Vermont removes inmates from Alabama prison

People may end up as correctional facility inmates if they are convicted of criminal behavior; having ignored the laws of society; having taken or put at risk the property, health, safety and life of others. In housing inmates out of state, Vermont has continually exhibited at best a cavalier attitude toward its responsibility to adher to its own statutes regarding the treatment and housing of inmates. The State's primary concern has been cost. Vermont has found it convenient to ignor it is bound by law to house inmates close to their family support networks, so upon release the inmates will be less likely to reoffend. Even though Dick Sears and others in government had severe doubts about the Alabama facility, the $50.00 a day fee was too enticing to resist. Sounds like an excuse many have used when explaining why they are in possession of stolen goods! Being in financial difficulty has never been an accepted excuse for ignoring the law, and Vermont must face that fact and build sufficient correctional facilities within its borders to house its own inmate population.

If you cannot do the time don't do the crime. everyone knows in VT if you are going to do a long time you stand a good chance in being shipped out.

Interesting numbers! Lets hear the rest of them! Just fry them!

Hmmm, The state of Vermont is frikin stupid...
Build or establish more jails in Vermont...
Try keeping inmates within there own county, easier and cheaper for the state and for the people...
Think outside of the box you dumb dumbs...
Oh and nothing like passing the buck over to other states you dumb dumbs, the economy sucks as it is, creating more jails is creating more jobs here...

I hear there will be room at Gitmo in the near future.

Alabama is just one more penalty VT gives inmates because of the unlikelyhood of visitors. NY does the same thing, NYC criminals are shipped to Attica or Adirondack CF because family members are less likely to sit in a bus for 7 hours just to visit the inmate.

Just one other thing to consider before you do the crime.

I think Russia should take all of USA's prisoners and vice versa! That should put an end to visits!

Christopher Coughlin wrote:

People may end up as correctional facility inmates if they are convicted of criminal behavior; having ignored the laws of society; having taken or put at risk the property, health, safety and life of others. In housing inmates out of state, Vermont has continually exhibited at best a cavalier attitude toward its responsibility to adher to its own statutes regarding the treatment and housing of inmates. The State's primary concern has been cost. Vermont has found it convenient to ignor it is bound by law to house inmates close to their family support networks, so upon release the inmates will be less likely to reoffend. Even though Dick Sears and others in government had severe doubts about the Alabama facility, the $50.00 a day fee was too enticing to resist. Sounds like an excuse many have used when explaining why they are in possession of stolen goods! Being in financial difficulty has never been an accepted excuse for ignoring the law, and Vermont must face that fact and build sufficient correctional facilities within its borders to house its own inmate population.

Vermont absolutely should be concerned with costs. Why should we, the tax payers, have to pay $140 a day to house these criminals, when we can pay $50?, which is still in my opinion way too much. This is more than many people in the area make working a full time job. From what I've heard, you don't get sent that far away unless you're going away for a while, in which case we would probably be accurate to assume your crime was not petty. It is not our responsibility to make sure that these losers are kept close to their family members. If they really cared about being close to loved ones, they should have thought about that before they committed their crimes.

I'll watch them for $25/day but you won't like how they are cared for! They will be alive but just barely! Certian ones like Sex Offender Woman Beater Michael Brillon can stay for FREE!

Real Vermonter wrote:

I'll watch them for $25/day but you won't like how they are cared for! They will be alive but just barely! Certian ones like Sex Offender Woman Beater Michael Brillon can stay for FREE!

Can I be one of your prison guards?

Yes but you have to be passionate and willing to remind the prisoners every second of the day and night why they are there!

Perhaps Sheriff Arpaio in AZ could house them for us. Pink underwear and jump suits, no TV, peanut butter or bologna sandwiches 3 times a day, labor in the prison gardens........

Real Vermonter wrote:

Yes but you have to be passionate and willing to remind the prisoners every second of the day and night why they are there!

Im in..kinda like raising my children again ha

JUST like rasing BAD children!

Anonymous wrote:

<quoted text>
Vermont absolutely should be concerned with costs. Why should we, the tax payers, have to pay $140 a day to house these criminals, when we can pay $50?, which is still in my opinion way too much. This is more than many people in the area make working a full time job. From what I've heard, you don't get sent that far away unless you're going away for a while, in which case we would probably be accurate to assume your crime was not petty. It is not our responsibility to make sure that these losers are kept close to their family members. If they really cared about being close to loved ones, they should have thought about that before they committed their crimes.

if another state can charge Vermont $50 a day why cant they just build a prison in Vermont to house them there? FOR THE SAME PRICE

DONT TRUST EVERYTHING YA HEAR IT CAN BE DONE AT HOME JUST AS WELL IN ANOTHER STATE!

$25/day take it or leave it!

wankee wrote:

Perhaps Sheriff Arpaio in AZ could house them for us. Pink underwear and jump suits, no TV, peanut butter or bologna sandwiches 3 times a day, labor in the prison gardens........

I find it interesting someone would tout that lunatic as a solution given that he received a vote of no confidence from his own deputies and has cost his county, its cities, and the state of AZ millions in dollars in lawsuits based on abuse (many found true by the way and upheld in court).

rounding up illegal immigrants doesn't seem like lunacy to me. making due with the funds you have available doesn't sound perposterous either.

BRV 40 wrote:

<quoted text>
I find it interesting someone would tout that lunatic as a solution given that he received a vote of no confidence from his own deputies and has cost his county, its cities, and the state of AZ millions in dollars in lawsuits based on abuse (many found true by the way and upheld in court).

I think you are full of C.R..A .. P...prove one word of what you are saying is true...

wankee wrote:

rounding up illegal immigrants doesn't seem like lunacy to me. making due with the funds you have available doesn't sound perposterous either.

I am not saying that catching illegals is bad but he isn't doing anything that other border area law enforcement agencies aren't in that regard. As to making due with what he has available, what sense does it make to save a dollar only to pay out twenty dollars to fight and lose lawsuits over prisoner abuse?

Here is a link to an article exposing his latest and greatest hijinks.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi...