this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
598 points (98.9% liked)

politics

19241 readers
1887 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Altimont owns Carmen’s Corner Store in Hagerstown, Maryland, a community where around 20 percent of people rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to buy their groceries. But a federal agency decided that Altimont can never accept SNAP as a form of payment at Carmen’s.

That decision isn’t because Altimont has done anything wrong as a business owner, but rather because of unrelated crimes from 2004, for which he’s already served his time.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) permanently bans anyone with drug, alcohol, tobacco, or firearms convictions from participating in the SNAP program—a harsher punishment than the agency dishes out to those who have actually defrauded the program. That’s not just irrational, it’s also unconstitutional, which is why Altimont teamed up with our organization, the Institute for Justice (IJ), to file a federal lawsuit against the agency on Tuesday.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 73 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Seems like a natural consequence of the 13th amendment. Why would you make it easier for an escaped slave to remain free? There are literally shareholders who have a vested interest in recidivism.

Edit: In case it wasn't clear, I find the situation monstrous. Just stating my thinking behind why it happens at all, and might be hard to change.

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Imagine investing in for-profit prisons, as a regular person. You're hoping that society tears itself apart so you can watch line go up. Monstrous indeed.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

A sane society would accept that finance is inherently sociopathic to some degree and explicitly prohibit speculation, regulatory capture, and other overtly destructive practices - rather than make the fines for such things a minor cost of business. That's without even getting into legalized slavery loopholes written into the actual constitution.

America is not a sane society.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 3 points 1 year ago

I don't think you even have to go that far - a sane society would ensure that you don't create incentives at odds with the good of the society

It's pretty basic stuff - some of our most ancient laws touch on the subject

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 58 points 1 year ago (9 children)

You would think that an idea to reduce recidivism and thus reduce crime, like rehabilitation over punishment, would be popular in a democratic system, it's a real problem that it isn't. A bunch of states are dealing with this as there's a backlash for bail reform.

People just think punishing crime more reduces crime more and it's not (necessarily) correct. And in a democratic system we reward what people think is true over what is true.

[–] Furbag@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's silly because it doesn't matter how bad the punishment is if every criminal from petty to professional thinks "I'll never get caught". They aren't even considering a possibility of failure, and thus the consequences will never be a deterrent to their actions.

Once they get to prison, no amount of human rights abuses is going to magically make them into upstanding citizens. But somehow people think that if prison is a bad place nobody would want to go back. While that's true, it's a naive point of view from people who have never stopped to think about how someone freshly released from jail earns money or pays rent or buys necessities.

If, as a society, we truly care about reducing crime and not just punishing criminals out of a sense of twisted vengeance, we should be prioritizing rehabilitation and reform, rather than letting prisoners who could otherwise be saved languish in a system that seems to be okay with criminal gangs having total control of the social hierarchy on the inside.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can thank the Prison Industrial Complex for sponsoring the Republican "Tough on Crime" propaganda. Reactionary idiots think there's a one step solution to all of society's ills, and if it doesn't work, it's the other political party that made it fail!

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago

Dems are fully on board with the tough on crime bullshit, even if they do stand against discriminatory punishment. They want to be tough on everyone equally.

[–] NounsAndWords@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

People just think punishing crime more reduces crime more and it’s not (necessarily) correct. And in a democratic system we reward what people think is true over what is true.

This is one of those rare instances that (to them) punishment is openly the point. It doesn't matter that there are ways to save money and increase everyone's quality of life in the process. And it doesn't hurt that an entire industry has grown to steal money from the state to punish these people and a small portion is put back into advertising/lobbying to make sure the cycle continues.

[–] centof@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

In addition to people somewhat naturally wanting to punish crime, A lot of people like to feel superior to others in any way they can. That way they can be internally excuse their own shortcomings.

Ex: I may be unsuccessful but at least I'm not a druggie, criminal, black, or a heathen. Too many Americans would rather hate and suppress someone in different circumstances rather than help them out.

[–] sab@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago

I'm afraid a lot of people don't even care if it's working - they just think being "though on crime" makes society masculine and cool (and preferably white). They'd vote for it even if they knew it's bad policy.

It's very sad that in the US we have a justice system for protecting the rich and a revenge system for punishing everyone else.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 47 points 1 year ago (64 children)

In the US, all felony convictions come with a lifetime sentence. It's just that the sentence usually only includes prison time at the beginning.

It's pretty fucked up, especially considering how many victimless crimes are felonies.

load more comments (64 replies)
[–] Neato@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm generally against prison for almost all offenses. There's no point to prison in America unless you just want to ensure someone suffers and is forever harmed by the state. Prison doesn't rehabilitate, it makes you into a worse person from what you need to do to survive. Prison doesn't encourage you being less of a criminal on release, it makes your life SO much harder to survive that crime is a much better option than before. Prison forces a social stigma forever through job applications and the like that ensures no one will ever forget and will treat you worse because of it. Prison and the justice system is designed to bleed money from poor people and their families so you can't even get out with a helping hand ready. Prison quality is incredibly low and practically zero Americans care about it. Just look at all the "prison rape" jokes: Americans by-and-large want prison to be tortuous due to a bloodthirsty feeling of vengeance and powerlessness.

Prison is there only to do further harm to those desperate enough to commit serious crimes in the first place. And to increase recidivism to ensure the prison industrial complex and police "unions" keep thriving. There's no point to sending 99% of criminals to prison but we have no alternatives besides mental hospitals which are not equipped to deal with a huge influx of violently disaffected people.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Your penal system is focussed on punishment whereas the European system is focussed on rehabilitation as prisoners at some point have to come back into society and you want them to behave.

On the other hand, US prisons are for profit so they have an incentive to make sure people stay longer and return faster so...

The US really is a fucked up place because of its economic incentives. I mean, the people aren't the problem, policies are.

[–] lardvark@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

As a former two-time inmate in the Ohio DRC, I can confirm that there is ZERO I'm the way of rehabilitation. 3.5 years total incarceration with nothing to show for it.

Edit: spelling

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kava@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

US prisons are for profit

The US definitely has a large for-profit prison industry but it's still a minority of prisons. About 8%, to be exact.

Of course even the prisons that aren't private entities still use prisoner labor. I think the for profit prison isn't the real problem with the US. Obviously it creates messed up incentives. Private prisons fund special interest groups who for example lobby against federal legalization of marijuana. They know it would reduce the number of prisoners and therefore less reason for them to exist. But in terms of influence, they aren't the largest players.

There's a lot of jobs in prisons, courts, law enforcement, etc. And they all depend on the massive prison industrial complex. So at this point it's hard to decouple because those groups have a lot of influence, even though they aren't private for-profit entities.

The cynic in my believes that the US prison system, the system that imprisons more people both in absolute terms and per capita than almost any country in history - comparable to the USSR during their peak gulag era - is meant to keep down potentially rebellious young men. These are the primary movers of revolts and dissent. Turn them into perpetual criminals so you have justification to lock them away forever.

The passives ones don't end up in prison and are also less likely to revolt, join a radical group, etc.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ComfyMuffin@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] andrewth09@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Your time is up and your parole's begun

[–] HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Which is exactly the point. The prison system is too profitable to risk the supply of prisoners drying up.

[–] mcathen@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

This is a feature, not a bug.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 1 year ago

I have a family member who got into a physical altercation with an airport employee nearly twenty years ago over the way that employee was handling his laptop. The government will have its boot on his neck for the rest of his life, even though he went to prison (it was only like six months) and completed probation. He's since tried to start multiple businesses, started a family, and in other ways moved on. He's forbidden from certain parts of society similarly to the people in this article.

It's completely ridiculous that a non-violent person could have an out-of-character outburst and be punished forever for it. But try discussing that with anyone who's advocating for crime-and-punishment policies.

[–] jon 5 points 1 year ago

Does the world have a government or did the headline perhaps forget to mention that it's referring to one particular country...?

load more comments
view more: next ›