• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

So Many Behind Bars In 'The Land Of The Free'

Wildman (and the rest of my [being a yank] British cousins), if you haven't been to the States, I wish you could come see what it's like. It's really not so bad as the news and statistics make it sound, I assure you. Just as there are places in the UK you wouldn't find wise to travel in, there are bad places here; however, it's not all like Boyz in the Hood or Colors, I assure you. I live in a decent-sized college town (by no means a metropolis [maybe 90,000]), and we have drugs and murder and so forth. Still, although if I walked down the worst street in town, I seriously doubt anyone would even say anything to me. Having said that, I wouldn't loiter in that area's park, since it would be seen as an affront. I think America's not so bad, when you consider there are countries out there sending 10-year-olds out into the streets with automatic rifles to work as enforcers for the local warlord. Really--and I mean this very seriously--I think any one of you here would not only do quite well in the States, but enjoy it here. My brother-in-law is from Essex (but now lives in Wisconsin) and he loves it; he watches American football and has traded F1 for Nascar (which might not be a cool choice, IMO), and genuinely loves the forthright yet amiable nature of the place.

America: try us, you'll like us!
 
Question: If the USA is the land of the free why are so many in jail there?

Answer: cos alot of people break the law and have to goto jail to pay for their crimes, there are so many people in jail simply because there are so many people that live in the USA. If you did a per head of population count of the amount of people in jail and the amount of people in jail in glasgow you would probably find there are more in glasgow and i should know cos im related to most of them.
 
Annasdottir said:
So what is the difference? They're the same thing over here (except that jail is spelt goal).
Click to expand...

What? So, like, David Seaman is a criminal?
He's been in goal for years. Shouldn't they have moved him to prison by now?

I think the capital punishment system is a bit screwed if they thinks it's fair to punish criminals by kicking balls at them at high speed.

Control: "You are number one"
Seaman: "I am not a number, I am a free man!"

:D
 
Isn't it gaol, not goal?
I thought it was a typo at first, but now three different people have used it.

We also have different levels of prisons, and different sections within the prisons. They do try to keep violent criminals away from the drug addicts and such--they also try to keep rival gangs separated. Also, there are maximum security, 'average' security, and minimum security prisons (for 'white collar' criminals). There are even prisons where some of the inmates have day jobs outside, then come right back to prison after work. And then, of course, there are the halfway houses, where ex-cons can live for a while as they try to reintegrate into society. All of these are run by state or federal prison systems, and they all count in the statistics. Jails are county or municipally run.
 
Yes it is gaol, not goal.

Unfortunately this bored dus not have an inbilt speeling cheker
 
The following figures are taken from Scientific American, issue 899.
Number of people incarcerated per 100,000 population
UK - 100
France - 95
Germany - 85
Sweden - 65
Spain - 105
Canada - 115

USA - 668
If you look at the US figures by race
Whites 330 per 100,000
Hispanics 1070 per 100,000
Black 2550 per 100,000

The original article can be foundhere

These figures speak for themselves.
 
Originally posted by intaglio
These figures speak for themselves.
Click to expand...


But what are they saying, Intaglio? That we're less inclined to suffer fools gladly and have a lower tolerance for BS? The figures might be speaking, but I non comprende.

Also, you have an incarceration total of 668 people out of 100,000 for the States; yet, you have the following figures by race (per 100,000): Whites 330, Hispanics 1070, and Blacks 2550. The math doesn't work. The race numbers add up to 3,950 out of 100,000; a good deal more than the original 668. Did the NAACP sponsor this research, by chance? It seems questionable to me.
 
TorgosPizza said:
Also, you have an incarceration total of 668 people out of 100,000 for the States; yet, you have the following figures by race (per 100,000): Whites 330, Hispanics 1070, and Blacks 2550. The math doesn't work. The race numbers add up to 3,950 out of 100,000; a good deal more than the original 668. Did the NAACP sponsor this research, by chance? It seems questionable to me.
Click to expand...

i was just thinking the same thing

is there anyone in the usa that actually lives outside of prison? :blah:
 
Torgos the figures add up because there are fewer persons of black and hispanic racial origin than whites, tho those figures are extrapolations. For the total figures I think that SciAm will have checked the figures before publication as will the US Bureau of Justice, the source of the US figures.

If you check the map the only country that approaches the US in terms of incarceration is Byelorus. The only one that exceeds it is the Russian Federation. These countries are not exactly bastions of freedom.

I'll leave you to compare the crime figures for the UK against California. Just remember that the population of the UK is greater than that of that State and there has been an ongoing terrorist campaign here. Ask yourself "why is criminality is so much lower in Western Europe than in the US?"
 
...and again there is the question of what exactly 'incarceration' means. Are they counting the drunk tank in Mayberry, RFD?
 
Could these figures be the result of a more stringent law system? I know the UK has a shit law system where pedophiles and murders can walk free, I know this is the case also in the USA but maybe they dont get it wrong as often as the UK does. Also gangs are more common in the USA than in the UK and i can remember hearing somewhere that a high percentage of USA prisoners are gang members.
 
I don't know about gang members, but did I mention illegal immigrants? The INS puts most of these people in prison--some regular prisons, and some internment camps. And the figures are monstrous--the INS rounds up hundreds of illegals every day at the southern border alone. If they are over 18 and from Mexico, they get shipped straight back (and usually sneak back in two days later). If not, they spend time in prison. It is a horrible system--even W. realizes it needs to be reformed.
 
Originally posted by intaglio
Torgos the figures add up because there are fewer persons of black and hispanic racial origin than whites, tho those figures are extrapolations. For the total figures I think that SciAm will have checked the figures before publication as will the US Bureau of Justice, the source of the US figures.
Click to expand...


Intaglio, I still don't get the numbers; however, it might be because I am stupid. I'm not trying to be a wise-ass, but could you explain how they extrapolate these numbers. Or even why, instead of just giving us the straight facts? It seems 668 is alarming enough, but the extrapolation comes off like bunk, like the wind-chill factor: "it's five degrees outside, but with the wind it feels like negative fifteen!" Five's cold enough to convey the idea, anything else is superfluous show-biz.

I'll leave you to compare the crime figures for the UK against California. Just remember that the population of the UK is greater than that of that State and there has been an ongoing terrorist campaign here. Ask yourself "why is criminality is so much lower in Western Europe than in the US?"
Click to expand...


I guess you're just better people than we are. Either that or we have better cops over here. It's harder to outrun our cops, because they have bullets that can catch most anyone. A higher arrest rate makes for a higher incarceration rate. Comparing us to countries like Sweden or the Netherlands isn't fair, either; if we decriminalised as many offenses as they have, our stats would be lower. We don't believe "if it feels good, do it" works as a viable cultural philosophy. Whenever we apply it, we get results like Richard Speck, Charlie Manson, Timothy Leary, and Marv Albert. Killers and morons. Why do incredibly rigid subcultures like the Amish have such great citizens being produced? That's a question I'm curious about, because I know why so many inner-city kids are in trouble.
 
Tang, do you mean that those found innocent walk free? or those who are found guilty are eventually released? Sure the European legal system is not as strongly revenge based as the US and personally I think to little support is given to victims.

There is a lot that can be done to improve the conviction rate of both violent and sexual offenders and much that should be done to stop reoffense by such people. I do not know what the reoffense rate is but I'll try to find out.

One thing that is true is that violent crime has risen in the UK in recent years and also that it has fallen in the US but whether this is a real trend or a blip I'll wait to see. What can be seen is that the general crime rate across western Europe is broadly similar to the US whereas murder in the US is 2 to 8 times greater than for Western Europe though this has fallen a little in the past 3 years.

The prisoners refered to include all US nationals inprisoned including those in local jails. Excluding those in local jails the numbers in Federal and State Prisons are about 500 per 100k

One important point, the paedophiles released about which there was so much publicity many of them are back in voluntary custody.
 
what i find interesting about that US is that we are the last free country in the world that still uses the death penalty, but yet we have such a high number of persons in our prison systems, including murderers. but yet people still claim that the death penalty is a detterent. the statistics say otherwise (and so does common sense). sorry, if i am a little off the subject. -MaceyHope
 
Well heck, imprisonment doesn't seem to be a deterrent, either.

Let's get rid of both the death penalty AND involuntary confinement.

We all know the crime problem will invariably be solved one day in the future when we let all the miscreants kill each other on gameshows.
 
intaglio said:
If you check the map the only country that approaches the US in terms of incarceration is Byelorus. The only one that exceeds it is the Russian Federation. These countries are not exactly bastions of freedom.

I'll leave you to compare the crime figures for the UK against California. Just remember that the population of the UK is greater than that of that State and there has been an ongoing terrorist campaign here. Ask yourself "why is criminality is so much lower in Western Europe than in the US?"
Click to expand...

I hope you are not getting your opinions about the living conditions of other countries from the media alone. The most violent country I've ever lived in was Spain (and that was fairly recently--not in Franco's time). If you read Pravda, Russia sounds like a nice, down-to-earth place.
Also--if the terrorist campaign is ongoing, those involved are not incarcerated! Maybe when it is under control, you'll have a higher prison population, too.

I'm sorry, but as many faults as I find with my own country, uninformed criticism peeves me. You can read as many articles as you like, and watch all of the tv and movies you can afford, but until you have lived in a country, you cannot have a working understanding of its culture. I have several disconcerting memories of going to see American movies while I was in Leeds--the rest of the crowd didn't laugh in the same places I did. In particular, I remember seeing an Eddie Murphy movie there--my English and Australian friends laughed at the visual gags and toilet humor, but none of the clever jokes. Why? Because they had never lived here and had no idea what might make up the daily life of an American. The US is even a special case in that respect, as our culture is derived from those of every other country in the world (and then we get criticized for not having any culture at all)--you would have to do a lot of traveling to get a sense of the whole country. Hell--even I have my opinions of New York, but I admit I've never stayed there long enough to confirm or disprove any of them. And for that reason, I do not actually act on any of those prejudices. For all of the weird news that comes out of that city, I wouldn't tell them who to elect for mayor.
As for Texas, I can tell you all now that it has its charms, but it is indeed poorly run, full of lawyers and insurance companies. On the whole, Dallas has almost as much character as the tv show in the 80's. The architecture is sad. The highway system SUCKS, and is covered with hypocrites in pickup trucks with bumper stickers that say "What would Jesus Do?" who tailgate and pass on the right--I don't think Jesus would do that. But, I would not say it is a violent place. I've seen one fight here, and I saw one car chase in 20 years. (And I work downtown.)
 
Education as the answer...

I don't want to argue the numbers (everyone else did a good job!), I just want to state that the fact is that there ARE too many criminals in the US.

Gangs are part of the reason, and yes, many of the men and women in the US prisons are gang members. And if you want to follow that thread, many children (yes they start recruiting kids as young as 5 or 6) become gang members because they live in single-parent ghetto homes with little or no parental attention because of parental drug use, or a working parent, or deceased parents . This last often results in kids living with a grandparent too old to effectively supervise the children.

But what are the core reason why such large numbers of the population, including non-gang-members, choose to break the law? Partly, I suspect, because of the changing shape of "the American Family". The former family structure most common was 2 parent, one non-working, and a value system taught to the children by strictures, rules, sometimes religion, and by example. Today that family structure is the exception rather than the rule. And while the education system tries hard to pick up the slack, feeding kids the breakfast they don't get at home, teaching them hygine, even giving them vitamins and toothbrushes, etc., they are hands tied when it comes to teaching basic value systems because they will run right up against the ACLU, who will sue the pants off an educator who tries to teach ethics or morals. And without the underpinnings of a basic set of beliefs of ethics or morals, any value system is just rules without reasons.

Now, how about the middle-class? Possibly because of the current tax structure in the US, most 2-parent families still have little or no family time, because it requires two incomes just to make ends meet. So even in the so-called nuclear family, many are still not instilling in their children a set of personal values that makes it unthinkable to commit a crime.

Add to the lack of personal values huge doses of visual exposure to violence and crime via the media, and you end up with entire generations of children who have no reality on WHY it's bad to hurt, kill, rape, steal, etc.

Add to that the fact that many if not most Americans don't know the crime statistics, don't know imprisonment statistics, have no prisons nearby their homes (they are built out in the boonies, usually), and don't even hear much about the death penalty (the media underplays it)...you don't have any real deterrent there either. Incarceration does not stop crime, especially if you keep it out of sight.

What is the solution? I don't know.
 
Fallen,
I went to Episcopalian schools. I just learned that my Ethics teacher, a priest, left his wife and children to run off with his (male) trainer. I don't know how to solve that one, either.

I am wondering if you are arguing that Americans on the whole are less moral than people in other countries? I mean, of course there are too many criminals--I don't think you could say that any country has the 'right' amount of criminals.
But how can you teach a basic moral system to such a heterogeneous society? When peoples have different basic morals--that's when they separate. But here we have a nation of foreigners brought together by economics.

I wouldn't agree that the public has no notion of crime statistics or the death penalty. Both are sensationalized by the media where I live--the death penalty in particular.

--Someone mentioned the Amish earlier...I forgot to point out that there has been a string of drug busts in Amish communities--it seems several of their young men have been dealing cocaine out of their horse buggies.
 
Afebk-

I agree that the question of how to instill a value system in any individual is a tough go. First you have to decide what values are the appropriate to pass on. And always, that individual can choose to reject those values and will generally consider that deviation to be justified, witness your former teacher. Man is a rationalizing being, not a rational one.

But if a person is never taught any values at all, the instinctive drives towards pleasure and fullfillment of one's desires will have to checks and no brakes, nothing to stop criminal or violent behavior in order to attain those desires. The ultimate in "the end justifies the means".

I do believe that any attempt to instill values can have a positive result. Even simply defining to a child (at a level they can understand) the basic concepts of ethics, morals and values is a worhtwhile goal. Some (not all, I admit) of those children whom such minimal efforts are made towards will end up setting up a personal values system. Those values may shift and change as that child's world-picture changes and expands with age and experience. But that person now has an invaluable tool, one that they keep their whole life.

I know full well that some people never ever define their own beliefs and values, just as some people live their entire life with no real goals or directions. Nothing can be done, we all have free will, you can't force that sort of thing on anyone...it's just sad. And sadder still when children don't really get the chance to determine the course of their own lives because no one ever sat down with them and said "you can decide what sort of person you want to be..."
 
Ok, a lot of points to address, so excuse me if things get a bit disjointed.

First the numbers; no-one seems to be arguing any more except to say they must be wrong but yes there are an awful lot more people in prison than elsewhere.

afebk, don't complain if I quote figures from your own Department of Justice as published in one of your own journals of reference. These figures are not taken from "The Media" but from serious research. If you want to complain, write to Scientific American.

Of course there are many cultural differences between Europe and the US one of the main ones appears to be that the purpose of prison in the US is to restrain and punish; in Europe it is to restrain and reform. In Britain this is not too successful, reoffense rates are over 60% except in specialist units where it can fall to less than 20%. In the US reoffending is over 75%.

Taxation;
...because of the current tax structure in the US,...
Click to expand...
. Check your figures, generally European Tax burdens are higher. From what I could find US tax is about 21% of GDP, UK tax at about 30% GDP. France Germany Sweden and Norway are higher still.

I'm not saying everything in the garden is rosy in Europe, far from it. In many ways the US has huge advantages as regards personal freedoms (and tax!). What I am saying is that the present attitude to punishment appears to be self defeating. If a course of action is counterproductive you should examine it in the light of others experiences
 
Recently I read in the paper that 1 in 134 is in jail in America.Australia is by no means free ,but only 1 in 3500 is in jail.Does freedom mean locking up lots of people? Im very confused!!!
Click to expand...
Another reason why I hate this country.
I am currently a freeloader of the USA.
Whoo Hoo.
Congrats---To---Me.
 
Aliant said:
Another reason why I hate this country.
I am currently a freeloader of the USA.
Whoo Hoo.
Congrats---To---Me.
Click to expand...

Do they know you're there...?
 
I'd like to suggest a thought for your discussion. It just might be America's love affair with the freedom of the individual is the main factor contributing to a higher crime rate. Sounds odd, I'm sure; yet, the idea does breed a certain love of self that puts our own desires over those of others. I'm not saying this is the case, but just want your opinions on the thought. Americans are constantly pushing the envelope for more freedoms, while we haven't mastered the application of the ones we have. We're like junkies, always looking for a progressively better high.
 
Interesting idea, Torgos. I've always thought that the loss of the sense of society is perhaps something to do with the increased mobility that has come with the car - and not just in America.

Perhaps a new thread is needed about this?
 
I've often wondered that myself intaglio, the car also helps to explain the reason why the crime rate has increased in many towns & villages.

Before the car, a criminal tended to be local & easily suspected if not caught, villages were like oasis a stranger stood out in the village & was seen entering or leaving.

These days cars pass in & out of places frequently & hardly noticed & so can your bad lad looking for an easy blag.
 
I see that a report published in the UK this week, claims that prison doesn't work, as 60% of prisoners are caught re-offending within two years. Which means that the re-offending rate must be even higher, as there must be those who are not caught!!!!

From a cynical perspective one can suggest that prison does work, as while an offender is banged up, he isn't offending & make a case for even longer prison sentences & a vast program of prison building.:(
 
They're not offending in prison, just building up the knowlege of other crimes and the network of contacts for a more successful career.
 
Which I suppose still justifies even longer sentences, to prevent the prisoner, putting their new found knowlege to use on the general public!!!!!

The longer they are inside, the less time they have to continue their chosen career!!!!!!:hmph:
 
Nice idea, are you going to pay? Last time I heard the cost of keeping each prisoner in was £70,000 per annum. That means, with the current prison population of 70,000, £4.9 bn. Lock people up for longer, lock up more people and within a couple of years you could treble the prison population (£14.7 bn).

Build three times more prisons than now (the UK prisons are at saturation point), thats an added cost. Do you also lock up all those who protest about the prison being built in their neighbourhood? Couple more years and we could get to US levels of imprisonment (£29.4 bn)

Then at some point a few people start to be released with the accumulated knowlege of what works and what doesn't. Eventually you have to start releasing people at the same rate as they are going in - or will every crime carry a life sentence? and hence an ever increasing prison population.

There are subsidiary effects as well. A lot of the prisonners released will be past working age and not contributing anything to health services or pensions (many criminals have a day job where they pay tax and NI). Those outside will have to make up the difference. Oh and those who do commit crimes will be willing to use any means to escaoe capture

Whats the answer? Well I don't have one though I have a suspicion that it will involve some sort of reformation work like that carried out at Barlinie. Reoffense rates there were cut to 20% on the worst measure and that amongst hardened criminals where recividism would be expected to be on the order of 90%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top