Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 12 Aug 1992 12:55:08 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: direct mail from jail

From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>

> I don't know why convicted felons can run for office, but I *do*
> know that convicts forfeit a number of rights when they go to
> prison, one of which is the right to vote.  In addition, there

Yeah, but do they forfeit their right to employment?

> is a law that says that a criminal cannot profit from his crime.
> In other words, you can't write a book about how you killed 50
> people and went to prison and expect to keep any of the proceeds.

And I agree with that law.

> It seems to me that people convicted of credit card fraud have
> given up their "right" (if any) to gainful employment that involves
> the use of other people's credit card numbers.  Maybe what we need is
> to require telemarketers who take credit card numbers to be bonded; I'm
> pretty sure convicts can't get bonded.   (And BTW, I've *been* a tele-
> marketer, and we *never* asked for a credit card number.)

And I agree with you on that too.

> And another thing.  If going to prison means that the only thing that
> changes is your address, what is the deterrent effect of the threat
> of prison?  There's a guy in Illinois suing the prison system because

And maybe you can tell us who suggested that the only thing that
should change if you are in prison is your address.

It is interesting that Missy P 2 B addresses every situation (i.e.
profiting from your crime and people convicted of credit card fraud
taking credit card numbers on the phone) other than the one I posed.
Why do I have the feeling that Missy's real problem is not
that credit card numbers of unsuspecting people fall into the hands
of convicted criminals but rather that we should use every excuse
and deny whatever possible to criminals.  What if the system was
set up such that the credit card numbers were given by punching in
the numbers rather than by voice?  And what if the telemarketing
people would scramble the numbers with a password (pass-number?)
so that the criminal would not receive the real number?  Or what
if the punched in numbers went to the telemarketing headquarters
directly without being revealed to the criminal?  Would then
Missy drop her objection?  I think not!  So why not come clean
and object to the idea of prisoners gaining employment.  I respect
and respond to that kind of approach better.

Let me ask my question again -- in case Missy missed it the
first time.  Say you are in prison on a crime unrelated
to POLITICS.  Say I would like to give you $1M to write a
book about your experience while on this list.  Should you
be allowed to enter such a contract?  Should I be allowed to?

Please answer this question and THEN pose your own if you so
desire.

> Apparently, we are no longer interested in penitence.  We're too busy
              ^^
> trying to make them comfortable and happy.  For many, this is the best
> they're ever going to get.

I don't know about YOU but I think people should pay through
their noses when they do others wrong.  I also think we are a nation
of laws (not the biblical ones :-).  So my concern is this: according
to our laws and Constitution as they are set as of now, can we
deny employment to prisoners?  Denying them to leave the prison
seems natural, denying them facilities, and offices and equipment
seems reasonable too, but can we deny them the right to enter into
contractual agreements with others?

> Gainful employment is the icing on the cake.

How about breathing (breeding)?

> ---Missy P 2 B

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU