Emptying out my notebook, I wanted to share a few details that did not make it into the story than ran this week about the Department of Corrections’ decision, in the face of a persistently high inmate population, to extend its contract with Corrections Corporation of America and continue to send hundreds of Vermont inmates out-of-state.
* Given that the DOC currently has 1,600 in-state beds and 2,100 inmates, I asked Corrections Commissioner Andy Pallito whether his department is considering building a new prison in Vermont, rather than relying on the for-profit CCA. Pallito said the DOC does not have even preliminary plans to build a new prison, but expected to discuss the issue with state lawmakers during the upcoming session.
“I think it will come up this legislative session,” Pallito said. “I think it will be a part of the conversation, though it’s always about money.”
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
If Vermont could give junkies and addicts a medical solution to addiction problems, a big driver of crime would be gone. Thing is, the idea that an addict could get a legal prescription for his fix is just a nonstarter for most people. We seem to prefer an unending war on drugs to actually tolerating those who are getting high to escape their demons.
If we cleaned up our courts and criminal justice system a big driver for crime would be gone.
Harsher penalties would in the long term reduce the prison population even if it would it cause a short term spike.
If a first offense DUI required 30 days in the clink instead of 30 hours community service do you think the number of cases would fall rather dramatically?
How about if distribution of drugs led to 3years in jail opposed to 20-30 days and community service? Think that might discourage a few more people that making an extra 50G’s on the side isn’t really worth it…?
No one fears a slap on the wrist…so why do we do it? If you aren’t going to adequately punish someone for breaking the law then stop it.. Clog up the system ……… stop doing so. Give them a penalty sufficient to deter criminals or just send them on their way with a scolding. The half assed approach is why their is crime and why we have too many criminals to hold in our own prisons.
And eliminate the plea deal… the most ridiculous thing ever. Most people are guilty, know they are guilty but plead not guilty why????? SO they can cut a deal with the state. In the meantime, they are scheduled for court, incarcerated in prison until the hearing and talk with the public defender who talks with the prosecution. On the other hand, if the sentence was a week in jail period… people who were guilty would just plead no contest, go serve their time and not have wasted the courts, public defenders, prosecutions time.
I
You give the legal system too much credit. They don’t think about anything this much. LOL
I would at least like to see a lot more treatment within the prison setting. Sullivan County NH – not too far from Springfield – has a program that provides substance abuse and (if needed) mental health treatment in their county jail, and it’s looking pretty promising.
So, it is your contention that a harsher sentence deters criminal activity? WOW. Research and education could show a lot of people that logic like that is what exacerbates the problem. Let us remember that we have a legal system, still, that presumes people are innocent until PROVEN guilty.
What’s a little corporal punishment amongst friends?
That’s a nice straw man you built there.
We already have long sentences for drug offenses, unfortunately as soon as one guy goes away another takes his place. The money, thanks to prohibition, is just too tempting for some people to turn away from.
I have read that in China, a drug dealer gets a bullet in the head, yet they still have drugs in China.
If addicts could get prescriptions for their high, the black market would disappear and along with it the violence and burglaries.
Addiction is a medical problem, and some medical conditions are chronic-but it is more humane and more economical to treat these people than to prosecute a “war on drugs”.
Addiction is a different animal. We definitely need to treat addiction in a much different way then we are. You can’t throw someone in jail, let them come off it, and they put them back on the streets and think they aren’t going to relapse.
Distribution is another story. I know at least one case where a dealer had been nabbed a time or two and gotten some community service, but as he was generating a 6 figure yearly salary a month on work crew wasn’t too bad. I mean heck, work 30 days for 100G’s where do I sign up. Eventually, he was busted and spent several years in a federal prison… missing out on his wife and kids growing up. To the best of my knowledge that solved the problem.
Did someone else take his place… I’m sure they did. Does that mean we should overlook the crime, not to me it doesn’t.
The way to end the dealing is to take the money out of it- addicts should be able to get a prescription for methadone or whatever keeps them on an even keel.
We’ve had this war on drugs since Nixon’s presidency and all we have to show for it is massive incarceration, disproportinately of black men, and the system seems fine with that.
Here’s where I think there is a flaw in your plan. What do you do with these people? Are you going to give a job to a heroin addict that is now on Methadone? Prob not, so they are going to be in the system collecting benefits and with little money and time on their hands. They are soon going to find that hey, this methadone sucks, I’m not getting high anymore. Hey lets go rob a place and get some heroin. Giving them treatment doesn’t end the problem. In VT we have methadone clinics…we also still have prevalent herion use and a 70% relapse rate for those who took methadone.
Consider, we average ~50 deaths per year from opiates in this state, or 250 over a 5 year period. We have had 76 methadone attributed deaths over a 5 year span. If you consider the 70% relapse that means 75 people who died could have quit using methadone… and 76 of them will then die from the methadone. That doesn’t sound all that successful to me unless your goal is to kill off drug users. Hmmmm…..
Although politicians make careers out of promising to perfect humanity, that is an impossible goal. Why just this morning I let my car idle for 10 minutes to melt the ice, now in Burlington this is a “crime”. The busybodies who passed that law probably would be outraged that I’m bragging about it here but the fact is there’s nothing they can do about it. Perhaps they could declare “war” but they’d have to rely on the police officers at 1 North Avenue who are idling their own cars day and night to enforce it.
What we end up with is a less free society where we all lose rights and freedom because of a minority who lack self restraint. I can’t fix addicts, no one can, not cops, not prisons and not social approbation. What we can do is recognize that the war has not worked and it is time to try something different.
I concur, we need to try something new. Methadone is being tried, it’s not working. A different approach maybe to make the punishment so outrageous as to deter anyone from committing it.
If the consequence of idling your car for more then 5 minutes resulted in a prison sentence would you idle it for 10? Probably not.
Do you want to live in a society where you imprison people for idling their cars? I don’t. (of course there are some peeps in Burlington who probably think it’s a great idea, LOL).
I don’t either, but if your goal is to eliminate car idling which would work better… a $25 fine or 25 days in prison?
I give up, man you are the hangin’judge! 😉
what’s your evidence that methadone isn’t working?
Outside of the statistics that indicate 70% of those treated relapse? Or that over a 5 year period 76 people died from methadone?
~50 people die each year from opiates in Vermont. Over 5 years thats 250 people. If 30% of those could be successfully treated with methadone (remember 70% relapse) then you could save 75 people…. but 76 methadone users died over a 5 year period…indicating that methadone would actually not save a single life. The numbers are my evidence that Methadone does not work…..
http://consensus.nih.gov/1997/…
Relapse happens in recovery from almost any substance abuse treatment (unfortunately), especially one as pernicious as opiate addiction. There’s years of research that says methadone is effective. I’m also curious as to how many of those 76 people who died from methadone were actually using it as part of a treatment plan vs. buying it on the street. Nothing’s effective as a treatment method if you buy it on the street, I think…
67% of the 76 deaths were attributed to illegally obtained methadone. 33% were attributed to methadone that had been prescribed to the person.
If you increase the use of it, you will also increase the prevelance of it being obtained by illegal means.
With regards to relapsing. I find your argument that all treatments have high relapse rates and as such that negates the high rate of methadone and so we should deem it as “effective.”
Obviously effective is a very subject word so it means different things to different people. When 3 of 10 people are successfully treated and 1 of those die from the treatment… well that’s just not how I would define effective. 2 out of 10 does not suggest to me that its the correct course to be on, and that an alternative should be pursued…