Our state's own Guantanamo Bay: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "This new scheme applied to sex offenders, too. Rather than merely being released after their prison terms, increasing numbers were civilly committed to secure facilities like ...") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
The question is how long hundreds of "patients," with no hope of release from this Minnesota-style Guantanamo, are going to put up with these conditions without harming themselves or others. If Minnesotans really want sex offenders to be detained for life, without any possibility of release like Guantanamo detainees, why not get right to the point and eliminate the unnecessary expense of sham "treatment"? Life sentences in prison with no parole or other chance for release for <i>all</i> sex offenders would eliminate the dishonesty of calling prisoners "patients," society would be more secure, and Minnesota could save a heck of a lot of money.<br> | The question is how long hundreds of "patients," with no hope of release from this Minnesota-style Guantanamo, are going to put up with these conditions without harming themselves or others. If Minnesotans really want sex offenders to be detained for life, without any possibility of release like Guantanamo detainees, why not get right to the point and eliminate the unnecessary expense of sham "treatment"? Life sentences in prison with no parole or other chance for release for <i>all</i> sex offenders would eliminate the dishonesty of calling prisoners "patients," society would be more secure, and Minnesota could save a heck of a lot of money.<br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<i>source: Article 'Peter Erlinder: Our state's own Guantanamo Bay' by Peter Erlinder (professor at the William Mitchell College of Law in St. Paul); www.startribune.com/ 562/story/383702.html; StarTribune.com; 21 April 2006</i> | <i>source: Article 'Peter Erlinder: Our state's own Guantanamo Bay' by Peter Erlinder (professor at the William Mitchell College of Law in St. Paul); www.startribune.com/562/story/383702.html; StarTribune.com; 21 April 2006</i> | ||
[[Category:Peter Erlinder]] | [[Category:Peter Erlinder]] | ||
Latest revision as of 23:17, 21 May 2017
This new scheme applied to sex offenders, too. Rather than merely being released after their prison terms, increasing numbers were civilly committed to secure facilities like St. Peter and Moose Lake, ostensibly for "treatment" as well as public safety. Over the past 12 years, Minnesota has already spent more than 300 million tax dollars on sex offender "treatment," and the number of "patients" is rising rapidly. Both the St. Peter and Moose Lake facilities are seriously overcrowded. "Patients" cost nearly three times more than prisoners, and "treatment" costs are rising faster than prison costs.
But despite these huge expenditures, over the past 12 years not one "patient" has successfully completed Minnesota's "treatment" program and returned to life in the community. Some "patients" have completed "treatment" by dying of old age or illness. From the viewpoint of "patients" who have no prospect of being released alive, breaking out can seem to be the only way out. And, as any undergraduate psychology student or prison guard knows, without at least some hope of release, there is little reason for these captives to cooperate with whatever program is offered.
The question is how long hundreds of "patients," with no hope of release from this Minnesota-style Guantanamo, are going to put up with these conditions without harming themselves or others. If Minnesotans really want sex offenders to be detained for life, without any possibility of release like Guantanamo detainees, why not get right to the point and eliminate the unnecessary expense of sham "treatment"? Life sentences in prison with no parole or other chance for release for all sex offenders would eliminate the dishonesty of calling prisoners "patients," society would be more secure, and Minnesota could save a heck of a lot of money.
source: Article 'Peter Erlinder: Our state's own Guantanamo Bay' by Peter Erlinder (professor at the William Mitchell College of Law in St. Paul); www.startribune.com/562/story/383702.html; StarTribune.com; 21 April 2006