+1 :salute:

That would be a start if more people where aware that due to mandatory minimum sentences in place for drug offenses which means that prisons have no choice when over crowded to release those not serving under mandatory length terms they have no choice but to let these people out and often these are the guys that committed violent crimes some have even said do not let me out!But that is a whole new can of worms.



As to CaptainHaplo we certainly will disagree because you are assuming that this occurs to everyone in the jail and depending on the set up in some cases it may but in many jails they do a separate section for the "drunks" and minor offenders the few hours in jail folks these do not even get a uniform or anything and in some jails they spend more time sitting as one might at the DMV than in a true cell and will not get searched in the "lousy" manner which is a necessary evil if the person is going to be in the jail long enough to have to stay in the true general population then though they have not been convicted they will have to deal with being in jail yes it might some what trample on your rights but not that heavily most people can bail out of jail and you are still getting your due process but if you are in a jail in the general population it stands to reason that the administration has to keep the thing safe for inmates and employees which means that they must insure that people are not ill or hiding contraband and to classify gang members(many jails segregate the gangs for obvious reasons.)

Furthermore your idea of having separate units for those convicted and awaiting transfer and those not seems like a good idea it would fail miserably unless the units where at two separate locations which would be the only way to ensure that the two groups do not interact in any manner what so ever.That would cost as I said billions of dollars in construction and transportation costs we are talking about every county jail in the nation here (you'd need two separate fleets for each group).That would also mean the raising of taxes in order to pay for all the new buildings and fleets of vehicles needed and the extra correctional officers needed.

You can have your view that is fine but I thin you are failing to take into consideration the massive costs that "fully protecting" ones rights would cost.
In the end yes it is lousy but it is from a cost effective and safety stand point the best option.

I don't see what is so safe about putting accused (and therefore possibly innocent) people into a prison cell along with convicted murderers and rapists.

I don't care one bit if drugs or other contraband get into prison. Keeping them sober is not worth trampling on the rights of innocent people.

Nor do I buy the cost argument. If cost effectiveness is really that important then why not just shoot people accused of a crime? After all just think about how cost effective a bullet would be compared with jail room and board, not to mention trials and lawyers and the rest of it... :yep:

Well you should because the majority of people in prison will be allowed back into society at some point and they are allowed to abuse drugs and perform criminal enterprise unchecked then they will have only gotten worse while inside and then when they get out they will come kicking your door in high on PCP and you will have a time putting them down even with a 3 inch magnum 12 gauge.(I can arrange you have a conversation with my brother whose entire squad unloaded on an PCP high Iraqi insurgent they had to blow him apart because even though mortally wounded they just do not stop nor easily will a dude high on meth either and they will come round to someones door after a few years of getting high and having fun in Augusts no searching for contraband prison and they will unleash their scum on society thanks August for the great idea.)

And by not caring about controlling those who need control (the goal of prison in the first place) the inmates who are just trying to do their time and pay their debt to society will have their rights trampled which they still have as citizens of this nation.So the best solution to the problem is to be smart and avoid unneeded interaction with LE in the first place then you don't run risk of getting falsely arrested in the first place.


"If cost effectiveness is really that important then why not just shoot people accused of a crime? After all just think about how cost effective a bullet would be compared with jail room and board, not to mention trials and lawyers and the rest of it..."

Because such a thing would be a clear violation of rights set forth in the Constitution.:03:

The strip search is a necessary action it protects everyone yes it sucks(but not all that bad for crying out loud I can think of few other tings more worthy of the worlds smallest violin playing a tune) but it really does not violate the rights of the accused because they are in a point of the due process system that requires they be held in a controlled manner if so deemed by a judge if they did not perform such actions we'd have seen some other case sooner or later where a person accused got killed by by another accused but not yet convicted with a contraband weapon that he smuggled it can happen and more than likely already has at some point.

In the end it matters little because it has been ruled on already and they made the correct ruling.

That is no solution at all. False arrest is a violation of a persons rights. People have been falsely arrested in their own homes. How does one be "smart" and avoid that?

Besides those cops work for me. I am not hiding from them so I can avoid being falsely arrested. What other freedoms do you advocate not exercising just in case the government tries to violate them?

So does being strip searched if the right to privacy still means anything anymore.

And thanks right back Steelhead for that very fine strawman you built. It invokes the specter of drug maddened ex convicts running around committing all sorts of murder and mayhem and even terrorists!

Unfortunately though I never said that prisoners didn't need to be controlled so your strawman fails.

Bottom line here is if drugs are a problem in a jail it's because the prisoners aren't being guarded closely enough to prevent them from having the time and opportunity to do them, not because the inspection of new arrivals isn't intrusive enough.

Oh bull, it doesn't protect anyone, your sarcasm notwithstanding. It's kind of naive to think that through incoming detainees is the only way a convict can get illegal drugs.

now it's nice to see that you're ok with some of your rights being ignored and violated, i'm sure that the powers that be appreciate your support, but myself and many others are not. Rule number one in dealing with any government: Rights not that are not jealously guarded are soon legislated away. You let one lapse and it just weakens the rest.

Also seeing a judge first is not a prerequisite to being strip searched. The law can hold a person for up to, what, 72 hours? without even bringing charges, let alone getting a court involved. That's long enough to be strip searched, and also long enough to be stabbed or assaulted by one of those convicts. Do you really think it's ok to put innocent people in that scenario?

Personally not for all the smuggled drugs in the world.

It has indeed been ruled on but whether they made the correct ruling is a matter of opinion. Just remember that it wouldn't be the first time their decisions have been overturned.

It's not often that I say this, but well said August. Couldn't agree more.

It is the view that "cost effective and safety" outweigh personal freedom and liberty that is so very wrong.
To quote Benjamin Franklin:

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

The cost of our liberty has been paid in BLOOD. Some of that blood has been shed by many who are here themselves or who have lost friends to secure that liberty. Our nation was formed because patriots who believed in those liberties fought and in many cases died for them. So while it may be considered "offensive" to some, I will say it anyway:

The day the government puts a dollar amount above the freedoms and liberties secured by the blood, sweat and tears of the patriots who serve the nation, it no longer has the right or authority to rule.

The Left wing of the court had this one right. I was arrested for a DUI my first year of college(charges were dropped) I spent 8 hours in jail because I refused sobriety tests.Should I have been strip searched for a misdemeanor offense? NO! People are arrested for the most minor things and should not be subjected to a strip search just because they are arrested. I have been on plenty of ride alongs with friends who are cops back home.Where I am from, they only strip search you if you are put into the actual jail not just the detention facility when you arrested and waiting to be bailed out.Strip searches occur in the detention facility when a person is arrested on a drug charge etc, I could find that reasonable but to strip search everyone who is arrested is pure garbage and kudos to the liberal justices for getting something right, for once.

Bubblehead - we agree on something... Is that scary or what?!?!?!?! :yeah:

How much obvious bull can that "legal expert" put in one short story?:doh: