The taxpayers ( it could be your parents or it could be you) are paying money and it cost a lot to feed guards and keep its facility going so I think prison should be privatized. In that way the government can actually use that money in other ways such as hospitcals and schools which create jobe for people in the country.
The cost is out of control. And what California is paying gaurds is unreasonable. I have teachers in my family, a six year degree, and prison guard guard family member, a six week training program. Who makes more, the guard. Let's end this nonsense.
And what of the care cost of the prisoners. We as state tax payers, are putting more of our money in prisons, than our schools. Schools in fact my be the one way to keep people out of prisons in the first place, so all of this makes no sense.
If our prison system were treated like a regular business venture and run by capable companies, undoubtedly it would be run better than it is now. Private companies would be held responsible and the prison "franchise" would be given to another company if it was not successful. This is what motivates companies to perform well- the desire for continued revenue.
Ever visited a local branch of the DMV or tried to mail something quickly at the post office? Don't be surprised if these thoughts conjure up bad memories. As with most government programs, efficiency and positive outcomes are the exceptions rather than the norm. The one government entity that does function well and achieves true results is the military. Why does the military differ from other arms and branches of the government? One word: Privatization! Most aspects of the military are subcontracted to the private sector, such as weapons development. Different companies compete with one another for lucrative government contracts. To win these, one company must out produce and perform competitors. The result is a superb and effective product that is second to none. The same pattern will follow with prisons as different competitors seek government contracts. The winner will operate an effective and cost efficient facility.
Privatization of prisons and prison management is reasonable. From a financial standpoint, private business can always operate cheaper than the government because the private business is motivated by profit. While government prisons cave in to prisoner demands, private prisons have ways of defeating prisoner demands. If a Muslim prisoner demands halal food, he is told that the only facility that has a halal kitchen is in another state. If the prisoner truly wants halal food, he is transferred; but, if he is just making trouble, he eats what is offered and stays within visiting distance of his acquaintances and family.
As long as the law is followed and rights are protected, I don't see any reason why prisons couldn't be run by private corporations. This could free up government funds for other projects. I think this could be done successfully, although I think that parole boards should still be government-run. Prisons could be privately run, but with a certain amount of government oversight/supervision.
It is no secret that the government has no concept of budget. Whether local of federal, the government doesn't know how to create a budget and stick to it. In private hands business owners know about the bottom dollar and know how to cut costs. A simple example would be to hire two men to work forty hour weeks instead of one man working sixty hours. This makes no sense in the private sector. The officer is paid overtime for twenty hours and he will not work to his total capacity. He will be tired and unmotivated to respond to all minor situations.
I support the option to privatize the penal system. Many government departments put out to tender the building and management of government responsibilities. The opportunity to have private corporations actively bid along side government agencies will result in a more financially responsible and better managed system. A tender system would give government departments equal opportunity.
Quite frankly the government is wasteful, and spends more money than is necessary and often more money than is available. If prisons were privatized and had to actually meet a budget then things would be different, they would be run more cost effectively and probably more efficiently as well. When private companies have budget shortfalls they make the necessary changes to run within their budget, the government just prints more money. Do we really want more inflation to keep prisons government run?
I think private prisons are fine as long as they keep the public safe from convicts. Why do we assume that anything ran by the government is great? There are many examples where this simply is not the case. A private security firm could do a better job than state run government.
As long a companies do not cut corners in keeping the public safe from the dangerous criminals they should be allowed to bid on such contracts. Let the private industry build and run the prisons and the employees in the private sector. Government should probably still oversea training and testing of employees for these private prisons. More programs for work outside the prisons for non violent offenders could be offered this way also.
Housing prisoners is a huge drain on resources across the country, and the only practical way to relieve this burden is through the privatization of the prisons and their management. This allows the institutions to do one key thing that state and federal prisons are not allowed to do, use the prison population to pay for itself and make a profit in the process. This is accomplished through industry programs inside the prison itself and through work-release programs that not only help to teach offenders real job skills and a work ethic, but also takes the financial burden of rehabilitating offenders off of the taxpayers.
Privatized prisons are reasonable and offer several advantages. The most obvious is that it would take away some cost burden from the state, as the private sector would front some of the costs and, in all likelihood, run a much more efficient program than the government. Secondly, the private sector would have an incentive to put prisoners to work doing basic labor to generate a profit. This would stop prisoners from sitting around all day, building up tension, and give them discipline and skills that could be used upon their release.
It would be of some help to local, state, federal governments to privatize prisons and the management of such. By hiring companies to run and manage the prisons, the states and counties that are expending large sums of money to operate these facilities could save a lot of money in the long run. A private company could manage the prisons much more effectively, and with a lot less expense, than the establishments that are currently running and managing them.
Private prisons look to cut costs in every way hurting the corrections officers and also jeopardizing public safety. Prisons should be left alone the way they are. They should be maintained as a government function. Private organizations are like leaches looking to suck money out of any avenue they can. Not even thinking about security risks. They run on skeleton crews and treat workers bad.
There is nothing against contracting some services: this is normal and has always happened. However, the overall management and day-to-day control of prisoners' lives should remain in the hands of the organisation that puts prisoners there: ultimately, the government on behalf of the people. Anything else leads to a discrepancy in the motivations for running prisons, which must ultimately be damaging for society.
A prison as a business would not be able to make the profit to enable it to continue operation. Without having a product and only being able to offer the service of prison incarceration, it would't be able to make the revenue required. In the event of a prison being privatized it's only customer/consumer would be the country of which wishes to store it's prisoners within. If the prison was indeed needed to go privatized it was probably because the country was in a state of recession which would mean it would not be able to afford to pay the now private company prison the fees of keeping the prisoners inside.
Why not NON_Profit does the same thing? Why must someone profit on the punishment of the government. I think its morally wrong and it should stop. Companies get greed its human nature the more you have the more you want. There will be a certain point where they cant get more efficient what happens next? Get more prisoners? Thats the only way they can survive once they hit the efficient level 0 they will. Corruption and alot of corruption.
It leads to hidden costs that private organizations put back on the government. They lobby for longer prison sentences, do not treat workers as reasonable as the state, and manage to put many companies already under contract with the state out of business. They are a band-aid for the real problem which is crime and why people are being sent to prison in the first place.
Private corporate entities are profit driven, as would be expected. As stated in The Economist: “From an economic point of view, we should expect firms that compete for and rely on government contracts, such as weapons manufacturers and prison operators, to maximize the spread between the amount billed and the actual cost of delivering the service.” The problem is that the profits are funneled out of state governments and into private prison profits precisely when states have been successful at curbing crime and incarceration, and reducing criminal justice expenditures. When their crime fighting strategies increased public safety, governments must pay up.
Public or private the prisoner will still cost x amount of dollars to feed and house. The variables available for a company to profit from are staffing costs and other corner cutting exercises. How can some of you people live with yourselves in promoting the reducing of pay for prison guards. These people do a job most of us simply cannot do. Why don't you also push for lower pay for our soldiers? It is in a similar vein. We pay prison guards to face societies most dangerous every day. They should be rewarded for this by reasonable pay and firm job security.
If a prison is run for-profit then it will be in the best interest of the business to keep prisoners in the system for as long as possible. This means that everyone in charge of the prisoners will have a vested interest in keeping the prisoners there instead of rehabilitating them -- their jobs depend on it. Even if you could trust the administration to 'do the right thing' and work toward rehabilitating prisoners, the companies would have a vested interest in lobbying for stricter laws that require more prison time. Lobbying for stricter laws just so you can make an extra profit is so wrong on so many levels.
For-profit prisons are inherently unjust, unnecessary, and counter-productive. First, the goals of maximizing profits are almost always at odds with the traditional goals of the criminal justice system such as: offender rehabilitation, reducing recidivism, increasing public safety, lowering crime rates, and ensuring our laws our sensible, fair and just. Additionally, the profit-motive involved tends to fuel the industry’s conflicting influence on public policy, for example, in the area of immigrant detention. (See: Lee Fang, http://www.Thenation.Com/article/173120/how-private-prisons-game-immigration-system#axzz2ajTXoEy0 How Private Prisons Game the Immigration System, The Nation, February 27, 2013.) Additionally, the "cost savings" claimed by the for-profit prison industry, which is many times artificially inflated (see: Michael Hallett, Ph.D. & Amy Hanauer, http://www.Policymattersohio.Org/wp-content/uploads/2001/05/Prisrpt.Pdf Selective Celling: Inmate Population in Ohio’s Private Prisons, Policy Matters Ohio, May 2001. Is generally achieved at the expense of the workforce (by paying lower wages and benefits; See: just google "correctional officer wages private prison comparison"), the prisoners (through increased civil rights abuses; see: Lana Nassar, http://www.Humanrightsadvocates.Org/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Human-Rights-Implications-of-Private-Prisons.Pdf HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS OF PRIVATE PRISONS Human Rights Advocates, February 2013.) and the public (for example, by substandard facility security allowing the escape of violent prisoners; see: D.M. Levine, http://money.Cnn.Com/2010/08/17/news/economy/private_prisons_economic_impact.Fortune/ What's costlier than a government run prison? A private one], CNN Money, August 18, 2010.)
Prisons either need to be run by the government, or run by NON PROFIT organizations. Think about it, if the for-profit prison industry gets government contracts by offering to perform these services CHEAPER AND they make a profit on top of that, WHERE do you think that money comes from? It has to come from somewhere... And it does. To do so, they must cut corners, CHEAT, pay less, under-staff, reduce services, withhold medical care (just google this, it's scary). I could rant on this forever. It's just WRONG WRONG WRONG
You are sacrificing safety and well being to save a few dollars. Instead of cutting corners on prisons we should reconsider who goes to prison in the first place. If you want to save money this is not the place to do so. Those that truly belong in prison should be securely put, so that they can not harm anyone else.
I do not believe it is appropriate for prisons to be run by private companies. As a society our government and the people have a responsibility for housing and having full control over our criminals. The general public elects a government who in turn manages our prisons and this countries offenders. This is how it should be where the countries people have direct and or indirect control over the people no one else wants. Prisons for profit seem and feel just wrong. When being paid to run prisons there would be no motivation in order to empty them. It would all be false figures. Society is not a business and the management of people should people regardless who they are should be done responsibly by the law and order of the country.
The Jails are dangerous enough as it is and those who are going to profit off of privatize prisons (Share Holders) are not going to be putting their life on the line...In addition to the many cut backs that will take place to save money...This creates chaos and an unsafe environment because humans are not created to be treated like animals..Once an animal is caged up under cruel conditions, you better not let them out because they are going to be worse off then they were before they were put in there...Making a profit off of humans is nothing but slavery in the 21st century..President Lincoln didn't do a thing by signing the Emancipation Proclamation it's just now done in a so called covert way...But when you think about it, nobody's stupid a blind man can see this is Master's enslaving human beings for greed.
While private prison companies do compete for the right to control a prison and therefore innovation develops and the most cost efficient way to run a prison is devised, the prisoners inside are shunned so that this can occur. We have to remember that providing a prison system is providing a service, not only to incapacitate, but to manage and hopefully rehabilitate as many inmates as possible into law abiding members of the community. Privatisation, a business essentially which will seek to cut corners and costs to make money, will be to the detriment of the humanitarian obligations which an ideal prison would fulfill.
Private prisons are not truly normal businesses in that their customers have no choice as to which to go in, and by extension, they have no incentive to make a better prison, and rehabilitating is just destroying their own profit. A Public prison, however, LOSES money when more inmates arrive, and therefore has incentive to rehabilitate
The mathmatics are quite simple ..The prison companies bribe the politicians to draught more laws to get more ppl thrown into their jails.. Which in turn rakes in more profits for more bribes.. Etc...Its not a vicious circle.. Its a downward spiral...Not to mention a direct conflict of interest...
Put more simply..The prison companies get to decide who goes to jail..Which ideally for them would be everybody except their employees...
Not much time, here's a few points: Private businesses' number one concern is maximizing profits. This, in itself, only means that their primary goal will not be at the best interest of the prisoners or society as a whole. They will care less about the rehabilitation of prisoners. They will not take the BEST possible measures to ensure that the prisoners are still living like the human beings that they are (regardless of crime, a prisoner is still a person) if it calls for what they feel is too much money. There is also a public safety issue. The safety measures will eventually decline, or they will not work to improve safety measures if it will cost them more. Also, would this not lead to, or at least strengthen the effects of what is now, the legalization of slave labor?! This will only give them incentive to finds ways to keep prisoners for as long as they can. Overall, the primary focus would be MONEY, PROFITS, MAXIMIZING INCOME; and not the safety and betterment of you and I, nor the prisoners. This is just corruption, disaster, unjust practices waiting to happen.
Privatised prisons only have one thing in interest, the more prisoners the more money whereas the public share a completely different interest to the privatised prisons. How can a privatised prison want to rehabilitate and reduce the recidivism rate of an offender when it's main interest (profit) is affected. In my opinion only the state should deal with managing prisons.
As a society we want to have the least amount of crime and the least amount of people in prison. Introducing concepts such as Overhead and Profit into this system you introduce an incentive to have the most amount of people in prison. It will breed corruption and slavery. It already has. The public defender system is a an absolute joke and through imprisoning victims of drug addiction with harsh laws such as minimum sentence laws and three strike laws we are creating a second caste of citizens at best and legalized slavery at worse. Why is alcohol legal and marijuana isn't except that one allows for the imprisonment of minorities. Then a vicious cycle begins because when you have a record and you try to find a job you are screwed and the same thing for finding housing. Read "The New Jim Crow" By Michelle Alexander. It will explain everything.
It is unethical for anybody to profit off of somebody in prison. It is morally wrong and inevitably will end up with those profiting off prisons wanting/needing more people in prison to increase revenue. Our society should be structured towards lessening the number of people in prison, not increasing the numbers.
No it isn't reasonable. It's especially unreasonable when the private prisons are for-profit. The state will still have to pay to incarcerate the person regardless, but when it's private you have to pay for investors' profits and dividends in addition to the other costs. How this can be construed as a "cost saving measure" outside of the magical "privatization is always right" bubble I don't know. If it can be construed as a "cost saving measure" it's probably because of problems in the laws for how public prisons are run and administered in the first place which could simply be changed instead of resorting to private prisons.
Private prisons also create a perverse incentive to push for laws and sentencing to get more and more people in prison so these people can make more money. One judge got caught taking bribes to give juvenile first time offenders longer sentences.
The only reason the government wants to privatise the
prison service is to make profits for the share holders many
who will be well connected to the tory party, we had a similar system in Norfolk some years ago where the custody of detainess was put into private hands one of
the government masons leaked they were making £85.00
profit per night for every prisoner held, and this was decades ago, it now costs £40,000 per year to detain a person in prison, why are we sending people to prisons for minor matters, when the so called law abiding government
and state police are involved in serious crime and tax
fraud, they are the real criminals in society, you note
when ever the tories come to power, we see draconian
laws, lock then up, which always goes side by side with
the need to privatise prisons, no doubt there's a nice
profit in £40,000 for a share holder, and lets not forget
the "Turn Key's" who seem to think everyone should be
locked up to provide them with a job for life, my view is this let the petty criminals out of prison and fill the cells
with corrupted MP's and bent coppers, and of corse thoose
middel class robbers who seem to think tax evation is a
crime that does'nt apply to them, a definate no from me.
posted by Karl.
Privatizing prisons removes all incentive to provide rehabilitative services. In private prisons, the rate of inmate-on-inmate assault is 65% higher, and inmate-on-guard is 45% higher. Private prisons are less accountable to the public and not held to the same rates of transparency. The argument that privatized prisons are more cost-effective should be a red flag. A prison run properly should cost the same amount whether run by the government or by a for-profit corproration, with the notable exception that the government is not trying to make a profit. Therefore, unless the prison operation is to cost more under private management, cost must be cut. They will be cut in staffing training, and the quality of life of the inmates, in rehabilitative and medical services, and in space. For-profit corporations are furthermore under pressure to increase profits on a continuing basis, perpetuating and intensifying the problem. The government pays for prisons, either directly or by paying a corporation to do it. The only ethical choice is for all jails and prisons to be public.
The reason for prisons and, by association, prison management, is to help society deal with crime. Prisons serve three purposes: protecting society, punishing wrongdoers, and rehabilitation. Any prison motivated by profit will fail at all three. Rehabilitation costs money, and there is no reason for a prison driven by profit to pay for it. By the same token, there is no reason for a profit-driven prison to pay more than the absolute minimum for guards, or to ensure that the punishment aspect is driven by anything other than whatever is cheapest. Prisons are too important to trust to private industry.
I think that the current system works well and this needs to continue. If it was privatized, then I believe the continuity will be missing and some private companies will manage things differently. Whereas now, the federal, state and local governments run and manage all of the facilities under their jurisdiction the same, which is fair across the board. I think this will be missing if separate private companies begin to manage these facilities.
Prison is a complex institution, and there are many important issues at stake. While they are convicted criminals, inmates are still human beings that possess certain unalienable rights. If prisons are privatized, the ability for effective regulatory oversight diminishes. Private businesses, also, are in business to make profit, not serve society. In the end, privatized governmental functions always cut corners in the name of saving money, and that can be detrimental.
By having a prison privately owned and operated, it creates an incentive for the prison system to have more prisoners. The larger the prison population, the more money the company would receive from the government to house and care for them. This means that these private corrections companies have the incentive to influence laws and court cases to help bolster profits.
Abuse of prisoners' rights is possible in government-run as well as private prisons, but something seems perverse in the incentive structure that private prisons impose not only on prison employees but on the direction of public policy; making prisons a profitable industry encourages us to lock up more and more people regardless of whether society is made safer in the long run -- even if, in fact doing so creates a class of embittered, alienated citizens with less access to the legitimate economy and a higher propensity for recidivism. The latter possibility seems likely, and the drive to build more prisons may have been a major cause of such moral absurdities as California's notorious three-strikes law, under which people have been sent to prison for life for such crimes as stealing a pizza or a few videotapes. A corporate, one-size-fits-all approach to crime, punishment, and rehabilitation is shortsighted and cruel.
No, I disagree that it is reasonable to privatize prisons and prison management. The government has been doing a really good job with the prison management. Moreover, prison and prison management is very sensitive area so it shouldn't be given into the hands of any private authorities. There is no necessity for prison and prison management to be privatized.
Privatizing prisoners is just a way for corporations to make money, they don't have the welfare of the prisoners in mind. Fewer and fewer things will be tried to stop recidivism. Conditions will be kept at a minimum of humane conditions in order to keep cost down. Corporations have as their ultimate and only goal the making of money, not the rehabilitating of prisoners.
Private prisons get paid to keep people incarcerated. They benefit by how many criminals are there at any given time. Prisoners often are doing longer sentences that don't fit the crimes. I feel that that is a miscarriage of justice. I feel that public prisons are already full and public ones are trying to get in on the prison game. If public prisons were going to be better at rehabbing prisoners then I would support them.
Instead of doing the right thing in a prison, decision makers at the administration level may have profit on their mind when in control of a prison instead of general welfare of the people. Whether this means moving a prisoner out as quickly as possible, or detaining him for as long as possible, we should do the right thing and let the government handle the prison system because when profit becomes the motive for keeping someone in prison, those that have done their time may not get the fair shake that the judicial system promised them when they were sentenced.
A lot of what's wrong with our country is that a business, a non-entity, has rights equal to the rights of a person. The problem is that a person is responsible for his actions yet, most often, when a business acts illegally or immorally, no single person is accountable. If all prisons were run by non-entities, a prisoner could be mistreated or killed and no one within the organization could be prosecuted. A perfect example is Wall Street ruining our economy? Have all the miscreants been prosecuted? No.
It would cost the government money, because they would have to pay for the prisoners. It would be in the interest of the prison to expand and make more money by (i) keeping prisoners as long as possible (ii) make sure the state doesn't loosen laws to provide a steady "supply" of prisoners. Therefore the prison would have no interest in rehabilitating people and could potentially influence politics by toughening laws.
Taxpayer dollars are beefing up George Zoley's pockets for cheap prison properties. Privatization is a means to an end for lawmakers who can't fathom what its like to reenter the workforce. Taking a look to Europe's approach can teach us a lot about our own system and its many flaws.