- 01-26-2009, 05:52 PM
You all remember Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona , who painted the jail
cells pink and made the inmates wear pink prison garb. Well.........
SHERIFF JOE IS AT IT AGAIN!
Oh, there's MUCH more to know about Sheriff Joe!
Maricopa County was spending approx. $18 million dollars a year on
stray animals, like cats and dogs. Sheriff Joe offered to take the
department over, and the County Supervisors said okay.
The animal shelters are now all staffed and operated by prisoners. They
feed and care for the strays. Every animal in his care is taken out and
walked twice daily. He now has prisoners who are experts in animal
nutrition and behavior. They give great classes for anyone who'd like
to adopt an animal. He has literally taken stray dogs off the street,
given them to the care of prisoners, and had them place in dog shows.
The best part? His budget for the entire department is now under $3
million. Teresa and I adopted a Weimaraner from a Maricopa County
shelter two years ago. He was neutered, and current on all shots, in
great health, and even had a microchip inserted the day we got him.
Cost us $78.
The prisoners get the benefit of about $0.28 an hour for working, but
most would work for free, just to be out of their cells for the day.
Most of his budget is for utilities, building maintenance, etc. He pays
the prisoners out of the fees collected for adopted animals.
I have long wondered when the rest of the country would take a look at
the way he runs the jail system, and copy some of his ideas. He has a
huge farm, donated to the county years ago, where inmates can work, and
they grow most of their own fresh vegetables and food, doing all the
work and harvesting by hand.
He has a pretty good sized hog farm, which provides meat, and
fertilizer. It fertilizes the Christmas tree nursery, where prisoners
work, and you can buy a living Christmas tree for $6 - $8 for the
Holidays, and plant it later. We have six trees in our yard from the
Yup, he was reelected last year with 83% of the vote.
Now he's in trouble with the ACLU again. He painted all his buses and
vehicles with a mural, that has a special hotline phone number painted
on it, where you can call and report suspected illegal aliens.
Immigrations and Customs Enforcement wasn't doing enough in his eyes,
so he had 40 deputies trained specifically for enforcing immigration
laws, started up his hotline, and bought 4 new buses just for hauling
folks back to the border. He's kind of a 'Git-R Dun' kind of Sheriff.
TO THOSE OF YOU NOT FAMILIAR WITH JOE ARPAIO
HE IS THE MARICOPA ARIZONA COUNTY SHERIFF
AND HE KEEPS GETTING ELECTED OVER AND OVER
THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY:
Sheriff Joe Arpaio (In Arizona ) who created the ' Tent City Jail':
He has jail meals down to 40 cents a serving and charges the inmates
He stopped smoking and porno magazines in
the jails. Took away their weights & Cut off all but 'G' movies.
He started chain gangs so the inmates could do free work on county and
Then He Started Chain Gangs For Women So He Wouldn't Get
Sued For Discrimination.
He took away cable TV Until he found out there was A Federal Court
Order that Required Cable TV For Jails So He Hooked Up The Cable TV
Again. Only Let In The Disney Channel And The Weather Channel.
When asked why the weather channel He Replied, So They Will Know How
Hot It's Gonna Be While They Are Working ON My Chain Gangs.
He Cut Off Coffee Since It Has Zero Nutritional Value.
When the inmates complained, he told them, "This Isn't The
Ritz/Carlton...... If You Don't Like It, Don't Come Back.'
More On The Arizona Sheriff:
With Temperatures Being Even Hotter Than Usual In Phoenix (116 Degrees
Just Set A New Record), the Associated Press Reports:
About 2,000 Inmates Living In A Barbed-Wire-Surrounded Tent Encampment
At The Maricopa County Jail Have Been Given Permission To Strip Down To
Pink Boxer Shorts.
On Wednesday, hundreds of men wearing boxers were either curled up on
their bunk beds or chatted in the tents, which reached
138 Degrees Inside The Week Before.
Many Were Also Swathed In Wet, Pink Towels As Sweat Collected On Their
Chests And Dripped Down To Their PINK SOCKS.
'It Feels Like We
Are In A Furnace,' Said James Zanzot, An Inmate Who
Has Lived In The TENTS for 1 year. 'It's Inhumane.'
Joe Arpaio, the tough-guy sheriff who created the tent city and long
ago started m aking his prisoners wear pink, and eat bologna
sandwiches, is not one bit sympathetic. He said Wednesday that he told
all of the inmates: 'It's 120 Degrees In Iraq And Our Soldiers Are
Living In Tents Too, And They Have To Wear Full Battle Gear,
But They Didn't Commit Any Crimes, So Shut Your Mouths!'
Way To Go, Sheriff!
Maybe if all prisons were like this one there would be a lot less crime
and/or repeat offenders. Criminals should be punished for their crimes
- not live in luxury until it's time for their parole, only to go out
and commit another crime so they can get back in to live on taxpayers
money and enjoy things taxpayers can't afford to have for themselves.
I'm a "liberal" who's all for this this guy
- 01-26-2009, 06:04 PM
This guy's a power-hungry psychotic. He does everything he can to abuse the prisoners, and many are in for things like simple posession of drugs. He even had random searches set up along the highways to catch more people with drugs so he could jail them until he was informed that it's unconstitutional.
- 01-26-2009, 06:04 PM
I am a firm believer that jail should not be comfortable. I am not saying to treat them inhumane, but don't make it more comfortable than out of jail. How the hell you gonna rob or kill someone, then go to jail and come out with a PhD? Why should you commit a crime then have cable TV? I heard of people committing crimes just to go to jail so they can get thanksgiving or Christmas dinner. What kind of shigiddy is that?
The only catch 22 is that some are falsely imprisoned, so it would be sad to get that treatment when you are innocent.
01-26-2009, 06:11 PM
The bottom line for me is jail is not for vacation. If you go once, you should not want to go back. Rehabilitation is a important factor in learning a better way to live but you should have to truly earn perks.
01-26-2009, 06:17 PM
I'm an Arizona resident. Anyone who complains about Joe is either an illegals, a convict, an illegal convict or a civil rights activist. He gets re-elected every year because we want him there. If you don't like the way he runs his jail don't break the law.
There were guys who would sneaking into tent city on work release crews to get food and shelter...during those same hot summers.
01-26-2009, 06:27 PM
01-26-2009, 06:42 PM
Where was the part about unlawful search and seizure?
I've been in his jail multiple times. No one is suffering inhumane conditions. Please.
01-26-2009, 07:32 PM
01-26-2009, 07:36 PM
01-26-2009, 07:38 PM
01-26-2009, 07:41 PM
"I am legally blind and if I can Squat,deadlift and over all get myself to the gym then anyone can get their a$$ in gear and get strong!!" - malleus25
01-26-2009, 07:41 PM
01-26-2009, 07:54 PM
01-26-2009, 07:57 PM
What rape? Where and when? What car searches? Where and when?
01-26-2009, 08:19 PM
I can't find the rape case I was referring to either but here are 24 of them in a nice PDF: http://www.spr.org/pdf/StoriesFromInside032207.pdf
If you think my dislike of the drug war is somehow irrelevant, then you are wrong because that's how this guy is filling his prison. It's not full of muderers and rapists. If you think it doesn't affect you, you're most likely wrong. There is a steroid forum here, if something you want or your PCT is scheduled, YOU could be in there. Personally I don't use steroids or any scheduled substances but I think people should be free to.
01-26-2009, 08:30 PM
I should add that I am an ACLU member but I don't have a problem with most of the stuff they fight, chain gangs, lack of tv/cigs/coffee, and tent cities are fine with me but save them for the REAL criminals.
01-26-2009, 08:37 PM
So let me get this straight. Drug offenders should not go to jail. People who go to jail get raped. Joe Arpaio is a rapist.
Do I have you straight?
01-26-2009, 08:51 PM
01-26-2009, 08:51 PM
By definition if you break the law (no matter how insipid the law may be) you are in trouble, ignorance of that law will not get you off. I also think the punishment should fit the severity of the crime. I agree that some of the things this sheriff may go after are petty but, you know what you're in for should you get caught. Therefore if you can't wait till you get to another county to smoke or obtain weed, you get what you asked for, period.
btw, GO STEELERS
01-26-2009, 08:57 PM
Just because the laws exist doesn't mean we have to agree with all of them. Legislation has NOTHING to do with morality. Supporting someone who imprisons people that haven't harmed and won't harm others is a terrible thing. My problem with this guy is that's who he's targeting. He's not helping society, just moving it towards a police state. I love the IDEA of "The land of the free." The problem is we don't live there and we move farther from it every day.
01-26-2009, 09:32 PM
You have some nerve making statements like the above. The discussion in here is not illegal. No sponsor nor retailer here sells or endorses anything illegal.
The people I work for own a legal on-line retail supplement store.
You are out of line. Big time. Please refrian from making statements of this nature again.
01-26-2009, 09:44 PM
YouTube - American Drug War: The Last White Hope (Trailer)
You should see this movie if you haven't. I'm not necessarily against his methods, but I also don't believe most of the people in jail should be there. Drug users have no business in jail, they should go to rehab just like alcoholics. If they commit crimes while under then influence, then that's a separate situation.
The Drug War failed...
01-26-2009, 09:48 PM
Joe Arpaio does not put people in jail. The judicial system puts people in jail.
01-26-2009, 09:55 PM
I have my own thoughts on weed as well relative to how it's judged and looked at but, obviously in that county it's as simple as this, know the rules, don't break them, then there's no problem and you won't end up with a cell mate.
01-27-2009, 06:37 AM
So Jim Crow Laws were right then ? Since they were upheld by the supreme court and just like today, every "decent" (read: white) person agreed that it was the right thing to do back then.....
Therefor, if you tried to marry, hell even f**K interracially, what, 40 years ago? you got what you asked for, PERIOD. They can take all their laws and shove em up their gay a$$e$.
I wonder if Whites ever became the minority and every colored person voted for "Jim Crow Laws" Fair, but equal.....right? They wouldn't have a problem with it, because....they got what they asked for, PERIOD. And they must follow all laws, Right?
I could f**king care less what people I don't know, never will and never will see think they know how I should live my life, f**k em all, victimless "crimes" are not crimes, ofcourse that's wrong they say, until it comes to them, their families, friends and bribers.......
Ain't nothing honest, good, fair or just about the f**king legal system, anyone who thinks that needs to wake the f**k up.
01-27-2009, 01:07 PM
No, Jim Crow laws were not right and as a person of color who experienced that, I understand where you're coming from. That being said, a person has no choice in what their skin color is or where they were born however, everyone has a choice weather to carry contraband and in most cases in doing something that will get them arrested.
Maybe if I lived there, I'd have a better feel for what's going on but, I do know that if things were a bit more strict like that at Rikers Island or some of these other places that people keep going back to, the rate of recidivism would probably change.
01-27-2009, 01:17 PM
seems to me that the people who complain about treatment of prisoners are usually people doing the sorts of things where they have a reasonable expectation that they could be a prisoner someday.
01-27-2009, 06:38 PM
I like the outside of the box methods this guy is using. I think people in jail/prison should not get to live a comfortable and laid back lifestyle. It should be tough and uncomfortable. The only people I would say should not be subject to these methods are those who are awaiting trial but do not have the funds available for bail or the ability to get a loan from a bondsman. This is only b/c they are technically still innocent. In regards to the whole drug debate, the fact is it is a crime. Whether you are inside for life b/c you murdered someone or your there for 60 days b/c of drug possession it doesnt matter. The only difference is the person there for life will have to deal w/ it for a lot longer. Its simple, if you don't want to be there than don't commit the crime. No one is forcing anyone to possess or use illegal substances. Maybe this will help deter people from committing crimes b/c hell the current system sure isn't.
01-27-2009, 06:46 PM
we had something similar in napa. we had "napa state hospital", which was a gorgeous old building, which housed the mentally unstable. they worked their own crops, grew their own food, etc. it was self sufficient, with the exception of payroll to staff.
some lawyers said it was unconstitutional to have mentally unstable people work - they might not know what they were doing, and it was unfair to make them work. so now it costs a billion a year to maintain it.
oh, and the building was outdated, so they tore it down :
now its just cement blocks, like every other jail.
01-28-2009, 04:15 AM
Well I wanted to point out, that not all laws are right and should be followed and you agree with that.
If one law should be questioned, shouldn't all of them?
Consider this: You wake up in the morning, have a beer(it happens) and you decide to check the mail. As you walk outside and now on the street with an open beer can, a passing cop stops you, because he notices the beer can.
He gets out of the car, tells you you're getting a citation for open container, so you say "WTF is this BS, I'm right outside my house" he decides that instead of the citation, he's gonna arrest you and charge you with what? Disorderly conduct? Drunk & Disorderly ? Breaching the Peace?
Then you get pissed off, so you say f**k this, get your hands off me, you get charged with Resisting an officer W/O violence. You get 3 charges, for drinking your beer a few feet away from your house, from saying a word about the irrationality of a cop's actions and for not wanting to be detained and taken?
Is this a bit "extreme"? Possibly, however, these laws DO exist and the Police CAN & WILL implement them anytime they will, there is nothing wrong in the eyes of the law with the above scenario, he got what he asked for, PERIOD.
While in some places, even in the US, it's 100% legal to drink in public, so that situation would've not happened, you would not be in jail facing charges, the law made him a criminal for something which is nowhere near criminal in the first place, but he got what he asked for, PERIOD.
Alcohol abuse: Harwood projected that the cost in 1983 was $116 billion (3).
I'm not even gonna get started on Alcohol vs illegal drugs here, but the fact remains, "criminals" with no victims are punished(too harshly) and criminals who victimize people are not punished harsh enough, like shooting a pizza delivery guy to impress your friends, killing him and then walking out of prison in 5 years! (Real Case Study in a CJ course I took)
Just pointing out the BS.
Ahh, but that is not "usually" the case.seems to me that the people who complain about treatment of prisoners are usually people doing the sorts of things where they have a reasonable expectation that they could be a prisoner someday.
That makes as much sense as the following:
1-People who object the death penalty do so because they "are usually people doing the sorts of things where they have a reasonable expectation that they could be a killed by the state one day."
2-People who are against the violent treatment of mentally ill people, do so because they "are usually people doing the sorts of things where they have a reasonable expectation that they could violently treated someday"
3-People who are against harsh interrogation and torture, do so because they "are usually people doing the sorts of things where they have a reasonable expectation that they could be harshly interrogated and tortured.
4-People who are against the Patriot Act or complete surveillance INSIDE their homes, do so because they "are usually people doing the sorts of things where they have a reasonable expectation that they could one day be facing prison without charges or they must have something to hide since they object to 24/7 surveillance!
Very irrational argument and false statement.
Just for the record, I am most certainly NOT against the death penalty and am in favor of harsh interrogation, ONLY if connections were proven beyond reasonable doubt and ONLY if it were proven that they DO have the information but do not want to give it up.
Ie: Subject A is the mastermind of an attack that will claim thousands if not stopped, Subject B knows a bit about the attack since he helped design it for Subject A, a "contractor" if you will.
Recent pics show Subj A talking to Subj B and involvement in the planned crime/attack and trading illegal equipment/cash with each other, Subj A escapes, but Subj B is caught, am I in favor of torture if needed in this situation? until the information comes out!
01-28-2009, 10:37 AM
He knew the open container law exists. Yet he chose to violate it. Wether the law is right or wrong he chose to violate it.
The cops, doing a job that he is paid to do, informs him he was in violation of the open container law.
A mature, intelligent individual, who knows he just broke the law would say something like; sorry officer, I made a mistake. In haste I forgot to leave my beer in the house when I ran out to get my mail. I made a mistake. Could you please give me a break.
Instead he behaves immaturely and unintelligently and use vulgarity, abusive and antagonizing language. Then when the cop informs him that his behavior is inappropriate and that he will be arrested, he use further abusive language and he becomes combative and resistant.
The cop was not irrational. He are irrational. A rational person would be passive and submissive, respectful and courteous in hopes that his humility will offer him an opportunity for leniency. He act the very opposite and is likely disrespectful, arrogant, abusive, vulgar and combative with any an all authority or any and all things that conflict with what he think is right or wrong.
You don't make the rules. Whether you agree with the validity or merit is not the issue. You can chose to follow them or you can chose to break them. But there is no one to blame but him for his behavior and his consequences. All of the trouble is of his doing and he brought it upon himself.
People need to quit blaming everyone else for the trouble that they create for themselves.
01-28-2009, 10:49 AM
Was there something that forced him from not putting down the beer on a table before he walked out the door - no.
01-28-2009, 10:55 AM
01-28-2009, 11:02 AM
So you believe we should follow the law, no matter what? or we create trouble for ourselves?
You wouldn't have a problem with Jim Crow laws then if they were implemented against you? Right? because if you didn't you'd be, as I quote you "Instead he behaves immaturely and unintelligently". For example, if you and your family use the wrong door or drinking fountain, you'd receive a misdemeanor citation, you would gladly accept that, act submissive and passive to the officer, apologize and ask him if he can cut you a break.
Yeah, let's all follow every law the government writes and never question or resist them, let em pass any law they want! OBEY OBEY OBEY !
01-28-2009, 11:08 AM
All laws are based on community rules. the community is based on local area. Just a week or two ago, a cleric in saudi arabia stated that 12 was a marriagable age for women. In the US that is child molestation.....
01-28-2009, 11:20 AM
So you'd agree with it? accept it and then maybe if you don't like it, work with your community to get rid of the law?All laws are based on community rules. the community is based on local area. Just a week or two ago, a cleric in saudi arabia stated that 12 was a marriagable age for women. In the US that is child molestation.....
You'd also accept your 12yr old daughter marrying a 25yr old then if you were living there?
If you were deemed fit for sterilization, you'd also accept it too, "These laws were upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1927 and were not abolished until the mid-20th century. All in all, 60,000 Americans were sterilized"Theres a difference between a peaceful protest and "get your ****ing hands off me you cocksucking pig". You do accept the cop giving you the misdemeanor ticket for the jim crow law, and then you work with your community to get rid of that law.
Trust me, if Jim Crow laws were implemented and I were to ever receive a citation for using the wrong door, I'd thank the cop for doing his job and keeping the community a safe and orderly place, apologize for my behavior and ask him for forgiveness, after all, he is doing the right thing and I am the criminal in that situation, it is for my and everyone's safety.
01-28-2009, 11:24 AM
01-28-2009, 11:26 AM
also great taking things out of context, its not a random selection of who got sterilized. Thats if you can count on wikipedia to be accurate of course
he U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a Virginia law allowing for the compulsory sterilization of patients of state mental institutions in 1927.
Beginning with Connecticut in 1896, many states enacted marriage laws with eugenic criteria, prohibiting anyone who was "epileptic, imbecile or feeble-minded" from marrying.
01-28-2009, 11:34 AM
If I then in the process behave in a way that brings added offenses upon me by acts of resistance then I have created more trouble for myself.
If I knowingly break a law I am guilty of breaking the law. It is my doing. If I unknowing break a law it is still my doing. I am guilty and still behave with humility. Belligerence is not the way to behave. I address it with due process.
If I have an issue with a law then I have every right to petition my congressman and protest what I feel is an unjust law. I do not on the other hand have the right to belligerently offend laws and law enforcers as a means of protest and than demonstrate further belligerence by resisting.
Fire burns. You don't like that it burns. You don't want it to burn. You want it to stop burning. Stick your finger in it. Did you change it? Whose got the problem?
01-28-2009, 11:47 AM
You said you would accept any law at any place you're in, so you'd have to accept that too.Thousands of people do every year. Would "I" accept that? no, but i'm not from that community, so my feeling is irrelevant. in their community that is acceptable behavior. Just like in tampa nude bars are ok, in utah bars aren't ok at all.
Don't be scared, I probably won't like your wife anyway.Probably you ought to be sterilized Realistically I could see that thousands of people ought to be. just go to a Walmart and go shopping, or drive through any ghetto.
But I do agree with the other part, I see about 70-80% of the population getting sterilized, once they're gone, no more of them !!
The term was further refined into mental and moral imbecility. The concepts of "moral insanity," "moral idiocy," and "moral imbecility," led to the emerging field of eugenic criminology, which held that crime can be reduced by by preventing "feeble-minded" people from reproducing.also great taking things out of context, its not a random selection of who got sterilized. Thats if you can count on wikipedia to be accurate of
he U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a Virginia law allowing for the compulsory sterilization of patients of state mental institutions in 1927.
Beginning with Connecticut in 1896, many states enacted marriage laws with eugenic criteria, prohibiting anyone who was "epileptic, [COLOR*********]imbecile[/COLOR] or feeble-minded" from marrying.
Sterilizing people that break the law too or refuse to submit, even if the law is not fair, a group of people that decide if you don't act in a certain way they think is right, they have the right to sterilize you?
Keep Obeying and Believing the BS!