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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.