Hello, I grew up in a relatively affluent neighborhood in 'Out-State' Minnesota. Having grown up during the 60s and 70s I, like most other Americans, have known my share of folks who engaged in the usage of drugs and alcohol and a commensurate amount of criminal activity. One thing for sure is that there has never been any shortage of criminal activity in suburbia...it is just veiled by an increasingly pronounced inequity surrounding access to legal representation. Looking back, I consider cases such as the "junk bond kings" of the Reagan era, or large-scale dope- dealers like John DeLorean--caught red-handed on tape engaged in an huge cocaine deal. Any poor person would have gotten 25 years. America, these days, is rife with criminal activity...though it assumes more palatable forms in 'nice' neighborhoods, or is shrouded--on confrontation--in legal jargon. I am troubled by the fact that, if you are poor or if you belong to a minority population, you are much more likely to do serious time in an institution for your offenses-if caught. If you are wealthy you can, in a sense, purchase 'innocense'. This is by no means a new observation...but we lie to ourselves about the salient fact that quality legal representation costs money. The poor and disenfranchised do hard time for drug offenses, the wealthy go to Hazelden and get 2 years probation. Anyone who doubts this has merely to pass some time in any District Court and watch what transpires. My question is: At what point do we turn from sentencing poor people to lengthy prison terms for 'criminal activity' (while the wealthy are treated for a 'disease' or a 'disorder') and start looking at other ways to turn the tide. Obviously, incarceration has not proven a solution to dependancy or serious and persistent mental illness. I am not talking about murder or rape...if anyone thinks the prison population represents a preponderance of such criminals, they are nuts. At what point do we stop building prisons and start building schools, clinics, and lifting up our poorer neighborhoods? Incarceration has become a business, folks. And an expensive one at that. If we are going to strive to incarcerate or draw into the system an ever-upward spiralling percentage of the population...at what percentage will we stop to consider other options: 7%, 9%...15%? If we are going to do that, let's at least strive for a semblance of equity in punitive response: rich vs. poor. Does anyone truly believe that the current system in any way approaches impartiality? If you are going to utilize Camp Ripley I am sure it will not be populated by the dope-consuming crowd in the 'burbs, will it? How 'bout using it as a place for urban youth to get out of the Hellishness of the realities they face... before they grow up and end up in Stillwater. Would that be a possibility?
Guy Gambill (Uptown) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
