Sheriff Joe's jail menu - now vegetarian

[WarriorAngel]

Normal prisons or jails aren't a lot of fun. Even when they have plenty of books, television, and good meals, they're still a form of punishment. Being confined to a small cell and having very limited freedom are things that human beings naturally do not like. To ratchet up the level of punishment associated with detention only makes sense if you assume that crime is the result of a rational choice and that increasing the marginal cost of criminal behavior is the best way to correct it.

The problem is, committing criminal behavior often isn't the result of a rational decision making process. Particularly in county jails, like the ones Arpaio runs, many of the prisoners are drug addicts. For people in those circumstances, being "punished" with the cruel and humiliating methods Arpaio uses accomplishes nothing other than making the person feel degraded. Even for prisoners without any form of mental illness or addiction, being forced to wear pink and being fed soy that they have to pay for is more likely to increase anger and aggression than anything else, and for no good reason (using pink to color buildings in prison to encourage prisoners to be calm is distinct from making them wear it as a source of humiliation).

Human beings are human beings, regardless of what they've done. Jails like the ones Arpaio runs are supposed to correct bad behavior and protect society, not denigrate human life.

See below

Sheriff Joe Arpaio created the "Tent City Jail" by purchasing military surplus tents. These are the same tents that our military troops are using in Iraq. His reasoning was that if it was good enough for American soldiers, it was plenty good for prisoners that cannot seem to abide with the laws of this country.

He stopped smoking and inappropriate contentographic magazines in the jails. He removed their weight training equipment and cut off all but "G" rated movies. He has jail meals down to 40 cents a serving and charges the inmates for them.

He cut off coffee because it has Zero nutritional value and therefore was a waste of valuable monetary resources. When the inmates complained, he told them, "This isn't the Ritz/Carlton... If you don't like it, don't come back." He bought Newt Gingrich's lecture series on videotape that he pipes into the jails. When asked by a reporter if he had any lecture series by a Democrat, he replied that a democratic lecture series might explain why a lot of the inmates were in his jails in the first place.

He took away cable TV until he found out there was a federal court order that required cable TV for jails so he hooked up the cable TV as required by law. Prisoners now have access only to The Disney Channel and The Weather Channel. When asked why he allowed The Weather Channel, he replied, "So they will know how hot it's gonna be while they are working ON my chain gangs."

...........


Maricopa County was spending approximately $18 million a year on stray animals, like cats and dogs. Sheriff Joe offered to take the department under his jurisdiction. The animal shelters are now all staffed and operated by prisoners. They feed and care for the strays. Every animal in his care is taken out and walked twice daily. He now has prisoners who are experts in animal nutrition and behavior. They give great classes for anyone who would like to adopt an animal. He has literally taken stray dogs off the street, given them to the care of prisoners, and had them place in dog shows.


What is the best part? His entire budget for the entire department is now under $3 million. Dogs are neutered, current on all shots, in great health, and when they are placed into a new home, they are micro-chipped. The cost for all of this - about $78.

The prisoners get the benefit of about $0.28 an hour for working, but most would work for free, just to be out of their cells for the day. Most of his budget is for utilities, building maintenance, etc... He pays the prisoners out of the fees collected for adopted animals. When will the rest of the country take a hard look at the way he runs the jail system, and copy some of his ideas?

Joe Arpaio

etc etc

 

[MikeK]

Normal prisons or jails aren't a lot of fun. Even when they have plenty of books, television, and good meals, they're still a form of punishment. Being confined to a small cell and having very limited freedom are things that human beings naturally do not like. To ratchet up the level of punishment associated with detention only makes sense if you assume that crime is the result of a rational choice and that increasing the marginal cost of criminal behavior is the best way to correct it.

The problem is, committing criminal behavior often isn't the result of a rational decision making process. Particularly in county jails, like the ones Arpaio runs, many of the prisoners are drug addicts. For people in those circumstances, being "punished" with the cruel and humiliating methods Arpaio uses accomplishes nothing other than making the person feel degraded. Even for prisoners without any form of mental illness or addiction, being forced to wear pink and being fed soy that they have to pay for is more likely to increase anger and aggression than anything else, and for no good reason (using pink to color buildings in prison to encourage prisoners to be calm is distinct from making them wear it as a source of humiliation).

Human beings are human beings, regardless of what they've done. Jails like the ones Arpaio runs are supposed to correct bad behavior and protect society, not denigrate human life.

Right on. Catholics are called to visit the imprisoned. I don't think very many of the participants in this thread do.

 

[MikeK]

This is a fun, quick read:
Sheriff Joe vs. Norway: Who Better Fixes Inmates? | MightyHeaton.com

 

[Genersis]

...Catholics are called to visit the imprisoned...

I didn't know that; you learn something new everyday I guess.

 

[Caedmon]

From the article - it was a slow process of cutting down on the meat.
He didnt just take it away immediately - it was gradual - if i read it correctly.
Now they eat soy substitute.

Supposedly it tastes like meat. I have had garden burgers at eat n Park - which were fairly decent.
Not sure i am a fan of soy - i cant take it in frequently.

That's all well and good, but after they've transitioned completely to soy, new inmates will still experience chemical shock. His meal plan integration, while spun to appear humane, is as short-sighted as the rest of his ridiculous practices.

Soy is fine for me because I've trained my body to eat it. It can be delicious and nutritious, but it can also give you powerful gas and runs.

 

[Caedmon]

I dont think restaurant food is comparably to jail food.

That's a good point. Why isn't it? I'm not talking about P.F. Chang's, I'm talking about a well cooked meal that doesn't leave your body funky. If they're forced to not only eat it, but also pay for it, it needs to be decent.

 

[Caedmon]

Shifting to a meatless diet isn't "chemically demanding" on the body at all. If anything, eating meat is more damaging and chemically taxing!

I don't understand this statement, because I know some vegetarians whose doctors have told them that omitting meat has been detrimental to their health, inducing anemia, for instance. I doubt Joe understands how difficult it is to plan a balanced vegetarian diet.

 

[Caedmon]

Don't tell Sheriff Arpaio that. He'll start feeding them Spam.

That's an interesting point. If Joe is so concerned about cost, why doesn't he just feed his inmates offal? I'm pretty sure that's comparable in price to processed soy products. It's because his goal is not to reduce costs. His goal is humiliation.

"Offal is cheaper than the more standard cuts, but it's just as rich nutritionally."

The Offal Truth | eHow

 

[Caedmon]

Maybe he feels he is incentivizing them to not return to prison. When you rape, rob or murder you don't get the same rights as other citizens.

Feeding and making inmates pay for their food is a tool to teach them that they need to make their own way in life.

Allowing them to pump iron all and enjoy their incarceration has not worked.

Well no, but it does help them forget about the anal rape. Or perhaps look forward to it? But seriously folks... *bah-doom-tsss*

The right way to run a jail is to deprive them of the luxury of interacting with the outside world, have them perform some kind of work that contributes to the outside economy, and provide them with the counseling and education opportunities they need to survive when they leave. They shouldn't come out worse, physically or mentally, than when they entered, agreed?

 

[AMDG]

Warrior, you know that you are fielding all sorts of complaints and negative comments simply because this is Sheriff Joe Arpio. Back when I worked in the Juvenile Detention center, the "clients" were served soy meat (the heart diet my husband is on often requires it and it's usually found in the "gourmet" or "health" sections of my supermarket so it's good for you but I know the kids called it "mystery meat"). Supposedly it's cheaper (the detention centers are on budgets you know, so much that they even considered catsup a vegetable!) Anyway, this was many, many years ago and there wasn't a negative word spoken (if I'm not mistaken, Clinton even gave his approval). Back then it was praised.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I don't understand your statement either, Caed....my best friend, my wife, me, my children, and many other people I know went cold turkey into vegetarianism and it was a piece of cake transition. No diarrhea, nausea, bad feelings, headaches, shakes, stomach problems, or otherwise. If a person doesn't know what protein is, has zero clue and thinks eating spinach and lettuce and carrots is what vegetarians eat, then YES, that would be bad. But if a person shifts to some soy, to legumes like kidney beans, pinto beans, Northern white beans, peas, lentils, etc. along with quinoa, and other healthy superfoods, eats plenty of antioxidant fruits and veggies, drinks almond milk, etc. etc. along with some dairy (unless they're going vegan) and eggs, I just fail to see how a vegetarian will be in some chemical mess state or feel bad at all? Most people I know who shifted over instantly feel HEALTHIER and more vibrant, more energy, stronger, and more getup-and-go? Meat is pretty worthless and often times with the hormones and pesticides and garbage in meat, people find out that meat is the culprit that has made them sick! Getting off meat isn't the thing that'll make you feel punky, rather the reverse!

I don't understand this statement, because I know some vegetarians whose doctors have told them that omitting meat has been detrimental to their health, inducing anemia, for instance. I doubt Joe understands how difficult it is to plan a balanced vegetarian diet.

 

[Anhelyna]

Folk you have to remember that at 4 periods in the year Eastern folk do go vegan - and do it without problems

At each Fast - and they do vary in length , the ideal is

no meat [ this includes fish except those with no faces and back bones ]
no dairy - no butter, no milk, no milk products
no eggs
no alcohol [ traditionally Slavs are permitted beer in modest quantities]
no oil [ normally taken to mean Olive oil - vegetable oil is permitted ]

yes - this is mitigated at weekend when we are normally permitted wine and sometimes oil. But all the same you don't hear us complaining that we are short of this or that - we KNOW how to ensure we get enough protein and nourishment.

When you do hear us moan is about one day after Pascha when we have really had a meat/dairy Fest and tummies are complaining

 

[Standing_Ultraviolet]

Warrior, you know that you are fielding all sorts of complaints and negative comments simply because this is Sheriff Joe Arpio. Back when I worked in the Juvenile Detention center, the "clients" were served soy meat (the heart diet my husband is on often requires it and it's usually found in the "gourmet" or "health" sections of my supermarket so it's good for you but I know the kids called it "mystery meat"). Supposedly it's cheaper (the detention centers are on budgets you know, so much that they even considered catsup a vegetable!) Anyway, this was many, many years ago and there wasn't a negative word spoken (if I'm not mistaken, Clinton even gave his approval). Back then it was praised.

Sometimes, the person who takes an action is relevant to the response. Sheriff Joe Arpaio has the reputation of being a political idealogue whose desire to be "tough on crime" leads to decisions that are controversial, inhumane, and even potentially illegal (he is currently being sued by the Department of Justice for racial profiling). Therefore, while it's normally the best policy to give someone the benefit of the doubt when they make a decision that isn't inherently evil (giving inmates soy is both cheaper and potentially healthier), in his case, it's only natural to interpret the decision through the fact that his behavior is often cruel.

You can't forget that this is a man who has had to have the federal government force him not to violate the constitution of the United States. According to the ACLU's claim in the constitutional lawsuit, which Arpaio lost, "Arpaio routinely abused pre-trial detainees at Maricopa County Jail by feeding them moldy bread, rotten fruit and other contaminated food, housing them in cells so hot as to endanger their health, denying them care for serious medical and mental health needs and keeping them packed as tightly as sardines in holding cells for days at a time during intake." He also publicly stated that his jails were a "place of punishment" for "criminals" when many individuals in jail are under investigation and are to be considered innocent until proven guilty.

Obviously, he doesn't get the same benefit of the doubt that I would give to most local law enforcement officials. I believe that Sheriff Joe Arpaio believes that what he does is right and that he may not be a terrible person, but he only believes that because he sees everything around him through a world view that our Church acts in this world to correct and heal. We shouldn't support it.

 

[AMDG]

What I said still stands. Any other person who offered a menu of soy to prison clients would be praised to high heavens for being creative in providing healthful meals to the "clients" and for saving the taxpayers money as well. Normally, a person doing something like this could expect a letter of praise or something. It's simply the fact that the person doing the good is Sheriff Arpaio and folks simply don't like him (notice how people have him convicted of doing all sorts of wrong without a shred of evidence--all they do is accuse him and bang--he's considered guilty.) It's all in the eye of the beholder. And in this case it's because the person being "beheld" question is Sheriff Arpaio. Can we say prejudice? Surely Warrior Angel sees it, even if you don't.

 

[Standing_Ultraviolet]

What I said still stands. Any other person who offered a menu of soy to prison clients would be praised to high heavens for being creative in providing healthful meals to the "clients" and for saving the taxpayers money as well. Normally, a person doing something like this could expect a letter of praise or something. It's simply the fact that the person doing the good is Sheriff Arpaio and folks simply don't like him (notice how people have him convicted of doing all sorts of wrong without a shred of evidence--all they do is accuse him and bang--he's considered guilty.) It's all in the eye of the beholder. And in this case it's because the person being "beheld" question is Sheriff Arpaio. Can we say prejudice? Surely Warrior Angel sees it, even if you don't.

It's a prejudice, given a certain definition of the term. It's not an unfounded one, though. Given that two federal courts (one in the initial trial and a second on appeal) have both found him guilty of violating the U.S. constitution, and given that he's on trial again, this time for racial profiling, it doesn't seem unreasonable to hold him to a different standard than other people.

The reasons why people make decisions matter, particularly in a case like this. Two people can do the same thing under different circumstances, and it have a drastically different meaning in each case. Inmates aren't likely to enjoy a switch to a vegan diet under any circumstances, but if it appears to be for their benefit or as a serious cost saving measure, they're more likely to tolerate it than if it seems like a personal insult to their human dignity.

When you make a person feel devalued, you give them less incentive to correct their criminal behavior and more incentive to act violently. You make your jails a more violent place, and you likely increase recidivism. Training a person to feel that they are valuable and have the potential to benefit society, and that their criminal behavior must be punished and corrected because of this, is more likely to reduce recidivism. Giving individuals job skills training and mental health care if necessary (particularly in cases of drug abuse) are both ways to reshape a person's worldview to see their place in the community in a more healthy light.

Obviously this doesn't work in every case, and sometimes jails or prisons just have to protect society from truly deviant individuals who will never act as productive members, but even simply warehousing individuals is better than abusing them. If operant conditioning is all you manage to accomplish (teaching a person that bad actions have unpleasant consequences), then you can still sometimes correct behavior. Making the unpleasant consequences demeaning, though, can reshape a person's view of the world to be even more antisocial. That's all that the sort of programs that Arpagio institutes accomplish.

 

[TheOtherHockeyMom]

What I said still stands. Any other person who offered a menu of soy to prison clients would be praised to high heavens for being creative in providing healthful meals to the "clients" and for saving the taxpayers money as well. Normally, a person doing something like this could expect a letter of praise or something. It's simply the fact that the person doing the good is Sheriff Arpaio and folks simply don't like him (notice how people have him convicted of doing all sorts of wrong without a shred of evidence--all they do is accuse him and bang--he's considered guilty.) It's all in the eye of the beholder. And in this case it's because the person being "beheld" question is Sheriff Arpaio. Can we say prejudice? Surely Warrior Angel sees it, even if you don't.

I don't care for Sheriff Joe but can recognize the good in this action, as I said earlier.

 

[WarriorAngel]

That's all well and good, but after they've transitioned completely to soy, new inmates will still experience chemical shock. His meal plan integration, while spun to appear humane, is as short-sighted as the rest of his ridiculous practices.

Soy is fine for me because I've trained my body to eat it. It can be delicious and nutritious, but it can also give you powerful gas and runs.

So you are against all vegan/vegetarian diets and not just 'the method' of cutting them off?

That's a good point. Why isn't it? I'm not talking about P.F. Chang's, I'm talking about a well cooked meal that doesn't leave your body funky. If they're forced to not only eat it, but also pay for it, it needs to be decent.

Because restaurant food is unlike homemade is unlike school programs unlike NASA unlike jail.

I believe some co's get the 'bid' and do the programs - by sending premade items as well as a cook heating it vs say a gourmet chef who has issues with food items not to his liking....

There are a lot of varying factors.

Among vegan/vegetarians and meat servings there are companies who make bids according to the prices they give.

He has saved the city a lot of money and not just because of the food items but because he has them 'helping' animals who would otherwise be euthanized.

SO Hockey - that should be 2 things you like about him now.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I concur, AM. The Left on one hand wishes more people would go vegetarian or vegan. When a Sheriff does that for his prisoners, he's an abusive pig out to defame their good names, crush their fragile spirits, and kill them off from chemical imbalances....kinda, well, should we say....absurd? LOL

What I said still stands. Any other person who offered a menu of soy to prison clients would be praised to high heavens for being creative in providing healthful meals to the "clients" and for saving the taxpayers money as well. Normally, a person doing something like this could expect a letter of praise or something. It's simply the fact that the person doing the good is Sheriff Arpaio and folks simply don't like him (notice how people have him convicted of doing all sorts of wrong without a shred of evidence--all they do is accuse him and bang--he's considered guilty.) It's all in the eye of the beholder. And in this case it's because the person being "beheld" question is Sheriff Arpaio. Can we say prejudice? Surely Warrior Angel sees it, even if you don't.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

If Sheriff Joe really wanted to kill these guys off, he'd feed them In 'N Out Burger and McDonalds and EXTRA MEAT!

 

[Sumwear]

If Sheriff Joe really wanted to kill these guys off, he'd feed them In 'N Out Burger and McDonalds and EXTRA MEAT!

have you had indian? not that curry people love.

I'm talking about indian where the people in the kitchen have to wear a mask because all the spices and peppers they use causes nosebleeds. that stuff will give you hemorrhoids the size of basketballs.