(LAT editors take issue with Beard and the CDCr)
Prisons and American values
Prisons and American values
Our treatment of prisoners expresses our values, and mistreatment such as that alleged by California hunger strikers should not be tolerated.
By The Times editorial board
August 7, 2013
At nine prisons across California, more than 500 inmates continuing
a hunger
strike they began July 8 to protest what they call cruel and
inhumane conditions, and this action — the third hunger strike in two
years — must surely lead many Californians to wonder: Why should we
care? What concern is it to peaceful and law-abiding citizens that
people convicted of serious crimes experience deprivation? Is their
fate not deserved?
We should care. Our treatment of prisoners, even the most dangerous
and irredeemable, is a fundamental expression of American values. It is
the primary illustration of what we actually mean when we speak of
justice, and it is our announcement to the world that we do or do not
have the courage, and the honesty, of our convictions.
We say we lock people up to keep ourselves safe, to deter other
would-be criminals, to express our respect for and reliance on law, to
rehabilitate when possible. And, yes, to punish. Retribution has a
role. But torture does not. There is a point beyond which, without
constant review, oversight and checks of the conscience, incarceration
can give way to sadistic torment.
PHOTOS:
Inside Pelican Bay State Prison
In so-called Supermax prisons, inmates are held, some for years at a
time, in solitary confinement, deprived of human contact for 22½ hours
a day. Correspondence with the outside world is restricted.
Given the prevalence of mental
illness among the general population of state prisoners — an
estimated 30% of such inmates have significant mental illness — it is
reasonable to assume that at least some of those who are placed in
secure housing units already have mental problems, and psychologists
and other experts assert that even the healthiest of people are pushed
to the edge by such treatment.
Prison officials argue that these units are necessary to prevent
gang leaders from ordering killings or other crimes. In a Times
op-ed Tuesday, California prisons chief Jeffrey Beard argued that
the hunger strike was an attempt by leaders of four violent prison
gangs to regain power. And we should not be naive; harsh measures may
indeed be necessary to prevent shot-callers from continuing their
criminal ways when locked up. But when inmates face the possibility of
a lifetime in solitary confinement, as they still do, and when the key
to returning to the general prison population is to "snitch" on another
inmate — although that virtually guarantees gang retaliation — there is
a legitimate question as to whether the institutions and the personnel
we pay to do our most difficult tasks are living up to our ideal of
justice.
A hunger strike may be the only way inmates in solitary can reach us
with their message of protest. We may find their complaints warranted.
Or we may not. But if we care about justice, we should listen.
--
Freedom Archives
Freedom Archives
--
SIGN THE JERICHO COINTELPRO PETITION!
Free All Political Prisoners!
www.jerichony.org
No comments:
Post a Comment