plus lets not forget why prisons exist in the first place-to make money. The more prisons that are built, the more they can lock up people of color, and people of a low socioeconomic strata. Building a prison is big buisness. Contracts of billions of dollars, lots of jobs. Big money. And the prisoners doing work inside those prisons, how much are they making for the products they make?
the US should do what britain did all those years ago.. find an island in the sth pacific and ship the criminals down there.
they essentially do. With illegal detention centers like bagram or gitmo abu gharib, flying suspected terrorists to places outside the u.s., to some unknown location, and doing god knows what to them. Bush more so than Obama did this he'd arrest some suspected terrorist and fly them to a detention center, Obama on the other hand just flat out sends troops to kill the suspected terrorists, so he's actually worse than bush, way more militant in that arena.
more militant than starting 2 wars??? how does that work? though i do find interesting your moral delineation between rendition and the accompanying torture and the continuing of a war inherited and associated 'activities'.
but im not speaking of supposed terrorists and possibly foreign enemies of the state. im speaking of the murderers rapists thieves and general lawbreakers that find themselves incarcerated.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
by the way, it's often better for the safety of prisoners and guards. If someone who identifies as female is housed with a bunch of men... THAT is just begging for trouble. And usually is.
I don't believe that they're doing what Godfather so eloquently called a "Wackadickoffamee." But they ARE housing them with the proper sex and they get their hormone treatments.
they essentially do. With illegal detention centers like bagram or gitmo abu gharib, flying suspected terrorists to places outside the u.s., to some unknown location, and doing god knows what to them. Bush more so than Obama did this he'd arrest some suspected terrorist and fly them to a detention center, Obama on the other hand just flat out sends troops to kill the suspected terrorists, so he's actually worse than bush, way more militant in that arena.[/quote]
more militant than starting 2 wars??? how does that work? though i do find interesting your moral delineation between rendition and the accompanying torture and the continuing of a war inherited and associated 'activities'.
but im not speaking of supposed terrorists and possibly foreign enemies of the state. im speaking of the murderers rapists thieves and general lawbreakers that find themselves incarcerated.[/quote]
lets be clear, obama isnt nonviolent. he isnt against war. Didnt run on an antiwar platform. he's prowar. And certainly didnt rush to get us out of Iraq. For a long time he too had 2 wars going on as well. And as I said, he has drones in various other countries so... When he ends the war in Afghanistan, stops the use of drones, ends support for israel, and brings all troops everywhere home, as well as ending all torture tactics and illegal detentions and that includes closing gitmo, baghram and elsewhere, then we can talk about obama being some sort of paragon of good. Until then Im not holding my breath.
The wars ceased to be bushs wars when obama came into office. Obama could have day 1 said, all troops are pulled out of both wars, and we are ending this outrageous war. He didnt.
The whole idea of an inherited war is laughable because obamas war policies are exactly the same as bush. His cabinets the same, everyone on his team is pro war. Obama himself is prowar. he believes just like Bush did, that terrorism can be rooted out, that the way to accomplish this is through military agression, and that the war against terrorism is ultimately a justified and winnable war. That ideology and thought process is Bush's. And certainly the absolute lack of any response in terms of dealing with torture and detention and rendition, its disgraceful. Again, Obamas views on the issue are Bush's. January 21st 2009, Obama comes into office. You dont think right then and there he could have shut down all dentention centers, and made a statement to the public that the US did torture in the past, and would never again, and anyone who did, whether that was lowly soldiers or higher ups ordering it, would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law? Or demanding any suspected terrorist who was arrested, be given a trial, right to a lawyer, access to their family etc..? How is Obamas views on the war and torture different than Bushs? I see them as indistinguishable.
Reguardless, he refuses to pull troops from afghanistan. He continues the bush era ideology of torture, detention and abuse, as well as wiretapping. Thats irrefutable.
and to clarify, Bush never had troops go into a country and out and out kill on the spot suspected terrorists. They, as I said, arrested them, flew them on a plane to a no name place, and who knows what happened to them. Obama, on the other hand, doesnt seem to do that, or doesnt have soldiers do that. He orders soldiers into the country and has them kill the suspect. Thats undeniably a different strategy and tactic. And I'd argue, even though I abhor Bush;s method, I think Obamas is worse.
yeah who knows what happened to those renditioned prisoners. best not to ask i imagine.
i think ultimately the point is anyone who suggests prisoners in the U.S. or for that matter prisoners the U.S. claims or holds, are treated in a humane or fair way is missing the plot. And that goes beyond Bush and Obama, but neither of them did anything to address it either. I feel the treatment of prisoners, the growing prison population, the growing prison complexes and buildings, death row are all huge issues that of course wont be addressed during the election and are largely ignored by the populace at large in general. Im a radical, so any issue im discussing Im interested in finding out the fundamental root of a problem and dealing with that. The OP's topic of choice may be tax payer funded operations for prisoners, but lets face it, realistically thats not happening in mass numbers, and the bigger issue isnt this isolated case. Its a shame people feel prisoners either get what they deserve or that prisons are full of legitmate criminals and bad guys or that the justice system revolves around some sort of fairness doctrine. Of all the positions to take in this issue, I find it mind boggling anyone would argue with a straight face that prisoners enjoy some sort of holiday and or vacation living while in prison with all the amenities and rights of free citizens in the general populace. Thats flat out not the case. Im not sure what people think goes on inside prison walls, but I can pretty much guarantee its not a happy sight.
These are legitimate real issues. The fact the prison population is majority black male on drug charges. That each states prison makeup in terms of race is majority black male as well. That prisons are being built at alarming rates and line the pocket
I'd say the bigger outrage is the taxpayer is expected to pay for more prisons, to lock up more people, to lock up more black males, and to legitimize and tacitly approve this racist corrupt judicial system scam. The outrage is that we allow this madness to continue, and that the death penalty is still in use, even with all we know now about people who are in prison for crimes they didnt commit. Any time a new prison is proposed in my town I vote no.
As a wise man once said, "they are trying to build a prison system, another prison system for you and me to live in. Minor drug offenders fill your prisons you dont even flinch all your taxes paying for the war against the new non rich"
Is it because everyone here already agrees the topic originally posted is absurd? Anyone think it's an ok idea?
I'm not necessarily opposed to it. (Nor am I necessarily in support of it.)
Im for it, because our countries lack of support of LGBTQ rights is a disgrace. It smacks of latent racism and homophobia. But im also for it because its a non issue. Mass amounts of (gasp...black) prisoners arent stealing your tax money to pay for operations. There are way bigger fish to fry in terms of issues of the prison industrial complex. If this is YOUR major issue in that arena, you should dig deeper on these topics. The fact our country executes people is something that continues to enrage and baffle me, and is way more of an issue than prisoners wanting a sex change at taxpayer expense.
Understandable, only this particular individual is a she. We can try to be respectful and understanding of transgendered individuals as the topic is discussed. What a snarky title to the article btw.
Normally I would be understanding and respectful ...
when he strangled his wife and dumped her body
that affected my understanding and respect a bit go figure :?
She trusted him, I think of her life over 20 years ago. Where is the compassion for her?
the real her by the way.
The only reason this man is a woman is because we not only allowed
but paid for hormone replacements and hair removal treatments in prison :wtf:
that should be against the law! let alone a 20,000 surgery to come :fp:
As one can tell I think this is ridiculous treatment for a convicted murderer.
I'm addressing your statements towards transgendered individuals in my post, not the crime nor the surgery.
The crime sounds horrific and I don't think the surgery should be paid for if similar types of medical procedures (in terms of cost, necessity) aren't allowed for other prisoners held on similar convictions. I understand your views towards this particular criminal and the crime committed, as well as the request for surgery.
No need to disrespect the transgendered while discussing this particular situation.
Just wanted to add a question - you have been a strong advocate in other threads for treatment and understanding of inmates who have schizophrenia; why not the same advocacy and understanding for those with gender identity disorder? Both are currently Axis I diagnoses in the DSM IV. Why strong advocacy for one diagnosis, but not the other?
Againfrom another thread and off topic but will elaborate...
I discussed in that thread that shooter was classic schizophrenic.
In that thread it is my belief that with readily available mental health care,
shootings like that one could possibly be avoided.
Help for the family etc. ...
that mental illness and subsequent healthcare, needs to be readily available
to stop mass killings. This the understanding I brought to the situation.
Here is the advocacy ...that is for mental illness treatment.
I do not feel a mentally ill person should face the death penalty but I am not in favor
of anyone facing the death penalty. This also understanding and empathy brought to the situation.
This case this man brutally killed his wife. Was found to be guilty. Treatments to change
him to a her should never have taken place, are you saying they should have?
I do not separate the man from the crime just as I did not in the shooter mentioned,
both needs to be punished. My worry in the shooter case is death,
as many were and still are calling for.
I do not disrespect transgendered people but will not respect this one ...
they are two very separate issues.
This killer was a he when he killed and should have remained a he and I have no respect
for him just because he is a transgendered.
I was speaking of him not all transgendered people of course.
Do you have any proof this man's crime was due to mental illness?
that he brutally killed his wife because of a Axis I diagnoses in the DSM IV?
If so I missed that...
perhaps one could better understand murder of any kind, including this crime,
when the killer is mentally ill. There would lie the empathy.
This changes not my opinion though that is...
he should not have been given sex changing treatments in prison
and a pending $20,000 surgery.
As one can tell I think this is ridiculous treatment for a convicted murderer.[/quote]
I'm addressing your statements towards transgendered individuals in my post, not the crime nor the surgery.
The crime sounds horrific and I don't think the surgery should be paid for if similar types of medical procedures (in terms of cost, necessity) aren't allowed for other prisoners held on similar convictions. I understand your views towards this particular criminal and the crime committed, as well as the request for surgery.
No need to disrespect the transgendered while discussing this particular situation.
Just wanted to add a question - you have been a strong advocate in other threads for treatment and understanding of inmates who have schizophrenia; why not the same advocacy and understanding for those with gender identity disorder? Both are currently Axis I diagnoses in the DSM IV. Why strong advocacy for one diagnosis, but not the other?[/quote] Againfrom another thread and off topic but will elaborate...
I discussed in that thread that shooter was classic schizophrenic.
In that thread it is my belief that with readily available mental health care,
shootings like that one could possibly be avoided.
Help for the family etc. ...
that mental illness and subsequent healthcare, needs to be readily available
to stop mass killings. This the understanding I brought to the situation.
Here is the advocacy ...that is for mental illness treatment.
I do not feel a mentally ill person should face the death penalty but I am not in favor
of anyone facing the death penalty. This also understanding and empathy brought to the situation.
This case this man brutally killed his wife. Was found to be guilty. Treatments to change
him to a her should never have taken place, are you saying they should have?
I do not separate the man from the crime just as I did not in the shooter mentioned,
both needs to be punished. My worry in the shooter case is death,
as many were and still are calling for.
I do not disrespect transgendered people but will not respect this one ...
they are two very separate issues.
This killer was a he when he killed and should have remained a he and I have no respect
for him just because he is a transgendered.
I was speaking of him not all transgendered people of course.
Do you have any proof this man's crime was due to mental illness?
that he brutally killed his wife because of a Axis I diagnoses in the DSM IV?
If so I missed that...
perhaps one could better understand murder of any kind, including this crime,
when the killer is mentally ill. There would lie the empathy.
This changes not my opinion though that is...
he should not have been given sex changing treatments in prison
and a pending $20,000 surgery.[/quote]
Im confused, so you dont think prisoners should be allowed to become transgendered while in prison? Why? If you are for it in mainstream society, why wouldnt you be for it inside prison walls?
Prisoner rights as a whole need to be addressed seriously in this thread and in society at large. We have a huge disconnect in reality if people are under the impression prisoners enjoy the same rights free citizens do.
I think it also brings up a very interesting issue not discussed seriously in here. Is prison and the judicial system in America about reform, or punishment? If you commit a no doubt awful crime, murder for example, and are indeed guilty, do you spent the rest of your life in prison? Should the justice system also be about trying to deal with your issues and trying to get you back into mainstream society and paroled? Does the American justice system as it exists now work, meaning, does prison deter crime? Does the death penalty? If you commit a crime and are in prison, does that mean youve forever forfeited your rights, and therefore can be treated inhumanely?
I think prisoner rights deserve to be supported. Society as a whole allows people to get sex change operations, as they should, Im supportive of that, but then why shouldnt prisoner #1234 be allowed to get one? Its harming no one. I think its a shame, beyond a shame, to treat prisoners as subhuman, like their feelings dont matter, and that if you commit a crime you will forever be THAT. I wouldnt want suspected terrorists treated this way, and I wouldnt want traditional prisoners treated this way either. People are human beings and deserve to be treated as such.
I grew up a few miles away from the murder, and one of my good friends was their next door neighbor. What he did was terrible and should be locked up for the rest of his life. He should be fed clothed and, should he need it, receive standard health care services as necessary. Standard does not include surgeries that will make him feel better about himself. If he breaks his arm, he gets a cast. If he cuts his arm he gets a stitch. I will even go so far as to give him all the cholesterol pills he needs to rot in MCI Walpole for a longer period of time.
But I do NOT want to, nor should I have to, pay for his sex change.
8/29/00*5/2/03*7/2/03*7/3/03*7/11/03*9/28/04*5/24/06*6/28/08*5/15/10*5/17/10* 10/16/13*10/25/13* 4/28/16*4/28/16*8/5/16*8/7/16 EV 6/15/11 Brad 10/27/02
Againfrom another thread and off topic but will elaborate...
I discussed in that thread that shooter was classic schizophrenic.
In that thread it is my belief that with readily available mental health care,
shootings like that one could possibly be avoided.
Help for the family etc. ...
that mental illness and subsequent healthcare, needs to be readily available
to stop mass killings. This the understanding I brought to the situation.
Here is the advocacy ...that is for mental illness treatment.
I do not feel a mentally ill person should face the death penalty but I am not in favor
of anyone facing the death penalty. This also understanding and empathy brought to the situation.
This case this man brutally killed his wife. Was found to be guilty. Treatments to change
him to a her should never have taken place, are you saying they should have?
I do not separate the man from the crime just as I did not in the shooter mentioned,
both needs to be punished. My worry in the shooter case is death,
as many were and still are calling for.
I do not disrespect transgendered people but will not respect this one ...
they are two very separate issues.
This killer was a he when he killed and should have remained a he and I have no respect
for him just because he is a transgendered.
I was speaking of him not all transgendered people of course.
Do you have any proof this man's crime was due to mental illness?
that he brutally killed his wife because of a Axis I diagnoses in the DSM IV?
If so I missed that...
perhaps one could better understand murder of any kind, including this crime,
when the killer is mentally ill. There would lie the empathy.
This changes not my opinion though that is...
he should not have been given sex changing treatments in prison
and a pending $20,000 surgery.
I think it relates to this thread. We're talking about medical care for prisoners; in this question 2 prisoners with Axis I diagnoses. I'm trying to understand where you draw the distinction in terms of who should receive the recommended treatment. I have trouble seeing things in a capsule and don't think doing so is often very relevant for real world issues.
I'm not asking you to respect this particular individual, nor the crime, but when you refer to someone who identifies as a "she" as a he, it's disrespectful to all transgendered individuals. Just as if you referred to someone using a racial slur, it would be disrespectful to all people of that race. I think you can talk about this situation without doing that.
I don't believe gender identity disorder was responsible for the crime here. In fact I would argue against it having an impact on the crime. So I think you are saying that if the diagnosis was responsible for the crime, you would support treatment in prison. What if there was someone who is schizophrenic, but was not psychotic at the time of the crime and the illness wasn't a factor. Would that person be deserving of the recommended treatment in prison? My question is whether you think 2 people in prison with different Axis 1 diagnoses are both deserving of the recommended treatment (given that both disorders either were or were not factors in the criminal act).
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
I cannot fathom the idea that people believe giving this man a sex change operation is the right thing to do. Another thing is this person is still a man so referring to him as he does not seem disrespectful.
96 Randall's Island II
98 CAA
00 Virginia Beach;Camden I; Jones Beach III
05 Borgata Night I; Wachovia Center
06 Letterman Show; Webcast (guy in blue shirt), Camden I; DC
08 Camden I; Camden II; DC
09 Phillie III
10 MSG II
13 Wrigley Field
16 Phillie II
I cannot fathom the idea that people believe giving this man a sex change operation is the right thing to do. Another thing is this person is still a man so referring to him as he does not seem disrespectful.
I don't necessarily support the operation being paid for, but if the prison provides a similar level of health care for other issues, I think there should be parity. I really don't know what level of medical care or treatment is provided in the prison system. It's respectful to refer to the person using the pronoun that corresponds to the gender with which they identify.
Post edited by comebackgirl on
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
I cannot fathom the idea that people believe giving this man a sex change operation is the right thing to do. Another thing is this person is still a man so referring to him as he does not seem disrespectful.
To be honest, it's very difficult to have this conversation with people who I'm guessing don't know anyone who's transgendered.
I'm addressing your statements towards transgendered individuals in my post, not the crime nor the surgery.
Im confused, so you dont think prisoners should be allowed to become transgendered while in prison? Why? If you are for it in mainstream society, why wouldnt you be for it inside prison walls?
Prisoner rights as a whole need to be addressed seriously in this thread and in society at large. We have a huge disconnect in reality if people are under the impression prisoners enjoy the same rights free citizens do.
I think it also brings up a very interesting issue not discussed seriously in here. Is prison and the judicial system in America about reform, or punishment? If you commit a no doubt awful crime, murder for example, and are indeed guilty, do you spent the rest of your life in prison? Should the justice system also be about trying to deal with your issues and trying to get you back into mainstream society and paroled? Does the American justice system as it exists now work, meaning, does prison deter crime? Does the death penalty? If you commit a crime and are in prison, does that mean youve forever forfeited your rights, and therefore can be treated inhumanely?
I think prisoner rights deserve to be supported. Society as a whole allows people to get sex change operations, as they should, Im supportive of that, but then why shouldnt prisoner #1234 be allowed to get one? Its harming no one. I think its a shame, beyond a shame, to treat prisoners as subhuman, like their feelings dont matter, and that if you commit a crime you will forever be THAT. I wouldnt want suspected terrorists treated this way, and I wouldnt want traditional prisoners treated this way either. People are human beings and deserve to be treated as such.
Is this directed at me? yes?
I see my words here ... tried to fix...
Allowed to get sex change operations :? it is a choice, a freedom that one makes and pays privately for even if through their own insurance policy. This is why I am not for this in prison.
This should not be paid for by taxpayers.
I think with the statistics on reoffending
I would have to say prison is both punishment and reform
not one or the other.
As far as your other questions...
First degree murder yes life I am against capital punishment
justice system and personal issues that's hardly possible the law is black and white
but yes less offenses parole is available but it is hard to find work for the law abiding
let alone those with a criminal record. Here in GA we have work programs and incentives for hiring.
I don't think prison or the death penalty deters crime for criminals. Those who
might be considering breaking the law it might very much affect their decision.
It would mine. But for criminals crime often starts petty and escalates
out of need and greed.
Treated humanely :? is entirely different than a sex change operation...
humanely is...
feed, clothed, shelter, education, spiritual council, safety.
As far as health issues, treatment only in life threatening physical situations,
in my opinion.
Many law abiding hard working people in our society suffer each day
for the lack of adequate health care.
Many children suffer. The money spent on prisoners could go to help those without.
That is where I want tax dollars going.
And who I have compassion for are the countless victims
and their loved ones of those housed in prisons.
Through no fault of their own they lost lives, were traumatized, lost children.
These are who live in my heart.
The murderers made their choice, showed no compassion or respect for life,
now they must live with what they did.
Hopefully realizing and then never forgetting what they did to another human being.
I cannot fathom the idea that people believe giving this man a sex change operation is the right thing to do. Another thing is this person is still a man so referring to him as he does not seem disrespectful.
I don't necessarily support the operation being paid for, but if the prison provides a similar level of health care for other issues, I think there should be parity. I really don't know what level of medical care or treatment is provided in the prison system. It's respectful to refer to the person using the pronoun that corresponds to the gender with which they identify.
It's respectable to refer to the murdering piece of dog feces as a murdering piece of dog feces.
I cannot fathom the idea that people believe giving this man a sex change operation is the right thing to do. Another thing is this person is still a man so referring to him as he does not seem disrespectful.
I don't necessarily support the operation being paid for, but if the prison provides a similar level of health care for other issues, I think there should be parity. I really don't know what level of medical care or treatment is provided in the prison system. It's respectful to refer to the person using the pronoun that corresponds to the gender with which they identify.
It's respectable to refer to the murdering piece of dog feces as a murdering piece of dog feces.
well that's a whole different issue and I don't disagree.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
I cannot fathom the idea that people believe giving this man a sex change operation is the right thing to do. Another thing is this person is still a man so referring to him as he does not seem disrespectful.
To be honest, it's very difficult to have this conversation with people who I'm guessing don't know anyone who's transgendered.
I am sure that is true. But I don't really think it would change my opinion on whether or not a murderer should have this operation paid for by the tax payers. That is pretty cut and dry for me.
You presented a good point when discussing the safety of the inmate and the guards however. That would be the only reason I would be for it, if it was cheaper than the other measures that had to be put in place to keep the inmate safe or if there was no doubt the guards would be at less risk of anything occurring.
Comments
more militant than starting 2 wars??? how does that work? though i do find interesting your moral delineation between rendition and the accompanying torture and the continuing of a war inherited and associated 'activities'.
but im not speaking of supposed terrorists and possibly foreign enemies of the state. im speaking of the murderers rapists thieves and general lawbreakers that find themselves incarcerated.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I don't believe that they're doing what Godfather so eloquently called a "Wackadickoffamee." But they ARE housing them with the proper sex and they get their hormone treatments.
more militant than starting 2 wars??? how does that work? though i do find interesting your moral delineation between rendition and the accompanying torture and the continuing of a war inherited and associated 'activities'.
but im not speaking of supposed terrorists and possibly foreign enemies of the state. im speaking of the murderers rapists thieves and general lawbreakers that find themselves incarcerated.[/quote]
lets be clear, obama isnt nonviolent. he isnt against war. Didnt run on an antiwar platform. he's prowar. And certainly didnt rush to get us out of Iraq. For a long time he too had 2 wars going on as well. And as I said, he has drones in various other countries so... When he ends the war in Afghanistan, stops the use of drones, ends support for israel, and brings all troops everywhere home, as well as ending all torture tactics and illegal detentions and that includes closing gitmo, baghram and elsewhere, then we can talk about obama being some sort of paragon of good. Until then Im not holding my breath.
The wars ceased to be bushs wars when obama came into office. Obama could have day 1 said, all troops are pulled out of both wars, and we are ending this outrageous war. He didnt.
The whole idea of an inherited war is laughable because obamas war policies are exactly the same as bush. His cabinets the same, everyone on his team is pro war. Obama himself is prowar. he believes just like Bush did, that terrorism can be rooted out, that the way to accomplish this is through military agression, and that the war against terrorism is ultimately a justified and winnable war. That ideology and thought process is Bush's. And certainly the absolute lack of any response in terms of dealing with torture and detention and rendition, its disgraceful. Again, Obamas views on the issue are Bush's. January 21st 2009, Obama comes into office. You dont think right then and there he could have shut down all dentention centers, and made a statement to the public that the US did torture in the past, and would never again, and anyone who did, whether that was lowly soldiers or higher ups ordering it, would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law? Or demanding any suspected terrorist who was arrested, be given a trial, right to a lawyer, access to their family etc..? How is Obamas views on the war and torture different than Bushs? I see them as indistinguishable.
Reguardless, he refuses to pull troops from afghanistan. He continues the bush era ideology of torture, detention and abuse, as well as wiretapping. Thats irrefutable.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I'm not necessarily opposed to it. (Nor am I necessarily in support of it.)
i think ultimately the point is anyone who suggests prisoners in the U.S. or for that matter prisoners the U.S. claims or holds, are treated in a humane or fair way is missing the plot. And that goes beyond Bush and Obama, but neither of them did anything to address it either. I feel the treatment of prisoners, the growing prison population, the growing prison complexes and buildings, death row are all huge issues that of course wont be addressed during the election and are largely ignored by the populace at large in general. Im a radical, so any issue im discussing Im interested in finding out the fundamental root of a problem and dealing with that. The OP's topic of choice may be tax payer funded operations for prisoners, but lets face it, realistically thats not happening in mass numbers, and the bigger issue isnt this isolated case. Its a shame people feel prisoners either get what they deserve or that prisons are full of legitmate criminals and bad guys or that the justice system revolves around some sort of fairness doctrine. Of all the positions to take in this issue, I find it mind boggling anyone would argue with a straight face that prisoners enjoy some sort of holiday and or vacation living while in prison with all the amenities and rights of free citizens in the general populace. Thats flat out not the case. Im not sure what people think goes on inside prison walls, but I can pretty much guarantee its not a happy sight.
These are legitimate real issues. The fact the prison population is majority black male on drug charges. That each states prison makeup in terms of race is majority black male as well. That prisons are being built at alarming rates and line the pocket
I'd say the bigger outrage is the taxpayer is expected to pay for more prisons, to lock up more people, to lock up more black males, and to legitimize and tacitly approve this racist corrupt judicial system scam. The outrage is that we allow this madness to continue, and that the death penalty is still in use, even with all we know now about people who are in prison for crimes they didnt commit. Any time a new prison is proposed in my town I vote no.
As a wise man once said, "they are trying to build a prison system, another prison system for you and me to live in. Minor drug offenders fill your prisons you dont even flinch all your taxes paying for the war against the new non rich"
Im for it, because our countries lack of support of LGBTQ rights is a disgrace. It smacks of latent racism and homophobia. But im also for it because its a non issue. Mass amounts of (gasp...black) prisoners arent stealing your tax money to pay for operations. There are way bigger fish to fry in terms of issues of the prison industrial complex. If this is YOUR major issue in that arena, you should dig deeper on these topics. The fact our country executes people is something that continues to enrage and baffle me, and is way more of an issue than prisoners wanting a sex change at taxpayer expense.
I discussed in that thread that shooter was classic schizophrenic.
In that thread it is my belief that with readily available mental health care,
shootings like that one could possibly be avoided.
Help for the family etc. ...
that mental illness and subsequent healthcare, needs to be readily available
to stop mass killings. This the understanding I brought to the situation.
Here is the advocacy ...that is for mental illness treatment.
I do not feel a mentally ill person should face the death penalty but I am not in favor
of anyone facing the death penalty.
This also understanding and empathy brought to the situation.
This case this man brutally killed his wife. Was found to be guilty. Treatments to change
him to a her should never have taken place, are you saying they should have?
I do not separate the man from the crime just as I did not in the shooter mentioned,
both needs to be punished. My worry in the shooter case is death,
as many were and still are calling for.
I do not disrespect transgendered people but will not respect this one ...
they are two very separate issues.
This killer was a he when he killed and should have remained a he and I have no respect
for him just because he is a transgendered.
I was speaking of him not all transgendered people of course.
Do you have any proof this man's crime was due to mental illness?
that he brutally killed his wife because of a Axis I diagnoses in the DSM IV?
If so I missed that...
perhaps one could better understand murder of any kind, including this crime,
when the killer is mentally ill. There would lie the empathy.
This changes not my opinion though that is...
he should not have been given sex changing treatments in prison
and a pending $20,000 surgery.
I'm addressing your statements towards transgendered individuals in my post, not the crime nor the surgery.
The crime sounds horrific and I don't think the surgery should be paid for if similar types of medical procedures (in terms of cost, necessity) aren't allowed for other prisoners held on similar convictions. I understand your views towards this particular criminal and the crime committed, as well as the request for surgery.
No need to disrespect the transgendered while discussing this particular situation.
Just wanted to add a question - you have been a strong advocate in other threads for treatment and understanding of inmates who have schizophrenia; why not the same advocacy and understanding for those with gender identity disorder? Both are currently Axis I diagnoses in the DSM IV. Why strong advocacy for one diagnosis, but not the other?[/quote]
Again from another thread and off topic but will elaborate...
I discussed in that thread that shooter was classic schizophrenic.
In that thread it is my belief that with readily available mental health care,
shootings like that one could possibly be avoided.
Help for the family etc. ...
that mental illness and subsequent healthcare, needs to be readily available
to stop mass killings. This the understanding I brought to the situation.
Here is the advocacy ...that is for mental illness treatment.
I do not feel a mentally ill person should face the death penalty but I am not in favor
of anyone facing the death penalty.
This also understanding and empathy brought to the situation.
This case this man brutally killed his wife. Was found to be guilty. Treatments to change
him to a her should never have taken place, are you saying they should have?
I do not separate the man from the crime just as I did not in the shooter mentioned,
both needs to be punished. My worry in the shooter case is death,
as many were and still are calling for.
I do not disrespect transgendered people but will not respect this one ...
they are two very separate issues.
This killer was a he when he killed and should have remained a he and I have no respect
for him just because he is a transgendered.
I was speaking of him not all transgendered people of course.
Do you have any proof this man's crime was due to mental illness?
that he brutally killed his wife because of a Axis I diagnoses in the DSM IV?
If so I missed that...
perhaps one could better understand murder of any kind, including this crime,
when the killer is mentally ill. There would lie the empathy.
This changes not my opinion though that is...
he should not have been given sex changing treatments in prison
and a pending $20,000 surgery.[/quote]
Im confused, so you dont think prisoners should be allowed to become transgendered while in prison? Why? If you are for it in mainstream society, why wouldnt you be for it inside prison walls?
Prisoner rights as a whole need to be addressed seriously in this thread and in society at large. We have a huge disconnect in reality if people are under the impression prisoners enjoy the same rights free citizens do.
I think it also brings up a very interesting issue not discussed seriously in here. Is prison and the judicial system in America about reform, or punishment? If you commit a no doubt awful crime, murder for example, and are indeed guilty, do you spent the rest of your life in prison? Should the justice system also be about trying to deal with your issues and trying to get you back into mainstream society and paroled? Does the American justice system as it exists now work, meaning, does prison deter crime? Does the death penalty? If you commit a crime and are in prison, does that mean youve forever forfeited your rights, and therefore can be treated inhumanely?
I think prisoner rights deserve to be supported. Society as a whole allows people to get sex change operations, as they should, Im supportive of that, but then why shouldnt prisoner #1234 be allowed to get one? Its harming no one. I think its a shame, beyond a shame, to treat prisoners as subhuman, like their feelings dont matter, and that if you commit a crime you will forever be THAT. I wouldnt want suspected terrorists treated this way, and I wouldnt want traditional prisoners treated this way either. People are human beings and deserve to be treated as such.
But I do NOT want to, nor should I have to, pay for his sex change.
I'm not asking you to respect this particular individual, nor the crime, but when you refer to someone who identifies as a "she" as a he, it's disrespectful to all transgendered individuals. Just as if you referred to someone using a racial slur, it would be disrespectful to all people of that race. I think you can talk about this situation without doing that.
I don't believe gender identity disorder was responsible for the crime here. In fact I would argue against it having an impact on the crime. So I think you are saying that if the diagnosis was responsible for the crime, you would support treatment in prison. What if there was someone who is schizophrenic, but was not psychotic at the time of the crime and the illness wasn't a factor. Would that person be deserving of the recommended treatment in prison? My question is whether you think 2 people in prison with different Axis 1 diagnoses are both deserving of the recommended treatment (given that both disorders either were or were not factors in the criminal act).
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
98 CAA
00 Virginia Beach;Camden I; Jones Beach III
05 Borgata Night I; Wachovia Center
06 Letterman Show; Webcast (guy in blue shirt), Camden I; DC
08 Camden I; Camden II; DC
09 Phillie III
10 MSG II
13 Wrigley Field
16 Phillie II
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
To be honest, it's very difficult to have this conversation with people who I'm guessing don't know anyone who's transgendered.
I see my words here ... tried to fix...
Allowed to get sex change operations :? it is a choice, a freedom that one makes and pays privately for even if through their own insurance policy. This is why I am not for this in prison.
This should not be paid for by taxpayers.
I think with the statistics on reoffending
I would have to say prison is both punishment and reform
not one or the other.
As far as your other questions...
First degree murder yes life I am against capital punishment
justice system and personal issues that's hardly possible the law is black and white
but yes less offenses parole is available but it is hard to find work for the law abiding
let alone those with a criminal record. Here in GA we have work programs and incentives for hiring.
I don't think prison or the death penalty deters crime for criminals. Those who
might be considering breaking the law it might very much affect their decision.
It would mine. But for criminals crime often starts petty and escalates
out of need and greed.
Treated humanely :? is entirely different than a sex change operation...
humanely is...
feed, clothed, shelter, education, spiritual council, safety.
As far as health issues, treatment only in life threatening physical situations,
in my opinion.
Many law abiding hard working people in our society suffer each day
for the lack of adequate health care.
Many children suffer. The money spent on prisoners could go to help those without.
That is where I want tax dollars going.
And who I have compassion for are the countless victims
and their loved ones of those housed in prisons.
Through no fault of their own they lost lives, were traumatized, lost children.
These are who live in my heart.
The murderers made their choice, showed no compassion or respect for life,
now they must live with what they did.
Hopefully realizing and then never forgetting what they did to another human being.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
I am sure that is true. But I don't really think it would change my opinion on whether or not a murderer should have this operation paid for by the tax payers. That is pretty cut and dry for me.
You presented a good point when discussing the safety of the inmate and the guards however. That would be the only reason I would be for it, if it was cheaper than the other measures that had to be put in place to keep the inmate safe or if there was no doubt the guards would be at less risk of anything occurring.