Reply
Wed 8 Jun, 2005 08:23 am
Some inmates are placed in protective housing units because their crime, their fame, or the fact that they have enemies statewide, means their safety would be jeopardized elsewhere. Some of these inmates are convicted murderers like Charles Manson. Should these sorts of inmates be treated differently? Should we protect murderers or rapists? Where do we draw the line on protecting the lives of convicted criminals?
In a civilized society, we are bound to protect all citizens regardless of notoriety. We may find the deed offensive, but are we to throw them to the wolves? Thus, making society no better than the criminal? Even Jesus hated the sin but loved the sinner.
And where should we put Michael Jackson?
Synonymph wrote:And where should we put Michael Jackson?
I saw on the news this morning that they already have a specific cell ready for him (if he is found guily) where he will be watched and logged every 15 minutes and will have video surveillance as they consider his a suicide threat if he is incarcerated.
Passive suicide by dehydration and anorexia.
You don't think he'd do just fine in General Population?
You are right Intrepid, but I still find it hard to spend any extra resources, whether it be time, money or simple effort, to protect some one that has acted and in many of these cases would still act evil.
Symonymph - that was what brought up my thought - the Michael Jackson case - he would be put in a similar resource as Charles Manson.
I believe it is much safer for prison guards to have all the bad apples stored in one barrel.
If Targets of Violence are housed among the violent the guards are also put at risk.
Supposedly Michael Jackson hasn't made contingent plans for his children in the event he is incarcerated. The older two could revert over to Debbie Rowe, but what about Blanket? Does he have a mother? Is Blanket a sign of the Apocalypse; was he the first baby born after the guff was emptied of souls?
Unfortunately, little Blanket is still with his father. Hopefully he won't be dangled over more balconies anytime soon.
Being put in a protected housing area is necessary to assure some inmates' safety. The Department Of Corrections is obligated to provide for the security of all inmates in their custody.
Some inmates might also jeopardize the security of the institution if they were placed in the general population. They might cause fights, even between other inmates. They need to be in restricted/protective housing just to make things easier for the officers.
Being in protected housing, particularly over a very long period of time, isn't always an advantage. It is much more restricted and isolated, so one has less opportunities for certain kinds of recreation and socialization. Since there isn't much to do in jail to begin with, that kind of isolation and boredom can be difficult to tolerate.