07. [text]

[ifightfor]

Suggest that incidence of Inmate-caused fatalities significantly reduced by implementation of "tit-for-tat" punishment for homicide: Killer suffers same death as victim, simultaneous with death of victim.

Offer of assistance with communication devices remains open.

[added somewhat later]

Query: Recommendation for preparation of liver (cow)?

[private to

Comments

[feels_no_love]

Suggest that Warden caused deaths invite the exact same consequences. Why should they get a free pass when--and it is not an if, it is a when--one of them decides to abuse their powers?

[ifightfor]

Suggestion inclusive of Warden as offender. Original complainant concerned with issue of Inmate-on-Inmate violence.

[feels_no_love]

Fair enough. I for one do not much care so long as things don't get even more unbalanced in the Wardens' favor.

[ifightfor]

Understood.

[Pause.]

Increased resentment against Wardens ostensibly disruptive to aims of system.

[feels_no_love]

True. Your logic is quite good, per the usual. Building resentment against the Wardens does indeed disrupt their aim to reform us.

But unfortunately there are those among the Wardens who do not seem to do anything BUT encourage inmate resentment. And they will fight even the suggestion that they are fouling things up.

[ifightfor]

Maintenance of status quo preferred over substantive change.

Implication: Wardens benefit from current system.

Query: Why?

[feels_no_love]

Because the current system is more easily abused to their advantage.

There are a few among the Wardens who seem interested in...how do you say...using the system as a tool for reform and community harmony. But they appear to be in the minority. Others are entirely wrapped up in their prejudices, their desire to abuse their power and their urge to torment us.

In short: some of the Wardens around here need Wardens.

[ifightfor]

"Who watches the watchers."