patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,350,327 comments by 15,721 users - UveBeenNudged1 online now
Comments 1 - 23 of 23 Search these comments
Ceffer
2016 Feb 27, 11:47pm
It depends on attribution. Obviously, if somebody commits a violent crime around drugs or alcohol, they are more likely to be prosecuted for the violence rather than a drug crime. The drug connection may not be attributed, the violent crime offense is.
How many of the violent crimes occurred when the prosecuted were drunk, dealing, high or involved in a criminal enterprise involving drugs? If these individuals had been sober and not selling drugs or involved in criminal enterprises involving drugs, how many of them would have committed the violence?
It's the usual problem with statistics, they don't embed context and they can be read to appear in ways that can be manipulated.
Same is true about attributing deaths to causes. The vast majority of drug and alcohol related deaths are attributed to something else, i.e. a standard organic or disease of some kind. In a large percentage of deaths, even autopsied deaths, a specific cause of death cannot be ascertained at all, and what is put down is nothing more than a best guess, or more likely, an altruistic convenience. Because of various politics surrounding death, only randomly does anybody put down on a death certificate that an individual died of alcoholism or complications of drug addiction. It doesn't play well with the wishful thinking obituaries.
indigenous
2016 Feb 28, 3:03am
That seems like a bit of stretch. As you say there are always contributing factors in everything. But murder is what you are going to be charged with if you commit murder no matter the contributing factors. E.G. I was drinking tequila and took my Prozac and was bragging how my M-134 could vaporize a house...
One of the contributing factors that law enforcement will never admit is the influence of demographics on incarceration.
Interesting article - good pick to challenge one's libertarian views. It is amazing how many articles on social media go with the narratives that so many blacks have been incarcerated for victim-less crimes. IF the cited numbers are correct, than the bias is far less than most of us thought.
There were OVER 700,000 arrests for marijuana in this country in 2014.
Whether or not all 700k found themselves in a privately owned for profit prison, the fact that the War on Drugs still rages so strong, proves that this whole country is one big open air prison
These people take taxpayer dollars and use them for their gang activities.
So it depends what your definition of mass incarceration, is.
There were OVER 700,000 arrests for marijuana in this country in 2014.
Whether or not all 700k found themselves in a privately owned for profit prison, the fact that the War on Drugs still rages so strong, proves that this whole country is one big open air prison
These people take taxpayer dollars and use them for their gang activities.
So it depends what your definition of mass incarceration, is.
Broadly I agree as I would like to make all drugs legal. However in that piece it is said the vast majority of those drug incarcerations was for dealing, not using (well the pharma-industry doesn't like competition). More surprisingly though was the missing black bias for incarceration for drug-related crimes, as apparently across all races most incarcerations were for violent crimes by roughly the same percentage, if the data cited is correct.
indigenous
2016 Feb 28, 9:22pm
The real unspoken exploitation of blacks has been through Davis Bacon and minimum wage and affirmative action.
It has become a boogeyman in public discourse: “mass incarceration.†Both left and right, from Hillary Clinton to Rand Paul, agree that it must be ended. But a close examination of the data shows that U.S. imprisonment has been driven largely by violent crime-and thus significantly reducing incarceration may be impossible.
How can this be? Violent crime peaked in 1992 (http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm) with 1.92 million violent crimes while violent crimes in 2015 was just over a million. So there is half as much violent crime as there was 24 years ago while imprisonment went from 800k to 2.2 million. How can half as much crime drive imprisonment to more than double? That doesn't make any sense at all.
Except of course if you are the wall street journal supporting the prison industry using statistics from the department of justice which has a vested and conflicted interest in crime statistics data.
When crime began to drop in the mid-1990s, so did the rise in incarceration rates. From 2000 to 2010, they increased a negligible 0.65%, and since 2005 they have been declining steadily, except for a slight uptick in 2013. The estimated 1.5 million prisoners at year-end 2014 is the smallest total prison population in the U.S. since 2005.
Nonsense, doj skipped county prisoners. I like how the article randomly jumps between rates and raw numbers depending on which is more advantageous. Sarcasm intended. 
indigenous
2016 Feb 28, 9:57pm
So back to the original of 80% of prisoners are incarcerated for drug charges?
Ceffer
2016 Feb 28, 11:22pm
The United States only incarcerates those whose freedom represents an imminent threat to the job and pension security of a public service union member.
So we now know the ratios for state prisons which is about 1.2 million inmates but what about for ratios for federal prisons and local jails which have another 1 million inmates? So is it really a myth or did someone forget to telling us about the other half of the inmate population?
State prisons about 18%, federal over 50%, local hard to tell because the records are scattered through thousands of jurisdictions. http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Prisons_and_Drugs http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/releasing-drug-offenders-wont-end-mass-incarceration/
Also if someone steals something and they go to jail for that theft but the reason they stole in the first place was to get drugs couldn't this also be concidered drug-related?
No, the way the data is set up only the most serious conviction is counted. What is totally missing and probably can't be accounted for is how may violent crimes are part of the drug trade. Things like drive by shootings over drug turf don't show up as a drug crime.
So back to the original of 80% of prisoners are incarcerated for drug charges?
Show where anyone says 80% of prisoners are on drug charges. Certainly not in your OP. How do we go back to something that isn't there?
The US has 5% of the worlds population and 25% of the worlds prisoners. In 25 years violent crime has dropped in half and prison population has tripled. Doesn't make sense even with the WSJ going rah, rah, sis boom bah.
MisdemeanorRebel
2016 Feb 29, 5:45am
Less than one-half of 1% of the U.S. population is incarcerated, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), so “mass†is a bit of hyperbole. The proportion of African-Americans in prison, 1.2%, is high compared with whites (0.25%), but not in absolute terms.
"Only" half a percent of the entire US Population, including children and 80 year olds in Nursing Homes, not just Adults 18-65. Gotta hand it to the Propagandist pumping the Corrections Companies at the WSJ: Smooth Move, Ex-Lax.
However in that piece it is said the vast majority of those drug incarcerations was for dealing, not using
And? What do you mean, however? Like, youve been brainwashed to think that somehow thats something different? That free market capitalists trapped in a police state, are ok to be jailed, bcuz dey da deelerz, not like the poor victim users?
That sounds pretty stupid. If the idiots in this country ACTUALLY supported Capitalism, if they actually wanted free markets, then drug dealers would be the poster boy for the oppression. Theyre merely trying to quell the demand by bringing some much needed supply to market. And they risk losing all their freedom just to bring some Capitalism and Freedom to the market.
However my ass
"Only" half a percent of the entire US Population, including children and 80 year olds in Nursing Homes, not just Adults 18-65. Gotta hand it to the Propagandist pumping the Corrections Companies at the WSJ: Smooth Move, Ex-Lax.
Nothing like getting data from people who have a financial interest in the results.
And? What do you mean, however? Like, youve been brainwashed to think that somehow thats something different? That free market capitalists trapped in a police state, are ok to be jailed, bcuz dey da deelerz, not like the poor victim users?
All it means that the incarcerated don't necessarily fit the narrative of the boy who occasionally buys pot and therefore enters the prison complex that he can't get out of anymore. It is treated differently by law right now and it's true that most people see a difference here, brainwashed or not (or maybe not everybody is a full-blown capitalist). I'd like to see that changed pretty much for all drugs, though some form of regulation (quality and dosage control) will likely be necessary.
indigenous
2016 Feb 29, 7:11am
Show where anyone says 80% of prisoners are on drug charges. Certainly not in your OP. How do we go back to something that isn't there?
Here is one from your NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/01/09/us/drugs-or-alcohol-linked-to-80-of-inmates.html
Since I posted this article I'm pointing to the specious nature of the 80% number.
Somewhere I read that the reasons are longer sentences, Federal minimums with no parole, plea bargaining, and stricter laws regarding drug use.
.
Show where anyone says 80% of prisoners are on drug charges. Certainly not in your OP. How do we go back to something that isn't there?
Here is one from your NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/01/09/us/drugs-or-alcohol-linked-to-80-of-inmates.html
Since I posted this article I'm pointing to the specious nature of the 80% number.
Somewhere I read that the reasons are longer sentences, Federal minimums with no parole, plea bargaining, and stricter laws regarding drug use.
Do you ever actually read past the title of articles or do you simply not comprehend the content. Drugs linked to the crime is a far cry from incarcerated on drug charges. Killing someone while stoned out of your mind and going to jail for murder is NOT incarcerated on drug charges.
indigenous
2016 Feb 29, 4:15pm
Do you ever actually read past the title of articles or do you simply not comprehend the content. Drugs linked to the crime is a far cry from incarcerated on drug charges. Killing someone while stoned out of your mind and going to jail for murder is NOT incarcerated on drug charges.
Do you ever actually read what I post?
I said I had the consideration that 80% of the incarcerated were there because of drug charges. Since the US does have more people in incarceration than the top 35 European countries , as per Lip's post, it seemed plausible that the trope was true and I never had reason to question it.
If you and Lips think your thinking is not colored by the tropes you subscribe to think again!
Do you ever actually read what I post?
I said I had the consideration that 80% of the incarcerated were there because of drug charges.
and again no one ever said 80% of prisoners were incarcerated on drug charges. You transposed drug and alcohol related crime into incarcerated on drug charges.
Both left and right, from Hillary Clinton to Rand Paul,
never said mass incarceration or on drug charges. The WSJ is just shilling for the prison industry. What a surprise.
Legalize drugs, taking the huge profits out of it that drive the crime and violence and drug related crimes will drop like a rock. Get people into with addiction problems into rehab and don't let people with a violent history or mental problems have guns other violent crimes will drop a lot.
But of course we can't do that, psychos have a god given second amendment right to guns. Insanity.
Violent crime, not drugs, has driven imprisonment. And drug offenses usually are for dealing, not using.
It has become a boogeyman in public discourse: “mass incarceration.” Both left and right, from Hillary Clinton to Rand Paul, agree that it must be ended. But a close examination of the data shows that U.S. imprisonment has been driven largely by violent crime—and thus significantly reducing incarceration may be impossible.
Less than one-half of 1% of the U.S. population is incarcerated, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), so “mass” is a bit of hyperbole. The proportion of African-Americans in prison, 1.2%, is high compared with whites (0.25%), but not in absolute terms.
There's a lot of historical amnesia about the cause of prison expansion, a mistaken sense that it was all about drugs or race and had very little to do with serious crime. This ignores the facts. Between 1960 and 1990, the rate of violent crime in the U.S. surged by over 350%, according to FBI data, the biggest sustained buildup in the country's history.
One major reason was that as crime rose the criminal-justice system caved. Prison commitments fell, as did time served per conviction. For every 1,000 arrests for serious crimes in 1970, 170 defendants went to prison, compared with 261 defendants five years earlier. Murderers released in 1960 had served a median 4.3 years, which wasn't long to begin with. By 1970 that figure had dropped to 3.5 years.
Unquestionably, in the last decades of the 20th century more defendants than ever were sentenced to prison. But this was a direct result of changes in policy to cope with the escalation in violent crime. In the 1980s, after well over a decade of soaring crime, state incarceration rates jumped 107%.
When crime began to drop in the mid-1990s, so did the rise in incarceration rates. From 2000 to 2010, they increased a negligible 0.65%, and since 2005 they have been declining steadily, except for a slight uptick in 2013. The estimated 1.5 million prisoners at year-end 2014 is the smallest total prison population in the U.S. since 2005.
Those who talk of “mass incarceration” often blame the stiff drug sentences enacted during the crack-cocaine era, the late 1980s and early '90s. But what pushed up incarceration rates, beginning in the mid-1970s, was primarily violent crime, not drug offenses.
The percentage of state prisoners in for drug violations peaked at only 22% in 1990. Further, drug convictions “explain only about 20% of prison growth since 1980,” according to a 2012 article by Fordham law professor John Pfaff, published in the Harvard Journal on Legislation.
Relatively few prisoners today are locked up for drug offenses. At the end of 2013 the state prison population was about 1.3 million. Fifty-three percent were serving time for violent crimes such as murder, robbery, rape or aggravated assault, according to the BJS. Nineteen percent were in for property crimes such as burglary, car theft or fraud. Another 11% had been convicted of weapons offenses, drunken driving or other public-order violations.
That leaves about 16%, or 208,000 people, incarcerated for drug crimes. Of those, less than a quarter were in for mere possession. The rest were in for trafficking and other crimes. Critics of “mass incarceration” often point to the federal prisons, where half of inmates, or about 96,000 people, are drug offenders. But 99.5% of them are traffickers. The notion that prisons are filled with young pot smokers, harmless victims of aggressive prosecution, is patently false.
The other line of attack is that the criminal justice system is racist because blacks are disproportionately imprisoned. About 35% of all prisoners, state and federal, are African-American, while blacks comprise about 13% of the U.S. population. But any explanation of this disparity must take blacks' higher rates of offending into account.
From 1976 to 1995, blacks were identified by police as the perpetrators in more than half of homicides, according to FBI data compiled by the BJS. During this same period, individuals interviewed for the national crime-victim survey described robbery perpetrators as black more than 60% of the time. While the rate of black violent crime fell dramatically after the mid-1990s, it remains disturbingly high. From 2000 to 2014, African-Americans were murdered eight times as often as whites per capita, nearly always as a result of black-on-black assaults.
Such serious crimes are still the main driver of African-American incarceration. The latest BJS figures, from the end of 2013, show that 57% of blacks in state prison were convicted of violent crimes. Only 16% were in for drug crimes. Those numbers nearly match the figures for the state prison population overall.
Nor have blacks always served longer sentences than whites once incarcerated. In 1993, at the peak of the prison buildup, blacks and whites in state prison served identical terms, a median 12 months, for all offenses. For drug crimes, whites actually served slightly more time than blacks, 12 months to 11 months.
A growing consensus now supports making the criminal-justice system less punitive. But prison rates won't drop dramatically unless serious crime declines further, which is unlikely. It certainly didn't happen in 2015, when homicides in the 50 largest U.S. cities increased 17%. Nor are racial disparities likely to diminish so long as African-Americans commit a disproportionate number of violent crimes.
http://www.wsj.com/article_email/the-myth-of-mass-incarceration-1456184736-lMyQjAxMTA2NDIyNDEyNDQ4Wj