Kates Law

[Vlad]

The House passes Kates Law which provides harsher penalties for convicted felons who return.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/24-house-democrats-side-with-gop-vote-for-kates-law/article/2627546

Shocked that it hasn't been posted yet.
Perhaps for the same reasons for its lack of coverage in the MSM...either too embarrassed to have to report that only 24 democrats voted for this bill...or still affixed to CNN reporting on Trump colluding with the Russians.

Another Trump win halfway there! Needs Senate passage.

[Benton]

Good intentions but largely a waste of time.

States already cannot pay for the massive amount of people we try to keep seperate from society. So what do they do? Early parole, governors grant early release, courts hand out concurrent sentences so they serve less time, etc.

I'll clap when lawmakers figure out a way to keep folks from committing crime. Longer sentences, given the last four decades, are not the answer.

[Goalpost]

I don't think senate passage will happen. 52 Repubs will vote for it. As is now, only 3 Dems will probably vote for it. 60 votes needed to pass. By the way, Pelosi did not vote for it in the house. This is a losing election story for the Dems. It will come back to hurt them.

[Dill]

(07-01-2017, 11:08 AM)Benton Wrote: Good intentions but largely a waste of time.

States already cannot pay for the massive amount of people we try to keep seperate from society. So what do they do? Early parole, governors grant early release, courts hand out concurrent sentences so they serve less time, etc.

I'll clap when lawmakers figure out a way to keep folks from committing crime. Longer sentences, given the last four decades, are not the answer.

This reminds me of the three strikes laws enacted during the Reagan/Meese era, which so greatly expanded prison populations at taxpayer expense, diverting millions of dollars from education.

It is largely symbolic--a "win" for Trump if it actually becomes law, which looks doubtful.

Few people would actually be arrested under this law, and they most would likely be people who crossed the border illegally three times looking for a means to feed their families. Imagine getting 10 years in prison for that.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

Up to 10 years for 3 misdemeanors? That's almost as stupid as mandatory minimums.

[Dill]

(07-01-2017, 02:53 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Up to 10 years for 3 misdemeanors? That's almost as stupid as mandatory minimums.

It's the same penal theory, playing to the same voters.

[HarleyDog]

(07-01-2017, 12:27 PM)Dill Wrote: This reminds me of the three strikes laws enacted during the Reagan/Meese era, which so greatly expanded prison populations at taxpayer expense, diverting millions of dollars from education.

What good is an education when your dead from thugs left out on the street? You could argue education makes the world a safer place, but so does locking up societes scumb. Kind of a catch 22.

[Benton]

(07-01-2017, 04:02 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: What good is an education when your dead from thugs left out on the street? You could argue education makes the world a safer place, but so does locking up societes scumb. Kind of a catch 22.

If reducing violent crime is your goal, re-fund mental healthcare. It will go a lot farther than enacting a law that's mostly going to just cause us to house and feed people who are looking for a way to house and feed people. I've never done the numnumbers, but there would be some serious crime related savings too

[SunsetBengal]

(07-01-2017, 04:02 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: What good is an education when your dead from thugs left out on the street? You could argue education makes the world a safer place, but so does locking up societes scumb. Kind of a catch 22.

They could make prison more grueling, make them work to offset their cost to society.  Simply removing them from society, housing them, and allowing them to socialize with other convicts isn't working.  Prison should be hard, not just for the weak who are at the mercy of the stronger inmates, but in general.  Prison should be a place that people truly don't want to go to.

[HarleyDog]

(07-01-2017, 12:27 PM)Dill Wrote: This reminds me of the three strikes laws enacted during the Reagan/Meese era, which so greatly expanded prison populations at taxpayer expense, diverting millions of dollars from education.

What good is an education when your dead from thugs left out on the street? You could argue education makes the world a safer place, but so does locking up societes scumb. Kind of a catch 22.

[GMDino]

(07-01-2017, 04:02 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: What good is an education when your dead from thugs left out on the street? You could argue education makes the world a safer place, but so does locking up societes scumb. Kind of a catch 22.

(07-01-2017, 07:53 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: What good is an education when your dead from thugs left out on the street? You could argue education makes the world a safer place, but so does locking up societes scumb. Kind of a catch 22.

All seriousness aside education might limit the amount of "thugs" left on the street. 

Nothing will eliminate the need for prisons.  

[Nebuchadnezzar]

If this law saves just one life, is it worth it?

This law is more of a deterrent than to actually put illegal immigrants who commit felonies or three misdemeanors behind bars if they are deported and cross back into the United States.

If this law isn't worth just one life saved then you should be for the death penalty.

[Dill]

(07-01-2017, 07:53 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: What good is an education when your dead from thugs left out on the street? You could argue education makes the world a safer place, but so does locking up societes scumb. Kind of a catch 22.

The number of people left dead from thugs is pretty small, proportionally. And most of the people locked up under three strikes were not violent offenders. At least a third were small time marijuana dealers and users.

Even fewer violent offenders will be locked up under Kate's law.

[Dill]

(07-01-2017, 09:21 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: If this law saves just one life, is it worth it?

This law is more of a deterrent than to actually put illegal immigrants who commit felonies or three misdemeanors behind bars if they are deported and cross back into the United States.

If this law isn't worth just one life saved then you should be for the death penalty.

I'm not for the death penalty, basically for the same reason I am not in favor of Kate's law.

I doubt many of the few Spanish speaking immigrants trapped by this law will understand it as a deterrant. Most will be unaware of it.

A law forbidding the sale of skateboards might save one life.
Whether a law saves one life is not the best way to measure it. We can't know if it will save a life. We can know that it will ruin the lives of people who are just trying to feed their families.  

[Dill]

(07-01-2017, 07:10 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: They could make prison more grueling, make them work to offset their cost to society.  Simply removing them from society, housing them, and allowing them to socialize with other convicts isn't working.  Prison should be hard, not just for the weak who are at the mercy of the stronger inmates, but in general.  Prison should be a place that people truly don't want to go to.

I don't think many people truly want to go to prison. The exceptions would be people who have been there a long time and don't know how to manage their freedom and can't get work on the outside.

I think that making prison more "grueling" hasn't been working. What about rehabilitation? Teach prisoners a vocation so they will have a better chance of surviving on the outside. Wouldn't that reduce recidivism? 

Keeping people in prison is costly. 10 years ago costs averaged about 35 thousand dollars per head. And we lead the world in prison population with over two million now.

[HarleyDog]

(07-01-2017, 10:14 PM)Dill Wrote: I doubt many of the few Spanish speaking immigrants trapped by this law will understand it as a deterrant. Most will be unaware of it.

Sounds like you're suggesting we build a wall?

[Benton]

(07-01-2017, 07:10 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: They could make prison more grueling, make them work to offset their cost to society.  Simply removing them from society, housing them, and allowing them to socialize with other convicts isn't working.  Prison should be hard, not just for the weak who are at the mercy of the stronger inmates, but in general.  Prison should be a place that people truly don't want to go to.

My area covers kentuckys only maximum security prison. I also cover a medium security. combined, they're one of my areas biggest employers. Most of the people who work in prisons will tell you the only way it works is with respect. You treat them like peopl, they follow the rules.

To be blunt, there's not enough profit in what you're suggesting. If you start treating inmates like dirt, you're going to have to triple the staff at most facilities. More than that at for profit prisons. Why? You treat a guy like he's got nothing to lose, he's going to act like he's got nothing to lose. And it's hard enough to find guards now in most states. In my area, the pay starts around $12 an hour.

As far as working, im not sure on state laws. In my area, every county uses jail inmates and prison workers. They work at the landfills, cleaning parks, mowing, etc.

[JustWinBaby]

Another fine bullshit wedge issue. Let's all watch them dance, and then pick our winners.

[ballsofsteel]

Tweety Pie has no idea what Kate's Law is about. He just signs whats put in front of him when Bannon says it will be terrific and make you look good. Tweety Pie thought Kate's Law was Jude Laws sister.