Know what assume is? It's a word that makes an ASS out of U and ME: ass u me. That's if you are gullible and make assumptions. The post was tongue in check, a joke, a jest. Simply put, Bull Shit.
Personally, I thought it was humorous. That's certainly the kind prison the reformists are looking for. Hey, we can really cut costs and respect human rights of criminals with a work release program. A prisoner gets up in the morning, leaves and goes to work, comes back in the evening and just sleeps in the motel/prison. He pays for the lodgings from his earnings. If he wants a computer or ISP service, he can pay for it, and so on.
We do this now in many states for convicted DUI's, why not murderers, rapists, muggers, robbers, etc. What's good for one class of criminal should be good for all classes of criminals.
I'm all for work release programs...as long as it doesn't reduce the divends and/or the capital gains. . . . . .
Let me first say that I am not a preacher, nor am I a lawyer. I am just a guy who payed attention in history class. And I have to say that and this is only my opinion. But I think the framers would roll over in their graves if they heard all this talk about dividends and capital gains out weighting peoples rights . I said this in my 1st message but i'll say it again. I do not condone the actions that got the prisioners where they are. And I'm not saying we shouldn't have prisons or that we shouldn't try to save some money. But all i Keep hearing is you guys talking about murders and rapists and how they should have no rights. I am going to give a hypothetical example of a situation that might land a perfectly normal otherwise law abiding citizen in the pokie. And ask if their right to treated fairly while incarserated should go by the wayside in the search for dividends and capital gains. I'll use a guy lets call him Chester for the sake of arguement. Its winter time and there is alot of snow and ice on the road. And Chester goes out to the store to get his sick kid some medicine. But on his way there Chester accidently hits his brakes on the ice. Which we all know is a no no because it makes the car uncontrollable. Anyway he does, and he hits an oncoming car and kills the driver. Chances are good that Chester will be held responsible for that drivers death. Maybe even be charged with vehicular homicide. Chester certainly did not mean to kill the driver. But , nevertheless, he should be held accountable and he should pay a debt to society for his mistake. And let's face it it was an accident. Chester did not leave his house with the evil intention of taking someone else's life. But, unfortunately he did. The question I am asking is while Chester is serving his term in a prison that PZN built and is managed by a private management firm. Should Chester's right to be treated fairly while paying his debt to society for his mistake be maintained? Or should we just not give a HOOT about Chester's rights as long as having Chester occupy one of PZN's beds produces profits for PZN's shareholders?