KCRag Forum

yeliab wrote:

WSPanic wrote:You can talk equitable societies and unicorns all you want - we still need to maintain our crumbling infrastructure and do what we can to keep US prisoners from suffering through third world squalor on a daily basis. I don't think anyone disagrees with you about our justice system - but I think most here feel we need to do something about the current situation (new prison or major updates to this one) while we work towards a solution for the future.

Unicorns... lol. You realize there are more equitable societies within the US and abroad? My personal "unicorn" is prison abolition and reevaluating the concepts of punishment and reintegration altogether, but I realize that is not immediately realistic (though it is an idea that had a significant amount of support in the 70s and is seeing a resurgence in the discussion around prisons). And most of what you seem to think is my unicorn involves getting prisoners from suffering from 3rd world conditions by reducing incarceration (though I wonder how much you've thought the third world conditions of prisoners unrelated to to this conversation about the correctional facility since none of what I've said is particularly novel).

Everything that I've brought up are things that we absolutely should be thinking about now as we are in the process of decision-making. If our goal is to reduce incarceration long term, that is a long term project that requires long term thinking and planning, especially when it comes to political feasibility. Right now, there are people in there waiting for years to go to trial, which puts additional pressure on the infrastructure because its over-crowded. I don't think that coupling policy to reduce pre-trial and non-violent offender incarcerations with either building a smaller prison or updating the current prison to house a more manageable level of individuals is unrealistic.

Curious to hear your suggestions though.

That may be a goal for you and I, but we aren't to that point as a society. While not ideal, our current way of adding new prisons does keep prisoners from suffering the kind of indignities outlined in the original article. My suggestion is to work within the current framework to help alleviate current issues, while at the same time working on reframing the debate. Because, if you've paying attention the past 200 years, you know the overall goal of our penal system has NOTHING to do with reducing incarceration long term.

Or, you know... just kill them all.

WSPanic wrote:My suggestion is to work within the current framework to help alleviate current issues, while at the same time working on reframing the debate. Because, if you've paying attention the past 200 years, you know the overall goal of our penal system has NOTHING to do with reducing incarceration long term.

What, specifically, are you suggesting when you say working within the framework and alleviating current issues? People in prison (and those most likely to be at risk of going to prison) do not have the luxury of incrementalism and maybe this is where we differ, but I don't think that the current system can be reformed because it is based on exploitation of labor and racism. For instance:

There is a prison right in South Carolina (I believe) whose water is under a boil order and rather than paying for bottled water, they simply refuse to provide adequate water to the inmates. Earlier this summer in St. Louis, inmates suffered through a heat wave of 107 degrees with no A/C. Women have fought wildfires and died in CA for less than $2 an hour. Inmates are being held months in excess of their sentences in our nations capital, and have not reported it out of fear of retaliation.

We are already vastly over-incarcerating and over-policing people for the purposes of profit for the prison industrial complex, corporations needing cheap labor, and politicians, as well as the "social benefit" of cleaning up the streets from what are deemed undesirables rather than addressing their social issues (and putting them out of sight, out of mind). If you've noticed, the options they've currently laid out in articles about the issue do not include building a smaller prison, or looking at the root causes of crime including over-policing/incarceration, or diverting resources towards those root causes -- reducing the incarcerated population doesn't even seem to be on their radar. I think we have to take opportunities to take a firm stance when they arise. I actually can't think of a better time to take advantage of making "radical" suggestions than the present climate where people are less trustful of authority/power structures, smaller governments are cash strapped, and we've demonstrated that the state can not manage that volume of inmates. Again, perhaps our opinions differ in the regard of reform, but even if I believed reform were possible, in negotiation one should always ask for more than they think they will receive, because they might be surprised.

"Does the thought of such an archaic death keep you from committing a crime that would lead to such a death?"

Considering the number of people who have been executed and on death row I don't think the idea of a death penalty enters their minds.

I love how replacing a county jail turns into a debate on the death penalty here.

The answer is that the jail is disgusting and going to continue to cost money from lawsuits. We need a jail, it's cheaper to build new, so we should build a new one somewhere.

/Thread

WoodDraw wrote:I love how replacing a county jail turns into a debate on the death penalty here.

The answer is that the jail is disgusting and going to continue to cost money from lawsuits. We need a jail, it's cheaper to build new, so we should build a new one somewhere.

/Thread

I wonder what further use the building could be put to? It's a substantial building and the lack of real windows doesn't really give it much use as an office or an apartment building.

Maybe a Data Center?

Maybe a jail?

Years ago there was talk of building a regional jail complex. Maybe the time has come to consider this option again.

Jackson County is moving quickly to build a new jail. Should voters have a say?

Jackson County is moving quickly to design and build a new jail.

A framework for constructing a new facility is now circulating at the courthouse. A new jail, costing roughly $180 million or more, would be built on land east of I-435 near Truman Road. Construction could begin as early as next summer, according to a timetable distributed to county legislators last week.

The existing downtown jail — the site of ongoing dysfunction, violence and scandal — would eventually be torn down.

...

https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/edit ... 10405.html

Maybe the Drury Inn can take it over. Their hotels are designed to look like jails already.

The existing downtown jail — the site of ongoing dysfunction, violence and scandal — would eventually be torn down

We should keep it. Not for any sort of significance, but because we could fill it with all the junk clogging up the bryant building and oak tower. It'd be perfect, probably.

LastGentleman, that is actually a very good idea. The jail would be a good server hotel, and it would save having to demolish it, and create more rubble in landfill. Then free up the Bryant Building and Oak Tower for housing conversion.

The other option would be to place any future General Administration Building on that site instead of the one between Charlotte and Holmes in the East Village. That structure will probably not be street-friendly anyway.

Taxes raised: http://www.examiner.net/news/20180925/j ... jail-needs

It seems somewhat ridiculous to me to move the jail to a less transit-accessible area. Much like the DMV move out of the State Office Building and onto Cleaver, it would seem to put additional burden on those least equipped to bear it.

Somewhat?

Jackson county government should be dissolved. It’s a fucking cesspool.

Just the county?

chingon wrote: ↑Wed Sep 26, 2018 4:18 pm Jackson county government should be dissolved. It’s a fucking cesspool.

The current county charter dates to 2010 and has an automatic mandatory review every 10 years at the longest.

So there's a process to get changes to county government. A good commission would invite the media to their proceedings.