Quote (Thor123422 @ May 20 2020 05:02pm)
Exoneration based on DNA evidence say that at least 1% of people are falsely convicted. That's a very significant number of people. The number of people on death row is estimated to be 4% false convictions. There aren't any estimates that I'm aware of that say its as low as 1 in 1000.
I never said anything about a 4 star hotel. Again, you're putting words in my mouth. It's a very bad habit of yours and makes it difficult to take your criticisms seriously.
Pay in many prisons is non existent, or cents per hour. I'm not aware of any prison paying anywhere close to minimum wage. Additionally, they are often charged for things like personal hygiene products and phone calls with family at absurd rates. Still, prisoners shouldn't be obligated to pay their stay. The idea that they should be put in debt for their prison stay is frankly disgusting, and a pretty perfect way to ensure they will never get back on their feet afterwards with that debt dragging their employment applications, credit applications, etc. down.
DNA based exoneration is primarily from old cases. That's kind of the problem. Those on death row and those sentenced to life who were convicted 50 years ago didn't have the benefit of DNA evidence, genetic mapping, etc.
Utilizing that fact when considering prison policy today is not great. I won't argue the point about "for profit" prisons at all. I don't like or support them. Either prisons should be a function of the state, not contracted out, or they shouldn't exist. But for cases tried TODAY, there's a severe problem:
You did not commit the crime. I did not commit the crime. Why are we obligated to foot the bill for the crime? People cost a lot of money to house, feed, clothe, etc. These costs should not fall to tax payers. We already have to pay our own rent/mortgage, taxes, etc.
What you're really discussing is people living tax free, 3 square, never a worry about the roof over their head. Due to strange "human rights" that nobody seems to be able to adequately explain, they even get cable. Who pays for it? We do. Not those who committed the crime.
I mean, I suppose rather than prisons where we actually "take care of" these people, we could simply create a huge compound, toss in some cows, goats, and basic tools, and drop new prisoners over the side, and they could raise their own animals, farm their own land, and effectively survive or die on their own. Even then though, the public is liable for the bill for the guards that insure prisoners stay in the compounds.
Do you see the issue here? I'm not discussing what pay currently is in prisons. I'm saying that penal labor as an offset to prison costs is just fine. It's possible to incentivise it to make it "do it willingly or assume the debt your incarceration has been lumping on the public", but one way or another, the system is pretty broken. Sure, private prisons should get the axe. On the flipside, no, I neither agree that forcing prisoners to work is slavery, nor that they should even be afforded an option where they can't work to earn their stay, unless they have outside cash, and are going to pay their own way.