Print

Print


--- On Tue, 12/2/08, Phil Gasper <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: Phil Gasper <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: U.S. war on drugs has failed, report says
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Tuesday, December 2, 2008, 12:45 PM
> Too many or too few for what or for whom? 

  probaly about rite for people on this list. mass o menace. my view is 1 is 2 many, or else everyone goes.

t.Way too many if
> the goal is a
> rational policy to control crime (see, for instance,
> Jeffrey Reiman, *The
> Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison*:
> http://www.paulsjusticepage.com/reiman.htm) and probably
> too many even if
> the goal is racist scapegoating.
> 
> I cited the huge increase in incarceration rates in
> California since the
> early 1970s. A huge proportion of the increase has been for
> non-violent drug
> offenses. In 2001, the rate in California was 697 per
> 100,000, putting it
> 14th in the US. By contrast, the incarceration rate in
> Western Europe, where
> crime levels (with the exception of homicide) are
> comparable, is less than
> 100 per 100,000. In Britain, which by European standards is
> rather
> draconian, the rate is 139 per 100,000.
> 
> --PG
> 
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 8:38 AM, mart
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> > as for the article, some numbers maybe are missing.  
> california has about
> > 30M people; is 173g prisoners too many or too few?