Talk:Incarceration in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Incarceration in the United States article.
Article policies
United States Portal
This article is within the scope of the United States WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to United States-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Criminal justice Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Crime, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide on true crime and criminology-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
WikiProject Crime To-do:


Contents

[edit] Population Stats

Just wondering... if the us population is 300 million and the prison population is 7 million, then why does it say that 1 in 100 adults are in prison?? shouldng it say 1 in 43 people?? or 1 IN 27 ADULTS? (adults make up 63% of the population, out of 300 million people of which 7 million are incarcerated) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.235.85.1 (talk) 19:05, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ground Level Nuke

This article drips with a particular POV - it needs to be discarded and written by someone else. While I more or less agree with this particular POV, it has no place here. The statistics and counts and international comparisons are scary enough, they can and should be presented in a neutral manner. People can come to thier own conclusions.

[edit] Your POV drips in another way.

The viewpoint of this article is actually quite "conservative" as is the media in general. How can a corporate media driven by profit be otherwise? Why should we make these facts seem less "scary"? Why condone the atrocities of our own government? It may not be politically correct to criticize the government, but where has being P.C. gotten us? Let's wake up and start rocking the boat. Otherwise you may be the next victim of the "justice" system.

The facts demonstrate that the reality is actually much worse than you think!

"The U.S. now locks up its citizens at a rate 5-8 times that of the industrialized nations to which we are most similar, Canada and Western Europe," said Marc Mauer, Assistant Director of The Sentencing Project, a non-profit criminal justice research and advocacy group.

"While Canada imprisons 116 people out of every 100,000 in the country, the U.S. locks up 702 people per 100,000."


While I concur that being politically correct is not entirely important, especially as it is a POV itself, I must say that finding reliable info about this subject that isn't biased has been hard. Statistics can be very misleading. Such as my personal fav, '5 out of 3 Americans can't do fractions.' How does one determine what is biased and what isn't on the internet? No solution for SF yet. Tell me on Talk:Sagittarius Flame if you have any ideas how to better research this topic w/o getting all stuck in a library. 21:16, 1 November 2006 (UTC)Sagittarius Flame

[edit] Television in ADX

The section about supermax prisons says that television privileges in the ADX prison are "virtually non-existent", but then further down it describes each cell as containing a "13-inch black and white television". What are those televisions for if television privileges are so rare? --209.108.217.226 18:02, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Those televisions are used for the same purpose they serve in the general population. They are the opiate of the masses.

I spent five years working in the ADX. The article concerning the ADX is wrong on several issues. All cells have televisions. The inmates get only local stations and an institutional channel. All cells have windows. You can not see the sky from the windows, only dead space. All cells have showers in them. Recreation is done in groups of 5 to 10 based on population. The unit yards are big enough to have two full basketball courts and a hand ball court. The rec. yard that the article mentions does exist. It is used for inmates who for what ever reason cannot have recreation with their fellow inmates. The cells are not sound proof. It has been my experience that inmates at the ADX are there for a reason.

[edit] Shorter Sentences in the U.S.

This section seems POV, or at least poorly written. E.g.:

"This overcrowding problem was caused by the War On Drugs of the 1980s."

No NPOV source is cited for this. From the information in this article, only coincidence can be inferred; causality is not shown. If someone has sources to support this claim, please reference them. Otherwise, this section should be removed or edited. ---blahpers 02:29, 2004 Nov 5 (UTC)

From what I know, the above quote is partially correct: the War on Drugs is ONE of the causes of overcrowding."


I also have to question the wisdom of including this sentence in the opening paragraph:

Some observers have gone so far as to accuse the United States of deliberately developing the legal system and the prison industry as a means of social control beyond that normally associated with criminal justice.

While it's phrased in a relatively NPOV manner, it is a very bold assertion and I'm not sure it should be one of the very first things a reader sees. Funnyhat 21:49, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] there are inaccuracies...

there are many inaccuracies and over-generalizations in this article, such as all of the info in the Maximum Security section, to begin with.

and

"Now, whenever a new prisoner is incarcerated, a criminal must be released to satisfy the fire code requirement. Consequently, prisoners of all kinds are let out of prison early."

this implies a stable prison population, implies that prisoners are not kept 8 to a 6-man cell, implies that prisons are not doubling capacity by simply adding a second bed to one-man cells, implies new prisons are not being built, when in fact,

the population is constantly growing, prisoners are NOT let out without regard to what crime they were convicted of, prison overcrowding is rampant, with inmates housed in overcapacity situations, put into prison gymnasiums and on rooftops, prisons with one man cells are doubling capacity by adding beds, and prison construction is at an all-time high and increasing yearly.

What are the sources for the data? Just that one book referenced in the article?Pedant 02:10, 2004 Nov 12 (UTC)

[edit] This entry should be rewritten and reresearched

I agree with the posting above. Prison population in the U.S. has consistently risen in recent history [1]. Prisoners are often double-bunked, contrary to what the current entry says [2].

Here is an article that would corroborate the assertion that the War on Drugs is responsible for the increase in prison population in the U.S. [3].

eappleton 08:43, 2004 Nov 12 (UTC)

[edit] Non-violent offenses

All this stuff about large percentages of inmates being for non-violent offenses needs to be worked on - Statistics lie and everyone knows it. It's extremely common for violent criminals to be convicted of "non-violent" drug crimes because often those are the easiest crimes to prove. Often, victims and witnesses are violent crimes are afraid to come forward, or are threatened and intimidated by defendants and their friends. Drug cases are much easier to prove because they usually involve undercover police officers who are much less likely to be threatened or intimidated. Tufflaw 01:46, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

This sounds fairly possible. However, a basic tenet of countries with a rule of law is that you consider crimes that people have been convicted of — not crimes that they may or may not have committed. David.Monniaux 06:47, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
This still needs to be grounded in reality. The vast majority of dispositions are via plea bargain, and especially in cases involving drug dealers, the violent crimes are dismissed in satisfaction of the guilty plea to a "non-violent" drug crime, thus skewing the statistics. Tufflaw 15:00, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
Interesting. You may then want to explain this phenomenon under the statistics section. I also suggest you edit plea bargain and signal this as a possible side effect of plea bargains. David.Monniaux 17:54, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] A very biased article

I don not know enough about the prison system to question the accuracy of this article, though some of its assertions seem ludicrous. But this article has been written in a very biased manner, something which is clear throughout.

Hah! I would like to see how it is possible to create an article which doesn't appear biased, as the truth of the US prison system is that it is truly appalling for an otherwise civilised country! zoney ♣ talk 08:58, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Agreed on that point. It's sometimes said that a country's prisons reflect the type of society one lives in, and the state of prison in the US is not good. Now, if you compare it to the prisons in hell hole countries ours are like country clubs by comparison, but you don't say that a thing is any good simply because everyone else is worse. Could we do better as a country, and maybe do something about the way prisons corrupt everyone - including the corrections officials - involved with them? Yes. Have we even tried? No, basically all anyone sees prisons as are a revenue facility and by making things as bad as possible, it encourages redicivism, which keeps everyone in their high paying and cushy jobs. The last people who want prison reform is anyone who makes money off prison systems as they are now. Paul Robinson 21:15, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
Nothing says that this isn't true (that they really were violent) but if the statistics are there it can be considered as fact. If not for that, what would you put on Wikipedia?

[edit] Commentary matches current sociological thought

My reading of this article is that most of it is in line with current criminological and sociological thought. I belive is article is in need of better citations, but as a whole, those who disagree with the facts presented should specify which individual facts they have a problem with, and we can deal with the issues individually.

It doesn't matter whether the article matches current sociological thought - you're basically saying that, because people THINK it's true, therefore it IS true. But when inaccurate statistics are used to skew towards a particular POV, then you run into trouble. People have heard the mantra "prisons are filled with non-violent offenders" so often that they just assume it's true, without anything to back it up. The statistics are notoriously inaccurate, as I mentioned above, because often violent criminals are eventually convicted for "non-violent" drug offenses, making it seem as if they are non-violent, when they are anything but. Not to mention the whole "drug offense" being non-violent is ridiculous as well. Anyone who lived in New York City, or any inner city in America, in the 80's will scoff at the notion that drug dealing is a "non-violent" offense. Tufflaw 15:17, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

I will stay out of the POV/NPOV debate, but I will say this is a very short article. It can't be left for months tagged as POV without anyone offering any changes. I would encourage people to be bold and edit the page as they see fit. Robneild 08:55, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Warped by bias

This article is warped by its manifest bias. An article purported about "prisons in the US" would be reasonable expected to focus on the prisons themselves: the various security levels, notable facilities, historical development, conditions for prisoners, impact on popular culture, etc. To have the article kick off with a discussion of the incarceration rate is absurd, and clearly motivated by the author's opinion that the rate is too high. This rant belongs in a discussion of the criminal justice system, not an aticle about prisons.

Sorry I don't have time to edit this article myself, but the bias accusation is valid, and the POV tag should be removed only when the article is NPOV, not because a timer has expired. Jeffr 14:08, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

I'm going to make an effort very soon to work on this, it really does need a complete overhaul. I agree with your assessment about the topics that should be included. Tufflaw 05:10, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nations not reporting statistics that may exceed US incarceration rate

According to [4], there is no information for 17 countries. This alone is enough to count as a "few" countries. Furthermore, only a handful, if *any*, are likely to have a higher incarceration rate than the US.

The initial sentence as stands, as Tufflaw reverts to, is quite simply misleading and inaccurate. The qualifier is barely justified (as indeed it may be the case that none of the 17 countries have higher incarceration rate). Certainly adding "few" is quite important if the qualifier is there at all.

zoney ♣ talk 30 June 2005 23:29 (UTC)

Regardless of the need to include the word 'few', the countries that do not report incarceration statistics are hardly a random sampling of the world's countries --- those that didn't report numbers tend to be the worst-run governments on Earth. The bare assertion that "only a handful" have a higher incarceration rate than the U.S. is dubious, to say the least. jdb ❋ (talk) 30 June 2005 23:45 (UTC)
"Furthermore, only a handful, if *any*, are likely to have a higher incarceration rate than the US." Not sure how you justify this assertion with no facts to back it up. This report also includes a pretty strong disclaimer at the end with respect to how the figures are collected, specifically that "people held in custody are usually omitted from national totals if they are not under the authority of the prison administration." This would omit millions of people in local jails in countries whose bookkeeping methods aren't as efficient as the U.S. In essence, because the U.S. is so good at keeping track of its prisoners, it looks like it has the highest number. This study is clearly flawed and can't serve as the basis for anything. Tufflaw July 2, 2005 04:56 (UTC)
The opening sentence makes it clear that it is the "reported" incarceration rate is what the US has the record for. The source given is based on the reported rates. The disclaimer in the opening paragraph as stands only mentions countries with no reported rates. There are only a few such countries (an important point).
And my comment about "only a handful, if *any*" is merely due to my considering it highly unlikely that anywhere could have a higher % of their population incarcerated. (Hello? Have you looked at how absurdly high the rate is, how many prisoners the US has?) I'll readily admit that this is not verifiable - as such, I haven't added that to the main text!
zoney ♣ talk 6 July 2005 23:20 (UTC)
It should be noted (and will be, when I get around to re-writing this mess of an article), that there are countries (more than just "a few") who only seem to have lower prison rates due to the abundance of corporal punishment doled out (ie: Singapore's public floggings). These should be considered when accusing the U.S. of having the highest incarceration rate. Tufflaw July 7, 2005 00:33 (UTC)
Right - but the opening sentence is specifically referring to the *reported incarceration rate*, for which the US has the highest. The existing disclaimer specifically refers to countries *not releasing incarceration rates*, and suggests some of those could have higher incarceration rates. Only a *few* countries don't release incarceration rates. My comments above are likely valid too - that even of these, it's likely only a *handful* have higher incarceration rates (aside from other issues of dealing with criminals) because that of the US is *huge*!
zoney ♣ talk 23:15, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I think we may safely assume that countries not reporting statistics, or reporting underestimated statistics, are authoritarian regimes, or are poor, disorganized etc. and do not have the means to support appropriate statistic gathering. Thus, we may accurately state that the US is the developed country with the highest incarceration rate. David.Monniaux 06:57, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Request

Could someone add some information about the structure of the US Prison system, the differences between Federal, State and County prisons and how they relate to their respective justice systems? --BadSeed 20:32, 23 July 2005 (UTC)


BadSeed, per your request, I've begun a section on this; however, it may take a few days to complete. Any input you have regarding what you would like to see would be appreciated.
PS: If anybody can send me information on the local jail systems of other states, it would be greatly appreciated as my personal experience and knowledge is limited only to Ohio's jail/prison system.
Stowsux 04:37 8 September 2005 (UTC) (11:35 7 September 2005 (EDT))

[edit] Figures

Removed "(the U.S. prison pop) is around 22% of the total world prison population" for all of the reasons noted in talk. Without accurate data for various countries the assertion is specious. Prison lists nine million incarcerated worldwide--North Korea alone would almost certainly take this up 5-10%. Make a guesstimate from [5]. Marskell 11:16, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Is that to suggest that 2-4% of the North Korean population is in prison (the necessary number to bring the world prison population up 5-10%)? That's a large percentage even for the worst forms of Stalinism or Maoism at their worst.


[edit] Deleting this

What an unsalvageable mess. I would support deleting this just so we can be cleansed; maybe, then, we can start fresh.

Lotsofissues 19:26, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I concur! --Coolcaesar 06:35, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rework the mess

We should just rework this entire mess, and delete unnecessary things as needed.

Mulder416 3:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Deletion of sections?

As an onlooker, just removing huge chunks does not seem to be the answer since it just makes it harder to understand. I shall revert, but someone may remove my edits should they see fit - but I ask you all strongly consider rewriting (on a test page?) BEFORE you remove stuff, no matter how small the replacement may be, something I feel is needed in its place. By all means strip the article, just don't destroy what slight knowledge is currently in place. Ian13ID:540053 20:11, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Then again, half this article seems irrelevent and useless. I'll have a look through, and try and deflate it a little. Ian13ID:540053 20:14, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

Dispite knowing nothing about the subject, I have cleaned up the article alittle, generally to make it NPOV and make sence. I have also added footnote references whereever possible to show statistic sources. Should be a good base for some expansion now :) Enjoy and good luck! Ian13ID:540053 10:35, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Population

I see in the article "As of 2003, the incarceration rate in the United States was 482 per 100,000 residents" but looking at the U.S. Department of Justice PDFs that seems to exclude various groups like juveniles? Is this usual? It goes on to say the total rate is 701 per 100,000 in 2002. Robneild 23:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Umm....

See Talk:Bubba. - 70.109.72.185 23:32, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This Article Is In Bad need Of Repair

This article needs to be totally overhauled, and brought into compliance with NPOV. Being in the law enforcement field, I can tell you that there is no possible way to arrive at many of the statistics that are mentioned. I vote to just remove this article all together, or NUKE it and start from scratch. Johnppd24 15:41, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the article is a mess and it has been tagged as such for a very long time. However as most of the numbers are sourced and from government documents I wonder which ones you are objecting to. Rmhermen 15:46, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Edits

So far, I've moved a few things from the beginning to alleviate some of the worst symptoms. An intro sentence has been added to the Comparison w/ other countries section and I moved a paragraph from the beginning that fit in better with the criticism than with the beginning of this article. I did this because the beginning of this article used to sound a lot more POV than acceptable. A total overhaul was a bit impractical. Let's work with what we have and chop out the bad fat of this article. 21:08, 31 October 2006 (UTC)Sagittarius Flame see Talk:Sagittarius Flame to comment directly.

Well, I've done a bit more grammatical work and axed a few less-than-NPOV statements and questionable ones as well. Please cite sources if you revert anything you've done to my edits and/or see Talk:Sagitttarius Flame to comment directly on any edits I've done. 21:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)Sagittarius Flame

[edit] Closed Society

The prison system in the United States and everyone that interacts with it is part of a closed society from which it is practically impossible, perhaps completely impossible, to obtain neutral data. For instance, the news media report facts that are usually not factual but politically motivated interpretations of random information. The court system reports information that is colored by its motivation to reduce workload. The police report information that has been adjusted to improve their working conditions, increase pay, and reduce their exposure to lawsuits. In many states, the county sheriffs department runs county prisons and they report their own point-of-view. The state prison systems are usually run by political appointees and their staff report information from their perspective. The federal government, with its prisons, reports only what they feel the people “need to know.” Other information is kept secret. With all those points-of-view about the prison systems, it is unlikely that there is a neutral point of view unless the article degenerates to a road map of where prisons are, rather than what they are.

With this in mind, I think that fixing the article simply requires better sourcing. For instance, when one reports that some prison uses psychotropic drugs to control its population, the information needs to be sited, at last as “According to the California Department of Metal Health, in their May, 2005 article on prison population…” Even if the California Department of Mental Health is wrong, and publishing blatant falsehoods, the article remains correct because the article is not required to determine truth, only to properly reference information. You certainly know that there is often a large gap between information and truth. If you want the truth, you will never be able to publish an article about prisons for the reasons cited in my first paragraph. Moreover, whatever you may have heard about prisons --- it is much worse than anybody would dare report. The correctional industry attracts workers who are deviates from the normal kind of person. These persons have their own point-of-view, which so filters (corrupts) information that normal people really do not know how to interpret it! --LymanSchool 16:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I fail to see how this is different from reporting on any other government agency or program. Ford MF 17:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
If you are reporting about some other government agency, chances are pretty good that the information was provided by a person or a group of humans who, although they might tend to cover up problems, are still sane and generally think like other humans. This is not necessarily so when reporting about prisons! The people who are in the "correctional business" are a different breed, entirely. Their perceptions are often often quite unlike persons who work in the trades, for instance. You will never learn what goes on behind the bars unless you live there. Then, nobody will believe you if you try to say, the result being that nothing can be verified. That's the point. Writing about prisons is very different than writing about playing checkers so you have to leave a little slack or else nothing gets written at all. --LymanSchool 01:58, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Aside from the fact that this entire talkpage section screams POV violation, you still haven't made a case for why CO's are some kind of magic breed that only people who work and live in prisons understand. Similar (and similarly flawed) "closed world" arguments could be made about police officers, prostitutes, mafiosi, drug addicts, Las Vegas showgirls, Hasidic Jews, &c., &c. Yet somehow good articles manage to get written about them. Ford MF 02:26, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
How naïve are you? When reporting about workers in prisons in the United States, you are talking about persons whose way of life involves abusing other human beings. This abuse, although usually physical, is often sexual and emotional as well. A whole industry has grown up around persons who get their rocks off by abusing others. This industry is called the “corrections” industry. The industry attracts perverts for employees. Of course, it is likely that you will claim a POV argument, but perverts are perverts regardless of the perspective. If you do not understand this, then the whole idea of communication is moot. Perverts are not going to provide documentation about their perversion because, the last time I checked, they could get into trouble for so indulging. This means that you are not going to have available any information that could truly show the state of US prisons today. You will have information provided by “correctional” institution officials, filtered for content, and information provided by former prisoners, perhaps expanded. What are you going to believe? You cannot believe any of it. You can only REPORT it, which was my original premise. Look at NSA. You have the same problem. You have an article about what the organization is supposed to do, plus some buildings. Then there is some stuff about what they got CAUGHT doing. From this, you can only infer things. You can never get inside. You report only what has been fed to you. The problem is even worse when it comes to prisons. Because of the closed nature of the corrections industry, they do not provide the public with any information. From the perspective of prison administration, the public does not have a right to know anything. They report to the courts, telling them only what they want the courts to know (overcrowding, etc.) and to the governor’s office requesting additional funding. Everything else is secret.
The US Juvenile corrections industry is a microcosm of the US Prison system. Persons who work in juvenile correctional institutions in Massachusetts are not allowed to divulge any of the “therapies” used to manage or control the juveniles. This means that you hear nothing of the rape and torture until somebody dies at a “boot camp.” Even then, you hear only that the unnamed juvenile (they can't divulge his name) was trying to kill a “counselor” so he had to be “put down.” How much is true? Probably nothing is true. The facts, from a spider on the wall, would probably be that the “Master” (not a counselor), was hitting the juvenile in the stomach for not standing up straight. The result being that the prisoner collapsed from internal bleeding. --LymanSchool 15:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
http://www.educationnews.org/Commentaries/Americas_Throw-Away_Children.htm
http://www.marshalltribune.com/story/1169074.html
http://www.freebookclubs.com/article/book-children-families-troubled-abominable-9-06.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_D._Devlin
http://www.blogofdeath.com/archives/001357.html
http://www.mcalesternews.com/features/local_story_328111307.html
For your enlightenment---LymanSchool 15:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Major edit on November 29

I tried to rewrite a lot to be grammatically correct and more politically correct. I tried to get rid of the weasel words as well. Of course, it can always be reverted, but I think this goes a long ways towards fixing it up. Cheers --LymanSchool 21:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

It appears useless. Most all the weasel words have been put back in since this edit. Editors need to learn that this is an encyclopedia article, not an Editorial! Things like this; "California, ostensibly to prevent violence, ..." cannot exist in an encyclopedia article. Something is done to prevent violence (according to some cited reference) or it is not. There are many other editorial comments that have been added, in particular unreferenced quotes like "Prison-industrial-complex!" If some noted source said this, then the source needs to be quoted. One cannot just guess that this is current world opinion (even if it is)! --LymanSchool 21:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vague Definition

In the section entitled 'Comparison With Other Countries' the article states "the U.S. rate is three to eight times that of the Western European nations". What constitutes 'Western Europe'? The Czech Republic for example? It is further west than Finland. The countries of Europe have massively different incarceration rates and in my opinion it makes no sense to talk about a GEOGRAPHICAL area like Europe when comparing cultural/social issues. It is like comparing incarceration rates between the northern and southern hemispheres. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.9.138.200 (talk) 08:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] These statistics are completely wrong

Whoever wrote the statistics part completely misread the USDOJ site. The numbers are for 2005 and the 1.4 million figure applies only to incarcerated women. It's written in plain English there, so I'm not sure how anybody got their signals crossed, but the size of the US prison population is a pretty hot topic so people might want to not completely mess up the statistics. Anybody who wants to correct it can feel free to; the USDOJ site that those numbers were taken from is here: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm. This is why Wikipedia isn't respected--it isn't even copied properly from primary sources. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.108.65.16 (talk) 15:00, 29 April 2007 (UTC).

I must be missing something, because the first two highlights on BJS page you referenced don't jive. With a total of 2,245,189 prisoners, the US population would have to be in excess of 450,000,000 to account for only 497 per 100,000 residents. Dividing total # of prisoners by total population gives more like 750 prisoners per 100,000 residents. Does the 2.2M include, and the 497 per 100,000 exclude, inmates not convicted, i.e., those being held over for trial or arraignment? The difference is roughly 750,000, which seems ridiculously high, even considering how backlogged the courts are. Someone please enlighten me.

[edit] Illegal immigrants.

They make up 27% of the prison population in the United States. I'm adding this to the article. --Rotten 23:23, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


Why aren't they just deported?

[edit] Conditions - paragraph add

I've reverted edit by 72.69.77.177 - big NPOV issues with the paragraph they have added plus no citation. Will-h 15:16, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 25% of world prison population

The only source I can find for the 22% is the world socialist website, with no backup whatsoever. Further, the citation is to an MSN article which DOES NOT say the same thing. I removed the statistic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.81.111.246 (talk) 19:06, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] politics in prison

Are there any corelations between the prison populations and the politics of the locality? For example, are right wing states likely to have more prisoners? Are there any studies relating to this subject? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.134.113 (talk) 18:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)