[mabbo]

I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it: if the purpose of prison is to rehabilitate people, then we're going about it in a very strange way.

Lock people away in a cell for a decade, deny them a lot of basic human rights (like books) then when they're good and messed up in the head from it, let them lose on the public. If they re-offend, well, that's clearly a sign that they are just a bad person. Best lock them up again.

[ceejayoz]

The Governor of New York proposed giving prisoners in essence a community college education while incarcerated. Outcry from the public and lawmakers made him shelve the concept, despite studies showing massive drops in recidivism from such things.

[Elrac]

The US penal system is shockingly big on vengeance over resocialization. America's Christian fundamentalists like it that way because they claim as their own the worst personality flaws of their ancient Jewish war god. And American politicians know they can easily collect a few more votes by acting "tougher on crime."

[Xeoncross]

As an American Christian I believe nothing of the sort. What is your source for this ad hominem claim?

The bible actually doesn't support the idea of prisons at all. If someone murders, then they need to be put to death. Otherwise, theft, drugs, and all other crimes are best handled outside of a prison system that does very little to help a person recover from their problems.

Christ advocated restoring a person. Secular governments advocate locking them up so they don't have to deal with it.

[Elrac]

Pardon the delayed response! I lost sight of this conversation.

Are you a Christian fundamentalist? Well known examples include the Westbury Baptist Church and the Southern Baptist Convention. If you're not like those people then what you believe is irrelevant to what I'm talking about and I don't understand why you're acting offended.

If you're interested, you can read a bit of exposition on the role of the Christian Right in pushing for increasingly harsh punishment in the US: http://www.politicalresearch.org/2004/11/06/calvinism-capita... . Along related lines, I find myself disgusted by the zeal with which Christian fundamentalists engage in the corporal punishment of children, again with solid support from the Bible: http://zakherys.tripod.com/greven.htm

You're correct that the Bible doesn't advocate imprisonment: It goes further by supporting slavery, which combines the loss of personal liberty with the obligation of enforced labor. And while the penal systems of modern, enlightened countries do tend to aim at resocialization rather than vengeance, prisons in the American Bible Belt have re-introduced conditions strongly reminiscent of Biblical slavery. Coincidence? I think not.

[Xeoncross]

Elrac, thanks for the follow-up. When I have time I would like to address this further.

However, I do consider myself a Christian - and looking at the 5 truths that make someone a "Fundamental Christian" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalism#Christian) I certainly hold to all five.

However, it appears that the new meaning of "Fundamental Christian" you and some others have assigned actually has nothing to do with this standard definition - and is a often a warped, hateful, version of someone's own imagination.

The "Christian Right" is about as varied as the muslim world is. You have to understand that the only people you hear about are those that are doing it wrong. For example, no one cares about everyone walking normally - it's those that start fights that get the attention.

Anyway, "It goes further by supporting slavery" isn't true either. That is just a sensationalist claim based on the ancient history recorded in the old testament. Jesus and the apostles and prophets actually went the other way and said that Christians should serve others instead of themselves.

Slavery was abolished in Britain and America through work of Christians like William Wilberforce and Martin Luther King, Jr.

[ceejayoz]

Not sure if it was a ninja-edit, but the poster appears to be talking about fundamentalist Protestants, who do tend to have a more Old Testament take on things than Christ's teachings.

[jqm]

Well...to be fair there is a bit of stoning in the bible. And if it comes to that, I'll take a stretch in prison if it's all the same.

[celticninja]

so you are christian but approve of the death penalty?

[tptacek]

Moralism aside, there's a point at which prisoner benefits can create an incentive to commit crimes. Not rape and murder, of course, but if you're 18 years old and driftless and already weighing the costs and benefits of, say, a commercial B&E, the fact that your worst case scenario includes a college education will have an impact. I'm not silly enough to think it would make criminals out of people who weren't already, though.

[anigbrowl]

I've come across several cases of people who were not professional criminals committing crimes so they could get access to medical care, although this is obviously not an issue in the UK.

Robbing a bank for $1 is still a crime, though not as severe one as intended: http://volokh.com/2011/06/21/man-commits-1-robbery-to-get-he...

A similar case: http://www.oregonlive.com/clackamascounty/index.ssf/2013/08/...

Career criminals do so as well, of course: http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/02/on-purpose...

According to this local news story, 80% of inmates at one Colorado county jail are either mentally ill or have serious medical issues that are diagnosed on arrival: http://kdvr.com/2014/07/07/expensive-trend-people-committing...

I could go on and on about this :-(

[vidarh]

> 80% of inmates at one Colorado county jail are either mentally ill or have serious medical issues that are diagnosed on arrival

The creation of the mental health system in the UK in the first place was a direct result of the observation that a large percentage of people incarcerated were mentally ill.

[anigbrowl]

The US used to have better mental health care but ended up going in the opposite direction to that of the UK, sadly. These two articles provide a decent overview, although they omit some important legal cases.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/04/timeline-mental-...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/12/w...

[GigabyteCoin]

>Moralism aside, there's a point at which prisoner benefits can create an incentive to commit crimes.

That already exists in our current prison system. Here in Toronto, 'criminals' are found every year standing beside broken windows of downtown businesses late at night because they couldn't stand the frigid cold and the homeless shelters were full. All they usually want is a warm place to sleep and some food that didn't come out of a dumpster.

While the prospect of running a lucrative commercial B&E enterprise with the "worst case scenario" including a college education might be tempting...

You will still be a known criminal to your family and friends, which will take years to change their opinion of you if at all possible. Nobody will feel comfortable leaving you alone in their home. Nobody will allow their children to approach you. Your options for employment will drop drastically once you are released from prison.

You will still lack freedom. Feel like taking a jog in the park? Not for another 10 years, you can't.

Etc.

If the above seem like a better scenario than your current situation, perhaps you need some guidance in a community college type setting.

[AnthonyMouse]

There is an extent to which this is already the case. If you're homeless and unemployed, three hots and a cot starts to sound mighty attractive.

The obvious solution is to make sure the same benefits are available to the general public without the requirement of criminality.

[tptacek]

Since the obvious solution is politically intractable and would require fundamentally altering the way all resources are allocated and collected by the government, you can see why a program to extend that benefit only to prisoners (which, but for the optics, might have been tractable) would cause an uproar.

[atmosx]

To me is strange for anyone to choose a life where he is absolutely not free, just to get a college degree. Degree or not, having jail time in your resume will have a (extremely?) negative impact.

[Fuzzwah]

What about people joining the army for just this reason?

[Retra]

You don't lose that much freedom in the military. At least, most of the things you would be permitted from doing are things that you wouldn't need/want to do anyway.

But I suppose you could say the same about prison, for some people.

[MichaelGG]

How pervasive is that attitude? I've worked with plenty of people with records. So long it's not something real violent or something lame/morally questionable (robbing an old woman because you're her financial advisor) the only real question I think of is "why were you caught" and if that is strong evidence of anything else. Like, it could indicate a poor understanding of information theory, or badly calibrated risk assessment.

Someone committing a nonviolent crime to get free room and board and college, of explained, sounds rather clever. Most people end up in significant debt for a similar outcome. (And low security prison in the US isn't so bad, about the same level as sharing a 2 star hotel room with a coworker, from what I've seen.)

[ceejayoz]

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/238488.pdf

> The majority of employers indicate that they would “probably” or “definitely” not be willing to hire an applicant with a criminal record.

[colechristensen]

Don't underestimate the value of a place to sleep, a roof over your head, and a rudimentary education to a large portion of the least fortunate. Having the certainty of those things could easily beat trying to hold on to a terrible job and keep a place to stay with food on the table.

[vacri]

That's sounds more like a "game theory" statement than a real life decision. The demographic you're describing isn't known for it's long-term planning capabilities, and most crimes are committed with the expectation that you won't get caught.

[lazyant]

that's what the biggest welfare system in the US is for (the military)

[SteveGerencser]

As they should. If you are going to give away a college education it should probably start with the people not in prison and even earlier before they begin to commit crimes.

I understand the desire to rehabilitate people, but when those in prison have more services and resources handed to them than the general population gets then there is a serious problem. If we started earlier in the education process and young students knew that they would be supported all the way through college / trade school / whatever, they would be far less likely to give up early thinking that they could never 'afford' to go to school so why bother.

[ceejayoz]

The national average cost to keep someone a prisoner is $31k/year.

http://www.reentryeducationnetwork.org/advocacy-platform.htm...

> New York State college in prison programs have also proven effective, with only 7.7% of incarcerated people who attended college classes re-incarcerated compared to the 29.9% recidivism rate of those who did not attend any college classes.

A 75% reduction in recidivism will pay for community college many, many times over. It's a tremendous net-win for the taxpayer, but our "hard on crime" attitudes prevent us from saving ourselves billions of dollars in damages, policing, legal costs, housing/feeding, etc.

[tomjen3]

You assume that the group that did attend community college is the same as the group that did not. This seems, to me, questionable. After all at least those who attempt to get a college education think it is worth the work, which is likely to cause them to reoffend, no?

Ignoring that, how about the effect that if you get caught for your crime you get a free college education? Wouldn't that remove some of the downside of a life of crime.

[ceejayoz]

> Wouldn't that remove some of the downside of a life of crime.

That's a problem if prison it to be primarily punitive. I'd prefer it were rehabilitative, and thus focused on "what's the best way to turn this person into a productive, positive member of society once released?" I'd also prefer a basic, community college-level education be available to all, not just the incarcerated.

[maxerickson]

The RAND meta analysis at your link (reference 3) rates the quality of the studies it analyzed. Among the groups that were assigned randomly (to have educational intervention or not), the reduction in recidivism was about 40%.

(I had wondered how self selection factored into the numbers...edit to add: I did not mean to suggest that the 40% I quote is directly comparable to the numbers in your post, I meant to share the factoid that the effect was strong when a quality control for self selection was present)

[SteveGerencser]

I'm just glad to see that a lot of people didn't read my full comment. Hard on crime was not what I said, what I said was that there is a finite amount of money available and that when we have to choose between educating prisoners or providing an education to people BEFORE they enter the criminal system the net gain for society is even higher because you stand a far greater chance of keeping them from entering the system to begin with. Making everything else irrelevant.

[TheSpiceIsLife]

> If you are going to give away a college education

Now there's an idea. Do both, give education away to everyone, including inmates.

During my parents younger days, here in Australia, a university education came at no cost to the individual. Sounds like a reasonable sort of scenario I reckon.

[arethuza]

In my day (1980s) I got a CS degree from a decent UK University and it didn't cost me a penny - everyone got their feed paid back then and as my parents weren't very well off I got a full grant.

Turned out to be a pretty good investment for HMG going by the amount of tax I have paid... :-)

[jackhammer]

In Germany all public universities (which are the good ones) are free. In Holland it is not free, but Dutch citizens a sort scholarship by default. Which is arguably even better.

[lotsofmangos]

I see, so all we need to do is link up some pre-crime telepaths with accredited university entrance organizations. I'll get the professors on the phone and you get me the telepaths. We'll have a Kickstarter going by next week.

[Retra]

Maybe we shouldn't give prisoners free room, board, and healthcare over the public while we're at it.

[lotsofmangos]

There are already some attempts to charge those in custody for room, board and medical procedures, even going as far as trying to charge for involuntary procedures involved in searches. Or police requiring $3,000 for property damage for getting blood on their uniforms after beating up a guy with a different middle name as who they were looking for.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/12/us/in-riverside-california...

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/01/14/new-mexico-ma...

http://www.elpasotimes.com/latestnews/ci_26100843/aclu-woman...

http://www.npr.org/news/documents/2014/DAVISINF.PDF

[notahacker]

I thought that Davis link was the most remarkable thing I'd ever seen. Then I Googled the back story, and found out that the officer lodging the complaint had also sworn in court that the Davis didn't bleed on him when the police department was sued, and then having somehow avoided a perjury charge, received a commendation from Ferguson City Council this year. And that one of the other officers involved is also facing a lawsuit for tasering a man to death. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/15/the-day-fer... http://www.fergusoncity.com/Archive/ViewFile/Item/236

[pluma]

If the guy died from the tasering, he was evidently just trying to avoid having to pay for the cost of the taser charge. His family should receive an appropriate invoice shortly.

[higherpurpose]

Not to mention about the whole "keeping someone locked with other criminals" thing. You know what they say, you're the average of you're closest 5 friends. If you're closest 5 friends are criminals and murderers for the next 20 years, how is that going to impact your thinking about the world?

[dredmorbius]

NB (and not to distract from your otherwise excellent point): it's "loose", not "lose".

[vacri]

The purpose of prison is not to punish or rehabilitate specifically. Prison is part of the legal system, whose purpose is to provide stability and safety to society, with prison acting as a means to apply sentencing. Plenty of people (myself included) prefer the rehabilitation angle, plenty of others prefer the punishment angle - but both arguments see 'keeping society safe' as their target condition for how a prison system is run.

[crusso]

if the purpose of prison is to rehabilitate people

You imply that rehabilitation is the only reason for prison and that there are proven methods of rehabilitation.

Rehabilitating people is hard and we don't know of any great ways to do that. Removing criminals from society is easy and straightforward.

[thatswrong0]

> Rehabilitating people is hard and we don't know of any great ways to do that.

Other countries have lower recidivism rates. Why not copy their leads? (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/09/why...)

If the point of our prison system is to lower crime rates, it isn't doing a very good job.

[MisterBastahrd]

Most of them go back into society with the albatross of having been in jail around their necks, not to mention the gap in work history. Going so far as to give lifers an education (along with the rest of the population) reduces crime. The prison population are still citizens who deserve to be treated well. They don't deserve to be the victims of crime any more than anyone else. The vast majority of people in jail are people with poor educations, poor upbringings, and/or mental disorders. Giving them a hand up is vastly more preferable than leaving them to their own devices and then tossing them back onto the streets.

[digikata]

And really really expensive. If the point is a safe society without high costs of maintenance it seems foolish to overlook rehabilitation.

[tomjen3]

We could make it much cheaper, if we wanted to. Cages hold a man as well as cells made of bricks, prisoners can work whenever they are not sleeping and things like recreational facilities are just going be used for and by gangs.

We could make prisons much cheaper than they currently are just by choosing either rehabilitation or warehousing. Warehousing would be even cheaper - or maybe split the prisoners up by worth (essentially asking is this person a good person who did something bad, or a bad person) and then have two different criminal systems.

[king_jester]

> Removing criminals from society is easy and straightforward.

This is one of the biggest misconceptions about prison. Prisons and incarceration do not remove people from society, those people are still a part of society even if their interaction and freedoms are restricted. Not too mention who and what defines criminality is a horribly messed up system.

[netcan]

There are a bunch of reason. Different people rank them differently. Deterrence, Removal from society. Justice. Rehabilitation is a tricky one. It's hard.

But in any case, I think there's absolutely no to torpedo rehabilitation in the way that we often do in prisons.

[sjtgraham]

Take away a person's humanity, don't be surprised when they behave like animals.