Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2009 8:12:33 GMT -6
Correctional Officers face danger of being murdered every day by these SOBs. We’re told that Death Row Inmates are a very real and continuing threat to Correctional Officers. It’s insisted we must kill them and kill them faster to reduce this threat. Lynne says ‘cry me a river’ and ‘COs know the risk and are there by choice’ and it’s taken to mean (or deliberately misconstrued to mean) she couldn’t care less about COs who’ve become murder victims, when in fact, she’s not referring to murder victims at all, but the (supposed) danger. I’ll bet some, probably many, pros knew that all along. Sometimes I wonder if the balk is over the insensitivity or over being asked to actually support what you spout. Sure, there are inherent risks to being a correctional officer, as with ANY job choice. “The walls of the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial holds over 17,500 names of fallen law enforcers. It contains the names of 528 correctional officers who have died in the line of duty. The first of those fatalities was William Bullard, a Missouri corrections professional who was beaten to death during an escape attempt on June 14, 1841…
Nationwide, there are more than 200,000 correctional officers currently serving today in local jails, state prisons and federal penitentiaries… There are roughly 8,000 assaults on correctional officers and security staff each year… In the past 30 years alone, more than 200 correctional officers have died in the line of duty. About one-quarter of them were stabbed to death.”Shocking. Horrific. … 8,000 assaults yearly in well over 4,000 prisons and jails and penitentiaries. Over a 30 year period, 200 COs perished in the line of duty ~ that’s 6.6 occupational (or ‘on the job’) injuries to COs leading to death per year in total, or 3.3 deaths per 100,000 workers, per year. We’re made to think that COs have the most dangerous jobs, and not to make light of that, but gimme a break, cry me a river, and whine in someone else’s direction ~ There are many occupations that are more dangerous: Fishing topped the list of ‘Most dangerous jobs’ in 2007 with 111 ‘on the job’ deaths per 100,000 workers, followed by logging with 86 per 100,000. Next dangerous jobs were aircraft pilots and flight engineers, then iron and steel workers, followed by farmers and ranchers, roofers, electrical power line installers and repairers, drivers, sales workers, truck drivers, refuse and recycling collectors, police and sheriff patrol officers. This makes up the ‘top 10’. Add another 10 or so ~ waste management, construction laborers, taxi drivers and chauffeurs, fire fighters, agricultural workers, grounds maintenance workers, operating engineers, construction equipment operators, electricians, workers in drinking places, the self employed, security guards and gaming surveillance officers. And so on. In fact, almost ALL jobs are more dangerous than is the job of a Correctional Officer who works the Row, since the last time a death row inmate killed a CO was in 1980, when Officer Richard Burke was sadly killed in the line of duty. So, yeah, I’m (still) thinking, ‘cry me a river’… not (and never was) at any murder victim, but in response to those of you who would have us believe COs (especially those working with DR inmates) have THE most dangerous jobs, that we MUST execute murderers to protect COs, and if we really care about COs we'll do it faster. I mean, the way some folks talk, you’d think COs are being slaughtered by DR inmates and other murderers and violent offenders often, daily even. ‘Scare’ tactics, maybe, to get those stupid (and obviously gullible) antis to ‘get it’. Or at least, to show how uncaring and callous antis are. And, when asked why it’s allowed to be so unsafe, the answer is to throw up their hands and pretend like feeding them finger-food would be unconstitutional, and to blame antis, when the truth is that they’re exaggerating the danger COs are in. Just a glance at the statistics and one realizes it’s no wonder the state’s not all that concerned about COs safety. They couldn’t care less about those in far more dangerous positions, some of which could (also) be made safer than they are. Why would they wanna make COs safer, when statistically and comparatively, it’s a position that’s, well, not too unsafe regardless of the perceived (and real) danger. Yeah, yeah ~ you’re probably thinking ‘ya dumb bytch ~ we’re talking murder here. Murder is different than just the danger of dying on the job’. Okay. To which I’ll just say ‘Kay, you might want to rethink your job choice considering YOU are in more danger of being murdered than is a Correctional Officer’ ~ particularly one that works with the deemed 'worst of the worst'. And, you aren't alone, not by a longshot. www.nleomf.com/TheMemorial/memorial.htmwww.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/CFOI_Rates_2007.pdfwww.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cftb0224.pdfwww.apbweb.com/officer-down-news-menu-26/787-2007-181-officers-made-the-ultimate-sacrifice-.html
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2009 9:32:45 GMT -6
Finally, a voice of reason in a sea of clamoring voices who would mislead us into thinking that CO's have it the worst and it just is not true.
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 25, 2009 9:37:39 GMT -6
"probably?" ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2009 10:46:15 GMT -6
In 2007, there were 610 job related homicides.
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 25, 2009 10:52:11 GMT -6
In 2007, there were 610 job related homicides. You said it, not me.
|
|
|
Post by Lisa on Jan 25, 2009 10:53:46 GMT -6
There are many occupations that are more dangerous: Fishing topped the list of ‘Most dangerous jobs’ in 2007 with 111 ‘on the job’ deaths per 100,000 workers, followed by logging with 86 per 100,000. Next dangerous jobs were aircraft pilots and flight engineers, then iron and steel workers, followed by farmers and ranchers, roofers, electrical power line installers and repairers, drivers, sales workers, truck drivers, refuse and recycling collectors, police and sheriff patrol officers. This makes up the ‘top 10’. Add another 10 or so ~ waste management, construction laborers, taxi drivers and chauffeurs, fire fighters, agricultural workers, grounds maintenance workers, operating engineers, construction equipment operators, electricians, workers in drinking places, the self employed, security guards and gaming surveillance officers. And so on. So? We can do very little to prevent those deaths, unless we can prevent all fires, people stop eating fish, and their bowels stop moving. But we can kill people who like to kill, and IMO, we should. What's the point in keeping them alive, really? If we're going to live in constant fear of what they might do, I don't get it. How many inmates serving LWOP or life have murdered prison employees or non-violent offenders? The number is much higher than the number of DR inmates who have killed again. The reason DR inmates rarely murder CO's is because security is MUCH, MUCH tighter on death row than in general population. This is precisely why future dangerousness is a factor in Texas. It allows juries to decide which capital murderers are more likely to kill again behind bars and which ones aren't. The ones that are get the death penalty, the ones that aren't get LWOP. As far as you being "deliberately misconstrued," at least by me? Maybe you'd like to believe that, and you're entitled to believe whatever you wish, but you're absolutely, 100% wrong. This was hashed and rehashed. You said what you said. You then explained what you "meant." You even admitted that you should have chosen your words more carefully. On that, we agree.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2009 11:34:05 GMT -6
Wow you sound just like a former poster who has a scumpal on death row. The person I am referring to took her son to see the love of her life on death row, perhaps he needed a role model. Finally, a voice of reason in a sea of clamoring voices who would mislead us into thinking that CO's have it the worst and it just is not true.
|
|
|
Post by PIP on Jan 25, 2009 12:20:40 GMT -6
How many inmates serving LWOP or life have murdered prison employees or non-violent offenders? The number is much higher than the number of DR inmates who have killed again. Can you back this up with some real numbers? I'd like to see them. Not to be a smart-a$$, but because I think it illustrates an important point if it is true. The ones that are get the death penalty, the ones that aren't get LWOP. This one too. And how about the murderers who don't get LWOP? I think starting with the ones that do would be a step in the right direction, however, those that don't I think would be just as telling to look at.
|
|
|
Post by PIP on Jan 25, 2009 12:21:38 GMT -6
Wow you sound just like a former poster who has a scumpal on death row. The person I am referring to took her son to see the love of her life on death row, perhaps he needed a role model. Finally, a voice of reason in a sea of clamoring voices who would mislead us into thinking that CO's have it the worst and it just is not true. I thought Cheffie hated Lynne?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2009 12:41:16 GMT -6
I have no idea. I don't care who is friends with who, Chef is banned from this site and continues to try to get on here. Wow you sound just like a former poster who has a scumpal on death row. The person I am referring to took her son to see the love of her life on death row, perhaps he needed a role model. I thought Cheffie hated Lynne?
|
|
|
Post by phatkat on Jan 25, 2009 12:45:35 GMT -6
How many inmates serving LWOP or life have murdered prison employees or non-violent offenders? The number is much higher than the number of DR inmates who have killed again. Looking at these two statements would lead a person to believe that the juries aren't too good at predicting future dangerousness after all. *Edited to fix quotation mishap. Whoops.
|
|
|
Post by PIP on Jan 25, 2009 12:56:50 GMT -6
How many inmates serving LWOP or life have murdered prison employees or non-violent offenders? The number is much higher than the number of DR inmates who have killed again. {quote]The reason DR inmates rarely murder CO's is because security is MUCH, MUCH tighter on death row than in general population. This is precisely why future dangerousness is a factor in Texas. It allows juries to decide which capital murderers are more likely to kill again behind bars and which ones aren't. The ones that are get the death penalty, the ones that aren't get LWOP. Looking at these two statements would lead a person to believe that the juries aren't too good at predicting future dangerousness after all.[/quote] Great minds. ;D
|
|
|
Post by PIP on Jan 25, 2009 12:58:14 GMT -6
I have no idea. I don't care who is friends with who, Chef is banned from this site and continues to try to get on here. I thought Cheffie hated Lynne? I don't care either... it was just a fun way to let you know I knew who you were talking about is all. Gone yet?
|
|
|
Post by Lisa on Jan 25, 2009 12:59:06 GMT -6
Can you back this up with some real numbers? I'd like to see them. Not to be a smart-a$$, but because I think it illustrates an important point if it is true. You want me to back up my opinion that those serving LWOP or Life have killed behind bars in greater numbers than those on DR? Why don't you waste your time doing the research, instead of asking me to waste mine? ;D This seems obvious to me. First, there's more of them. Second, the security isn't as tight in general population. IMO, the point it illustrates is that security is much, much tighter on DR. This also seems obvious to me. Huh? Here's what I wrote: "This is precisely why future dangerousness is a factor in Texas. It allows juries to decide which capital murderers are more likely to kill again behind bars and which ones aren't. The ones that are get the death penalty, the ones that aren't get LWOP." Murderers convicted of capital murder in Texas are sentenced to death or LWOP. There's been no other option since 2005. Evidence of "future dangerousness" is presented to the jury during the sentencing phase at trial, and the jury then decides whether the evidence holds weight or not. If the jury finds there's enough evidence that "future dangerousness" exists, only then can a capital murderer be sentenced to death. If not, a convicted capital murderer is sentenced to LWOP. That's just a fact. Wish all murderers received at least that much, but what about them?
|
|
|
Post by GlennF on Jan 25, 2009 14:18:29 GMT -6
Here's one way to prevent any trouble: And no, not meaning the spoiled one who was spat at in the face!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2009 15:52:26 GMT -6
So? We can do very little to prevent those deaths, unless we can prevent all fires, people stop eating fish, and their bowels stop moving. So, they’re work related deaths, much as deaths of COs are work related. Which deaths do you cry over and which ones, not so much? I guess there’s not much we can do about all the armed robberies that wind up taking the lives of many on the job ~ except maybe insist that we ensure that businesses and stores follow OSHA guidelines for safety, make the punishments for firestarters greater, stop using electricity, and instead of fish start eating our refuse while storing our money under our mattresses. Likewise, you can't prevent all 4 to 6 homicides per year of COs unless you want to start killing all violent offenders. Non-violent offenders? What are they doing with LWOP prisoners and lifers? Far as COs, well, of course it’s higher considering the number of DR inmates who’ve killed COs in recent years ~ the last 29 anyway ~ is zero. Still, I don't know how many of the few COs killed per year are killed by lifers. But, let’s look at 2007 CO casualties as an example: Senior Corrections Officer Smith died of complications from injuries caused when he fell from a transport vehicle. Death, not murder. Deputy Sheriff David Gwin suffered a fatal heart attack after being assaulted while trying to place an inmate in a lock-up cell. Deputy Sheriff Paul Rein was shot while transporting a prisoner (who was not a murderer) to court. CO Stephen Anderson was killed when an inmate overpowered him, took his gun, and fatally shot him. Susan Canfield was killed during an attempt escape by two inmates during an outdoor work detail with 70 other inmates and 7 correctional officers. Elizabeth Franklin died of injuries sustained when she fell from a tower. Death, not murder. Of 6 Correctional Officers who died 'on the job' 2 were not homicides. Of the 4 remaining deaths at least 1 was not by a murderer, which leaves 3. So, somewhere between 0 to 3 were murdered by (possible) murderers serving less than a death sentence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2009 15:54:18 GMT -6
Wow you sound just like a former poster who has a scumpal on death row. The person I am referring to took her son to see the love of her life on death row, perhaps he needed a role model. I thought Cheffie hated Lynne? Yeah, last I checked.
|
|
|
Post by Lisa on Jan 25, 2009 16:19:14 GMT -6
So, they’re work related deaths... Unavoidable work related deaths, and it saddens me when they occur. Avoidable work related deaths. An executed murderer can't murder a CO, but a LWOPer has a lifetime to get 'er done. Whoa, I wouldn't say "Cry me a river" in response to any death. That was your mistake, not mine. Beats me, but they are often housed together, work together, eat together, play dominoes with each other, screw each other, watch TV together, along with many other activities. Should they be together? Not in my opinion, but resources are limited, and they're going to be more limited in the very near future.
|
|
|
Post by gman on Jan 25, 2009 17:36:27 GMT -6
Correctional Officers face danger of being murdered every day by these SOBs. ... snip The protection argument has never been strong because we can never be completely safe no matter what we do. We can make ourselves saf-er of course, but so many of these 'saf-er' ideas are agenda driven. This is one of them and you are right to keep harping on about it. Or should that be harpying?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2009 18:56:11 GMT -6
So, they’re work related deaths... Unavoidable work related deaths, and it saddens me when they occur. Are you suggesting all work related deaths but those ones caused by inmates who kill COs are 'unavoidable'? Yes, avoidable. Except the accidents that occur ‘in the line of duty’, and except those POS who are violent but not (yet) murderers. Shall we off all those who might pose a threat to COs? Beats you and says you. In CA, there are 5 levels of security, level 5 being DR and SHU prisoners, I believe. Level 4 is where we house our ‘worst of the worst’ we don’t intend to off. From what I understand, this is where we house our LWOP prisoners, lifers, and other violent offenders. I can’t imagine too many states throwing everyone together for the block party you suggest. In answer to an earlier question, I did find this bit of info ~ according to BJS, in 2002 the prison murder rate was 4 per 100,000, less than most DP states, including yours and mine. There were almost 3,000 deaths in state prisons. Fewer than 50 of those deaths were homicides.
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 25, 2009 20:19:51 GMT -6
Beats you and says you. In CA, there are 5 levels of security, level 5 being DR and SHU prisoners, I believe. Level 4 is where we house our ‘worst of the worst’ we don’t intend to off. From what I understand, this is where we house our LWOP prisoners, lifers, and other violent offenders. I can’t imagine too many states throwing everyone together for the block party you suggest. I'm afraid you're wrong, Lynne. Level 4 security is earned (as it were) by misconduct in prison. General pop has many lifers and LWOPers. Bull could fill you in on that, as I imagine he will. Gee, I wonder why? Lynne, frankly, your conclusions and indifference are beginning to border on the despicable. You're beginning to sound like the whiners on PTO.
|
|
|
Post by Lisa on Jan 25, 2009 20:25:03 GMT -6
Are you suggesting all work related deaths but those ones caused by inmates who kill COs are 'unavoidable'? Of course not, but I think you're comparing accidental deaths with intentional acts of homicide a little too much for my taste. The only thing the two share in common is someone died as a result. Not unless they've been convicted of murder. I believe we should execute murderers for the murders they've committed and to prevent them from murdering again. The process used to assign inmates to units isn't necessarily related to the specific crimes they've committed. In Texas they go through the Diagnostic Unit for evaluation. Not only their criminal history, but their age, whether they're a first time or repeat offender, their health (physical & mental), possible gang affiliations, job skills, education levels, IQ levels, results of psychological testing/evaluations, and I forget what all is used to assign them to a unit. Believe it or not, the proximity of their families is an important factor. Many believe, and I'm one of them, that inmates who have loved ones visit them on a regular basis are less likely to reoffend, and less likely to violate prison rules. Then once they get to the units, there are different levels of security in place there, and they all start out on the same level, and work their way up or down the levels, depending on how they behave themselves. This does not mean inmates on one level are kept isolated from all other inmates on different levels at all the times. An inmate might behave himself for a long period of time and get promoted to trustee status, even murderers. In fact, murderers serving long sentences usually do achieve trusty status after so many years, after they finally learn that good behavior behind bars has its rewards. The thing is it only takes 5 seconds for them to throw it all away, and it happens all the time. I wouldn't call it a "block party," but inmates serving time for violent crimes come in contact with inmates serving time for non-violent crimes in general population. This is happening every day. This is happening on every unit that houses general population inmates, and this includes murderers serving LWOP and murderers serving life with the possibility of parole. It's happening in every state. I don't know how it could be eliminated entirely. Some states might do a better job at keeping the contact at a minimum, but no state keeps all of its violent offenders completely separated from all of its non-violent offenders at all times. More than likely things have changed, but that's the way it was back in the 70's and early 80's in Texas. That's if I remember right. It's been a long time. A very long time. Death row is a different matter & a different, permanent level of security altogether. The inmates' movement is much more restricted on a permanent basis, as is their contact with prison employees, volunteers, visitors, and even the other inmates on DR. DR is nothing like general population. Not even close. Do I wish we had the resources to house all murderers like the ones on death row? Sure I do. Apparently most people don't though. Like has been sad so many times, murders don't really happen until it happens to their families. Sad, because it could happen to any of us at any time.
|
|
|
Post by PIP on Jan 25, 2009 20:48:33 GMT -6
Can you back this up with some real numbers? I'd like to see them. Not to be a smart-a$$, but because I think it illustrates an important point if it is true. You want me to back up my opinion that those serving LWOP or Life have killed behind bars in greater numbers than those on DR? Why don't you waste your time doing the research, instead of asking me to waste mine? ;D This seems obvious to me. First, there's more of them. Second, the security isn't as tight in general population. IMO, the point it illustrates is that security is much, much tighter on DR. This also seems obvious to me. Then we should be offing the ones in gen pop, not those on DR. Huh? Here's what I wrote: "This is precisely why future dangerousness is a factor in Texas. It allows juries to decide which capital murderers are more likely to kill again behind bars and which ones aren't. The ones that are get the death penalty, the ones that aren't get LWOP." They're doing a "bang up" job doncha think? Murderers convicted of capital murder in Texas are sentenced to death or LWOP. There's been no other option since 2005. Evidence of "future dangerousness" is presented to the jury during the sentencing phase at trial, and the jury then decides whether the evidence holds weight or not. If the jury finds there's enough evidence that "future dangerousness" exists, only then can a capital murderer be sentenced to death. If not, a convicted capital murderer is sentenced to LWOP. That's just a fact. I wasn't aware; that's why I was asking about it in the first place. Wish all murderers received at least that much, but what about them? That's exactly my point (and I think some of Lynne's as well) we go around putting down a tiny percentage of murderers [after a very very long wait] while the vast majority of them are mixed in to gen pop and kill not only CO's, but also other inmates. Why is this ok (not saying you think it is)?
|
|
|
Post by phatkat on Jan 25, 2009 21:15:37 GMT -6
This thing about "future dangerousness" in TX is interesting to me. Throughout my education, I've always been told that how unethical it is for counselors/psychologists to try to predict future behavior, especially when it comes to forensic patients. Basically, it's been shown that even those who are trained at a masters+ level in human behavior are highly unskilled at predicting whether a criminal will commit another crime, even when that practitioner knows and has been working with a client.
However, TX apparently trusts that judgment to 12 laymen. I can't begin to understand how that works. Tell me I'm misunderstanding this discussion, because TX is really starting to worry me.
|
|
|
Post by PIP on Jan 25, 2009 22:07:30 GMT -6
This thing about "future dangerousness" in TX is interesting to me. Throughout my education, I've always been told that how unethical it is for counselors/psychologists to try to predict future behavior, especially when it comes to forensic patients. Basically, it's been shown that even those who are trained at a masters+ level in human behavior are highly unskilled at predicting whether a criminal will commit another crime, even when that practitioner knows and has been working with a client. However, TX apparently trusts that judgment to 12 laymen. I can't begin to understand how that works. Tell me I'm misunderstanding this discussion, because TX is really starting to worry me. I do not think you are misunderstanding the discussion, however, I think you are looking at it from a clinical perspective. I am not sure if there are even so-called "experts" testifying to "future dangerousness" in TX, but I am pretty sure there are a lot of people who do not think "murderer" is a disease or a symptom or something for which one can be cured (myself included). So I am not sure if a clinical perspective can be applied here ~ no matter how telling or interesting it is ~ and it is...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2009 22:28:10 GMT -6
Beats you and says you. In CA, there are 5 levels of security, level 5 being DR and SHU prisoners, I believe. Level 4 is where we house our ‘worst of the worst’ we don’t intend to off. From what I understand, this is where we house our LWOP prisoners, lifers, and other violent offenders. I can’t imagine too many states throwing everyone together for the block party you suggest. I'm afraid you're wrong, Lynne. Level 4 security is earned (as it were) by misconduct in prison. General pop has many lifers and LWOPers. Bull could fill you in on that, as I imagine he will. And, I believe that you're wrong. We (along with our jury) were told that all LWOP (murderers) and lifers begin (and most of the time stay) at level 4, and that they can never go below a level 3 no matter how 'good' they are. Indeed, our perp started out at on 'Level 4' ~ he didn't 'earn it', but he could have 'earned' SHU. Last I checked he was at Pelican Bay. Regardless, let's say you're right. Why would prosecutors allow juries (who’ll decide the fate of 1st degree murderers) to which the prison system is explained to believe that LWOP, lifers, and other violent offenders are not held with non-violent offenders? Further, the two sites I could find, both basically say that level 4 prisons in CA are for ”… the real hard cases; violent predators, hardcore gang members, prisoners unable to program well at other facilities, unable to obey and follow the rules”. New Folsom ~ Level 4 or maximum security prison , for example, houses lifers, murderers, armed robbers, and those who’ve committed assault with a deadly weapon. So, why would we house any of them in lower security? lasc.edu/theword/Features/Entries/2008/11/19_Prison_System_in_America.html
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 25, 2009 22:41:04 GMT -6
This thing about "future dangerousness" in TX is interesting to me. Throughout my education, I've always been told that how unethical it is for counselors/psychologists to try to predict future behavior, especially when it comes to forensic patients. Basically, it's been shown that even those who are trained at a masters+ level in human behavior are highly unskilled at predicting whether a criminal will commit another crime, even when that practitioner knows and has been working with a client. You disingenuously fail to mention the #1 predictor of future violent behavior, which is past violent behavior. And "unethical?" Gimme a break. Defense attorneys put expert witnesses ( both psychologists and psychiatrists) on the witness stand all the time to vouch for the gentleness of defendants. Is that "unethical?" And let's look at another reason: It's "unethical" because many of their respective associations don't believe in the DP. OK. You're misunderstanding the discussion, because you view the violence perpetrated as a problem to be fixed through therapy and counseling. I see the DP as first of all a "penalty," and then protection of society from those whoe have demonstrated a propensity for extreme violence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2009 23:06:20 GMT -6
Are you suggesting all work related deaths but those ones caused by inmates who kill COs are 'unavoidable'? Of course not, but I think you're comparing accidental deaths with intentional acts of homicide a little too much for my taste. The only thing the two share in common is someone died as a result. Wouldn't know about, and don't particularly care about your taste. And, I'll compare whatever I choose. And, what I’m comparing is the RISK, the DANGER of death to workers. Last I checked, the dead aren’t at risk of either accidental death nor of being murdered, since they're already dead. There are many jobs that carry a greater risk of accidental death AND/OR homicide than COs. If preventing them from killing again is the goal, surely the track record of Death Row, particularly in recent years, should show that it’s not necessary to kill them, only to house them under the strictest of maximum ~ even Death Row like ~ conditions and security.
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 25, 2009 23:10:22 GMT -6
If preventing them from killing again is the goal, surely the track record of Death Row, particularly in recent years, should show that it’s not necessary to kill them, only to house them under the strictest of maximum ~ even Death Row like ~ conditions and security. I see PTO in your future. They'll eat you up like chocolate cake, too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2009 23:20:57 GMT -6
That's exactly my point (and I think some of Lynne's as well) we go around putting down a tiny percentage of murderers [after a very very long wait] while the vast majority of them are mixed in to gen pop and kill not only CO's, but also other inmates. Why is this ok (not saying you think it is)? That's certainly part of it, though not all. Just the other day, it seems like, we were being told how much danger COs are in from Death Row inmates. Come to find out, not so much after-all, and the story changes. Fact is, there are many ways to prevent murder in the workplace ~ not all, never all ~ FSOOB ~ to bring the number of homicide victims down, but it's not cost effective, is it? And, people are killed while just trying to get by. It's not fair. I'm not saying it's okay for COs to be murdered, only that there are less of them being murdered than in other lines of work so it seems (to me) rather useless to expect the state to give a chit about it when they don't give a chit enough to do anything about the conditions that make murder in other workplaces an even greater risk than that of COs. In all likelihood, with 'only' 3 or 4 murders a year, the state thinks it's doing a bang-up job.
|
|