This guy must be a DUer!!

Check out the second op-ed piece. How many times have we heard that on DU??

http://www.azstarnet.com/star/Tue/30826tueletrpckg.html

Way to go!

But the last one sucks. More compassionate conservatism, no doubt.

Prisoners could maintain parks
I have a solution to several problems recently publicized: deterioration of our national parks and overcrowding of our prisons. The National Park Service could supervise all the able-bodied prisoners and direct them to repair, rebuild and maintain our national parks.

This would give young men an outlet for their energies and revitalize our parks at the same time. Work camps could be set up and each state contribute a certain percentage of selected inmates to reside there.

Our resources are readily available: man-power, free time and commitment to the American spirit.

Evelyn M. Smith

:puke: Slavery, anyone? :mad:

Kenny boy and the gang cleaning our national parks, I can go for that.

I fully understand that many people currently in prison simply don't belong there as they're doing time over petty offenses (three strikes laws, anyone?) or non-violent drug posession. That aside, I would MUCH rather put those people to work helping maintain our national parks or cleaning the sides of highways than having them work for some big corporation cold calling people or doing trade work for $1/hour.

I'm not looking to start a flame war with you or anything, but I'm just looking at another side to that issue.

I don't like flames.:-) I think I see what you are saying, & certainly, if prison inmates want to work, they should be able to. What really put me off about this woman's idea is

1. What if prisoners don't want to work for free, what if they don't want to work at all?

2. "Work camps could be set up". I don't like the sound of this at all. It gives me the creeps.

Sorry, but what's the problem with that? Many US States have the death penalty, and this could hardly be described as more barbaric than that.

Criminals are in prison to punish them for crimes and to reform them. This program could give them valuable work experience, more opportunity for exercise and fresh air than normal, something creative and constructive to do with their time. It would help maintain national parks for the benefit of everyone, helping to repay the debt that they owe society for the crimes they've committed and the costs associated with catching, trying and jailing them.

OK, you'd have to be VERY careful about how you set it up in practice, but in principle I can't see a problem.

You could consider making it optional and possibly add the benefit of a reduced sentence or small wages for this community work.

...prisoners work cheap-to-free, and the entry of prison labour (or other cheap-to-free labour, such as workfare or heavily subsidized 'job creation' programmes) into a sector tends to drive the existing employees out of work and drive wages down. After all, if you can get indentured servitude, why do you need actual employees?

I was in a situation similar to this once, when I was in a workfare program. While there, you're not physically incarcerated, but you are similarly compelled to do whatever it is the authority figures at the top want you to, because otherwise they'll cut off your cheques, and then you'll be truly broke and homeless, barring a miraculous job appearance. While they claim that participation is "optional," the option is sort of like no option at all. I also had an experience where a business owner intended to hire me on an extreme subsidy (they would have had to pay about $2/hr for me), and fire the guy who was already doing the job for $15/hr. That's just not right.

The situation would be different if participation were strictly voluntary, but where you get into any situation involving incarceration, economic blackmail, or other forms of duress (overt or covert), then you're immediately talking A Bad Thing, period, end of story.

:toast: