If they are not in solitary confinement, they are being confined with other people.
Would you want to be the confined with someone who has a history of being violent with his cell mates?
Would you want to be the confined with someone who has a history of being violent with his cell mates?
Some reading comprehension is in order.
I would have thought that surely most inmates would just want to get their head down and serve out their sentence?
You are not understanding my comment.
If the violent inmates are not solitary, they are in a cell with YOU. Do you want them in a cell with you, or in solitary?
They could easily have groups of cells where inmates are confined individually but can still have non-physical contact with other prisoners.
And as most of those in solitary aren't raving psychotics (mostly they attacked guards or rival gang members, an issue largely due to prison overcrowding) they could be allowed monitored time in the yard with other prisoners.
>The offenses that landed them in solitary? Most often, it was evidence that they were "affiliated" with a prison gang, whether or not they had broken any rules.
Solitary isn't being used as a last resort for people who have killed previous cellmates -- it's being used for all sorts of things.
I think solitary makes sense for people who are already unable to coexist with other inmates, but that doesn't seem to be the main use at the moment.
If I was in prison and could make a case for anything you can bet I'd be the biggest pain in the ass (wrt legal wrangling) I possibly could. I mean, my life is pretty much trashed already, right? No harm in seeing if you can get a reduced time or even a settlement out of it.
That said, I can only imagine that enforced solitude would be pretty awful in its own right.
I am talking about the well being of OTHER inmates.
>Yes, people would rather be with people even if those people aren't perfect.
So, yes or no, you would want to be in a cell with a "not perfect" person who has killed has last two cellmates?