruling guarantees that the drug cartels will continue to profit off the U.S. marijuana market, that American citizens will continue being subjected to police violence and lengthy prison sentences for engaging in a harmless behavior that the majority of Americans believe should be legal, and that the drug war that has done so much damage to our law, our society and our individual liberty will continue.
Click to expand...

http://time.com
 
dora_da_destroyer

dora_da_destroyer

Master Baker
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
65,925
Reputation
16,494
Daps
271,448
Reppin
Oakland
shyt is slavery. You can’t put forth “prison/sentencing reform” bills and in the same breath support and let private prisons exist, really wish there was a bigger movement to shut all of these down.
 
P

Prince.Skeletor

Don’t Be Like He-Man
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
29,468
Reputation
-6,925
Daps
57,577
Reppin
Bucktown
Call Me James said:
They aren't adhering to the same standards and transparency.

They currently are not required to follow foia laws.

And unlike state and federal prisons they have the ability to lobby the government they are a sub contractor of. :hhh:
Click to expand...

Bro come on you know the american govt. is not a transparent one right now.

But otherwise I think the only thing that would change is the slavery part.

Let's not forget police is not private yet they still have quotas as you know.
 
S

Secure Da Bag

Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2017
Messages
42,522
Reputation
21,902
Daps
132,299
North of Death said:
The war on drugs would of had to be ended first before private prisons have any type of possibility to be weakened...But this begs the question, why didnt Obama end the war of drugs? He could of did it by executive order and/or directed the agencies in the executive branch not to enforce it:francis:

Obama Is Letting the Drug War Rage on Pointlessly


http://time.com
Click to expand...

According to the article, Obama rejected that recommendation on the week of 8/11/16. So I think he didn't do anything too "radical" for Clinton's sake. Basically, he did whatever he could do to not hinder her election chances and let her decide if she won (which we know she didn't).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top