190
Woman strangled during overnight visit with her husband at a California prison
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2025
190 points (96.1% liked)
News
28181 readers
4578 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Compensate their families or other next of kin.
I'll be honest, I believe in prison abolition. I don't really want to defend the concept of life in prison. We don't need to lock people up.
But it's clearly better than killing people.
Do families get compensated after their relatives die in prison? That's a new one to me.
I guess the families could be compensated if their relatives get the death penalty? Then that would make it "ok" by your "logic."
Yeah, it'd be nice if people didn't commit crimes. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in.
You should focus on reality instead of your fantasies more often.
This exact same glib argument can be used against your own complaints about life imprisonment, so I'm not even sure what you're arguing for at this point.
Uhh, what? I guess I need to be very specific with you, lol.
You were saying that you don't want to defend life in prison or locking people up. I countered by saying "yeah, it would be great if we lived in a world where that wasn't necessary, but that's not the world we live in."
Since you're the one so pre-occupied in living in a fantasy world where you think prison isn't necessary, I said "You should focus on reality instead of your fantasies more often."
Ironic how you're saying this after you're the one who said "compensation for families makes dying in prison ok." How come you completely ignored my point about giving compensation to families of people who get the death penalty?
You're the one arguing we shouldn't imprison people for life. People in favor of life imprisonment can turn right around and say; “yeah, it would be great if we lived in a world where that wasn’t necessary, but that’s not the world we live in.”
“You should focus on reality instead of your fantasies more often.”
I was saying it's better than the death penalty, not that it's okay.
Wrong. I'm arguing that by your "logic," the reasons you give against the death penalty are also applicable to life in prison. Therefore, you shouldn't be saying one is okay but not the other, which is what you were doing.
Good, I'm glad you can at least be direct about it now. What should we be doing instead?
You started off arguing against life in prison.
I only said that life in prison is less bad than execution. I never said either were okay.
Create a society where there aren't incentives to do crimes and then focus on reeducation and rehabilitation for people who need help adjusting to life in a peaceful society.
We need schools and hospitals, not dungeons. In some cases people might need to be involuntarily placed into reeducation and rehabilitation, but that's far different from just locking them up as a form of punishment.
What should we be doing instead of sending people to prison until we have the society you envision?
Well we could start by massively reducing the prison population. If we addressed crowding, existing prisons would be far more humane.
I'm sure there needs to be a phase-out period while we build hospitals and schools, it really wouldn't take that long if we actually marshalled all the forces of production on the project. If we built as fast as China we could replace all prisons in a year.
You didn't really answer my question.
By instead, I meant instead of sending people for prison (possibly for life.)
"Reducing the prison population" still involves sending people to prison, possibly for life. What should we be doing instead of sending people to prison before we live in a society where people don't commit crimes worthy of incarceration?
I'm sorry I have to be so specific with you, it feels like I'm talking to a genie lol.
Well I literally said we can keep the prisons open while we build the hospitals and schools. There's no where else to put people who are a danger to themselves and others.
Also, we can definitely redefine what a "crime" even is; so many people are locked up that don't need to be.
To be clear, since you don't seem to understand what I'm saying, I'm saying that hospitals and schools replace the prisons. In a just society, antisocial behavior would be treated with rehabilitation in hospitals and reeducation in schools. Again, the hospitals and schools replace the prisons.
I'm sorry that I keep repeating myself but it seems like there's some fundamental disconnect with what I'm saying that you don't seem to be understanding. Are we communicating through translation software?
So... we go all the way back to my previous point where I said you think it's okay to imprison people for life even with the possibility that they are innocent.
Stay on topic.
No, I understand exactly what you're saying. You know it's stupid to argue "the death penalty isn't ok because sometimes people are innocent" while saying "but it's okay to lock them up for life even though sometimes they're innocent." Instead of owning your incorrect stance, you try to pivot and derail to something else to avoid admitting you're wrong.
Do you see how difficult it was for you to admit it's necessary to lock people up? That's because you knew you were wrong, but tried throwing as much shit at the wall to see if you could get away with it.
Lol, me too! I have to keep repeating myself because you don't want to admit when you're wrong. So you just keep saying the same thing in slightly different ways or throwing in distractions thinking it's going to get you different results.
I said to keep the prisons open until we replace them. That necessarily means we aren't imprisoning people for life, because the prisons will close. We just hold them for the length of time it takes to replace the prisons with schools and hospitals.
Get it?
Also I don't know where you got the idea that I actually support life imprisonment? I only said it's better than the death penalty.
I keep repeating myself because you seem to be willfully misunderstanding me over and over.
Sure. If we happen to migrate to this fabled society of yours where prisons aren't necessary before people currently in prison die. But until we reach your fantasy, (which could be a LONG time) you admit that "you think it’s okay to imprison people for life even with the possibility that they are innocent."
All the schools and hospitals in the world aren't going to stop people from harming each other. Get it?
Oh my god, we're just going in circles now. Re-read my previous comment for why you're incorrect.
I'm going to have to ignore you now because I've said everything I needed to say and you're just proving me right again and again. You know your argument is weak, so you're afraid to stand by it. You keep pivoting to something else to obscure the fact that you're wrong.
You may need to work on your reading comprehension, too. I suggest taking a remedial English course at your local community college.
Thanks for showing me that people like you don't actually have a leg to stand on when saying the death penalty should be abolished. You're living in a fairy world while pretending it's reality. It makes sense that you'd think "schools and hospitals" could replace prisons, lol. How many schools? How many hospitals? You know people still commit crimes when going to nice schools and having access to nice hospitals, right? Lol.
Reeducation and rehabilitation you stupid shitbag, why is this so hard for you to understand?
Talking to you is self harm.