bytor2112 Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 I imagine Jerry Sandusky's prison stay will be unpleasant and .....short. Disgusting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 I imagine Jerry Sandusky's prison stay will be unpleasant and .....short. Disgusting.Why might it be short? He is not all that old. Or are you suggesting that the other prisoners might murder him for his crimes?It's a sad commentary on the US "justice" system when an incarcerated man stands a good chance of being murdered. It is a much sadder commentary on the state of the US citizenry when this is widely seen as desirable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted June 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 Why might it be short? He is not all that old. Or are you suggesting that the other prisoners might murder him for his crimes?It's a sad commentary on the US "justice" system when an incarcerated man stands a good chance of being murdered. It is a much sadder commentary on the state of the US citizenry when this is widely seen as desirable.I have heard that child molesters don't fair too well in prison and wouldn't be surprised if it happened....would you? I made no comment as to whether I find it desirable for incarcerated people to be murdered in prison ( I don't), but I am sure it happens and not just in U.S. prisons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeuroTypical Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 I didn't see bytor's comment as an indication of desirability, just as taking a guess about what would happen. I share his guess - when an inmate population discovers a child molester in their midst, it does not go well for the molester. A lot depends on which prison, and what kind of inmates he'll be around. PrisonChaplain, do you have any insight to offer about Sandusky's chances? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bini Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 I just read about this. I've heard too, that pedophiles are frowned upon in prison by other inmates. No question, it is always wrong to wish harm on another person but it's also human nature to want justice on behalf of a child who has been exploited by an adult. I can't deny that I wouldn't go there in thought, that if someone hurt my child, I'd wish hell upon them. I don't think a death sentence would even touch how I felt inside. Anyway, one of the victim's mothers was quoted saying, "We all lost." I hope these young men can move forward with their lives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echo2002 Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 I thought pedophiles were separated from general population because of the danger they might face. Of course I guess anything could happen in prison. I hope the victims feel that justice was served. Hopefully he will never see freedom for the rest of his life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 I made no comment as to whether I find it desirable for incarcerated people to be murdered in prison ( I don't), but I am sure it happens and not just in U.S. prisons.No, you didn't. But you broached the subject, and I have heard literally dozens of people soliloquize about the brutal beauty of such prison yard justice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeuroTypical Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 (edited) I thought pedophiles were separated from general population because of the danger they might face.There are approximately eighteen gazillion-bajillion people incarcarated in the US for sex offenses - maybe a quarter to an eighth of them for offenses against a child (but don't quote me on those numbers). I don't think we have pedophile-only wards (at least not in the U.S.). From what I hear, prisons will take some steps to keep inmates from harm, and will act to remove known threats. But they're a prison - they can't keep everyone away from everyone else all the time. It would be cost prohibative, not to mention a violation of civil rights. The prisons don't advertise what charges go with an inmate. Most folks are smart enough to lie about why they're there. Sanduski is in trouble because he's in the news and everyone will know. But again, you can't give him special treatment because "something" "might" happen.It's a sad commentary on the US "justice" system when an incarcerated man stands a good chance of being murdered.Yes, lots of valid justice system complaints. But here's something to think about: Yeah, you can make a case that chance of murder in prison is a bad thing. But how are you on, say, being sodomized in the shower? How about getting beat up? Shunned by other inmates? Consider the sentence: "Do you know what they do to pedophiles in prison?" An honest answer to that question, has done quite a bit to keep offenses from happening. Living through the answer does something to keep people reoffending. How far do you want to go to end that reality, and make prison for abusing a child no worse than, oh say, a 3rd time weed posession felony?Consider a sliding scale of justice, with frowny faces and time-outs on one end, and getting shanked and murdered on the other end. We all draw our own lines where we consider "justice" to land. Below the line is a lack of justice, and above the line is abuse of power. I know where I draw the line, but I'll be hesitant to judge where someone else draws it. Edited June 23, 2012 by Loudmouth_Mormon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aino Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 I thought pedophiles were separated from general population because of the danger they might face. Of course I guess anything could happen in prison. I hope the victims feel that justice was served. Hopefully he will never see freedom for the rest of his life.It is more likely that he will be in seclusion and separated away from the others, particularly with a high-profile case such as this one and considering his charges. I would be very surprised if they just tossed him in with the rest of the population, otherwise he would probably be killed immediately. It isn't "special treatment" as was mentioned above, but a precautionary measure regarding what is a very real situation in prison hierarchy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annewandering Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 They do put prisoners in solitary for their own protection. He is lookng at a minimum of 60 years so he is going to be spending a lot of time in there. He might actually prefer to take his chances out in the population after a few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted June 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 No, you didn't. But you broached the subject, and I have heard literally dozens of people soliloquize about the brutal beauty of such prison yard justice.Your comment sounded accusatory....if I am mistaken, that's how I read it. My point was that Sandusky has much to fear given his crimes when he is locked up,it was not Bytor saying" now that slime ball will get what he really deserves." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 here's something to think about: Yeah, you can make a case that chance of murder in prison is a bad thing. But how are you on, say, being sodomized in the shower? How about getting beat up? Shunned by other inmates?I don't care about the shunning. Any harm that comes to inmates from other inmates is unacceptable.Consider the sentence: "Do you know what they do to pedophiles in prison?" An honest answer to that question, has done quite a bit to keep offenses from happening.I don't believe this. Do you have any evidence at all to back it up? If a man is not put off at the idea of a prison sentence, he is not going to bother to think, "Oh, wait, if I actually go to prison, they will forcibly sodomize me and beat me senseless and probably kill me." In any case, such offenders surely count on never getting caught, so possible far-off consequences that may or may not ever happen many years from now are trumped by the immediacy of satisfying the perverse lust.Living through the answer does something to keep people reoffending. How far do you want to go to end that reality, and make prison for abusing a child no worse than, oh say, a 3rd time weed posession felony?You appear to be missing the point, LM. I'm okay with putting child molesters to death. But in that case, we should execute them. Putting them in prison and letting them get beaten to death is unconstitutional. It is cruel and unusual punishment. It is utterly indecent. And please don't give the rejoinder that their crime was indecent. That is beside the point. If we are going to kill him, let's be honest and execute him, not stick him in with a bunch of human-shaped animals and smile with evil satisfaction while the subhumans do the dirty work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 Your comment sounded accusatory....if I am mistaken, that's how I read it.You are mistaken. I don't know how you read it that way, but you read it wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted June 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 You are mistaken. I don't know how you read it that way, but you read it wrong.Well...............I guess so;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annewandering Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 and what possible reason do we have to think that what is a horror to most might just be heavenly for others? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bini Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 There was a program on TV several years ago about guards committing rape in women's prisons pre-90's and how there were no laws in place at the time to protect these women. I think it was the mid-90's when a law was finally passed and made it illegal for guards to sexually assault female inmates. It's probably searchable online but I found it interesting. One guard interviewed said that these women were seen as nothing more than criminals and whores. More wrongs, definitely don't make rights, and we all lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bini Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 and what possible reason do we have to think that what is a horror to most might just be heavenly for others?Predators = HeavenlyVictims = Horror Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annewandering Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 Predators = HeavenlyVictims = HorrorI am referring to his stay in prison. Just in case I was not clear. A victim is one who does not want what is done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prisonchaplain Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 (edited) PrisonChaplain, do you have any insight to offer about Sandusky's chances?Prison rape is illegal...as is murder. Despite the movies and commonly accepted assumptions, the odds are that Sandusky will not be molested, much less murdered. I have not followed the case closely, but many states, as well as the feds, have programs for sexual offenders. He may find himself living in a facility where many have done similar crimes. Again, I have no specific knowledge of his case, and do not pretend to speak for any agency or department--just offering some educated guesses.Here's what one study reports: Sex Offenses and Offenders: An Analysis of Data on Rape and Sexual Assault - MINCAVA Electronic Clearinghouse Edited June 23, 2012 by prisonchaplain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prisonchaplain Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 There was a program on TV several years ago about guards committing rape in women's prisons pre-90's and how there were no laws in place at the time to protect these women. I think it was the mid-90's when a law was finally passed and made it illegal for guards to sexually assault female inmates. It's probably searchable online but I found it interesting. One guard interviewed said that these women were seen as nothing more than criminals and whores. More wrongs, definitely don't make rights, and we all lose.There is no question but that the laws have gotten tougher. Nevertheless, I became a chaplain in 1998, and already our training made it clear that there was no such thing as consensual sex between staff and inmates. We were told stories of former staff now doing time for engaging in such activities. All that to say, I doubt that staff rape of inmates was ever considered "no big deal," on a wide scale.Here is an excellent site that deals mainly in facts: Prison Rape | National Institute of Justice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arnolt Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 I don't care about the shunning. Any harm that comes to inmates from other inmates is unacceptable.I don't believe this. Do you have any evidence at all to back it up? If a man is not put off at the idea of a prison sentence, he is not going to bother to think, "Oh, wait, if I actually go to prison, they will forcibly sodomize me and beat me senseless and probably kill me." In any case, such offenders surely count on never getting caught, so possible far-off consequences that may or may not ever happen many years from now are trumped by the immediacy of satisfying the perverse lust.You appear to be missing the point, LM. I'm okay with putting child molesters to death. But in that case, we should execute them. Putting them in prison and letting them get beaten to death is unconstitutional. It is cruel and unusual punishment. It is utterly indecent. And please don't give the rejoinder that their crime was indecent. That is beside the point. If we are going to kill him, let's be honest and execute him, not stick him in with a bunch of human-shaped animals and smile with evil satisfaction while the subhumans do the dirty work.You are right. They shouldn't get the chance to do that dirty work. On the other hand I can not accept the wish for death penalty for any crime except murder in the absolutely first degree and under crueful circumstances, according to the law of the states in the US where it is possible. I have just read about that case in "Welt"-online, which is a serious newspaper here in Germany. For one who is interested in German reporting about this case: Sexueller Missbrauch: US-College-Legende drohen 442 Jahre Haft - Nachrichten Panorama - Weltgeschehen - WELT ONLINE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 You are right. They shouldn't get the chance to do that dirty work. On the other hand I can not accept the wish for death penalty for any crime except murder in the absolutely first degree and under crueful circumstances, according to the law of the states in the US where it is possible. I have just read about that case in "Welt"-online, which is a serious newspaper here in Germany. For one who is interested in German reporting about this case: Sexueller Missbrauch: US-College-Legende drohen 442 Jahre Haft - Nachrichten Panorama - Weltgeschehen - WELT ONLINEThe discussion is purely academic. It would be impossible to get child molestation classified as a capital crime. My point was that I have no principled objection to capital punishment for such crimes, so my dispute is not with the fact that the guy might die for his guilt. Rather, it is the method in which that death comes about -- almost a vigilante posse lynching. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misshalfway Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 Well, I hope the guys suffers good and proper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annewandering Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 The discussion is purely academic. It would be impossible to get child molestation classified as a capital crime. My point was that I have no principled objection to capital punishment for such crimes, so my dispute is not with the fact that the guy might die for his guilt. Rather, it is the method in which that death comes about -- almost a vigilante posse lynching.which oddly relates back to another thread on if its ok to kill a guy molesting/raping your child. Vigilante not so hot an idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echo2002 Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 I think in the case where the father walked in on a man molesting his daughter was probably more a sudden rage that over came him that he did not or could not control. It didn't sound like the father was saying "you molested my daughter, now you're going to die". The father called 911 crying to them about what he had done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.