Prisons

How the Religious Right Might Come Around on Prison Reform

Finding common ground on criminal justice and prison reform for America's right.

|

Chase Madar in American Conservative has an interesting interview with former Virginia Attorney General Mark Earley that traces some of the ways in which someone from a traditional right did, and perhaps how others could, start thinking more sensibly about prison and crime in these here United States. (This is a matter on which Rand Paul is trying to be a leader.) Earley is a former president of the Prison Fellowship, a Christian ministry.

Excerpts:

….to talk to prisoners one-on-one and to the corrections officers, you get a different kind of story. You begin to see the collateral damage of imprisoning people. The greatest sociological predictor of whether someone's going to wind up in prison isn't their color or their income, it's whether their father or mother is in prison. The consequences are just devastating….

There was never a coherent, intellectually thought-out [conservative] position on law enforcement compared to the more robust, well thought-out conservative approach to taxation. But, of course, one of the most potent arguments against mass incarceration, for conservatives, is that if you believe in limited government and are against dependence on the state, and you look at our criminal-justice system, you're just not going to be very impressed by it. We have about one out of every hundred adults in this country under total state control. Think about that.

I saw that in the '80s and '90s, criminal-justice policies were driven more by what constituents wanted, what worked in the short term. But if you do that long enough, then all your constituents wind up having family members in jail….You can't have centuries of slavery and abject racism that don't have consequences across generations. Without a fair amount of consideration, minorities are gong to fare poorly in any criminal-justice system, especially with a history of marginalization.

Interviewer Madar wraps up with:

Depenalizing American society is going to take changes in policing, in sentencing, in parole and reentry, and in leaching out the lust for state punishment that has come to saturate so much social policy.

No political tribe has the power to do this by itself. Even in states with conservative supermajorities, rolling back Soviet-like incarceration levels is not going to happen without broad coalitions—not blandly "centrist" but quirkily transpartisan. The real challenge is going to be shifting the enormous depoliticized mass in the ideological middle, which has become passively radical in its acquiescence to hyperincarceration and overpolicing.

Back in 2010 Radley Balko wrote for Reason on an earlier iteration of Earley's evolution on matters of imprisonment, and the beginnings of a conservative revolution turning against cliched "tough on crime" thinking that ruins lives and beggars governments unnecessarily.

Yesterday, Elizabeth Nolan-Brown wrote about how the misuse of local jails  as essentially small scale debtors prisons for people who can't pay off state-imposed fines is fueling America's incarceration crisis.

NEXT: Chuck Grassley Says Sentencing Reforms Backed by Mike Lee and Ted Cruz Are 'Lenient' and 'Dangerous'

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Also, all the un-Christian buttsex.

  2. Devil’s advocate:

    “The greatest sociological predictor of whether someone’s going to wind up in prison isn’t their color or their income, it’s whether their father or mother is in prison.”

    Is criminal nature learned or inherent?

    If it is learned then leaving those parents out of jail to further teach their children is probably a bad idea.
    If it is inherent then leaving those people out of jail will allow them to continue their criminal behavior and a bad idea.

    Liberty’s advocate:

    Putting people in prison for anything other than violence against other people is a bad idea.

    1. What about fraud? If I deprive you of you life, liberty or property through fraud, should I not be locked up? Think Madoff.

      1. Fraud is a form of violence.

        1. Really?

        2. Fraud is not force. It is deception. I fail to see how it can be called violence.

          1. Fraud is an infringement on someone else’s rights usually resulting in some form of theft.

            1. Theft by deception is not violence.

              1. Didn’t mean to imply that it was.

              2. Theft by deception is not violence.

                Bullfuckingshit!

                  1. It is taking my property against my will. That is theft. It IS an initiation of force.

              3. So, if someone comes by with a forged deed to your house you don’t think that, at some point (say after exhausting legal remedies – so the state doesn’t use violence on *you*) you would be justified in using violence to get your property back?

                What about a burglar sneaking in while you’re outside?

                Theft is violence, no matter how its done.

      2. If you steal timber in Louisiana the penalty, other than jail time, is to pay your victim three times the value of the timber stolen. That is good enough for me.

        If you take something, put it back.

        Madoff should be busting his ass off and paying his victims. Granted, he can never pay back what he took, but it would be more than they got under the current system.

        If someone steals from me, I want my shit back. It does me no good to have the state punish them. Any money gotten from thieves currently goes into the CJ system. The victims are basically just fucked.

        People who injure others are a different story. They are a physical danger and should be removed from society.

        1. Also, Madoff is a fake name, right? A joke?

          Really, who would give their money to a guy who calls himself Madoff? That is the easiest homophone ever.

        2. But the only reason you get the ‘pay it back’ solution is because of the threat of *violence* if you don’t comply.

  3. the beginnings of a conservative revolution turning against cliched “tough on crime” thinking that ruins lives and beggars governments unnecessarily.

    Yeah. You can just barely make it out if you squint, and kind of look off to the side a little bit. Or maybe that’s just a smudge on the window.

    Or, possibly, a faerie riding a unicorn.

  4. Earley is a former president of the Prison Fellowship, a Christian ministry.

    Uh-huh. And I’m sure that Prison Fellowship would never accept government money for running supervison or diversion programs.

    1. I’m also sure that Prison Fellowship would never take advantage of the power they now have over whether the people they’re supervising remain free to interfere with their spirtual beliefs.

      1. Better to let people rot in prison i guess. If the price of getting people out of prison is subjecting them to that, just let them rot.

        1. Yes, because the only two choices are leaving them in prison or letting them out at the whim of religious prostelytyzers.

          1. Then you care more about you bugotries than you do about the victims of this.

            1. The other day you responded to my comments about religion with retorts regarding theism. They’re not the same thing. I have seriously known people who truly believe in an invisible man in the sky who watches over us. I’m not exaggerating. I’ve known others who took religious teachings as a metaphoric way of looking at life. I’m guessing that’s you. And me to a certain degree. But your not believing in an invisible man doesn’t mean that others do not. We’re three steps out of the cave with a lot of toys. Human nature today isn’t any different from when we were wearing the skins of animals that we killed. Smart people can believe some really stupid shit.

              1. There’s always Utah

            1. Ya there’s a reason (DRINK!) their original president bailed

              1. Are you imbibing the Devil’s Brew?

          2. I love that Stormy knows nothing about this group, has provided no evidence that the ministry is doing anything unethical, and yet assumes that because they’re Christian based they must be mistreating the prisoners in some way.

            I’m not saying it isn’t possible. I’d just like you to provide me with some evidence before you make wild claims about peoples’ morality.

            1. I think he’s perhaps going off the common sense idea that religious proselytizers can have tendency to put getting people right with their religion that can sometimes cloud other duties.

              1. I once had an insurance agent who thought it was more important to sell me insurance for my soul than a medical policy. I have no idea how he stayed in business.

            2. It’s like I read the news and I’m aware of Hazle v. Crofoot.

          3. I’ve seen religion change people for the better. I’m not against religion; it’s just not for me. If the law does not deserve respect, then where else does someone get their sense of morality? I get mine from some basic principles, but that doesn’t work for everyone. Some people become better members of society when they get their morality from religion. Sure, it’s not perfect. But it’s better than the alternative of no moral sense at all.

    2. Do you know anything about it? It’s volunteer-based.

  5. My dad is a devout Christian who is involved in Prison Fellowship and he’s pretty anti-war on drugs. I don’t know if Prison Fellowship is the reason for it because he’s been involved for longer than I have been interested in politics, but it has probably helped.

  6. All cultures are equal and only a racist would say otherwise.

    Female Genital Mutilation on the Rise in the U.S.

    More than half a million women and girls in the U.S. are at risk of undergoing FGM in the U.S. or abroad, or have already undergone the procedure, including 166,173 under the age of 18, according to the Population Reference Bureau (PRB). Immigration to the U.S. from African and Middle Eastern countries?where the practice of FGM is a deeply entrenched cultural tradition?is the sole factor for the rise in numbers, says Mark Mather, a demographer at PRB who led the data analysis. There has not been an increase in the practice happening in the U.S. itself, he says.

    In the past year, FGM has come under greater scrutiny in the international community. In Egypt, where female circumcision is illegal, a doctor named Raslan Fadl was sentenced to two years in prison for manslaughter in January for performing an FGM operation that killed 13-year-old Sohair al-Batea in 2013.

    Jesus. At least female genital mutilation is illegal in Egypt now.

    1. Maybe politics is genetic. After all, my mother is a conservatard and my father is a progtard. And here I am: a libertard.

    2. Wonder what they mean by ‘at risk of undergoing the process either in the US or abroad?’

      1. I agree that’s incredibly weasely. It reminds me of ‘at risk of sex trafficking’ which is always used to make sex trafficking seem more prevalent than it is.

        However, the number they give is pretty believable given that it’s estimated that 98% of Somali women undergo the procedure and so do 91% of Egyptians.

        Those practices don’t stop at the border when people move here.

        1. I don’t doubt that, I just wonder what makes them ‘at risk.’ Having parents from areas where it’s commonly practiced?

          1. Are you this stupid or just trolling for an exercise in rhetoric. SMH

    3. The Soviets loved Social Justice and multiculturalism.

      We all know who said this (paraphrased): ” The reason is to brainwash people so that they cannot think clearly. They cannot defend themselves, their families, or their society against attacks.”

      I just went back and read the Rotherham thread from earlier today. I missed it. There is an excellent example of how that works. The people of the town, including the cops and courts, were allowing their children to be kidnapped and raped. They told themselves that Pakistanis were just people too and deserved the benefit of doubt, that they should be able to immigrate unchecked. This despite the Pakistanis openly saying that they were invading the country for the purpose of taking it over and gladly letting the welfare office fund that. The brits are blinding themselves to the fact that Pakistan has as many rapes per year as the rest of the world combined. That raped women are often imprisoned and raped again. That courts there have sentenced women to be raped. They were afraid to even admit the truth to themselves or try to defend themselves for fear of being called a racist.

      Just people too. Uh huh. Like my grandfather used to say ” If you let pigs in the house, pretty soon you are going to be stomping around in pig shit.”

      In case anyone is wondering, I am NOT an open borders guy.

      1. Er, the Soviets forced many of the people under their rule to give up much of their culture, including language instruction.

        “In case anyone is wondering, I am NOT an open borders guy.”

        Wow, I never, ever would have saw that coming!

        1. “The other dimension of “Soviet imperialism” is cultural imperialism. The policy of Soviet cultural imperialism implied the Sovietization of culture and education at the expense of local traditions.[5]”

          http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Empire

        2. Yeah I laughed at that line. Tell the Ukrainians and the Tatars how much the Soviets loved multiculturalism.

          1. Russians were always hard on minorities, that didn’t change with communism.

        3. Ugh. Yes, they loved it but they weren’t peddling it at home. They were peddling it here.

      2. The brits are blinding themselves to the fact that Pakistan has as many rapes per year as the rest of the world combined.

        I don’t know where you get this number, but I find it rather unlikely.

        1. Must have left the Congo out of the statistics. That said, Pakistan no longer allows DNA evidence in rape trials, only eyewitnesses.

          1. Pakistan also has 1000 honor killings every year that we know about, and the actual number is probably far higher than that. Pakistani families can request a diyat (basically blood money) from the killer and the Pakistani government then has no jurisdiction to investigate the crime.

            India is lucky to have gotten rid of that hellhole at the partition, although Pakistan is still screwing with India through the training of terrorists and the low scale invasion of Kashmir with Pakistani aided militants.

        2. Uh…I got that number from memory and it is more than 15 years old, it was just fixed in my mind from all those years ago. I was pissed and typed too fast.

          Looking around now I see other places have gotten pretty bad too, but Pakistan is still at the top by a wide margin.

          The point stands. Letting hordes of immigrants in from a place that has a real, no-shit, rape culture is suicide for a civil society.

      3. I try not to treat people as members of a collective group, but I do make an exception for Paki’s.

        1. Kumail Nanjiani turned out pretty well.

          So far.

  7. Actually a significant number of conservative Christians have been working in this area for a long time. Chuck Colson leads a big group.

    1. I hear tell it was Christfags who led the charge against slavery.

      1. It’s true abolitionism was strongly Christian, but not with many Southern evangelicals.

        1. Christian anti slavery views are distinctly modern.

          1. Recent would be a better word

          2. I don’t know, some groups back then took parts of the Bible that suggest, at least by analogy or symbolism, that slavery is bad in Gods eyes. But the denominations that are numerous among the religious right, their forerunners tended not to be that way. Many broke off specifically to defend slavery (SBC).

            1. IIRC, the general NT view on slavery is that it should be conducted morally, but is not condemned as a practice.

              1. I think you’re not wrong but would add a lot of that was practical acceptance of how things were. Paul told slaves to obey their masters because to do otherwise was to invite a wold of pain, both for the slaves and the fragile Christian community.

                But verses like there are no slave or master in Christ suggested to some abolitionists something different.

      2. Whoa there Paul. Get off your high horse. It was Christfags who embarked on the Crusades.

      3. Slavery was both criticized and defended on Christian grounds by opponents and proponents of slavery. It’s just as accurate to say “Christians fought the end of slavery” as it is to say “Christians ended slavery”

  8. “the enormous depoliticized mass in the ideological middle, which has become passively radical in its acquiescence to hyperincarceration and overpolicing.”

    I think many people live in the 60s and 70s, when softness on crime was actually a thing, not just propaganda by paranoid right-wingers. That is to say, softness on violent *and* nonviolent criminals.

    Then there was a bipartisan backlash, with both Republicans and Democrats supporting stiffer sentences for violent *and* nonviolent crimes. There was the push for longer drug sentences, which IIRC wasn’t solely a right-wing movement. I don’t think the black people demanding higher crack sentences were right-wing operatives, for instance.

    And there were the Democrats agreeing with Republicans about “consistent” sentences – which ended up being consistently stiff.

    I think the “radical centrists” suspect – perhaps with reason – that we’re just going to have another swing of the pendulum, going back to softness on crime across the board – both for your local dope dealer *and* for your career burglars.

    *Someone* should be distinguishing between different types of crimes, and making clear that they’re totally for stiff sentences for repeat violent felons.

    1. Depends on what you mean by soft on crime. The system certainly isn’t soft on crime when it comes to sentencing people of “crimes” that are easy to prove, like drugs. But when it comes to actual crimes with actual victims? That stuff requires actual work to prove. It’s a lot harder than sending someone to prison for the contents of a bag that they had in their pocket. I’d argue that cops are very soft on crime. Ever been a victim of a crime? I have. Cops don’t to shit. They’re too busy going after drugs.

      1. OK, you got me. At least my cops looked around the house once the burglars got through.

        1. In my case they wanted consent to look for drugs so they could bust me. They didn’t give a shit about the broken window, torn screen, stolen property, or anything like that. When I refused to consent to them searching for an excuse to arrest me, they left. I haven’t called the cops since. What’s the point if they treat you as a criminal for calling them?

          1. They came to my business concerning a break in a few years ago. They were there a half hour poking around before I asked them if they noticed the 30 casings on the floor from a 9MM. They were completely oblivious to them until I mentioned it, then they went into full federal case mode.

            Idiots.

            1. If there’s no accountability for when they do something heinous, it must be 100 times worse for things where they’re just being lazy or incompetent. When you can gun someone down with no consequences, being utterly incompetent at solving crimes won’t even faze you. I’d love to see actual, un-juked stats on their closure rates for all different kinds of crime.

              I bet you it is abysmal.

              1. I basically knew who had broken in and where they lived. The stupid assholes left a trail of candy wrappers back to the Section 8 housing down the block (that is not an exaggeration).

                Cops never even went down there to ask around. Covered my business in fingerprinting dust and left, never to be heard from again.

                1. I think that people don’t even realize how much crime must have gone down over the last 20-30 years or so considering that the cops, over the same period of time, have gotten more and more lazy, incompetent, thuggish, and don’t even bother with most real crimes and instead go after easy stats like stop-and-frisk or DUI.

                  I mean, what do the cops do all day seeing as they don’t seem to bother actually trying to solve real crimes?

                  1. Booty calls

    2. I think many people live in the 60s and 70s, when softness on crime was actually a thing, not just propaganda by paranoid right-wingers. That is to say, softness on violent *and* nonviolent criminals.

      Sadly, this was not a myth.

      “In 1976 the state legislature passed a bill that would have ended the furloughs of first-degree murderers. Governor Dukakis, as the Edsalls point out, vetoed it. A strong advocate of prisoners’ rights, he contended that the bill would ‘cut the heart out of efforts at inmate rehabilitation.

  9. This just in:

    Zambrano-Montes being pursued across a street by the officers and then collapsing to the sidewalk under a hail of police gunfire. Witnesses said Zambrano-Montes was carrying a rock and was walking away when the officers fired as many as 13 rounds.

    The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Washington called the shooting “very disturbing,” and at least one eyewitness questioned the use of deadly force on a crowded street.

    “I could not believe they were shooting guns. There were cars and people everywhere,” said Pasco resident Benjamin Patrick.

    It was the fourth fatal police shooting in Pasco, a city of about 68,000, in the past six months. Officers were cleared of wrongdoing in the previous shootings.

    His crime:

    More than a dozen people apparently witnessed Tuesday’s rush-hour confrontation between 35-year-old Antonio Zambrano-Montes, who had gotten out of jail on Monday, and three officers. The officers had tried to arrest him after witnesses reported he was throwing rocks at cars outside the Fiesta Foods supermarket in downtown Pasco.

    Three officers confront a rock-thrower, all three officers mag-dumping on him.

    http://seattletimes.com/html/l…..ngxml.html

    1. Oh, anyone have ideas how to get the *Left* to come around to criminal justice reform?

      1. I meant to be responding to myself.

      2. The left to come around to CJ reform? You are joking right? A totalitarian society must have an unchecked, unaccountable army of thugs to keep people in line.

        Why do you think all their protests in Ferguson were about racism and not a word was said about CJ reform? It is a distraction for the purpose of avoiding CJ reform.

        1. They only want to argue about who should be on the receiving end of the state’s use of force.

    2. Once officers engage anyone at this point, it is submit or die. Run away? Die. Drive away? Die. Don’t submit fast enough? Die.

      They’re basically a pack of cani arrabbiati that you really, really do not want to encounter. And they just keep getting worse and there are more and more of them all the time.

    3. Ok, shit, I just saw the video. I’m going to need some serious justification on this shooting.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-0uqFTBclo

      1. Holy shit. He doesn’t even run away. He more like trots away, slows down, puts his hands in the air, lets them get to within 5 feet, and THEN they gun him down! Not before failing to hit him with their opening salvo and needlessly endangering innocent bystanders of course.

        Fuck.

        1. Holy shit. He doesn’t even run away. He more like trots away, slows down, puts his hands in the air, lets them get to within 5 feet, and THEN they gun him down!

          Well, they already had the guns out. You can’t expect a cop to get his gun out and NOT shoot someone to death.

          totality of the circs smooches

      2. What in the actual fuck?! That was a fucking murder.

        1. Certainly looks like it, this dude was little and cowering. I’ve been on that street in the past getting gas and coffee on road trips from work in Norcal to Montana.

          In the distant past I thought the ACLU types and lefty inner city types were just fucking with cops for cred.

          I no longer accept that, some cops are out there killing those they are sworn “To protect and serve”. There is no longer any doubt and they need to pay the price.

      3. That’s unbelievable. There’s nothing in that video that makes the shooting look in any way justified.

      4. I think it’s time to disarm the cops. I’m ok with them getting shotgun fired beanbag rounds and Tasers.

        They cannot be trusted with real guns. Not even a little bit.

        1. Been watching the British show Babylon, and I’m starting to like their system of disarmed cops with a limited squad of armed police for emergency situations.

  10. Good morning, Worm your honor.
    The crown will plainly show
    The prisoner who now stands before you
    Was caught red-handed showing feelings
    Showing feelings of an almost human nature;
    This will not do.

  11. Rand Paul ‘Concerned’ About Scope of Obama’s War Request

    Huff Post comments are what you could guess:

    Robert Pawelski ? Top Commenter
    I’d doesn’t matter what scope the President proposed Rand Paul would object to it.

    All Rand Paul and the Republicans are doing now is aiding and abetting ISIS.

    Every day Republicans delay and nit pick our Foreign Policy to death, the more they show ISIS and every other terrorist group, how soft we are on supporting human rights and how ineffectual and indecisive we are as a nation.

    And this are the same Republican that gave George Bush and Dick Cheney, a blank check based on fiction and fantasy.

    It is really amazing that the party of peace ™ is so pro war now that Obama wants it.. and it is really amazing that these people really don’t realize that Rand wasn’t a Senator during W’s time nor has he ever supported the Iraq war.

    1. Stephen Stafford ? Top Commenter ? Interdenominational Theological Center
      Forget Rand. Summons Kentucky.

      Yo, Kentucky. You been eating blue grass, swilling down too much bourbon or got into a bad batch of moonshine. That is the only thing that could explain enough people being around to say and do what it takes to put Rand Paul in office.

      If that is the case, do us a favor and ban blue grass, bourbon and all batches of moonshine.

      They have figured us out! Blue grass, bourbon, and moonshine! Now they must BAN IT!!!!11!!!1!

      1. They have figured us out! Blue grass, bourbon, and moonshine!

        They forgot cornbread and butterbeans.

    2. Er, isn’t the dynamic in the Congress that the Republicans want a more belligerent authorization and Democrats a more restricted one?

      1. The biggest flashpoint in the debate over this authorization will be on the question of ground troops. Many Democrats are wary of opening the door to another ground way in the Middle East while many Republicans don’t want to rule out those forces if they are needed to defeat ISIS….Some congressional Democrats who have urged a vote on the effort to fight ISIS also want the administration to agree to roll back the 2001 authorization that Congress passed after the 9/11 attacks.

        http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/09/…..ermission/

        1. I don’t want a war with ISIS, but I want a half-ass, hands tied behind our back war with ISIS even less. If they are going to do it, at least do it less wrong: go in hard, kill them all, get out. If that takes ground troops, so be it. Sure, some other group will step up to fill the void, but at least we won’t be mired in nation building while that happens.

          1. Agree LP and fuck off with the cnn links botard.

        2. True.

          I think you can make a pretty strong case, though, that, even if you think going in at all is a bad idea, the worst decision would be going in without the authorization to complete the mission.

    3. None of that matters. Only TEAM. These people are too stupid to even see their own contradictions, and they specifically only associate with people who are the same and will never point it out.

    4. Rand Paul also is in favor of going after ISIS, he’s specifically concerned about giving the president too much power for future troop surges.

    5. I admit ISIS does need killin’. Letting Obumbles do it is a mistake. So far, every damn thing he has touched in the middle east has come up Muslim Brotherhood.

      Letting him go after ISIS will probably mean that they come out stronger.

      1. Our consistent involvement in the Middle East has proven one thing: the US seems to continually create alternative versions of terrorism no matter how many battleships we park at the edge of the fucking deserts.

        At some point when will the average American dimbulb wake up and realize that snipers are fruitless bullshit in the real world and ultimately useful only for the production of great fucking 8-buck-a-ticket movies.

        1. “At some point when will the average American dimbulb wake up and realize that snipers are fruitless bullshit in the real world and ultimately useful only for the production of great fucking 8-buck-a-ticket movies.”

          AC, I’m gonna take issue and separate him from the war he ended up fighting.
          In WWII, the average German civvy, IMO, was more culpable than the average German rifleman. The first had some choices available, the luxury of which the second did not enjoy.
          The sniper signed up, and was ordered to do his duty; I did too, in the Vietnam war (well, I didn’t really ‘sign up’; I was ‘signed up’).

          1. It’s AC, he’s delusional yet entertaining at times Sevo.

    6. Every day Republicans delay and nit pick our Foreign Policy to death, the more they show ISIS and every other terrorist group, how soft we are on supporting human rights and how ineffectual and indecisive we are as a nation.

      Funny, I seem to remember Republicans saying pretty much the exact same thing about the anti-war left (HA!) in the run up to the Iraq war. I’m sure the poster appreciates the irony.

    7. “And this are the same Republican that gave George Bush and Dick Cheney, a blank check based on fiction and fantasy.”

      That hag Pelosi is a Repub?!
      How’d she get elected in SF?

    8. the more they show ISIS and every other terrorist group, how soft we are on supporting human rights

      I remain appalled that our record on human rights is so self-evidently inferior to that of ISIS.

  12. ….to talk to prisoners one-on-one and to the corrections officers, you get a different kind of story. You begin to see the collateral damage of imprisoning people.

    Former prosecutor spent his life getting people locked in cages, later admits he he didn’t give enough of a fuck to actually find out what happened to them once they had disappeared from his view.

    Go hang yourself, Fuckbag.

    1. Former prosecutor spent his life getting people locked in cages, later admits he he didn’t give enough of a fuck to actually find out what happened to them once they had disappeared from his view.

      Go hang yourself, Fuckbag.

      I take it you’re not a big believer in redemption, then.

      1. “I take it you’re not a big believer in redemption, then.”

        I’m gonna say his ‘redemption’ ought to be offered with a sizable helping of apologies for those kids behind bars if he wants people to buy it.

        1. It’d be nice if these sorts would have their come to Jesus moments while they were still in a position to do something with it.

          1. Dances-with-Trolls|2.12.15 @ 10:52PM|#
            “It’d be nice if these sorts would have their come to Jesus moments while they were still in a position to do something with it.”

            That too. When he was in a position to gain personal advantage by being ‘tough on crime’, he saw no need for compassion. Now that he’s looking for good press, why, uh,…
            And still no apologies.
            Who was Clinton’s AG who took ‘responsibility’ for Waco? And suffered not at all.

            1. Who was Clinton’s AG who took ‘responsibility’ for Waco? And suffered not at all.

              Janet Reno. Her continued existence is proof that this country is no longer a free one, and is particularly no longer one that might be restored to its former state of freedom.

              If it were a free country, it would have been her executed and not McVeigh. If someone had killed her, preferably by burning her alive in her home, then it would have been evidence that the people of this country preserved the spirit of resistance. But the tree of liberty died of thirst a long time ago.

        2. I understand and largely agree. That said, if he’s willing to put whatever bullshit credibility he’s gained to work ending mass incarceration, I’d say that is something to be applauded.

  13. OT:
    Freeways at a standstill, h’copters flitting about. Yep, Obo the beggar’s back in town, naturally at rush hour!
    Hey, his suckers aren’t inconvenienced.

  14. I got a DUI in CA about 12 years ago. Some of the punishments are ridiculous. I had to sit through AA type lectures and pay tuition for the privileged. The fines are outrageous. They take your drivers license and then expect you to somehow show at the indoctrination sessions.

    But one of the penalties was hard labor. Like 8 hours of scraping the sludge off of a municipal wastewater treatment plant’s sedimentation basin floor. That made an impression on me. The other punishments, not so much.

    The old conservative punishment for crime – breaking rocks in the hot sun – is not such a bad idea. Better than pop-psychology or being Tyrone’s girlfriend. IMO.

    1. What makes you think breaking rocks in the hot sun will make you less desirable to Tyrone after a long hard day?

    2. there are good reasons for punishing DUI’s harshly.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.