Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Incarceration Nation
Ron Bailey beat me to the punch on the new Pew study showing that 1 in 99 American adults are behind bars.
A few thoughts:
It's a staggering figure that by far and away leads the world, both in the total number and in the percentage of the population in prison.
And while there's certainly some truth to the theory that throwing lots of people in jail is in part responsible for the drop in violent crime over the last 15 years, the story's a bit more complicated than that. As the Washington Post explains in the article linked above, a state like Florida, which has been giddily locking people up for two decades, has experienced only a slight drop in crime over that period. New York, on the other hand, has experienced a substantial drop in crime since the early 1990s, but the state's prison population is the lowest its been in 15 years.
The violent crime rate has also inched back upward the last few years, even as prison populations have continued to soar.
Strangely enough, the Washington Post story on the study says (correctly, I think) that we're finally starting to see reform in sentencing law, as well as some consternation from elected officials about our shamefully high incarceration levels. But not because our political leaders are suddenly concerned about civil rights, or the humanity of keeping one percent of the country in lockup. It's more because supporting a prison system that's bursting at the seams has become a drain on state budgets.
Whatever it takes, I guess. It'll also be interesting to see what happens when the nonviolent drug offenders we locked up in the 1980s with mandatory minimums start getting released.
|2.29.08 @ 10:18AM|#
1/9 = percentage of black males 20-34 incarcerated = proportion of state employees nationwide employed in corrections (when they aren't shaming us at abu ghraib)
|2.29.08 @ 10:33AM|#
If the folks I went to high school with are "average", 25 are
in prison right now.
A-frigging-mazing.
I think we have a problem.
Furious George|2.29.08 @ 10:36AM|#
Sociologist James Q. Wilson, who in the 1980s helped develop the
"broken windows" theory that smaller crimes must be punished to
deter more serious ones... However, Wilson disagreed that the rise
in the U.S. prison population should be considered a cause for
alarm: "The fact that we have a large prison population by itself
is not a central problem because it has contributed to the
extraordinary increase in public safety we have had in this
country."
I guess ideologues will go to their death believing their theories,
even in the face of contrary statistics. How many lives has Wilson
helped ruin. The fact that China ranks below the US is quite
disturbing.
GE|2.29.08 @ 10:37AM|#
I'll play Devil's advocate on this a little: Maybe America is
more efficient at apprehending, processing and incarcerating
criminals than other nations? Obviously, out of 300 million
Americans there are still criminals wandering around. I don't think
measuring the ratio of Americans in prison is the right measure: we
should be measuring how many free criminals there are in society vs
behind bars.
Comparing 1-in-100 Americans behind bars vs .5 for Britain (I'm
making this up) is not a valid comparison if the average American
commits more crimes.
Radley Balko|2.29.08 @ 10:39AM|#
GE,
I think the problem is that America has too many crimes on the
books, and the sentences for those crimes are too long,
particularly for nonviolent and consensual crimes.
|2.29.08 @ 10:40AM|#
Seriously, what is up with the people who comment here who can't
make the observation that laws are not uniform across every country
in the world? A country who criminalizes relatively harmless
behavior is likely to have higher incarceration rates, but not
necessarily more scumbags. I'm not saying this is definitely the
only explanation, but come on!
Derrr.
|2.29.08 @ 10:41AM|#
ok, I should have used the preview button, and would have seen that Balko said it better.
Taktix®|2.29.08 @ 10:42AM|#
Where's my hap tip, Balko?
Do we need to add plagiarism to the list of Reasonoid gripes?
Just kidding, keep on it, you're doing important work.
|2.29.08 @ 10:43AM|#
Reinmoose,
I appreciate the sentiment, but Russia, China, Britain, and Sweden
have drug prohibition, too.
Taktix®|2.29.08 @ 10:44AM|#
The fact that China ranks below the US is quite
disturbing.
While this story is shocking and horrible, I doubt China is
reporting accurate numbers on this.
As far as being, at minimum, the worst of the free, honest
societies, well... that sucks...
|2.29.08 @ 10:47AM|#
I hope this story gets LOTS of play. It's one of the most overlooked political issues. One more example of the failure of conservatism.
|2.29.08 @ 10:47AM|#
but do they enforce their drug laws the same way in those other countries? are the penalties similar, and do they have mandatory minimum sentences? i wonder if the proportion of non-violent offenders in their prison populations are different, and how they approach the question of rehabilitation.
|2.29.08 @ 10:48AM|#
Reinmoose,
I appreciate the sentiment, but Russia, China, Britain, and Sweden
have drug prohibition, too.
Which is why I said:
"I'm not saying this is definitely the only explanation"
GE|2.29.08 @ 10:51AM|#
Radley,
I was pointing out a different issue than our overly-strict drug
laws, of which I agree with you.
If country A and B had the same population, and equal numbers of
murderers, rapists and thieves, comparing incarceration rates
wouldn't be valid. The question wouldn't be "Why does Country A
have so many more prisoners?" the question would be "Why doesn't
Country B do more to lock up its criminals?"
In our case, America has a higher incarceration rate than Canada
and Western European nations, but we also have a more violent
populous (higher murder rate, property crimes, etc).
If magically tomorrow our drug laws were repealed, and all
non-violent drug offenders were released, we'd still have a higher
incarceration rate.
kinnath|2.29.08 @ 10:52AM|#
The fact that China ranks below the US is quite
disturbing.
Executing prisoners is an efficient way of reducing the overall
prison population.
Alex|2.29.08 @ 11:06AM|#
This is terrific news. Lock em all up. Make them some grimier prisons too, spend less money... I'm sure some of these prisons are nicer than being homeless/below poverty.
|2.29.08 @ 11:07AM|#
It'll also be interesting to see what happens when the
nonviolent drug offenders we locked up in the 1980s with mandatory
minimums start getting released.
I would think after spending their formative years in the company
of a diverse assortment of sociopaths they will be nicely seasoned
and many of them will be delighted to share their newfound skills
with the rest of the population.
The fact that any consensual adult behavior
engaged in on private property is illegal shows the grip that
puritans have over the nation's legislatures 220 years after the
U.S. Constitution told them to get a life.
Russ 2000|2.29.08 @ 11:11AM|#
I think the problem is that America has too many crimes on
the books, and the sentences for those crimes are too long,
particularly for nonviolent and consensual crimes.
You don't even have to make new crimes. Zero-tolerance attitudes
just lowers the threshold for the existing crimes. Like .15 BAC
becomes .08 BAC.
Russ 2000|2.29.08 @ 11:14AM|#
I would think after spending their formative years in the
company of a diverse assortment of sociopaths
Are you talking about prison, the police department, or public
schools?
Tym|2.29.08 @ 11:14AM|#
I think the problem is that America has too many crimes on
the books, and the sentences for those crimes are too long,
particularly for nonviolent and consensual crimes.
How true, and most people who believe in prohibition could still
see that something is inherently wrong when selling your neighbor
some pot gets you a longer prison term than killing him in many
jurisdictions.
|2.29.08 @ 11:17AM|#
I appreciate the sentiment, but Russia, China, Britain, and
Sweden have drug prohibition, too.
I cannot imagine any modern country allowing it's citizens to use
dangerous drugs. I think this is worldwide by the UN Single
Convention treaty.
Episiarch|2.29.08 @ 11:17AM|#
We should follow China's model and just kill people for minor "crimes"--then our stats will get better and the fucking Europeans can't shake their heads at us. Yeah, that's the ticket.
|2.29.08 @ 11:18AM|#
The laws proscribing drugs, prostitution, gambling and other
victimless "crimes" are not just.
Shame on anyone who chooses to becomes a law enforcement officer
knowing that they will have to enforce this barbarity.
|2.29.08 @ 11:22AM|#
The fact that any consensual adult behavior engaged in on
private property is illegal shows the grip that puritans have over
the nation's legislatures 220 years after the U.S. Constitution
told them to get a life.
The government has a right and in fact an obligation to protect
morality.
Zero-tolerance attitudes just lowers the threshold for the
existing crimes.
Anything that can help the police to keep us all off drugs is
inherintly a good thing, I'm all for it.
It's more because supporting a prison system that's bursting at
the seams has become a drain on state budgets.
All the more reason to have prisinors work. Prison should turn a
profit.
We are moving from an agricultural, to a industrial. to a service
and finally to a prison based economy. We need slave labor to
compete with the third world.
Our sentences for drug "crimes" are longer.
They are still a mere slap on the wrist compared to countries free
from drugs, like Saudia Arabia and Sinkapore.
|2.29.08 @ 11:23AM|#
The laws proscribing drugs, prostitution, gambling and other
victimless "crimes" are not just.
Shame on anyone who chooses to becomes a law enforcement officer
knowing that they will have to enforce this barbarity.
Those things are wrong, and have terible downstream effects on
society. Don't want to be in Jail OBEY THE LAW!!!
|2.29.08 @ 11:32AM|#
Wait a second, EUROPEANS think it's bad for our incarceration
rates to be this high?
Well, screw them! That means there isn't a problem. Hooray!
|2.29.08 @ 11:33AM|#
I wonder how many are on probation and have a record for a small amount of pot or having a couple beers and doing no harm?Their not in jail but their job status is ruined.I remember growing up in the late 60's and early 70's near Ohio U.I sure many smoked pot but few were jailed[the teachers included].My dad worked at a local shoe factory and after work most men went to the bars.Dad would have a couple of beers and drive home.By todays standards all would be in criminals.
|2.29.08 @ 11:39AM|#
Juanita,
Are you kidding or are you a child?
If neither, remember that it's individual liberty that bequeaths
the greatest benefit to society. Also, the harmful effects of the
laws proscribing those "crimes" far out weigh any downside of the
activities themselves
zoltan|2.29.08 @ 11:39AM|#
Anything that can help the police to keep us all off drugs
is inherintly (sp) a good thing, I'm all for it.
Good thing the police are so good at that. Maybe they can help keep
me off fast food, skydiving and other dangerous things.
MK2|2.29.08 @ 11:41AM|#
Shame on anyone who chooses to becomes a law enforcement officer
knowing that they will have to enforce this barbarity.
Shame on bozos with simplistic, self-righteous views.
proud paultard|2.29.08 @ 11:44AM|#
'It'll also be interesting to see what happens when the
nonviolent drug offenders we locked up in the 1980s with mandatory
minimums start getting released."
If prisoners were not violent when they went it, I am sure that
they will be violent when they get out. Your government, in
action.
|2.29.08 @ 11:46AM|#
That's right, Juanita. There is no drug or alcohol abuse in
Saudi Arabia. Yep. There are no gay people there, either. Did you
know that?
They also don't have VD or AIDS.
Oh, what a utopian life the Saudis lead. Their women are chaste,
their men are all pure-intentioned... oh I miss it so, my dear home
in the desert.
Jumpin' Jesus on a pogo stick, Juanita. You need to turn in your
Troll Card - I'm charging you with Excessive Stupidity. Be glad
we're letting you live because, in Saudi Arabia, they take off your
head for being so stupid.
kinnath|2.29.08 @ 11:47AM|#
Rick, Juanita is a "performance artist" that has been haunting H&R on a regular basis for years. It is pointless to engage 'her' in any attempt at a discussion.
|2.29.08 @ 11:48AM|#
If nothing at all was illegal, this little dilemma would fix
itself.
We don't need no stinkin' laws.
|2.29.08 @ 11:48AM|#
I just like using her as a wall off which I can test my insults.
You see, I'm not very good at slinging insults, and I need the
practice.
She's such a sweetheart for offering herself up this way.
|2.29.08 @ 11:57AM|#
I have to say that in the years I spent living overseas, this was far and away the single most embarrassing issue I got asked about. There was nothing to say to justify it in any way whatsoever. And it says something too that this is now being discussed as if it is in any way a new problem. It's not. As bad as having more than one in every hundred citizens behind bars, the fact that we disenfranchise some of them for life even after they have done their time is an even blacker mark on our democracy. Stuff like this makes flag wavers look like total morons in my book. Hopefully this gets nudged up the list of things we (especially the libertarians among us) might like to re-examine. I have faith that if anyone can keep beating the drum on this, it's Radley. Keep at it. About once a week as a friendly reminder would be nice. Something like a "Friday Fun Link for Those of Us Who Aren't Incarcerated."
wtf?|2.29.08 @ 12:03PM|#
The news this morning said the rate is 1 in 15 for black folks
and 1 in 35 for hispanics.
I'm also concerned about the ideas int he artcile about
alternatives tio incarceration. I think fines resulting in
garnished wages will become more prevalent.
Shannon Love|2.29.08 @ 12:03PM|#
Great, looks like were gearing up for another repeat of the
'60's and '70's were intellectual experts will tell us that they
can reform criminals by talking to them. Criminals and their
victims will be dehumanized as mere mindless atoms in the gas of
society. We will be told we can nothing about crime until we first
fix every conceivable social inequality in the world. Cities will
become war zones again. Boy, I can't wait. Dibs on front row at the
first Dirty Harry remake!
Locking up a large number of criminals in prisons is absolutely the
worse solution to crime, save all the others. We've experimented
extensively with alternate methods and they don't work.
|2.29.08 @ 12:06PM|#
Troubling numbers.
"It'll also be interesting to see what happens when the nonviolent
drug offenders we locked up in the 1980s with mandatory minimums
start getting released."
What do the powers-that-be expect? What is anyone to do who just
spent a decade or two in prison and now stands in front of the gate
with nothing, nowhere to go, just some probation requirements
designed to send him straight back to jail? Perhaps that's exactly
what they do expect.
I wonder, though, perhaps US crime policies do keep society more
orderly. Contrast the UK where people are ruthlessly prosecuted for
political incorrectness, but the real everyday street-level
hooligans are allowed to act out with impunity.
See
here for just one example.
Or a UK policeman's
blog, another source for how screwed up things can get.
|2.29.08 @ 12:07PM|#
Uh huh. It's the people who think that incarceration rates are too HIGH who are dehumanizing people.
|2.29.08 @ 12:07PM|#
We can just hire (without pay) all the prisoners as prison guards. That will help keep this level of incarceration sustainable. They can just rotate as to who the guards are this week.
|2.29.08 @ 12:07PM|#
MK2:
Shame on bozos with simplistic, self-righteous
views.
Shame on MK2. He/She employs tantrum rather than argument.
|2.29.08 @ 12:11PM|#
The UK is at a more advanced stage of the disease than we are -
their prisons are now simply full. There's a great deal of
hand-wringing and hair-pulling in progress, although I believe the
root cause - an escalating cycle of 'tough on crime' legislation
that progressively locks away more people for doing less - is
generally, if grudgingly, acknowledged.
And the British have reached this realisation despite an
incarceration rate that is less than a fifth that of the United
States'... so yes, some Europeans are ahead of us on this
issue. In fact, it's hard to imagine any civilised country in the
world that isn't.
|2.29.08 @ 12:17PM|#
Shannon,
Let me take a crack at this: How about not criminalizing their
behavior in the first place? As in the case of non-violent drug use
and not legalization per se because I know that that seems to be
off the table in the U.S., how about knocking personal drug use
down on the priority list to, say, the level of jaywalking?
Anything from keeping your scary sixties hallucinations from coming
back and keeping those scary lefty intellectuals who like to pursue
non-violent and non-coercive means at bay. Honestly, you have no
sympathy whatsoever for someone doing hard time for a non-violent
drug offense? I'm guessing no, but it helps to know who those of us
who still give a shit are up against.
|2.29.08 @ 12:18PM|#
kinnath,
Thanks. I've been here for years too and I guess I do recall
her.
I probably get sucked into worthless debates too often. One time in
a thread here, I discovered that I was having a discussion with one
of those conversation bots!
kinnath|2.29.08 @ 12:25PM|#
I can cope with Juanita when 'she' posts as Juanita. It's when 'she' uses alternative handles that 'she' pisses me off.
Michael Ejercito|2.29.08 @ 12:30PM|#
Gee, I wonder what those prisoners did to deserve to be imprisoned?
|2.29.08 @ 12:43PM|#
In the 1920's Babe Ruth was a hero and getting drunk every night.My grandfather made moonshine and even the local sheriff was a customer.Today the cops smash in doors to arrest people growing a plant and haul before congress players who take drugs to help them heal and play better.Enough said.
|2.29.08 @ 12:53PM|#
Michael Pack:
Indeed! And on top of that threaten to prosecute them for "lying to
Congress".
The magnitude of the legislators' power trip is staggering!
|2.29.08 @ 1:27PM|#
I agree that extensive drug decriminalization needs to occur,
and that non-violent drug offenders should not be behind
bars.
However, I decline to join the larger sentiment that having
criminals behind bars in general is somehow shameful. When
criminals are behind bars, they are not on the street committing
crimes against law abiding citizens.
So 1% of the US population is behind bars. What is the correct or
desirable number? 0.5%? 0.05%? 0%?
I argue that all violent criminals should be behind bars, whatever
that number is.
Britain hardly imprisons anyone any more, and real public menaces
are given "Anti Social Behavior Orders" which mean nothing. The
level of victimization of the average citizen in the UK is much
higher than here. Perhaps they need to imprison more criminals.
PC|2.29.08 @ 1:31PM|#
"Shame on bozos with simplistic, self-righteous views."
Hope, audacity, change...
Shannon Love|2.29.08 @ 1:34PM|#
Pinko,
How about not criminalizing their behavior in the first
place?
That would be nice but if you read the report, that's not what Pew
is suggesting. There talking about going back to the fail
rehabilitation methods of the 60's and 70's.
Even if we do legalize drugs (which I support) I don't think we'll
seem much of drop in crime. Firstly, a lot of people sent up for
minor drug offenses are usually life long petty criminals. They get
long sentences for drugs because of their previous records. The
minor drug offense that results in a long sentences is just the
last thing they got caught for. Second, most of the people who
really pile up the man hours in prison are there for violent
offenses. The total man hours won't drop much. Third, drug
addiction renders people dysfunctional and they have to turn to
crime to support themselves. If drugs are easily available we might
end up with more criminals because we would have more dysfunctional
people.
For the last 150 years we've had successive waves of penal reform
all without much effect. Recidivism rates are roughly the same as
they were a hundred years ago. We don't have, and probably
shouldn't seek, to have the power to re-engineer peoples minds.
|2.29.08 @ 1:39PM|#
Shannon,
I think the strongest argument about drug reform reducing crime is
that significantly reducing the criminal black market will entice
fewer people to become career criminals, and will allow drug
"entrepreneurs" to do their business and settle their greivances
within the law.
|2.29.08 @ 1:49PM|#
I think the strongest argument about drug reform reducing
crime is that significantly reducing the criminal black market will
entice fewer people to become career criminals, and will allow drug
"entrepreneurs" to do their business and settle their greivances
within the law.
Not to mention removing the risk premium that the black market adds
to the price of its goods and obviating the need to commit crimes
to procure drugs in the first place.
|2.29.08 @ 1:52PM|#
Joe,I think your right.After all,the 18th amendment helped create Al Capone and others.Also,when you have laws that are so broad a large portion of the country ignores them many have less respect for other laws.During the 1920's it was hard to get a jury to find a bootlegger guilty.Why,because they were in fact criminals themselves as far as alcohol was concerned.I'd say many feel that way about the income tax laws today.
Charles|2.29.08 @ 1:56PM|#
And to add to all of that above, Shannon, if we spent 1/10 the
money on drug rehabilitation and preventing addiction that we spend
on prohibition, we'd have less of a drug problem than we do
now.
Also, wacky idea: why don't we let people do what they want by and
to themselves, and let the government only start worrying about it
when they directly threaten or harm other people?
|2.29.08 @ 2:02PM|#
Michael Pack,
I'd put laws that restrict peaceful people from immigrating in the
same category.
It's a guy moving to a new city to get a better job. Eveybody does
that. When you turn the police on ordinary people doing ordinary
things, ordinary people who do ordinary things are going to turn on
the police.
That's why, while the health and safety effects of peyote are no
worse than those of smoking pot, laws against mescaline are less
unreasonable than laws against marijuana.
Not that I wouldn't repeal both, if given the chance. Just
prioritizing.
|2.29.08 @ 2:08PM|#
Joe,I agree.I've done things much more dangerous than drugs.I've raced bikes,rock climbed,done whitewater[class 5 and 6] and duck hunted in 4 foot waves on the Great Lakes.I have no idea how I'm still alive.
|2.29.08 @ 2:10PM|#
Isn't "Class Six" basically having somebody throw you off a cliff with a boat strapped to your back?
|2.29.08 @ 2:12PM|#
"Even if we do legalize drugs (which I support) I don't think
we'll seem much of drop in crime. Firstly, a lot of people sent up
for minor drug offenses are usually life long petty criminals. They
get long sentences for drugs because of their previous records. The
minor drug offense that results in a long sentences is just the
last thing they got caught for. Second, most of the people who
really pile up the man hours in prison are there for violent
offenses. The total man hours won't drop much. Third, drug
addiction renders people dysfunctional and they have to turn to
crime to support themselves. If drugs are easily available we might
end up with more criminals because we would have more dysfunctional
people."
Shannon,
First, where do get this information from? Do just assume this is
true?
Second, as swillfredo points out, many drug users resort to crime
to get drugs in the first place- you know, the high-price,
high-risk of using drugs.
Third, you say you support legalizing drugs but yet you conclude
that doing so would only bring about more crime and more
dysfunctional people. Based on your own conclusion, how could you
say you support legalizing drugs?
|2.29.08 @ 2:17PM|#
Joe,most.We shot the upper Gully in WV while in food stage.Sweets Falls was a 14 ft drop that day.I must admit though,being in a 18 ft. boat in 15 degree temps. wearing waders and heavy clothes and 2 dogs and gear and heavy waves is the most exciting thing I've ever done.
|2.29.08 @ 2:26PM|#
The wholesale legalization of drugs and other (oh god, not that)
pleasurable activities would have to go hand in hand with a great
national campaign on personal responsibility. We, as a nation, have
been breeding for at least a couple generations a society of folks
that is unwilling to take care of themselves. From Katrina to
McDonalds coffee burns we can see examples of a complete lack
independant behaviour. If we want to live free of all these
government regulations, we have to get everyone to let go of the
government teat.
There are so many voters that are willing to lay in their own feces
and wait for uncle sam to pull them out. Adjustable rate mortgage
anyone? The government is only too willing to give them that hand
out.
We find ourselves at the lower end of that slippery slope in the
WOD.I got nothin against a a cold beer. Or a good sip of shine. Or
some good bud to start a day off right. Or even a sojourn to meet
Mescalito. And historically it seems that most drug laws were
enacted for very dubious reasons. But as a result of those laws and
other stupid things from our representatives, we have a real bucket
of shit here now.
I think maybe drug legalization and welfare reform and tort reform
go hand in hand. And when we return these felons to society, maybe
it should be with a real shot at a return to society. not a couple
hundred bucks and a bus ticket home.
|2.29.08 @ 2:29PM|#
The wholesale legalization of drugs and other (oh god, not
that) pleasurable activities would have to go hand in hand with a
great national campaign on personal responsibility.
Never happen, most pleasurable activities are wrong and immoral,
which is why they are ilegal.
|2.29.08 @ 2:35PM|#
"Even if we do legalize drugs (which I support) I don't think
we'll seem much of drop in crime."
Shannon,
Actually, by definition, according to your statement, we will
definitely see a reduction in crime. And we will see a reduction in
not only the crimes we just removed from the statutes, but the
whole crimes that tend to follow in their wake. We'll be left just
with the crimes that always get overemphasized, the occasional
nutjob that ingests or smokes too much crack, pcp, acid, whatever
you like, and does real harm. Those people will be locked up for
commiting violent crimes.
You are according way too much "good faith" to the criminal justice
system here. I wonder then, why you don't just attribute "good
faith" across the board when the government does anything. When
something so blatantly dangerous and repugnant to "liberty" like
this recent study gets giftwrapped for you, why don't you brandish
your liberatarian bona fides for everyone to see and condemn the
situation? What you are doing, instead, is confirming the suspicion
that libertarians only seem to wake up and snap to attention only
when a white guy somewhere is inconvenienced. And just to head you
off at the pass, there are several nasty race issues buried in all
of this regarding arrests, convictions, sentencing rates, and
disenfranchisement, so do me a favor and don't play stupid. It's
all a shame, really, this missed opportunity.
|2.29.08 @ 3:04PM|#
I still don't understand the 'if we legalize drugs it will cause more crime' thinking.I'd say most thefts are for things other than drugs.How about Nike shoes,cell phones or a summer home for a congressman?If all laws were based on property rights[#1 you own yourself] and harm against said property, we could cover everything from theft and murder to pollution and dui laws.It's to simple to to pass of course.
zoltan|2.29.08 @ 3:57PM|#
MP:
If you look at Bureau of Justice stats they lump alcohol and
drug-related crimes in one and lump together "drug-related" crimes
with crimes committed under the influence.
Robert|2.29.08 @ 4:24PM|#
It's more a racial problem than anything else. If you leave out all but Caucasians and [non-cauc] Asians, the USA isn't an outlier in incarceration.
|3.1.08 @ 6:18PM|#
I can't understand how anyone could look at those figures and still believe that we live in a free country. Are people so naive as to think that all of those prisoners are really guilty?
MK2|3.2.08 @ 5:27PM|#
Shame on bozos with simplistic, self-righteous views.
Shame on MK2. He/She employs tantrum rather than argument.
???
I was merely parroting the bozo's original formulation.
Amanda Elend|3.13.08 @ 11:07AM|#
Hi. Just wanted to let you know that we used one of your
articles for our show today on moblogic.tv
(http://www.moblogic.tv/video/2008/03/13/one-out-of-a-hundred/).
Here's the link to our blog post.
(http://www.moblogic.tv/blog/2008/03/13/were-number-1/).
We'd love it if you checked it out. Please let us know what you
think (good or bad). Your opinion means a lot to us.
Thanks!
Amanda Elend
moblogic.tv
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245