The Panopticon come to life.
Prison is not supposed to be a walk in the beach. I understand that. People that commit offences need to be consequenced for their transgressions against what society deems to be the proper set of standards. Consequences should not include psychological torture, self-mutilation and degradation.
“Supermax prisoners’ daily lives are chock full of alienating and undignified experiences, so empty of positive human interaction, thousands are willing to risk death than endure such inhumane conditions. That alone speaks volumes about the reality of life in supermax prisons.
One of the most humiliating aspects of life for inmates are the frequent strip searches – forced to be naked, ordered to bend over by guards and spread the buttocks apart to have the anus inspected for contraband while coughing. Strip searches are the old normal. The photos of nude prisoners in Abu Ghraib in Iraq shocked the world, but to be stripped naked for hours or even days is standard operating procedure in supermaxes.
Nelson explained: “Every time you leave your cell you’re strip searched … They do this to degrade and shock you…Sometimes the guards would make ‘homosexual’ comments like: ‘Hey baby, spread your cheeks’. Darrell Cannon, a survivor of a nine-year stretch in Tamms, described the strip search: ‘They tell you to open your mouth, raise your tongue, hold your hands up, they go through your fingers and toes and tell you to turn around and spread your cheeks up against the chuckhole … It’s degrading to have two other human beings looking at you like you’re some kind of specimen. It is extremely degrading.”
Conditions certainly look promising for an orderly transition back into society.
“Prisoners on suicide watch are routinely left naked in their cells. And inmates have been punished by “caging”, they’re held naked or partially clothed in outdoor holding cages in inclement weather.
There is no pretence of rehabilitation in supermax prisons; the purpose is harsh punishment. Prisoners endure supersized portions of psychological punishment as a result of strict and prolonged solitary confinement. Inmates are confined for 23 to 24 hours a day, every day, in cells that measure 7-by-12 square feet. It is psychological torture.
Supermax prisons are intended to isolate prisoners and to deny human contact. Cannon said: “Everything you do, you do alone … It [supermax] was designed to break you mentally, by not allowing you to have another human being right there with you that you can interact with.”
This extreme environment of sensory deprivation and social seclusion makes men go mad. Supermax prisons are filled with inmates with mental illnesses diagnosed. Laurie “It is a form of insanity to put people in a place that provokes mental illness … Either they went in crazy, or they go crazy once they are there,” said Jo Reynolds, an organiser for the Tamms Ten Year Committee and a Soros Justice Fellow.”
Straight punishment does not fix people. Remove the authority or system that is enforcing said strict punishment and old behaviours will return. So much money is being spent on incarceration in the face of all we’ve learned about how human beings work. We can build the supermax prison but can we build the services and support necessary to transition people back into society? Hell no, we are just ‘coddling’ criminals then and appearing to be ‘soft’ on crime.
Horsepucky.
“Prisoners resort to cutting their flesh: A form of self-mutilation that results in thick scarring. Small shavings of concrete, plastic ‘sporks’ or paper clips are used to cut and cause bleeding to arms, legs and genitals. Cannon remembers some prisoners cutting themselves, “just to feel something … they were willing to do anything to get out of their cell and into the infirmary to be around other people”.
Nelson recalled an inmate who continually tightened a piece of string around his finger. It became gangrenous and was amputated. Men who injured themselves told him: “I need the pain, to feel real”.
“Gassing” is also common in supermax prisons. It is a word used to describe prisoners throwing urine and faeces at guards. Gassing is treated as a security threat and is met with excessive force by a tactical team.
Prison mental health staff label inmates who engage in cutting and gassing as malingering and “acting out”, not as suffering from mental illness. And yet there is decades of indisputable, well-documented evidence that solitary confinement causes mental breakdown and self-injurious behaviour.
Dr Terry A Kupers, a psychologist who has conducted hundreds of assessments of prisoners in supermax prisons, explained in an article in the Belleville News-Democrat. “Twenty-three hours a day alone in a cell causes many inmates to brutally attack themselves,” he wrote. “In the adult male population of the United States, self-mutilation occurs only in solitary confinement. It’s an epidemic across the country. They’re not faking.”
23 hours a day of solitary confinement? The line between prison and torture-camp is blurring.
“Supermax prisons are modern, high-tech, taxpayer funded concentration camps. The architecture is a twisted blend of Fascist-Stripped-Classical and Functionalist designed to facilitate the One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest punishment of inmates. They are located in rural areas in small, conservative, majority white towns desperate for jobs. Pelican Bay was built on an abandoned logging site and is completely cut off from its surroundings. Tamms supermax is located in the far corner of Illinois in the village of Tamms, population: 724. The remote location of supermax prisons keeps them hidden and away from public scrutiny and protest. Media are not allowed in.
On the perimeter of supermax prisons loom large and imposing guard towers with gun turrets and floodlights that resemble German Flak towers.
The interior of supermax prisons is built on the architectural principles of isolation, surveillance and über-control. Doors and gates are controlled electronically. A panoptic central guard tower is encircled by prisoner “pods” and closed-circuit TV cameras allow guards to see into every cell. Privacy is nonexistent. Concrete cells contain a poured concrete bed, immovable concrete desk/stool, stainless steel sink, toilet and mirror. Metal wire mesh cell doors have a slot to deliver food and other items. Some doors have Plexiglas covers that insulate cells from sound, air and vision.”
Contemplating or threatening suicide? Well, well just add more restraints and there we have it, problem solved! (NSFW, violence and language)
To reiterate, yes prisons are necessary. Torture and inhumane treatment is not if we want to honour the claim that we are civilized society.
*April 15th, 2012 Update* – Al Jazeera has continued the series on incarceration in the United States.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
12 comments
August 10, 2011 at 8:23 am
Vern R. Kaine
Arb, have you ever met any of these kinds of prisoners in real life? Thinking about dragging a “reformed”one around to a cocktail party or two? 7 out of every 10 inmates in federal prison are rapists, arsonists, or murderers. The behaviors they exhibit are what bring about the extractions and responses from the guards who are in a highly dangerous position and grossly outnumbered to begin with.
These people have no place in a “civilized society” and if either their choices or some mental condition has turned them into an animal and that’s how they want to be treated, they’ll get it through their own choices and actions.. Besides, the sentencing periods are already liberal enough so they’ll only be enduring the so-called “inhumane” treatment for 1/10th the time anyways.
Guess why they strip search? Because prisoners have learned to hide anything ANYWHERE. It’s degrading? Boo hoo. Better their hurt feelings than a dead guard or other inmate, don’t you think? Or no? Of course, like with the military, it’s much easier for the liberal elite to envision a sadistic guard and a romanticized version of a reformed offender than it is to accept the reality that every inmate in a federal prison is actually an evil person.
Talk to a federal prison guard or an actual inmate as to what life’s really like behind bars. Better yet, ask the victims of these offenders who’s suffered (or is suffering) more by comparison. Keep in mind that every prisoner is a professional con-artist and what they say to the media or some survey-taker is just another con that the liberal elites always fall for based on what can only be some twisted sense of guilt.
And the “orderly transition back into society” line is bull$hit. They’re in a SuperMax for a reason. Let’s see you free up a bedroom in your home for one, or petition your alderman to put a halfway house next door, or better yet, have one down the block where your children play once you’ve “rescued them” from prison if you think they’re so safe and civilized when the “strict punishment is taken away”.
“So much humanity is wasted in prison”. Right. Jack Henry Abbott was a great writer, wasn’t he? Certainly that’s worth rescuing. Wasn’t it Mailer who said “culture is worth a little risk”? Well how’d that turn out?
Or how about with Andrew and Zachary Bagby? Liberal elite “let’s take the punishment and incarceration away” approach was in effect there again. That turned out like a gem, too.
The liberal left always gets played by these cons to bend the rules in cons favor vs. the victims, and in my opinion it’s a disgrace to victims everywhere.
LikeLike
August 10, 2011 at 9:28 am
intransigentia
I wonder if you could clarify:
For those offenders who are so dangerous they really should stay behind bars for the rest of their lives, what do we as a society gain by subjecting them to any more than the minimum force necessary to maintain safety?
Since most offenders will not be kept in prison until the day they die, how do we as a society benefit from having people who have been subjected to this kind of treatment, released back among us? Alternatively, should all violent offences result in an automatic life sentence?
LikeLike
August 11, 2011 at 1:55 am
Vern R. Kaine
Hi Intransigentia,
To your first question, I would offer that the rules and procedures that are in place right now for inmates (such as the strip searches, tossing cells, the “chair”, solitary, etc.) have come about over time in response to the efforts of inmates to either harm guards or other inmates. They appear to be either preventative measures or reactionary measures i.e. if a guy throws his feces at a guard, he gets locked down. If he resists, he gets forced down.
To me what exists actually is the “minimum force needed” because any less than that (mentally or physically) results in more guards or prisoners being proactively killed or injured.
To your second question, “…how do we as a society benefit from having people who have been subjected to this kind of treatment, released back among us?
It’s a good question, but a simplified one in my opinion that skips over many factors. We’re looking at prisons seemingly as the start or cause here when in my opinion it’s far into the middle. Change what’s outside the prison and you change what’s inside. I’ve read about recidivism rates and the Norway prisons and all that, and I do believe they have merit, but the fact is there’s too many factors to change for that to be reality in the U.S.. There’s a religion of violence that’s existed since America’s inception that won’t go away anytime soon, which makes Norway vs. U.S.A. hardly an “apples to apples” comparison. You can even compare Canadian prisons to US prison culture and you see a huge difference. Therefore, I believe a human or social experiment from an armchair like the one the post suggests risks, and costs, lives.
In the sense of wanting more social resources our views may not differ as much as you might think, however the main issue I do have with the “liberal” thinking on this issue is that while all the prisoner’s rights champions are lightening and loosening policy, the Ramon Alvarados, Shirley Jane Turners, and Otis Tooles (or these people: http://www.wesleylowe.com/repoff.html) take advantage of them and innocent people are killed. I think it’s sick that liberals side more with the prisoners than either the guards or the true victims on this issue, and worse, I think it’s ridiculous how it’s people who know little to nothing about what it takes to deal with these offenders who sit outside a prison and pretend that we actually know how. And why? Our guilt? For me, I feel more guilty that I live(d) in a country that puts a baby BACK in the hands of its psycho, murdering mother based on the same kind of thinking and policies that put Johnny the Rapist or Cold-Blooded Murderer’s sensitivities over the safety of a guard or the rights of a victim.
Re: the last question, do I think that violent criminals should receive “automatic” life sentences, first I’d disagree with the “automatic” part. Second, I’d point out that there’s varying degrees of what a “violent” criminal is. The average violent personal offense sentence is 4 years, which probably isn’t even what the criminal actually serves, so what are we talking here? A bar fight, or an illegal burning an 83 year old woman alive to try and cover up a forged check? (Ramon Alvarado).
Whether I think these people should receive life in prison or the death sentence or whatever is largely irrelevant. What matters more to me is what they actually receive and why. If they should receive a life sentence but they don’t because of overcrowding, that’s a problem. If they shouldn’t be here in the first place, that’s a problem. If they’re released and moving in next door to me or my family because some bleedheart figures now that they said “sorry” and cried a little they surely are now “reformed” and they’ll surely be safe in my neighborhood, that’s a problem. Their eggs were really runny this morning or the guard made a boo boo on their feelings? Very, very, low on the list of problems, I think.
Forgive my sarcasm, but in my opinion if someone does something inhuman then they’ve given up their rights to be treated as human. This treatment leads a murderer, arsonist, or rapist good candidates to return to society then? Fine. Keep them behind bars longer. Why should they be given that chance more than their victims? Rapists have $100k per year spent on them in federal prison. Think rape victims get 1/100th of that spent on them? Can’t do the time? Don’t do the crime.
I think the story of Dwayne “The Dog” Chapman and a few others are heartwarming and inspiring, too, but I’m not for changing a system that banks on the other 99% of hard criminals being just like him, and unfortunately there isn’t a million more Chapmans either inside or outside jail to help with the problem. He’s the exception, not the norm. I say instead focus our “rescue efforts” on puppies at the pound – they’re more deserving.
LikeLike
August 11, 2011 at 11:46 am
The Intransigent One
It seems to me that we do agree, what goes on in prisons is way in the middle of any causal chain, and the resources that really need to get spent are the ones much earlier along the path, that give people the support and opportunities they need in order to become upstanding, contributing citizens. And one of the things that needs to change (and is unlikely to change) is getting rid of what you very aptly described as a religion of violence.
That said, I remain unconvinced that the treatment described in the cited article is, in fact, the minimum required for safety. Obviously in many cases force is necessary, and dangerous behaviour by inmates shouldn’t be tolerated. However, the article describes treatment that sounds to me like it goes beyond necessary force for safety, and into degrading punishment for the hell of it. Dismiss it as a “booboo on their feelings” if you like, but do consider that if it’s bad enough to drive hardened criminals insane, it’s probably pretty bad.
Also, I wonder if I wasn’t clear enough about the offenders who aren’t serving life sentences: obviously there is a difference between somebody who got in a bar fight, and someone who killed somebody in a horrible way over basically nothing. There indubitably are some who go free who really should never see the outside of a prison again. No dispute on that.
The problem I’m trying to point out is for those who aren’t the worst of the worst. The ones that we really wouldn’t expect to be given a life sentence. Your guy who got in a bar fight. Since he will be getting out eventually, should he be subjected to conditions that will likely make him more of a problem to society than he was before he went in? Seems like a lose-lose proposition to me.
LikeLike
August 11, 2011 at 3:07 pm
Vern R. Kaine
“Your guy who got in a bar fight. Since he will be getting out eventually, should he be subjected to conditions that will likely make him more of a problem to society than he was before he went in?”
There is actually someone close to me who was incarcerated in Alberta for a violent crime (assault). From his experiences (and others which I’ll mention shortly), his assessment of things was pretty simple: show the guards respect, don’t get on their bad side (i.e. spitting, mouthy, violent, etc.) and your time can go by relatively easy. My friend went in poorly, came out fine and has been fine ever since. Although similar, I don’t think the treatment is as heavy-handed on the well-behaved as this post is trying to suggest.
Plus, control in prison isn’t just physical, it’s psychological, and it has to be. Prisoners have to be “degraded” by guards to a certain level for their own safety and those of the staff. It’s the same on the outside – it’s illegal for you or I to insult a police officer. Why? An officer will also command you to stop swearing even though those are “just words” because they know those words are a gateway to a situation escalating. That’s outside. Think of the potential repercussions to someone standing up to, or defying, authority inside a prison and the risk of a particular guard being seen as weak, soft, vulnerable, or whatever. It doesn’t take much for violence or a riot to break out, and guess who gets targeted first?
My other reference point is a family member who, let’s just say, has been a ward of the both the state and federal penal system in the U.S.. My friend has never met my cousin, and my cousin has done way harder time, but his version of reality and my friend’s are quite similar. His opinion is that yes, it sucks, and yes, the guards are a-holes, and yes, it’s degrading, but he won’t deny that it has to be that way for order to be maintained. He went in bad and came out the same (he just went back in, actually). He’s not the worst of the worst, but he’s incurable, and even he says all those efforts inside a prison are a joke. The guards that I’ve spoken to in FL, MT, and NV agree as well: beforehand it should be about prevention and afterwards it should be about reform, but in-between it should be simply about incarceration, contemplation, and safety.
I guess based on all this I don’t buy that the less than worst-of-the-worst get this sort of treatment unless errors, overcrowding, or simply their own defiances put them in that type of security environment in the first place. I also don’t believe what guards do alone “makes” good people bad. I believe prisons do make bad people even worse, but I think they’d be WAY worse if prisons didn’t do what they do to keep these people in check.
I’d like to add one other thing. With friends and family that I have, I’m all for second chances after these people have served their time. Lawyers, however, and the corresponding risk of a huge lawsuit prevent my company and I imagine others from offering those second chances. Personally, I would like to see mandatory military training (not necessarily combat service) on the “reform” side as part of the re-integration into society. With the exception of haneous crimes, I would be far more willing to hire an ex-con who has proven themselves as a model soldier post-incarceration than someone who just got a stamp of approval by some shrink. I think it’s far easier to b.s. a parole officer, shrink, or social worker than it is to b.s. a drill sargeant and fellow soldiers. Just a thought…
Appreciating the dialogue by the way. :)
LikeLike
November 1, 2011 at 1:19 pm
Mike
Hello, I came to this page looking for insight into the fate of an old friend of mine who was placed in the Florence ADX prison in Colorado. He was caught selling ecstasy and agreed to a plea bargain of 5 years in federal prison. His only crime was a non-violent victimless offense of selling what is largely considered to be a benign and possibly beneficial substance when used in conjunction with therapy (feel free to do your own google search). There were no weapons involved and in the years that I have known him i have never seen him to display violent behavior. Unfortunately I imagine that might change given his new reality.
The longer I follow his case the more I am convinced that the drug war needs to be abolished and all forms of illegal torture and incarceration as well. People should not be subjected to such egregrious punishments for victimless crimes. Just wanted to let the people commenting above know that not all people in Supermax prisons have a history of violence or anti-social behavior.
LikeLike
November 1, 2011 at 2:02 pm
The Arbourist
The longer I follow his case the more I am convinced that the drug war needs to be abolished and all forms of illegal torture and incarceration as well.
Thank you for stopping by and commenting. I’m sorry your friend has to go thought such an ordeal. It must be extremely stressful and harmful for him.
I would have to agree with you on this point, as it has been proven again and again, punishing people does not “fix” them. It never has and most likely never will.
Just wanted to let the people commenting above know that not all people in Supermax prisons have a history of violence or anti-social behavior.
I would infer that the great majority of people in prison are currently being interred for non-violent crimes. The “War on Drugs” has been the a great boon for the prison industry, along with mandatory minimum sentencing restrictions on judicial sentencing.
I hope your friend fares well and manages to survive his experience with the least amount of physical/psychological harm possible.
LikeLike
November 24, 2012 at 1:02 am
James
HAHAHA Rot in Jail and hell, I’m so happy there are jail like this.
LikeLike
November 24, 2012 at 8:06 am
The Arbourist
Your concerns are noted James. Thank you for sharing your edifying opinion with us.
LikeLike
February 24, 2013 at 5:16 am
Hotdog
There will come in a time where. Populated criminal will only grow due to too many people competing for the same resources (food, water, shelter, coin). I’m in favor of death penalty to a guy who kills 3 people or more. Or equal criminal action. Also if you are charge with theft 5 times or more you just don’t get it. Also parent of the children who commit crime should be in prison with the child. Let face it bad parenting spawn more criminal. Off with his/her head. Let face it Resources isnt forever. If we don’t start culling the herd getting rid of the bad apple then we might not have enough resources to feed our future generation.
Again we don’t have unlimited resources. What going to happen when we overpopulate? Wars, Migration… to where , diseases will break out, Depression will occur alot more often, On another note to make is drinking water is actually scarce if it wasn’t for our technology. So really culling our kind is to save our future from outbreaks. We do it to other animal why not us? Many other animal do it to their own herd why not us.
LikeLike
February 24, 2013 at 8:30 am
The Arbourist
@Hotdog
Prisons will not be the answer when scarcity is the problem. Death, disorder and the breakdown of society yes. Problems with prisons, most likely not.
Having a mandatory sentencing structure is not particularly just. The death penalty is not an effective deterrent.
So putting more people in jail is the answer? I thought that you said that we were having problems with overpopulation in jails?
We are in fact “culling the herd”. We let the poorer nations bleed their young and vulnerable. We accept the sacrifice of their people with ease.
LikeLike
February 24, 2013 at 9:41 am
VR Kaine
Interesting to revisit this post and prior comments from so long ago.
While most of the opinions I expressed remain the same, one point brought up by Mike compels me to refine one of my own: I still believe for the most part for the reasons I stated that current treatment of prisoners is what it needs to be, however my comment skipped over the fact that largely due to the drug war, certain prisoners may very well be in the wrong prisons or shouldn’t even be prisoners at all. To subject these people to the bare minimum standard of treatment that a Supermax requires to maintain safety and order would be excessively harsh and could very well be identity-shifting where someone goes in good and humanistic and comes out bad and animalistic.
LikeLike