|
|
| Rikers Island (1443628) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
| (1443628) | |
Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 22 18:46:40 2017 I am opposed to closing Rikers.Discuss. |
|
|
| (1443630) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Jun 22 19:06:01 2017, in response to Rikers Island, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 22 18:46:40 2017. IAWTP.However, I would like to see a reasonably sane very liberal poster here (maybe SMAZ or Stephen Bauman) defend the idea of closing Rikers. |
|
|
| (1443641) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Thu Jun 22 19:27:32 2017, in response to Rikers Island, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 22 18:46:40 2017. Di Blowsio's gonna close down Rikers and move the carriage horse industry there.No wait, he's moving the Parking Violations Bureau there. Now he'll fill the jail cells with scofflaws. The lowest of NYC society. LOLLOLLOL Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (1443647) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jun 22 20:00:37 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by AlM on Thu Jun 22 19:06:01 2017. However, I would like to see a reasonably sane very liberal poster here (maybe SMAZ or Stephen Bauman)LOAlM! = #agentprovocateur |
|
|
| (1443696) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Thu Jun 22 23:55:24 2017, in response to Rikers Island, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 22 18:46:40 2017. In my opinion there isn't much up for discussion.No matter which side you are on the politically incorrect issues will have to be addressed and acknowledged. Education and mental illness immediately come to mind. |
|
|
| (1443698) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Fri Jun 23 00:07:18 2017, in response to Rikers Island, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 22 18:46:40 2017. As are most reasoning people. It's not like there is an over-abundance of vacant cells that warrant consolidation. This nust seems to be diBlowsio trying to reduce the "minority" population of NYC residing in jail instead of being put on little or no bail. |
|
|
| (1443704) | |
Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 01:27:07 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by AlM on Thu Jun 22 19:06:01 2017. Well lets discuss why it would be worth closing down.1. Rikers isnt helping anyone basically it has become a giant holding cell. Most people in Rikers are there awaiting their day in court. If anything Rikers is a reminder of an overburdened, underfunded, beauracratic nightmare of a court system. We should not have people waiting years or getting lost in the system. 2. Its dangerous and outdated. It is not helping anyone where its been proven time and time again that sneaking contraband into Rikers seems quite easy, and that technology has left Rikers in the dust. Building smaller, newer, smarter facilities makes it harder for criminals to communicate and recieve contraband, makes it safer for correction officers and makes it harder for bad corrections officers to commit criminal acts. So basically if you have smaller, more secure facilities and a better court system. There is truly no need for Rikers. So lets force us to visit the problems plauging the system like the court system and how pourous Rikers is and lets fix them. If we keep Rikers open we dont fix any of those lingering problems and they remain an elephant in the room. We the taxpayers end up footing the bill in keeping people in jail when they should not be, and from numerous lawsuits stemming from what is going on there. Not everyone at Rikers is a saint, lets make thet clear, but for low level offenders who are truly no harm to society there should be 0% chance they suffer in a bureaucratic nightmare that costs us the taxpayer in the end. |
|
|
| (1443705) | |
Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Fri Jun 23 01:43:45 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 01:27:07 2017. Good post |
|
|
| (1443706) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Jun 23 01:52:28 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 01:27:07 2017. Exactly what is an "outdated" prison?!?!?!?!?!?!? |
|
|
| (1443707) | |
Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 01:55:31 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 01:27:07 2017. OK.Giant holding cell Are local jails anything else? Underfunded Why not spend the money on fixing it rather than replacing it? Isn't fixing cheaper? Dangerous Not fixable for far less money than a replacement? harder for criminals to communicate Isn't Rikers lots of individual buildings? If you have lots of smaller jails would they be smaller than an individual Rikers building? Better court system Isn't that a different issue which needs its own money and can be done independently of Rikers? low level offenders How is a smaller jail with the same unsaintly people as fellow prisoners any different? I wouldn't mind spending tax dollars for making the system better. I'm just not seeing how the extra dollars would help. |
|
|
| (1443708) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 01:59:00 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Jun 23 01:52:28 2017. The infrastructure and layout might have been ok for when it was built but it is ill suited for today. The design, and layout has become a problem. Which has been acknowledged. |
|
|
| (1443709) | |
Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 02:04:54 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down, posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 01:55:31 2017. People shouldnt be spending YEARS waiting for a caseTo rebuild Rikers to suit its need it would be wiser to do the smaller jails city wide. And it would be just as expensive. Yes Rikers is many facilities but they are outdated and would need to be rebuilt from the ground up. Either way you pay. No the system and the jail work together hand in hand, to fix one is to fix the other. You cant address one without the other. Again smaller jails and a system which can process them quickly ensures a lower population overall and a safer population. i can sum up how you feel with a simple phrase..."out of sight, out of mind" i mean lets be real who wants a JAIL near them? |
|
|
| (1443710) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 02:06:45 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 01:59:00 2017. But that's fixable by building replacement buildings on site. It doesn't require acquiring land and building dozens of local jails. |
|
|
| (1443713) | |
Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Fri Jun 23 02:55:38 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 02:04:54 2017. why do people spend years there?I assume they are awaiting trial, can't afford bail, or have such a long criminal history that they are denied bail. |
|
|
| (1443714) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 03:04:41 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 02:06:45 2017. But the city can make money selling off rikers land for development and use it to help pay for the cost. Or LGA can be expanded to handle bigger planes. Its not as if we build the smaller jails and then Rikers just sits abandoned.Also transporting costs are decreased as well. The initial cost may be high but we need to thibk long term and in the long term the costs are lower. |
|
|
| (1443719) | |
Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Fri Jun 23 05:51:44 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down, posted by LuchAAA on Fri Jun 23 02:55:38 2017. To use just one example, courts in The Bronx are so backlogged, it can, and does, take several years for a case to get to trial. If you can't make bail, you will spend those years sitting on Rikers Island. It has happened that defendants have spent more time waiting for their cases to work through the system, than their actual sentences would have been. |
|
|
| (1443724) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by ftgreeneg on Fri Jun 23 06:55:32 2017, in response to Rikers Island, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 22 18:46:40 2017. Don't think it need or should be shut down. For couple of reasons.1. Closing Rikers doesn't do any thing to solve problems with NYC's jail system (long wait till trial, dangerous, inefficiency etc) if the system and management doesn't change they're just moving the problems from one place to another. 2. Rikers in a perfect location. It's isolated no NIMBYism. Lets be honest no one wants a jail in their neighborhood. What needs to happen is an overhaul management, infrastructure and modernizing everything at Riker's and the prison system. Moving Rikers is nothing but treating the symptoms and not the problem. |
|
|
| (1443729) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 07:19:13 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 03:04:41 2017. The value of Rikers land is substantially reduced because of the existence of LGA.I just don't see any evidence that long term costs are lower or even comparable. |
|
|
| (1443742) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Fri Jun 23 08:23:20 2017, in response to Rikers Island, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 22 18:46:40 2017. Someone needs to consult Commander Riker about this. |
|
|
| (1443743) | |
Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 23 08:25:59 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 02:04:54 2017. Why would it be wiser to do smaller jails citywide? Why not build the smaller jails on Rikers Island?That's the problem. The argument for jail and court reform is independent of the argument for moving jails out of Rikers. |
|
|
| (1443744) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 23 08:29:27 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 03:04:41 2017. Rikers Island is essentially undevelopable. It's in an inconvenient location right by an airport.Airport expansion onto Rikers would cost billions and would be of marginal utility. New York already has two airports that can take larger planes. |
|
|
| (1443751) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 08:47:48 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 23 08:29:27 2017. Given the way the LGA runways are situated, I don't really see what benefit LGA would make of the land. Neither runway, if extended, would really extend into Rikers. Extension of the east-west runway seems to be blocked mostly by the bridge, and hardly by the island. |
|
|
| (1443753) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Fri Jun 23 08:52:14 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 08:47:48 2017. Good point. Of course, Tickets could be converted to a massive hub with a bus terminal, long term parking, rental car facility and public restrooms. |
|
|
| (1443754) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Fri Jun 23 08:52:49 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 08:47:48 2017. Good point. Of course, Rikers could be converted to a massive hub with a bus terminal, long term parking, rental car facility and public restrooms. |
|
|
| (1443755) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Jun 23 08:52:56 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by R2ChinaTown on Fri Jun 23 08:52:14 2017. And a golf course |
|
|
| (1443758) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Fri Jun 23 09:04:37 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Jun 23 08:52:56 2017. Well, miniature golf with lots of water hazards . |
|
|
| (1443760) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Jun 23 09:15:21 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by R2ChinaTown on Fri Jun 23 09:04:37 2017. The final hole can be de blawszio's wide open mouth |
|
|
| (1443764) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 09:40:57 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 07:19:13 2017. But the basis of your argument isnt so much cost, its out of sight out of mind |
|
|
| (1443766) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 09:43:11 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 09:40:57 2017. The major basis of my argument is cost vs benefit. Absent evidence to the contrary, I believe closing Rikers will cost a massive amount of additional money (both short term and long term) without any real benefits to either the prisoners or the taxpayers. |
|
|
| (1443769) | |
Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 09:46:01 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 23 08:25:59 2017. That is where you are wrong and your argument falls apart, having smaller jails within the city in the borough where they can be processed with an that allows it maintains the smallest population possible, we minimize transporting cost, we minimize everything. We create system that ensures speed and keeps the jails empty except for the worst offenders and if we move them to state prisons then that problem is solved.I mean the only argument for keeping Rikers is NIMBYism PERIOD |
|
|
| (1443771) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 09:50:38 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 09:43:11 2017. If you want to spend money demolishing a bunch of buildings to rebuild them without also fixing the overall problems, be my guest, you want to waste your money go ahead but my taxpayer money wants solutions. Smaller jails which are closer to the courts, ensures that less people in jails which means smaller facilities are needed which means less personal, less transporting and the list goes on and on which means more money in my pocket.Your solution throws money at a wall hoping for something to change. It wont. Youre essentially putting a fresh coat of paint and calling it a success. |
|
|
| (1443773) | |
Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 09:51:19 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 09:46:01 2017. Transport cost is a small portion of cost.How does population size decrease if you keep people locally? Maybe too many accused are denied reasonable bail, but that's a separate issue independent of where you jail them. |
|
|
| (1443774) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Fri Jun 23 09:54:36 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 09:50:38 2017. You are wrong. You are being emotional and not logical. |
|
|
| (1443775) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 23 09:58:30 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 09:50:38 2017. But building jails elsewhere has the same cost of demolition and rebuilding, but it adds property acquisition. It is likely that the land on Rikers is completely unmarketable and can't be sold to recoup the costs to purchase land elsewhere.I don't see the argument that placing the jails closer to the courts. One proposal for a replacement jail has one at the end of the long dead-end of Maspeth Avenue in Brooklyn. Still out of sight and out of mind of most people and not usefully closer to the courts. The major costs for transportation will still be there, it doesn't add that much to drive the prison bus for a few more miles. |
|
|
| (1443776) | |
Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 23 10:04:24 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island why it should be shut down, posted by ClearAspect on Fri Jun 23 09:46:01 2017. NIMBYism is a valid argument.Having smaller jails doesn't allow the smallest population possible, it just ensures that when the courts fall behind and force more people into the jails, the jails will just be dangerously overcrowded and the conditions will be worse. |
|
|
| (1443778) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 10:08:11 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 23 09:58:30 2017. I don't see the argument that placing the jails closer to the courts.It's a legitimate argument. Transportation is a major overhead cost for the system. Just not one worth $20 billion or whatever. |
|
|
| (1443779) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Fri Jun 23 10:11:52 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 10:08:11 2017. I think the difference would only be fuel cost as the administration and mobilization costs would be same. |
|
|
| (1443780) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Fri Jun 23 10:12:53 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by Fred G on Fri Jun 23 10:11:52 2017. Ok maybe labor cost too for hourly employees. |
|
|
| (1443782) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Jun 23 10:18:42 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 10:08:11 2017. They could put the courthouse out there |
|
|
| (1443783) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 23 10:25:44 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Jun 23 10:18:42 2017. This would only work for Bronx County, and it would either be inconvenient for the court by splitting between two locations, or you would have defendants who are out of jail forced to travel to Rikers for their court appearances. |
|
|
| (1443789) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Jun 23 11:05:45 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 23 10:25:44 2017. i understand that but in my opinion the transportation issues are frivolous.And by the way that's a defendant's problem to make their way out there for an appearance. |
|
|
| (1443791) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Fri Jun 23 11:11:56 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Jun 23 11:05:45 2017. Same transportation issues for juries, witnesses and |
|
|
| (1443799) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Jun 23 11:21:22 2017, in response to Rikers Island, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 22 18:46:40 2017. So am I.Discuss. |
|
|
| (1443800) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Jun 23 11:23:09 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by R2ChinaTown on Fri Jun 23 11:11:56 2017. Yup. But no matter where the courthouse is it'll be a pain in the ass to get to. |
|
|
| (1443803) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Charles G on Fri Jun 23 11:30:56 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 10:08:11 2017. There are two reasons that I'm not even sure that transport costs would decline.First is that transport efficiency would likely deteriorate with many smaller prisons. As it stands now, the detainees are in one location, and they can arrange transportation to the various courthouses with some degree of efficiency. Once you have multiple prisons, they will either have to have more transport vehicles (each with their own driver and guard) or have vehicles making stops (which lengthens the trip times and introduces security challenges associated with each stop that the transport vehicle makes). Second, unless you have a predictable flow of arriving and departing detainees, having many scattered small prisons increases the likelihood that any particular prison will become over-crowded at any point in time. Which means that new detainees would be scattered into other prisons around the city that were not the intended location for that detainees courthouse. Meaning that they might potentially be even further away from their courthouse than if they were at Rikers. |
|
|
| (1443808) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 12:30:15 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by Fred G on Fri Jun 23 10:12:53 2017. Yes, which is considerable. Corrections officers travel in the vans that carry prisoners. Defense attorneys (usually paid by the city) have to travel to Rikers instead of to a jail near the court.Also, it limits the flexibility of the courts (I know because I've been on a jury in a criminal case). You can't run a case 10 minutes late because the prisoner is scheduled for the 4:30 van, so if the witness is expected to run a bit late, you may have to put off their entire testimony till morning. This is all real money, just not billions. I can see the case for adding some jail cells near courts and maybe closing the absolute worst Rikers buildings then. |
|
|
| (1443810) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Jun 23 12:33:30 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by Charles G on Fri Jun 23 11:30:56 2017. It depends whether you put the jails near the courts, or just randomly over the city. So you probably have a good point, because available land is all over, and probably in the most distant possible locations.And of course you are right that more jails means more vans needed, and also less likely to be filled with exactly the maximum allowable number of prisoners, all going to the same place. |
|
|
| (1443814) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Chicagomotorman on Fri Jun 23 12:43:03 2017, in response to Rikers Island, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 22 18:46:40 2017. Is Sing Sing still a functioning prison? |
|
|
| (1443816) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 23 12:45:00 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by Chicagomotorman on Fri Jun 23 12:43:03 2017. Yes. |
|
|
| (1443817) | |
Re: Rikers Island |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Jun 23 12:45:01 2017, in response to Re: Rikers Island, posted by Chicagomotorman on Fri Jun 23 12:43:03 2017. Yes. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|