Educating Inmates

I think it's a great idea. When these people come out of our prisons no better than they were when they went in, with the additional tag of "ex-con" attached to them, what do you expect?

If we can at least let them also add the tag of "college educated", they (and by extension, society) will at least stand a chance. And for those that aren't suited to a traditional college education, we can help provide them with a welding certificate, a crane license, or even something as simple as a CDL. Give them something to hang their hat on when they get out. Something they didn't have when they went in. And give any prospective employer a reason to think they just might be willing and able to achieve at something if given the opportunity. Not only will they be better off, but so will we.

And for all of you who have the typical knee-jerk reaction of feeling so put upon, do the math. Based on Jack's numbers, if we assume a 5 year average sentence, if only 1 in 15 "repeat offenders" is kept out of the system by this, we come out ahead.

'We' all come out ahead, 'we' the efficiency experts who continue to increase our corporate profits by eliminating jobs? 'We' the good people in 'our' gated private country clubs who immolate and mollify the masses with destructive programs that have a pretty face?

"Hey, Tyrone, be a good little prisoner, do your book work, and when you get out you'll be qualified for a position. We will have cut that position by then to satisfy the stockholders, but look on the bright side, you'll have learned something!"

"Hey, Jose, check this out! We're raising your minimum wage up to Ten Dollar an hour! Double digits, my man, the American dream! You've made it! Now we're going to raise the price of everything to pay for it, because we're damn sure not going to pay for it ourselves, so by the time you get a gallon of milk and a loaf of bread twice a month it'll mostly be gone. But the sour looks and nasty attitude your boss Linda, whose $13 per hour to put up with your shit will remain at $13 an hour for a long time because of your raise, that will never be gone. You can enjoy that forever."

"We"'s an asshole. Fuck "we".

I think it's a great idea. When these people come out of our prisons no better than they were when they went in, with the additional tag of "ex-con" attached to them, what do you expect?

If we can at least let them also add the tag of "college educated", they (and by extension, society) will at least stand a chance. And for those that aren't suited to a traditional college education, we can help provide them with a welding certificate, a crane license, or even something as simple as a CDL. Give them something to hang their hat on when they get out. Something they didn't have when they went in. And give any prospective employer a reason to think they just might be willing and able to achieve at something if given the opportunity. Not only will they be better off, but so will we.

And for all of you who have the typical knee-jerk reaction of feeling so put upon, do the math. Based on Jack's numbers, if we assume a 5 year average sentence, if only 1 in 15 "repeat offenders" is kept out of the system by this, we come out ahead. Originally Posted by Doove

Are you assuming because they are educated they wont go back to their life of crime again?

What are the percentages that they commit crimes again and do what got them in jail in the first place?

I don't think educating them for free is going to fix them when they get out.

The first thing they do is go back to where they were, friends, etc so im not sold.

I think it's a great idea. When these people come out of our prisons no better than they were when they went in, with the additional tag of "ex-con" attached to them, what do you expect?

If we can at least let them also add the tag of "college educated", they (and by extension, society) will at least stand a chance. And for those that aren't suited to a traditional college education, we can help provide them with a welding certificate, a crane license, or even something as simple as a CDL. Give them something to hang their hat on when they get out. Something they didn't have when they went in. And give any prospective employer a reason to think they just might be willing and able to achieve at something if given the opportunity. Not only will they be better off, but so will we.

And for all of you who have the typical knee-jerk reaction of feeling so put upon, do the math. Based on Jack's numbers, if we assume a 5 year average sentence, if only 1 in 15 "repeat offenders" is kept out of the system by this, we come out ahead. Originally Posted by Doove

Typical knee jerk reaction? I'd like to think its more of a knowledgeable response.

There are a few cost effective interventions already in place that cut down on criminal activity. Jail and prison diversion programs along with drug courts, while available in some areas should be state-wide. These have been proven to be cost effective and lower the rate of re-offending. A third of those incarcerated are mentally ill. If there was adequate mental health services available in communities, we would see a huge drop in prison populations. Our three strikes and out rule, especially when imposed on non-violent offenders is a really bad policy. All less costly for both society and budgets when compared to educating crooks.

Until we address the sky-rocketing price of an education for those that haven't been imprisoned, I think this is a foolish idea. At the current rate schools are increasing tuition, very few will be able to afford anything but a high school degree in just a few short years. Con-Ed is much more of a reward for criminal behavior than a humanitarian initiative. I would rather see resources used to keep people out of the criminal justice system before they start committing crimes that lead to lengthy and expensive prison sentences.

I don't really have a strong feeling either way. It does make some sense to do , but how about some unintended consequences?

Maybe it does result in fewer repeat incarcerations .... because now that they are educated , they are smart enough to not get caught. In that case, it just means fewer prison sentences, but paradoxically , more crime.

Or how about these educated prisoners now change from purse snatching and auto theft to "smarter crimes" like identity theft and white collar crime , which are more damaging than the crimes they did before becoming educated.

Maybe that's just silly talk, but those kinds of things come to my mind as I cogitate over how hard it is to change a person's nature.

Are you assuming because they are educated they wont go back to their life of crime again? Originally Posted by bjwstw

At a rate better than 1 in 15? Or even 1 in 10, if that's what would be required to make it justifiable on a cost/benefit basis? Damn right i am.

What are the percentages that they commit crimes again and do what got them in jail in the first place?

If they come out with a diploma or some sort of marketable skill, i'll bet it'd be less than 93%.

I don't think educating them for free is going to fix them when they get out.

It won't fix all of them, no. But if it fixes enough to be cost effective, then the only reasons for not doing it are.........what again?

It won't fix all of them, no. But if it fixes enough to be cost effective, then the only reasons for not doing it are.........what again? Originally Posted by Doove

This comment is directed at all those who see this as a viable answer. Not just you Doove.
Think about this: If education is going to "fix" things then educate them BEFORE they commit crimes and end up in the corrections system to begin with. Education should be a preemptive measure to cut down crime, not a reactive afterthought. I say offer free or low cost education / training to EVERYONE in this state and let those who do the crime do the time. I'd even go as far to say we need to get rid of all the perks in the jails such as cable TV, weight rooms, etc., etc., . . . . It's supposed to be a friggin jail. Not a secure hotel.

It might be satisfying to think of prisons primarily as places of punishment where we "lock them up and throw away the keys", but, except for those serving life terms, most prisoners have to be released at some point, and it does not do society any good if 40% of former inmates commit more crime and return to prison within three years.

We desperately need some good ideas to revamp our failing prison system which results in so many revolving-door repeat offenders.

It might be satisfying to think of prisons primarily as places of punishment where we "lock them up and throw away the keys" Originally Posted by jackfengshui

Jack, THEY ARE places of punishment. That's their primary function.

, but, except for those serving life terms, most prisoners have to be released at some point, and it does not do society any good if 40% of former inmates commit more crimes and return to prison within three years. Originally Posted by jackfengshui

I'll repeat as you've missed my point. Free education for CURRENT inmates may cut down on the recidivism rate but does absolutely nothing to keep NEW criminals from committing crimes and entering the system which is where the viscous cycle starts. Add the fact it is unfair to anyone who is a law abiding citizen and has to personally pay for their education. Educating those already in prison is a REACTIVE measure and the end result may keep some from returning to prison but does absolutely nothing to stop a NEW crop of inmates. If education is "thee fix" then educate PRIOR to the crimes being committed.
You need to stop the cycle BEFORE IT STARTS. Not as an afterthought once they're behind bars. This issue needs a PREEMPTIVE answer, not the REACTIVE one being considered.

We desperately need some good ideas to revamp our failing prison system which results in so many revolving-door repeat offenders. Originally Posted by jackfengshui

You're right in the fact that the prison system is failing. Our prisons have become nothing more than secure hotels and resorts. When was the last time anyone making comments here paid a visit to any of our correctional facilities ? Our prisons living conditions are a step up from what most convicts are use to. For them, it's no big deal if they get convicted and thrown back in prison. It's an upgrade for them. There's no "FEAR" of going to jail anymore. That "FEAR" needs to be reintroduced as a deterrent.

You need to stop the cycle BEFORE IT STARTS. Originally Posted by rke324

No argument from me there. Unfortunately, even if (and that's a big "if"} we could stop future cycles, we still need to do something about the current "cycle" which has long started and has no sign of going away.

Just as I expected, very few minds have been changed in this thread, but at least we have had a forthright airing of different points of view about this thorny social problem.

There exist processes that should not be decided solely on a cost/benefit analysis. I know some will call me insane for suggesting that, and in general all the decisions will be made primarily based on personal gain. But if we are to discuss what is truly best for the most people, maybe we can leave the profit & loss statement behind.

Educating criminals merely because it will cost us less is inhumane. It is deciding how to treat humans based on dollars. Incarcerated criminals are what they are for earning incarceration. The justice system will need some fixing too, but the fact is before becoming imprisoned one chance was lost.

There are aspects of society being under-addressed that we can use our prison system to address, as in work inmates can do to support society while incarcerated. We can spend less money on them while incarcerated, and we can create jobs for them when they get out, without giving them a product free men have to pay for.

I dare suggest it is the cost/benefit analysis that created this mess.

If we could reduce the number of revolving-door criminals (and educating inmates may or may not be one solution), we will save taxpayers' money and, more importantly, make society safer. Anyone who does not care about the first benefit can just consider the second.

Is this going to be like the Roch HS teacher that was teaching the kids how to run a midnight auto parts store a few years back? just askin

Jack, THEY ARE places of punishment. That's their primary function.



I'll repeat as you've missed my point. Free education for CURRENT inmates may cut down on the recidivism rate but does absolutely nothing to keep NEW criminals from committing crimes and entering the system which is where the viscous cycle starts. Add the fact it is unfair to anyone who is a law abiding citizen and has to personally pay for their education. Educating those already in prison is a REACTIVE measure and the end result may keep some from returning to prison but does absolutely nothing to stop a NEW crop of inmates. If education is "thee fix" then educate PRIOR to the crimes being committed.
You need to stop the cycle BEFORE IT STARTS. Not as an afterthought once they're behind bars. This issue needs a PREEMPTIVE answer, not the REACTIVE one being considered.



You're right in the fact that the prison system is failing. Our prisons have become nothing more than secure hotels and resorts. When was the last time anyone making comments here paid a visit to any of our correctional facilities ? Our prisons living conditions are a step up from what most convicts are use to. For them, it's no big deal if they get convicted and thrown back in prison. It's an upgrade for them. There's no "FEAR" of going to jail anymore. That "FEAR" needs to be reintroduced as a deterrent.

Originally Posted by rke324

I did a month ago, and I will agree with what you said some of it. Shit, he knew more about outside the jail then I did, I don't turn the news on that much, he has nothing else to do, free time, but he does read a lot.. You are learning while you read, so in essence some education being done, now to his credit doove might have some stats in his favor its a tough call, I also think fixing the inner city now before the crimes start get em young get em educated, we need to throw money there and fix the schools.

Educating criminals merely because it will cost us less is inhumane. It is deciding how to treat humans based on dollars. Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

That's pretty out there, but ok.

Fact is, if it works based on a cost/benefit analysis, it's only because it works. So can we at least agree that treating humans based on what makes society safer is....humane? In the extreme?