|
|
|
In
2013, one recommendation by a federal three-judge panel was to reduce the
population of elderly prisoners. The state responded with a plan
to consider parole for prisoners who were over the age of 60 and who had
served more than 25 years. Out came the metaphorical pitchforks,
torches, dogs, and public outrage. Prosecutors, victim's rights groups,
and assorted advocates for death in prison voiced their abhorrent shock,
fueling the fires. On March 12, 2016, the San Jose Mercury News article,
Parole
twist stuns, angers, captured Dr. Murdock's observation regarding society's
thirst for punishment. With a broad brush, the advocates for death
in prison attacked the wisdom of the federal judges and the state legislators,
who'd attempted to find rational ground.
The driving force of today's prison agenda of financial exploitation is vengeance. Thinking that more prison bunks will cure crime is like thinking that more hospital beds will cure cancer. Long term incapacitation has to be replaced with a true rehabilitation system. With today's ever-growing social ills, people might be so blinded with a thirst for more punishment that they can't see that the failure of current prison models might well be society's canary in the mine. Here
are some thoughts about rehabilitation and recidivism. If I understand
things correctly, then most prisoners are members of gangs, and they spend
their resources fighting among themselves. Is it possible that, maybe,
prisoners don't necessarily have to be one another's enemies? Maybe
the authorities are the enemy, and their provocateurs are playing the gangs
against one another, as a strategy.
—editor
Letters to the Editor
Dear Frontiersman Good Afternoon. My name is [name omitted]. I am a "lifer" serving 2 life sentences. I live with a roommate [name omitted]. He also receives your newsletters on a regular basis. And I would like to request to also be put on your mailing list as well. Also, if you do not mind, I would like to make a particular article of yours. It is entitled "Material-Safety Data Sheet" and is about women. I am unsure of its printed date, but think it was/is 1996 or 1998. It's an old printing, I know — but if you still have one, I'd very much enjoy having a copy of it.... —a prisoner
I have to wonder about the courts. If they'll sentence a man to serve two life sentences then, in a capital case, will they sentence a man to be executed twice? Does any of it make any sense at all? The Material Safety Data Sheet appeared on page 4 of the February 1996 issue. That was more than 20 years ago. You have a long memory. —editor
Dear Friend, Sam.... I have let many other prisoners here read your Frontiersman, so you may get more mail soon. I hope "Matthew" didn't give you too much rain & you are not flooded... —a prisoner
It's been dry here. —editor
Greetings Sam: Been a while since I wrote to you. Hope you are well. Very much enjoyed the October Frontiersman. I was on hiatus in the writing department but, have found a person to continue posting my stuff so the inspiration has been rekindled. Will share with you once I get going again. Hope you are doing good my friend. —Sticky
A White Man's Notes Sam Aurelius Milam III •In most conversations with a man, a woman's purpose is to explain to him that he's wrong about something, and to correct him. •When talking to a woman, a man is well advised to keep Miranda v. Arizona firmly in mind.
|
Bibles,
Goats, and Choices
Sam Aurelius Milam III I've been criticizing Christian evangelism for a long time. Eventually, somebody always accuses me of Christian bashing. I construe such an accusation to be a tacit admission that my criticisms are valid. Otherwise, the critic would be able to refute them. Since they're valid, he can't refute them. So, instead, he attacks me. Next, he'll assert that the people that I'm criticizing aren't really TRUE Christians. They're some other guys who just call themselves Christians. They're fakes. The Christian who's complaining to me always believes himself to be a TRUE Christian. Every Christian on the planet claims that only the members of his own particular group are the true Christians. The other guys are always fakes. Every Christian on the planet claims that only his beliefs are correctly based on the Bible. The beliefs of the others are always false. Since every variety of Christian calls every other variety of Christian a fake, it all cancels out. I don't see any reason to suppose that any one of them is any more credible than are any of the others. I don't care if a Christian's beliefs are based on the Bible or on the entrails of a goat. Given the multitude of different versions of the Bible (and of goats), I believe that anybody who wants to call himself a Christian has as much right to do so as does anybody else. A claim of unique legitimacy might theoretically be valid, but not necessarily. It will certainly be disputed by other identical claims. So far as I'm concerned, all Christians share the guilt of evangelism, which is one of the most harmful influences in the known history of human society. Any Christian who doesn't want to be a part of the sorry Christian history of carnage, blood, and brutality can do what I did. He can divest himself of any and all connections to Christianity and stop calling himself a Christian. Usurperation of Church and State
In olden times, or so I'm told,
And should a doubt arise to lure
With crushing boards or flaying blades,
But now, faced with diversity
So when the doctrine of the church
|
Acknowledgments My thanks to the following: SantaClara Bob; Lady Jan the Voluptuous; Betty; Carl, of Gramling, South Carolina; Gary, of Ione, California; and Eric, of Ione, California. — editor
Websites http://frontiersman.org.uk/ http://moonlight-flea-market.com/ http://pharos.org.uk/ http://sam-aurelius-milam-iii.org.uk/ http://sovereign-library.org.uk/ Blonde Jokes
It's Great to Be a Guy Because
Interesting Frontiersman Availability — Assuming the availability of sufficient funds, subscriptions to this newsletter in print, copies of past issues in print, and copies of the website on CDs are available upon request. All past issues are available at http://frontiersman.org.uk/. Contributions are welcome. Cancellations — If you don't want to keep receiving printed copies of this newsletter, then return your copy unopened. When I receive it, I'll terminate your subscription. Reprint Policy — Permission is hereby granted to reproduce this newsletter in its entirety or to reproduce material from it, provided that the reproduction is accurate and that proper credit is given. I do not have the authority to give permission to reprint material that I have reprinted from other sources. For that permission, you must apply to the original source. I would appreciate receiving a courtesy copy of any document or publication in which you reprint my material. Submissions — I consider letters, articles, and cartoons for the newsletter, but I don't pay for them. Short items are more likely to be printed. I suggest that letters and articles be shorter than 500 words but that's flexible depending on space available and the content of the piece. Payment — This newsletter isn't for sale. If you want to make a voluntary contribution, then I prefer cash or U.S. postage stamps. For checks or money orders, please inquire. For PayPal payments, use editor@frontiersman.org.uk. In case anybody's curious, I also accept gold, silver, platinum, etc. I don't accept anything that requires me to provide ID to receive it. — Sam Aurelius Milam III, editor
|
|
|