Slashdot Mirror


Prisons Moving To All-Video Visitation (mic.com)

"A new system called 'video visitation' is replacing in-person jail visits with glitchy, expensive Skype-like video calls," reports Tech.Mic. "It's inhumane, dystopian and actually increases in-prison violence -- but god, it makes money."

Slashdot reader gurps_npc writes: In-person costs a lot to administer, while you can charge people to 'visit' via video conferencing. (Charge as in overcharge -- just like they charge up to $14 a minute for normal, audio only telephone calls). This is new, and the few studies that have been done show that doing this increases violence in the prison -- and it's believed to also increase recidivism. But the companies making a ton on it like that -- repeat customers and all. Of course, the service is horrible, often being full of static and dropped calls -- and the company doesn't help you fix the problem.
Meanwhile, the EFF reports that last year Facebook disabled 53 U.S prisoner and 74 U.K. prisoner accounts at the request of the government, and is urging people to report takedown requests for inmate social media to OnlineCensorship.org.

8 of 277 comments (clear)

  1. No surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    US prisons are a systematic violation of basic human rights. They are barbaric, full of horrific atrocities, and there is no excuse for them.

    1. Re:No surprise by Iamthecheese · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would much rather have the convicted criminals under lock and key than roaming the streets.

      No one is saying prisoners should be let free but this "hard on crime" insanity is actually just hard on criminals, and raises crime rates by turning a guy that made a mistake into a hardened criminal. If you really, truly want safe streets you're going to have to show some compassion.

      --
      If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
    2. Re:No surprise by currently_awake · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For profit prisons have a vested interest in not reforming criminals. They have a vested interest in making money. This achieves both goals.

    3. Re:No surprise by gweihir · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Indeed. "Tough on crime" does not work, or rather it has the opposite of the intended effect. That has been known reliably for a long, long time. Criminals do not expect to be caught, and hence penalties do not figure in their motivation. And then not giving them a good chance to become part of society again after they were caught, just makes the problem much, much worse.

      The cave-man reflex of just applying more violence to anything undesirable makes basically every problem worse, but being cave-men, its proponents are not equipped to even grasp simple statistics that say they are doing it wrong. Incidentally, the same effect is at work with the "War on Drugs" that has created huge crime-cartels and a lot of users that suffer entirely preventable damage due to contaminated drugs or that have to do crime due to artificially and massively inflated prices. Or the "War on Terror" that has created a lot of new terrorists by killing inconceivable numbers of innocent bystanders.

      Applying violence to a problem is about the most base and most stupid thing you can do. The only thing more stupid is to apply more violence when the approach fails.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  2. Yeah, this system is evil. by RyanFenton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Our prison system seems to be turning increasingly evil - as in, willfully and casually harming others on a consistent basis well beyond their charter of stopping harm to others, for their own benefit.

    They're increasingly subverting our political process, in order to take what should arguably be a time of reformation and a path back to society (and improvement of the general welfare), and using is to transform every human into a maximum income machine, including transforming laws to make the process worse. There's occasional noises towards public good in the letter of the rules of these places, but they're getting increasingly privatized and 'efficient' at gathering money.

    I understand the ideal - this is where we throw folks who won't follow the rules, who won't respond to fines, a place where we repay unfairness with unfairness, so that we can remain productive. Which would be a fine ideal too, if it didn't cost taxpayers $60,000-$130,000 a year per person for land,buildings, employees,healthcare, goods, administration, etc.. We're basically paying for a rather large professional army, complete with all the logistics, in order to make a large portion of our population feel bad for the rest of their lives, for the most part.

    It's part of why I've never understood the common Christian conception of Hell - a place of eternal pain, complete with the equivalent of angels who spend their existences making people feel bad for something they can no longer do anything about.

    If the point of this horrible song and dance was to reduce motivation to break rules - then there should be a television in every public space, if not in every home, to show the suffering of rule breakers, to at least justify the lesson that we should be learning from all this suffering. If all these people were paying the cost, for our benefit, then all our children should see their suffering, so all this suffering wouldn't be a waste of both their lives and the time of all the people spending their lives imprisoning them.

    Perhaps we don't because we really are all rule breakers. Most traffic studies I've seen find that the average driver breaks around 4,000 traffic laws every year. Proportionally the same with bike riders and pedestrians. And that's just the easily observable stuff. But we don't really enforce our rules, instead we pay people to selectively enforce them, and prosecute infractions in some of the oddest ways possible. Things like 'discovery processes', armies of paid lawyers, laws changing at the request of lobbyists, special courts, judges owning stakes in other parts of the process, and very strange politics and biases everywhere.

    If the point of the whole game is to pay the least amount of resources, in order to keep the maximum number of people cooperative and productive, then I think everyone would judge that we're doing this the wrong way. There's a LOT of nations to compare against, and we're having worse results than almost all of them.

    The prisons we have now are doing horrible jobs in all regards, and are actively engaged in a process of making things worse. If we're spending all these resources, the cheapest thing to do is to take this large army, and reconcile it with better, more productive, and cheaper goals. It's never going to be cheap or easy, but almost anything is going to be cheaper and easier than the road we're going down now.

    Ryan Fenton

  3. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  4. I actually know a felon by Beeftopia · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, I know a felon, a guy who incarcerated for felony theft. He was a real treacherous shitbag before he went in, but now, he's quite polite (I'm sure he's still quite treacherous but I have no interest in finding out). No more late night parties, his house (yes, there is money in his family, so he has a house) is lights out relatively early in the evening. I think prison had quite the correct effect on this guy. It seems to have deterred him from future criminality.

    Prison should deter people, both those who have committed crimes so they don't want to return, and those who don't with to have a stay in the first place.

    This nonsense about 'everyone is a criminal - you're committing crimes right now' - is nonsense. I haven't seen a shred of evidence to support such a thing (which I how I make decisions on the accuracy of claims).

    If you have a panic attack whenever you see a cop, that would seem to warrant an examination of your own life. Don't ride dirty. Don't have guns, drugs or drug paraphernalia on you or in your car.

    Are there bad cops? Of course. Do they make up more than a tiny minority of cops? No. I haven't seen a lick of evidence to suggest otherwise.

    Lionizing criminals, which I remember in the 70s and 80s only leads to a lot of innocent people suffering. Criminals should be held to account for their actions.

    1. Re:I actually know a felon by imidan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you have a panic attack whenever you see a cop, that would seem to warrant an examination of your own life. Don't ride dirty. Don't have guns, drugs or drug paraphernalia on you or in your car.

      I don't have a panic attack when I see a cop, but I *am* acutely aware that the cops are not my friend. I don't really know what constitutes 'riding dirty'. I don't have guns, drugs, or drug paraphernalia in my car. But if a cop has a notion to fuck up my day and my car because I'm driving through his shitty little town and they make their revenues by making bullshit traffic stops and ginning up cause to search my car and stealing any cash I have through civil forfeiture, there is absolutely nothing I can do about it. I'm completely powerless in that situation, and a lot of the creepy fucks who are attracted to police work get their jollies by taking advantage of that power imbalance. Or maybe they're just corrupt and greedy. Their motivation doesn't matter that much.

      There are plenty of examples of this behavior in news reports. There is no reason to believe it can't happen to me. I mean, here's one from just a few days ago, where the only reason the victims had their money (~$50,000) returned is that they were a Christian band who had raised the money for an orphanage, and that kind of thing makes bad headlines. http://dailysignal.com/2016/04...?