How Did We Get Here? Vacating Friday, Crime, Homicide and a PO Visit

I got to work on Friday, feeling marginally better than on Thursday. I could walk without wincing. Butt dialing finally got me with #1 nephew. I did the group therapy, then went to the bank, and then paid rent. When I got back here, I crashed until after 4 pm. Then it was back east to get my groceries for the week. I meant to work on "Three-Way Split". Instead, I ate and went through the email and read The New York Review of Books. I had finished with TNRB, on the verge of calling it a night, when the PO put in his monthly appearance.

I feel for the poor fellow, he seems so lost when he comes to visit. He asks about new relationships (I have only had vague guesses about the government's interest in my romantic life), he asks about my mental health (as if this were 2009 and not 2024), and he asks about work. He saw the couch/futon and asked if I had moved the bed out into the front room (I guess he never noticed the CPAP machine, which is not in the front room), and got confused when I said that my cousin had died, and I had his bed. He did not notice the new table at which I was seated with the computer. His powers of observation have been selective. He did have two new questions: do I do anything but go to work and come home? Obviously, he does not read this blog. I explained the buses stopped running at 6 pm. I did not mention that I am up at 4 pm. I do not know if this is out of concern for my reintegration into society, or whether it is part of the government's concern over my dating life. I do not tell him that I am living the life I intended to live long before I left Fort Dix FCI: get my writing done, wrap up business, and wait for death to pay me a long-awaited visit. K has not been able to make it over the past few weeks. Most everyone else I know is either dead or not talking to me or far away. CC has been working on her long-gestating rummage sale. I like the quiet. What I do not like is the lack of production. The other new question was if I was okay with money. I am.

Then I stayed up a while longer looking at the news and listening to the thunder. We had thunderstorms all night.

Some items collected last night follow.

Okay, how did we get here? Two-thirds of Americans say Trump unprepared to accept the election outcome: POLL

Nearly all of Harris' supporters, 92%, say they personally are prepared to accept the outcome. That declines to 76% of Trump's supporters. Instead, 21% of his supporters -- which translates to 8% of all adults -- are not prepared to do so.

Answer: we have too many weak-minded citizens who have fallen for Trump's belief that the country really wants him, and even if they do not, then he will make them take him.

Trump keeps talking about crime and being tough on crime. Evidence doesn’t support old adage of being tough on crime is slanted towards Indiana, which is in sync with Trump's anti-crime machismo: 

Apparently, it goes unnoticed that we have been extremely tough on crime for generations. While prison population numbers are down from their peak, Indiana’s incarceration rate is still well above the national (and global) rate. Moreover, time spent in prison has increased for many years. Whatever you think of these numbers, it seems clear that we aren’t exactly mollycoddling folks on the wrong side of the law.

Perhaps more to the point, almost zero evidence exists to support the tough-on-crime stance. Even with the recent spike in violence (which is  returning to pre-pandemic levels), crime has been trending downward for thirty years. Incarceration has played only a tiny role in this drop, and an important study has concluded that since 2000, the increase in incarceration has played almost no role at all. In other words, we are not standing for something when we wave the tough-on-crime flag. Instead, we’re falling for our slogans and rationalizing beliefs.  

***

Another positive sign is the recent (albeit sporadic) reluctance to pass criminal statutes and raise penalties for every problem we face. As the Interim Committee on Correction and Criminal Code will soon examine, the tendency to add new crimes and sentences has continued since the 2014 reforms. Some legislators appear to have noticed, and a few might even believe it’s counterproductive. Several criminal law bills taking an unjustified tough-on-crime approach — from enhanced sentences for habitual offenders to new varieties of reckless driving — have failed or been sharply curtailed in the last few sessions.  

Here’s hoping that trend is real and will continue. There is no reason it shouldn’t. From poverty reduction measures to evidence-based community violence intervention, we know there are better ways to address crime. We only need the courage to change our minds and the willingness to try new things. Thanks in part to a fear of looking foolish, it took me a long time to come around. But, eventually, the evidence of failure became more important that the unjustified fear. 

 What I saw in prison was a culture adapted to incarceration. People who were more at ease in prison than in civil society. Unlike Indiana, the federal system does not have any means of reducing its very long sentences through educational programs (which have been found to reduce recidivism). We had drugs, alcohol, tobacco, cell phones - everything but women, taxes, debts, and responsibility. Think about that when you think we need to get tougher on criminals. That is what "tough on crime" truly means, beating up on people rather than addressing the causes of criminal behavior. The ultimate end of this get tough on crime will be hanging children for stealing handkerchiefs; welcome to 1724.

Yikes! Robots are coming to the kitchen − what that could mean for society and culture

Automated kitchens aren’t sci-fi visions from “The Jetsons” or “Star Trek.” The technology is real and global. Right now, robots are used to flip burgers, fry chicken, create pizzas, make sushi, prepare salads, serve ramen, bake bread, mix cocktails and much more. AI can invent recipes based on the molecular compatibility of ingredients or whatever a kitchen has in stock. More advanced concepts are in the works to automate the entire kitchen for fine dining.

Since technology tends to be expensive at first, the early adopters of AI kitchen technologies are restaurants and other businesses. Over time, prices are likely to fall enough for the home market, possibly changing both home and societal dynamics.

Can food technology really change society? Yes, just consider the seismic impact of the microwave oven. With that technology, it was suddenly possible to make a quick meal for just one person, which can be a benefit but also a social disruptor.

Er, SkyNet in the kitchen? Why has no one thought of this as one of those AI horror stories?

I am amazed how little Homicide gets mentioned when I read anything about the best television shows. I guess it is streaming now, so that might change. ‘Homicide: Life on the Streets’ laid the groundwork for Peak TV – and it’s finally available to stream for new and old fans of the series

Up at 4 am and worked on the email. Then back to bed, for a couple of hours. Back here to work on this post. Laundry needs to be done - going on the bus! Then working on "Three-Way Split".

sch 9:17