Re: Considering the feelings of felons

On 5/23/2024 4:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

In article <v2o7tu$1tkcc$2@dont-email.me>,
  moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
 

On 5/23/2024 1:53 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

In the race to the bottom, my state has made a bold and aggressive move.
How can California catch up?
>
The legislature sent a bill to the governor, HB4409, an amendment to the
Crime Reduction Act of 2009.
>
I know it's a House bill but it's actually an amendment managed on the
Senate side. My legislature has a practice in which a series of shell
bills are passed early in the session, then amended by deleting everything
after the enacting clause, as it gives legislative leaders greater power
to shove bills through at the end of session; very little happens before
the final weeks of regular session.
>
Changes references from "offenders" to "justice-impacted
individuals". Provides that funds shall be distributed via a
grant program (rather than allotment of funds shall be based on
a formula). Provides that the Adult Redeploy Illinois Oversight
Board is created to oversee, provide guidance, and develop an
administrative structure for the Adult Redeploy Illinois
Program. Provides that once all members have been appointed, the
Board may exercise any power, perform any function, take any
action, or do anything in furtherance of its purposes and goals
upon the appointment of a quorum of its members. Establishes
specified membership on the Adult Redeploy Illinois Oversight
Board. Provides that the Oversight Board shall, in addition to
its other duties establish a grant program (rather than develop
a formula) for the allotment of funds to local jurisdictions for
local and community-based services in lieu of commitment to the
Department of Corrections and a penalty amount for failure to
reach the goal of reduced commitments stipulated in the plans.
Provides that grant funds awarded shall be administered by the
Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, in coordination
with the Oversight Board, and shall be consistent with the
requirements of the Grant Accountability and Transparency Act.
Provides that the Illinois Criminal Justice Information
Authority shall provide administrative support to the Adult
Redeploy Illinois Oversight Board.
>
https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=4409&GAID=17&GA=103&D
ocTypeID=HB&LegID=151356&SessionID=112
>
I'm not sure what "Adult Redeploy" is. I'm not sure if it's pre-trial
diversion or if it's for adults leaving prison and finding work for them
while still on parole or probation. "Commitment" to the Department of
Corrections sure sounds like incarceration.
>
Now, I heard this on WBBM radio, the 24-hour news station formerly the
CBS O&O but now Audacy. They picked up on requiring state agencies not
to use the word "offender" any longer.
>
My state is gerrymander central for the state legislature, perfectly
legal thanks to promotion of gerrymandering by the John Roberts Supreme
Court versus individual rights of voters to any representation that they
might otherwise choose if the United States had free and fair elections.
The next time John Roberts comes up for re-election, will you please
join me in opposing him?
>
In my state's constitution, the supermajority needed to override a veto
and pass other privileged motions is 3/5. In both houses, the Democrats
did such an amazing job drawing districts that there's a supermajority
in each.
>
The Republican opponent, Sen. Steve McClure, asked if victims would be
called "criminally impacted individuals" but the sponsor didn't touch
that term. "There's been a tremendous rush in this chamber to take away
penalties, take away accurate language to reflect criminal behavior, take
away crimes. Most importantly there seems to be this incredible rush to
take away all accountability for people who commit crimes," said McClure.
>
Note McClure's objection to moviePigization of legal language.
>
https://www.audacy.com/wbbm780/news/local/bill-passes-state-legislature-to-c
hange-the-term-offenders

>
Does it help to point out there *is* a difference between "offenders"
and "justice-impacted individuals"?  Hint: think of parole boards who
refuse to free a model prisoner as long as he maintains his innocence...

 Just say you're guilty to get out, then tell anyone who will listen that
you're really innocent and you only said you were guilty to gain your
freedom.
 Of course such people aren't who the politically correct lunatics in the
legislature are referring to and you know it. They're talking about the
run-of-the-mill shitbag who commits crime, gets caught, prosecuted,
convicted, and imprisoned. The hearts of these politicians inexplicably
bleed for such people and rather than worrying about how their victims
are coping with the violence and loss that have been inflicted on them,
the pols sit around and think up new jargon to soft-pedal who it is
these shitbags really are.

I've no reason to doubt that, as I've been told, prisoners routinely profess their innocence to each other.  And since we know by now that *sometimes* they're right, we have to admit that some prisoners are indeed "taking one for the team" in order for us (including them and their families) to reap the stability our justice system provides.  But at the same time, no, I don't understand how the wording change we're discussing, though semantically meaningful, reached the top of any serious legislator's priority list.