[GCFL-discuss] Pink Sheriff

[gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net]

On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 22:20:45 -0700 gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net writes:
Crime has decreased in Maricopa County since Arpaio was originally
elected sheriff.
We are proud to have this man as sheriff.
Jeanene

Data please... categories of crime, raw numbers, percentages, and
comparison with the crime rates in other counties of the same state, or
other counties of similar economic development and population densities
in any state. You will be less proud of the sadistic SOB the first time
someone in your family ends up in his jail. Don't think it could ever
happen? Some of the highest profile front-page crimes are committed by
people nobody in their high school graduating class would ever have
thought this person would ever be involved in. Much less petty stuff that
sheriff's deal with. There but for the grace of God go I... or you.

Siarlys


Lance, I have had many wonderful camping trips in Boy Scouts also, and in
no way would I ever compare them to being in jail. Nor did I spend six
months to a year living in tents. After a week or three I got home, had
access to a modern bathroom, slept in my own bed, all that kind of good
stuff. 

As to prisoners giving up their rights, that is part true and part highly
dangerous.

Obviously, they have given up their rights to move around freely, to own
firearms, to choose what they are going to eat, to run out to the store
whenever they feel like it, to have playstation nine in their bedroom,
etc. etc. etc.

But also remember that the people in charge of jails and prisons are not
perfect little angels. In fact, most of them come from the same social
and economic backgrounds as some of the nastiest prisoners. (Not all, I
think someone in this discussion group has worked in a prison, but many).
If you simply say, prisoners have no rights, then whenever a particularly
sadistic guard (its an attractice job for a sadist to apply for) subjects
a relatively quiet prisoner who is just trying to follow the rules and do
their time, to treatment nobody should have to go through, there is no
recourse because, you have already said, prisoners gave up ALL their
rights. Whenever some imperfect human being is in a position of
authority, there must always be some process for review and appeal. They
could be wrong. Some percentage of the time, they will be wrong -- even
the best of us are wrong sometimes. Oliver Cromwell exhorted the British
parliament once "Gentlemen, I beseech ye by the bowels of Christ to
consider that ye may be wrong." Does Sheriff Arpaio have the humility to
do that? If not, then he is unqualified to hold a position of authority.
Bottom line: people in government will always give voters an attractive
reason for what they want to do: they usually have others reasons they
aren't telling us about.

Siarlys

P.S. The tents are not necessarily a big issue. Being in a tent with some
breeze blowing can be better in a hot climate than being in a building
that retains heat all night and becomes dangerously stuffy inside. But I
would have some shade at the hottest times of the day also. We don't have
to provide TVs and cable, we do need to organize prisons so there is some
activity occupying the time, and some of it should be educational or
modestly recreational, not only grinding labor. Remember, these inmates
are going to be moving back into your neighborhood at the end of their
sentence. Give them enough respect that they are able to respect you when
they come home.



Dave:

I did not read the praise of Sheriff Arpaio ten years ago, I just
received it by email two days ago. Further, it could not have been
written ten years ago, because we were not occupying Iraq ten years ago.
Or maybe the original writer got something screwed up, but I commented as
I received it.

Siarlys
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.gcfl.net/pipermail/gcfl-discuss/attachments/20050614/ea79149d/attachment.htm