CDCR Does Not Need Cell Phone Jammers!

[radioman2001]

Something's upside down here, prisoners with more rights than the average citizen. One of the reasons I don't fly anymore.

 

[phillydjdan]

In all this discussion on how X isn't legal or X doesn't work, nobody has yet to disprove the viability of metal detectors. I don't know about you, but last time I went through one I had to take my belt off and it STILL went off. I've seen them pickup a screw in someone's knee. You mean to tell me that an inmate can stuff a phone up his butt and walk through a metal detector without it going apesh*t? And what about full-body scanning devices? I've seen where the airports are getting them. It looks kind of like an X-ray machine, and the gun tucked in the terrorist's waistband sticks out like a sore thumb.

Ok, X-rays and cavity searches aren't legal in your area. Why not try to make 'em legal? They're inmates. How many law makers do you think are going to say "No, I won't support that legislation because it's unfair to the inmate". Especially in California, where gang members are rampant and assaults and murders occur frequently, I'm surprised there hasn't already been some changes to the law. But who here is going to take that kind of time to see a plan like that through? If you work in CDCR, I would hope you would!

Now on to the statement that the job of correctional employees is not to punish the inmate population. Wait, am I missing something? Isn't that what units like "the shu" and "the hole" are specifically for? When an inmate stabs the child molester in the next cell, do you not take him/her to solitary confinement? That's a punishment.

So you're saying dogs aren't allowed to sniff an inmate??? Um, how about changing that, since, they can do that to me as I sit here in my free world home. It sounds to me like some sweeping changes to the law in regards to inmate rights is necessary. I would imagine not many of them have been changed to meet the current times and issues.

Now, how much of an impact do you think cutting off illegal cell phones will have in the drug dealing, assault and murder orders, and other illicit activity that is supposedly happening via cell phones? From what I gather outgoing mail is not opened unless there is a specific suspicion (at least it's that way in PA), so couldn't an inmate do this via outgoing mail? Or even via the inmate phone system using codes? It may cut down on it slightly, but I highly doubt it's going to have a tremendous impact on that kind of activity. It's been going on well before cell phones existed, and won't stop once they are gone.

KMA, you say these guys have more rights in prison then out it. Band together and change that! Look at all the other changes/additions to laws these days. The government has made it legal for law enforcement to do so many things lately, why not add some inmate rights reforms to the mix?

And let's go even more broad with contraband. What about drugs? Aren't they a bigger problem? So what are we going to do about that, give them all involuntary injections of chemicals that counter-act the drugs? That's the narcotics equivalent of what this "managed network" aka Global Tel-Link monopoly is doing.

Now understand, KMA and Grumpy, I'm not against you and what you do. It takes guts, and my hats off to you for doing it. I wouldn't last a day as an officer. I'd end up trampling right on some inmates rights. I'm just saying there are other solutions out there. You may not think so, but you look at the problem from inside. Sometimes an outside look is what it takes to make a plan that works. As for the officers out there that choose to engage the inmates in smuggling contraband, their superior officers need to be more diligent in catching them, and they should be tossed in the cell next to the inmate that wanted the contraband. Zero-tolerance. Maybe that would make a difference?

 

[poltergeisty]

My vote is for a simple pat down. Commonsense goes a long way. But that's too easy and no one will hear any of that. Watch, someone will tell me otherwise.

 

[N9NRA]

Just read the whole thread (quite intresting ), and there`s something we`re missing here. Consider this senario for a moment, most prisons are along, or at least near, a highway, now think on this, you`re in your car and you happen to become stranded somewhere near the facility outside the walls on this highway and the prison is using a jammer, guess what...your cell may not work ether. Ya see, these cellphone jamming devices don`t "respect the walls" of the place where they`re installed, in short, them jamming signals DO propagate outward for a distance (albiet a short distance) and COULD be just strong enough to cause an untentional problem with travelers on the nearby roadway. Know that this is somewhat unlikely, but i bring this up just for some thinkin` thoughts. N9NRA

 

[GrumpyGuard]

In all this discussion on how X isn't legal or X doesn't work, nobody has yet to disprove the viability of metal detectors. I don't know about you, but last time I went through one I had to take my belt off and it STILL went off. I've seen them pickup a screw in someone's knee. You mean to tell me that an inmate can stuff a phone up his butt and walk through a metal detector without it going apesh*t? And what about full-body scanning devices? I've seen where the airports are getting them. It looks kind of like an X-ray machine, and the gun tucked in the terrorist's waistband sticks out like a sore thumb.

Whole body scanners have been ruled unconstitutional as they are an invasion of personal privacy for people entering the secure perimeter of any state run prison in California. Each person who comes to visit an inmate must pass through a metal decetor, employees are exempt, when entering the secure perimeter for their official duties.

, X-rays and cavity searches aren't legal in your area. Why not try to make 'em legal? They're inmates. How many law makers do you think are going to say "No, I won't support that legislation because it's unfair to the inmate". Especially in California, where gang members are rampant and assaults and murders occur frequently, I'm surprised there hasn't already been some changes to the law. But who here is going to take that kind of time to see a plan like that through? If you work in CDCR, I would hope you would!

X-Rays and cavity searches are legal in CDCR, but must be performed by a licensed medical professional, and deemed medically necessary, therefore the inmate will be placed on "potty watch"...enough said.

Now on to the statement that the job of correctional employees is not to punish the inmate population. Wait, am I missing something? Isn't that what units like "the shu" and "the hole" are specifically for? When an inmate stabs the child molester in the next cell, do you not take him/her to solitary confinement? That's a punishment.

It is not our job to punish inmates. If an inmate in our jurisdiction decides he or she wishes to break the rules the consequent of their action could land them in a more secure housing unit such as Administrative Segregation (Ad/Seg or the hole) or the Secured Housing Unit (SHU). These are no means solitary confinement as the inmates have the ability to communicate with each other or staff.

So you're saying dogs aren't allowed to sniff an inmate??? Um, how about changing that, since, they can do that to me as I sit here in my free world home. It sounds to me like some sweeping changes to the law in regards to inmate rights is necessary. I would imagine not many of them have been changed to meet the current times and issues.

This is as much for protecting the K-9 as protecting the inmate. I will go no further on this one as I do not have the qualifications of a K-9 handler.

Now, how much of an impact do you think cutting off illegal cell phones will have in the drug dealing, assault and murder orders, and other illicit activity that is supposedly happening via cell phones? From what I gather outgoing mail is not opened unless there is a specific suspicion (at least it's that way in PA), so couldn't an inmate do this via outgoing mail? Or even via the inmate phone system using codes? It may cut down on it slightly, but I highly doubt it's going to have a tremendous impact on that kind of activity. It's been going on well before cell phones existed, and won't stop once they are gone.

All out going inmate mail is searched and scanned. Any mail that brings up red flags is sent for further investigation. Legal mail is exempt.

, you say these guys have more rights in prison then out it. Band together and change that! Look at all the other changes/additions to laws these days. The government has made it legal for law enforcement to do so many things lately, why not add some inmate rights reforms to the mix?

Several reason this make this question very compounded. In California we have the Prison Law Office (PLO) the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and the three panel of Federal Judges that have placed the CDCR under receivership for medical and mental health care.

And let's go even more broad with contraband. What about drugs? Aren't they a bigger problem? So what are we going to do about that, give them all involuntary injections of chemicals that counter-act the drugs? That's the narcotics equivalent of what this "managed network" aka Global Tel-Link monopoly is doing.

Drugs are a problem as is inmate manufactured alcohol and the same steps are used to fight this problem and it includes use of K-9's continued searches by staff. Giving them "Injections of chemicals that counter-act the drugs" would be the same as saying all predators, and mentally ill inmates should be sterilized. Global Tel*Link has a contract to provide telephone service to the inmate population and is not a monopoly as this contract goes to bid.

Now understand, KMA and Grumpy, I'm not against you and what you do. It takes guts, and my hats off to you for doing it. I wouldn't last a day as an officer. I'd end up trampling right on some inmates rights. I'm just saying there are other solutions out there. You may not think so, but you look at the problem from inside. Sometimes an outside look is what it takes to make a plan that works. As for the officers out there that choose to engage the inmates in smuggling contraband, their superior officers need to be more diligent in catching them, and they should be tossed in the cell next to the inmate that wanted the contraband. Zero-tolerance. Maybe that would make a difference?

In the State of California it is a misdemeanor to bring in a cell phone to the inmate population. A simple flip phone can bring as much as $500 from an inmate, and a smart phone goes for about a grand. As a supervisor I have approximately 10 to 15 officers to supervise each day. I can't be in all buildings and on the yard and take care of my responsibilities as it is let alone babysit each of my officers to ensure they are not bringing in contraband. There are systems in place and we do have a zero tolerance for any staff bringing in contraband or that are over familiar with the inmate population. They may not be sentenced to prison but they will lose their job.

 

[gcgrotz]

So let me see if I understand this: it is illegal to scan a person with x-rays unless done by a doctor but if you go through LAX they can scan anybody they want and see if that person is wearing underwear or not. Something wrong with this picture?

 

[GrumpyGuard]

So let me see if I understand this: it is illegal to scan a person with x-rays unless done by a doctor but if you go through LAX they can scan anybody they want and see if that person is wearing underwear or not. Something wrong with this picture?

You are talking about two different technologies. The full body scanners that are in use at airports to screen passengers were in use in California state prisons for a few months until the courts ruled them an invasion of privacy. X-Ray machines are a medical device used to diagnose medical conditions and therefore must be performed under the direction of a medical professional.