Coming from Denmark where life is max 16 years and where people rarely go to jail just because society does not know what else to do with you and then moving to the US, the justice system when it comes to petty crimes, always seemed very draconian and counter productive.<p>For most people — just the mere notion of being in conflict with the law — is enough to send chills down their back. How sad that something that could have been used to actually function as a mild punishment ends up completely destroying a life and the potential of being part of society.<p>In a hundred years from now people are going to look back at things like the war on drugs as one of the most barbaric, absurd and useless pieces of legislation ever to have been implemented. A war which ended up destroying more lifes than it saved.<p>I for one applaud Obama for finally taking a stanse against this unnecessarily strict legislation and hoping that normal otherwise law abiding citizens wont get their lifes completely destroyed for things anyone could have done. I love the US but the legislation I could certainly do without.
If I had to characterize Mr. Obama's administration, I'd say he all too often says exactly the right things (and maybe even believes them) but the implementations (if any) leave an endless amount to be desired.<p>But this, like everything the last 8 years, will come out to little more than an eloquent WashPos article. Thanks Obama.<p>Edit: TIL the president cannot pardon state level crimes. oops
The story of Kalief Browder is heartbreaking.<p><a href="http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/10/06/before-the-law" rel="nofollow">http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/10/06/before-the-law</a><p><a href="http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/kalief-browder-1993-2015" rel="nofollow">http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/kalief-browder-1993-...</a>
Far too little and probably too late.<p>Come on Mr. President - you had the past 8 years to visit jails and prisons, to make sweeping changes to the Federal Prison System, and to push for legislation to seriously curtail solitary confinement, for children and adults alike, throughout the state systems.<p>This may serve as a bit of notoriety on your legacy, for the position you take here will surely only gain traction and be looked upon as utterly obvious, but it does little to help those poor souls suffering needlessly and alone tonight.
I see some good points and bad points in this article. I applaud the president for looking into an issue that is traditionally ignored by leaders in the US- the effects of our prison system on the population. I wish he hadnt stopped at solitary confinement. Our entire prison system and matrix of crime->sentencing needs to have a complete overhaul to remove the drug bias on sentences. Repeat violent offenders need to be kept off the streets. Drug users need help, not incarceration.<p>I also wish he hadn't taken credit for reducing crime. I think that this has almost nothing to do with the president. Its very easy to cherry pick the statistics you like and claim responsibility. Would he also like to take responsibility for the continuing/increase in violence against citizens by the police? The violations of civil liberties? Anyway, I hope that this starts building momentum that we need to change our prison system. I think some of the policing issues will start to work themselves out as different socio economic groups see that cops aren't there to harass and arrest, and that drug users may be able to get help.
> As president, my most important job is to keep the American people safe<p>The author, er, the President is incorrect. His most important job is to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. He says this constantly, and, politics aside, it is important for every American to remember what the actual duty of the President is, as affirmed when sworn into office.<p>Side note: Why is this on HN?
There is a guy that is in solitary confinement since 1983 [1]. I was shocked when I read about him. It's a fascinating story, nevertheless so shameful for the society.<p>23 hours a day in a room for more than 30 years. :(<p>1 : <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Silverstein" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Silverstein</a>
2 : <a href="https://thomassilverstein.wordpress.com/" rel="nofollow">https://thomassilverstein.wordpress.com/</a>
Jimmy Carter 2.0: after decades in power, now he wants to rethink policy. Maybe tomorrow he will condemn extrajudicial executions? Or Guantanamo? And sky's the limit once he's out of office.<p>It's one thing that politicians try this but why do people, even smart people, buy it?
It is so hard for me to imagine that socializing with hardened criminals (and being subject to violence at their hands) could be better for me psychologically than being alone. In some ways, that makes solitary even more scary to know that this is true.
The example he gives is heartbreaking, however the solution he poses is only treating, in this particular case, symptons of two other issues:<p>Why does it take 2 years to stand trial for a petty crime?
Why is the accused sent to prison while awaiting trial for a petty crime?<p>Edit: added 'in this particular case'
The article has:<p><i>16-year-old named Kalief Browder from the Bronx was accused of stealing a backpack</i><p><i>"stealing a backpack"</i> doesn't sound so bad, but in the newyorker[0] ha is out on parole and <i>"charged with robbery, grand larceny, and assault"</i>.<p>Robbery and assault by someone out on parole are a fare way from stealing a backpack.<p>I totally agree that the use of solitary confinement is probably to widely used and the story of Kalief Browder is sad, but after reading a bit more about it I feel a little bit tricked by this story. I wish the journalist cold better lay out the whole premises at the start, so I can easier make up my own opinion.<p>0: <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/10/06/before-the-law" rel="nofollow">http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/10/06/before-the-law</a>
I'm with the president on this. Sure wish he'd actually do something, though.<p>As an example of what he could do, there are a few folks from both parties who share agreement that the prison system needs reform. It wouldn't have been too difficult to have co-wrote this piece with them. Heck, then at the end we could have read about the actual legislation sponsored, instead of him just hoping somebody, somewhere will send some to him.<p>Perhaps this president has a different idea of his job than I do. He seems very interested in pretending to be outside the system, dispassionately analyzing it, announcing where we've all failed and where we might do better.<p>This is a great skill for a candidate, and it'll probably serve him well after he leaves the job, but right now? Might be better to do less preaching and a little more compromising. Perhaps I'm being too tough on him. Don't know. Apologies if that's the case. I do note that observers from both parties have described him as being distant and disengaged.<p>This reminds me of the question researchers asked many years ago. Doctor A comes in and takes his time with you, he's polite and interested. Doctor B is gruff and rushed, doing only as little as he thinks necessary to get the work done. Which is the better doctor?<p>The answer is, of course, you don't know. Without seeing results, all you can really comment on is style. Ideally you'd want a doctor that had both technical and interpersonal competence. But without taking a hard look at what kinds of results occur, all a layman can do is comment on the stylistic nature of what they've observed.<p>So it is here. This is a very-well written piece. My intent here is not to criticize the president or play politics, simply to point out that the tech community has a <i>lot</i> of issues we care about, no matter what our party is. And there are a ton of folks who can make a good case for one thing or another. It's important that we sort out folks who can make a great speech but get little done from those who might not be able to put seven words together -- and could actually implement the changes we have to have.
After nearly 8 years of drone strikes and escalation of many of Bush's worst human rights abuses, we get this kind of insulting and silly propaganda, intended to help create the impression that Obama was a humanitarian.<p>We should all be insulted by this...
Not only is the criminal justice system abusive (a problem itself) it plain isn't working.<p>The thing is... there are some extremely bad people in the system who know the ins and outs and consider prison just another place to abuse others while being taken care of.<p>We have too many laws. We spend to much time worrying about little stuff and not enough about big stuff. My personal opinion (I realize this is not likely to be a popular one) is that we need to stop locking people up for little things and return to public hanging for big things. Smoking crack might be stupid but is it really a crime?<p>On the other hand someone brutally killing a child for fun doesn't deserve to even breathe our air. Something like this is beyond rehabilitation. It is broken. Put an end to it without delay and return the raw material to the earth. But don't monkey around with solitary confinement. It is inhumane and in my opinion probably more so than hanging.
Did anyone else notice the parts about 2 years for stealing a backpack or violence at the hands of the guards?<p>Maybe solitary isn't the problem?
What we <i>really</i> need to rethink is imprisonment in general. The elimination of corporal punishment has led to this state of affairs. Nothing is more cruel and unusual than stealing a person's <i>time</i>. Whip wounds heal. And oftentimes, the violence experienced inside is worse than a whipping.
Will he be able to actually do something or will they all block each other so nothing changes? Won't the Tea Party find out that less solitary confinement will utterly destroy the U.S. and make it totally Un-American?