Our
Education section is an undiscovered gem. And it is
definitely not a
compilation of boring academic essays but a riveting look at the
serious
problems facing our education system. Take a moment to check it
out.
About Advertising
Click
Advertise Here for more details about our great advertising
rates.
IMPORTANT
NOTE
If running Norton Internet Security (NIS), please
temporarily disable it to enjoy the rich graphics of this
site.
Adult
Magazines
Should Prisoners Have Girly Magazines?
By Daniel Muniz
Should inmates in prison be allowed to possess adult magazines such
as Gallery, Cheri, High Society, or Playboy? Or should convicts also
have publications like the motorcycle magazine Easyriders since it
has partial nudity?
The Indiana Department of Corrections felt that inmates should not
have access to any such material when they recently enacted a policy
to ban publications with nude, partial nudity, and strong sexual
content. However, convicts Earnest Tope and Wade Meisberger from the
Pendleton Correctional Facility went through the prison grievance
system to challenge the ban but have routinely failed in their
efforts to have this policy overturned.
Shortly afterwards, the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union)
stepped in on the prisoner’s behalf to file a class-action lawsuit
for the 20,000 deprived Indiana inmates.
The first thing that the ACLU did was to seek as much publicity as
possible so they put this case in the court of public opinion. They
started out by making an outrageous interpretation of the policy by
claiming that just about anything could be banned in the prison
system, including some of the great literary and artistic works. And
they even went as far to make the bogus assertion that a magazine
such as National Geographic could also be prohibited. Furthermore,
the ACLU also insists that private personal correspondence such as
love letters sent to inmates could also be targeted.
The purpose of the publicity is to get the public on the side of
prisoners even though many of the inmates are violent offenders. Of
course the ACLU wants to take this case to court (it is irrelevant
if they win or not because they will be generously reimbursed by the
government either way) but they also hope to get the public involved
and most importantly, get the press to apply pressure to the Indiana
Department of Corrections because after all, it is a state agency.
And the tactic is all too common. That is, paint prison officials as
being more sinister than the violent criminals by portraying them as
being book burners who want to prohibit access to the world’s great
literature and art. And such a false depiction will also make it
appear that the Department of Corrections will trample over the
“freedom of the press” by going after news magazines, newspapers,
and even National Geographic.
Forget about the facts of the case like whether or not punishment
includes prohibiting a prisoner from having sexually explicit
magazines in their possession. The ACLU will put the constitution on
trial instead. As a result, some of the news wires are sympathetic
to the lawsuit when they reported this story.
Let’s first focus on the actual facts of this case. That is, should
prisoners have such material in the first place?
Is it cruel or unusual punishment for a convicted criminal serving
time in prison to be deprived of sexually explicit magazines that
are intended to arouse and titillate? Do inmates have a legitimate
need to see naked women in sexually provocative positions? Will they
be emotionally devastated if they are deprived of their girly
magazines? Or do prisoners simply have the constitutional right to
enjoy such publications as a leisure activity?
It could be said that the inmates may just want to only read the
articles but the fact of the matter is that the pictures come with
the magazines.
The bottom line is that people in prison are being punished for the
crimes that they committed. Although certain Liberals may deplore
the concept of punishment, it is precisely the reason why criminals
are locked up in the first place. Yes, they may or may not be
rehabilitated during that time but regardless of the outcome, they
are being punished by staying in prison for the duration of their
sentence. And if the prisoners refuse to change their behavior after
they are released, they are going to get punished again.
The concept that that the inmates will lose their civil rights if
such a type of magazine is banned is ludicrous and the ACLU knows
it. And such an assertion will have little public support and
sympathy. That is why the emphasis is on a “scorched earth” approach
in which they imply that prison officials may possibly ban
everything including basic constitutional rights. The ACLU can now
stir the passions from the public in explaining that convicted
criminals will now lose all of their rights. And if the lie is
repeated often enough, people may even believe it.
Indiana determined that prisoners do not have a right to magazines
of naked women. And if inmates have a problem with that, then they
should not return to prison when they are released. And for the
criminals who are not ever getting out of prison, then that is
merely the consequence of being locked up.
Prison is not intended to be a resort. It is harsh place to live at
especially with many unsavory roommates. But people should have
thought about that before they committed the crimes that put them in
there in the first place. And if they don’t like it, then don’t come
back. And if you don’t have the option to eventually be released,
then tough. That is the price you pay for committing a heinous
crime.
Am I being cold-hearted and mean-spirited?
Perhaps there are groups of people who see it that way. But the
rationale for using prison as a form of punishment is that a
prisoner is going to get punished. Radical isn’t it?
And part of that punishment is being deprived of certain personal
freedoms, such as being prohibited from having a girlie magazine.
Are we going to split hairs and include Maxim and Men’s Health
Magazine since those publications have plenty of pictures of
scantily clad women?
The ACLU definitely wants to since they are going to be reimbursed
from the government for filing these frivolous lawsuits. And they
intend to make this issue as expensive to the taxpayer as possible
through litigation so that the prison system will drop the policy.
But more states need to follow Indiana’s example.
There is nothing wrong with punishing prisoners by taking away the
personal freedoms that they already forfeited. Prison needs to be an
unpleasant uncomfortable place that will discourage more people from
wanting to end up there in the first place as well as discouraging
its current prisoners from coming back.
We want your opinion! Tell us what you thought about
this article. Click the
Your Feedback menu item to send us
your comments.
COMMENTS FROM READERS
Prisons are meant to be a place you NEVER wish
to return to. Unfortunately, most prisons are now nothing more
than a Holiday Inn with a fence around it. All at taxpayer
expense of course. I personally believe they should bring back
the chain-gangs and other forms of forced labor. Today,
impoverished, yet insightful criminals actually look forward to
spending time in prison. Good food, job programs, plenty of
drugs, gang activity, cable TV, free health care. Must feel like
home sweet home to most!
The taxpayers in this country can thank liberals and the ACLU
for a justice system that supports the criminals and ignores
their victims. -Tim
Any opinions or views
expressed herein belong solely to the author and does not represent
any employer, organization, political party, governmental agency, or
any other entity and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
site owner or its participants.
Premium Ad
Announcements
Our
Miscellaneous section is our feature that covers offbeat
stories as well as our personal musings on just about anything.
Take a five minute break and check it out.