Even Greener Pastures
Language Learning => Questions about the Use of Language => Topic started by: Kseniia on January 30, 2019, 06:37:52 pm
-
@Kseniia, I don't know him personally, but I know of him.
*actually it's a relief that people think this way mostly because they are not well-informed (not that I claim to be well-informed myself but still) — I personally know Stalin's fans and people wholeheartedly supporting Churchill's "I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time" position, and it's much, much worse.
Yes, you're right. I don't think most people in Britain are against the idea of a united Ireland as such (in fact I'm sure many would be only too glad to get rid or Northern Ireland), but the only thing many of them know about Irish nationalism is the IRA, which they, quite understandably, don't like. But with all this recent talk about the "precious Union" and the "UK family" and with the DUP looming large in UK politics, maybe attitudes are changing, but I'm a bit out of touch there, so I don't really know.
-
@Coligno, oh, you know him? He's basically the founder of the Russian centre of Celtic culture, and the explanations for Russian speakers are written by his student (she's Head of the Department of Germanic and Celtic Philology at MSU now, as far as I understand — though I never studied at MSU myself so I can be wrong here).
Well, it's not that unusual for people to take negative information about their country's politics to heart (I catch myself feeling the same sometimes), but you're right, when it comes to Irish republicanism, the reaction is particularly bad. *
(...) where have you been learning phrases like "Up the RA!"?
I'm not supposed to tell anyone Seriously, though, maybe I heard it in a documentary or something (I think they mentioned these slogans in the documentary "Irish ways" [https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=E-lm6bQEp6I ] — a very interesting one, by the way, because they interviewed both republicans and loyalists (and representatives of the British Army, and of course ordinary citizens). But I'm not absolutely sure, and anyway in Russia it's relatively easy to come across this kind of information: for example, one of the most popular Russian folk-rock singers, Хелависа, used to sing Rising of the Moon at her concerts (I remember this performance of her, for instance — https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=2ogjWwnVxgY , from 2:20).
*actually it's a relief that people think this way mostly because they are not well-informed (not that I claim to be well-informed myself but still) — I personally know Stalin's fans and people wholeheartedly supporting Churchill's "I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time" position, and it's much, much worse.
-
@Neal, I assumed your question was directed at Kseniia: I think you probably know me well enough by now not to be surprised that I know a thing or two about Irish. And, to answer it for her, she's much better read than she likes to admit.
@Kseniia, Ah, Garry Bannister, is it?
This would be an English friend, I presume. The English generally have very little understanding of Irish history or their own country's pernicious role therein, or the conflict in the North (as Brexit is currently making abundantly clear; it's an amusing irony that the Irish border which is now causing the English Brexiters so much trouble was actually created by them in the first place). I think the English press presented a very one-sided story during the Troubles, and any attempt to try and gain a deeper understanding or a more balanced picture might be condemned as pandering to terrorists. But, cogar, where have you been learning phrases like "Up the RA!"?
-
@Neal, are you asking me or Coligno? Because the answers would be quite different: Coligno is definitely well read and I'm definitely not. Anyway, it's not about literature, it's about history, about some (quite recent) events in Ireland — I think you know a lot about it yourself but maybe you're just more used to looking at it from a different angle? "No Béarla" is just an Irish show about the language, by the way - not even a documentary, but there are a few interesting things about it. I was talking about this conversation:
https://youtu.be/GKZ4kAU62JI?t=42
@Coligno, you're right of course, I actually don't know if there were any Irish-learning groups in prisons in other time periods... Maybe there was something like this but not in the form of Jailtacht?
Ah, the page is from the Moscow State University textbook "Современный ирландский язык. Учебные диалоги с комментарием" (https://ufile.io/uulhj , page 98) — but the author says some stories are from Irish school textbooks so I don't know where exactly this particular story is from, originally.
[I thought you might find this a bit amusing but it almost brought a conflict into my house: I translated it into English when a friend of mine asked what I was reciting. Well it wasn't the best idea ever, I might have as well said something like "up the RA!", the reaction would've been the same I think]
-
Kseniia, yes, the Hunger Strikes were quite a harrowing affair, which the film portrayed very well. (Just as a brief aside, an Iranian friend of mine told me that after Bobby Sands died, Winston Churchill Avenue in Tehran, which is where the British Embassy was located, was renamed Bobby Sands Street. Of course the British weren't too keen on the idea of having an embassy with an address on Bobby Sands Street, so they sealed up the main entrance and started using a back door which opened out onto some other street instead.)
I'm sure the Irish language was a tool of resistance in prisons long before the Troubles, but I don't know that there had ever been the Jailtacht phenomenon before, where prisoners as a group were actively engaged in learning Irish with that specific idea in mind. Undoubtedly in Kilmainham, and other prisons of that era, the number of inmates who already had Irish when they arrived was much higher, and the language probably taken more for granted.
I'm curious to know what textbook you're quoting from. An seoinín tusa? Ní hea. :D Ar fheabhas!
-
Is Irish literature a field of study for you or are you just that well read? Damn I am envious.
So much to know, so little time!
-
Coligno, yes, I know the term, I think I first encountered it in "No Béarla 2" in which Manchán Magan had a conversation with Jake Mac Siacais about the Jailtacht in Long Kesh. And shortly afterwards I watched the film "Hunger" with Fassbender (part of me wishes I hadn't, what happened there was horrifying...). Haven't read Feargal's book, though, so thank you for the link.
But I think the role of Irish as a tool of resistance in prisons is not limited to the period of the Troubles. "Ní Síocháin gan Saoirse" and other messages written on the walls of Kilmainham Gaol (or Príosún Chill Mhaighneann) come to mind. By the way, nowadays we even have these short stories in modern Irish language textbooks for beginners:
(https://i.ibb.co/rkJNJP9/1.png)
-
An interesting question. I hadn't realised they had different meanings in the US: in English, Scottish, Irish and Northern Ireland law they're completely synonymous.
Incidentally, Kseniia, on the subject of prison, have you ever heard of Jailge? I think you might find this interesting (but if nothing else, at least you can listen to some Belfast accents -- hopefully you'll be able to understand, because I see that the automatically generated subtitles can't cope): https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=244&v=0Q0mBBHt8fQ. Feargal's (who I was at university with) own father learnt Irish when he was interned (imprisoned without trial).
-
Here is a blurb on bounty hunters in the US:
https://people.howstuffworks.com/bounty-hunting1.htm
I forgot extradition, bounty hunters do not need to go thru that process, their hunt can cross state lines.
A really fun movie about a bounty hunter is "Midnight Run" (not to be confused with "Midnight Express"!), highly recommended.
In the blurb above they mention a couple of TV "Reality Shows" about bounty hunters. 'Dog' the Bounty Hunter made a name for himself by going to Mexico and capturing the rapist heir to the Max Factor fortune, and embarrassing the FBI in the process:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jun/20/usa.mexico
The Mexican govt held him for several days on kidnapping charges! That made Dog a minor celebrity in the US, and he had a long running TV show.
That´s a pretty old story (2003), but you can`t have people just going into other countries and kidnapping fugitives. The US would not be very happy about undercover Mexican bounty hunters (which I doubt they even have) coming into the US, grabbing someone, and then sending them back to Mexico without as much as even consulting the local authorities. Turn the tables and the problem is obvious.
-
Here is a blurb on bounty hunters in the US:
https://people.howstuffworks.com/bounty-hunting1.htm
I forgot extradition, bounty hunters do not need to go thru that process, their hunt can cross state lines.
A really fun movie about a bounty hunter is "Midnight Run" (not to be confused with "Midnight Express"!), highly recommended.
In the blurb above they mention a couple of TV "Reality Shows" about bounty hunters. 'Dog' the Bounty Hunter made a name for himself by going to Mexico and capturing the rapist heir to the Max Factor fortune, and embarrassing the FBI in the process:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jun/20/usa.mexico
The Mexican govt held him for several days on kidnapping charges! That made Dog a minor celebrity in the US, and he had a long running TV show.
-
@Ksneiia and Irena,
Each State has a whole body of laws on the books that regulate bounty hunters (I`m sure they have to be licensed and bonded), and they can`t just „shoot first and ask questions later.“ It probably was like that in the Wild West in the 1880s, but not now. They are certainly not above the law, anymore than the police are. And bounty hunters who violate the law are subject to all the criminal and civil penalties like anyone else. (I kind of agree with Jerry that a form of immunity sort of goes with positions of high power unfortunately.)
I have no idea how many people jump bail, but I don`t think the bail bonds business is a big money-maker in the US. Next to my office there`s a little bailbondsmen`s office, with a cheap neon sign in red that flashes „Bail Bonds, -24 hour Service“, all day, but there`s never anyone there. I tried going into their office once to ask if the mailman had misdelivered a package I was expecting and their door was locked. Great 24 hour service. They didn`t look like they were making much money (my office is 5 minutes from the courthouse, which explains why these guys are all over the place). But, don`t forgetm not everyone charged with a crime has to post bail. I used to do criminal law about 20 years ago, and I sat through plenty of morning calendars in court watching other people`s cases. Instead of bail, you normally ask for and get what we call „OR“ (in cases of minor crimes, like drunk driving, domestic violence - which are misdemeanors) „OR“ stands for „Own Recognisance“. That means they let you go without posting bail, on just your promise to come to the next court date. So we used to always ask for OR on smaller cases for everyone with no record and minor offenses. A lot of people on OR don`t show for their next court date (maybe 1/3 don`t show?) because they are just deadbeats. So, when the case was called and the defendant was a no show, the Judge would just say „OR revoked, bench warrant issued, bail set at $5,000.“ That would usually be it, and then he`d go onto the next case. Just routine. This is just an everyday thing for Judges. They probably get 20-30 no shows a day and just revoke OR, set a standard bail and issue a bench warrant. But, our local sheriff´s office has so many bench warrants to execute, that they probably have stacks of them, and I personally think they give them low priority in looking for people. The only time these guys who don`t show for court get caught is when they are driving and get pulled over by the cops. The cop runs the license number and drivers license and if the computer shows the guy has a bench warrant, then they just take him in.
But, unless someone is on OR or bail, they have to be brought to court within like 72 hours or something and tried in like 10 days, under their speedy trial rights, unless they waive time, as we call it (this is all just lawyer jargon of course). If on OR or bail, they usually do waive time to avoid rushing to trial.
Glad I don`t do criminal defense anymore. It`s a hard way to make a living.
I never liked criminal law, because you are pretty much always on the losing end of the stick and you know it (sorry, but these guys are usually guilty as sh*t), and you wind up just begging the DA (prosecutor) for a deal, or a reduced charge, or lighter sentence so you can go back to your client and say „Guess what a good deal I got for you! I`m a genius!“ And then you negotiate more, and it´s just this back and forth game you play. The DA wants to settle the case and so do you. So, everything is a compromise. You only try the cases where your guy is factually innocent and/or the evidence against them is really weak, or you just get unlucky and you get a DA who is a real a*shole. Most are not. They are usually young females right out of law school, with husbands and kids and they are just doing a job. And they are often nice people.
-
Two big things are they do not need "probable cause" and they do not need search warrants. If you jump bail they can use any means necessary to hunt you down. I don't think that really includes violence (unless you resist).
Hmm... And what happens in mistaken identity cases? Suppose someone jumped bail, and suppose for whatever reason, they (incorrectly) thought you were their guy. So they can just break into your house without a warrant? And when it turns out they were wrong, then what? Are they criminally responsible?
This happens with the police quite frequently, Irena. It's a part of police work. I would seriously doubt that bounty hunters are less diligent about finding the right guy than the police are. They're probably more careful since they aren't working under the same sorts of time pressures as the cops.
Sure, they can be held criminally responsible, just as the cops can and are all of the time. They don't have immunity.
They only class of people in the US who enjoy immunity are the politicians who are at the very top of the food chain. Clintons, Obama, Kennedys, etc.
-
Two big things are they do not need "probable cause" and they do not need search warrants. If you jump bail they can use any means necessary to hunt you down. I don't think that really includes violence (unless you resist).
Hmm... And what happens in mistaken identity cases? Suppose someone jumped bail, and suppose for whatever reason, they (incorrectly) thought you were their guy. So they can just break into your house without a warrant? And when it turns out they were wrong, then what? Are they criminally responsible?
-
Two big things are they do not need "probable cause" and they do not need search warrants. If you jump bail they can use any means necessary to hunt you down. I don't think that really includes violence (unless you resist).
In the movie "The Fugitive" Federal Marshalls are after an escaped convict. In this case since the convict committed a violent crime the Marshalls were allowed to consider him "armed and dangerous" at all times. Basically shoot first and ask questions later.
-
Speaking of Rikers, there was a plane crash there in 1959 or so. Prisoners rushed to help and saved lives. The ones who did this were let out of jail as a reward. It's on YouTube if you're interested.
-
@Sofia, yeah, I agree, it looks like some kind of business to me, too.
@Neal,
Bounty Hunters can do all sorts of things that cops cannot.
Emmm... I'm not sure I want to ask this question really but anyway... What sorts of things? I mean, they can't have a permission to beat you, for example? That would be crazy and too "The Hateful Eight"ish. So what can they do to you if you jump bail, legally?
-
I have the impression that the whole thing about bail is a big business in California (no idea about the rest of the US) and that the judiciary system works hand in hand with dubious bail agencies.
-
Rikers is kind of notorious, I don't think it is standard fare for Jails in the US.
If you do jump bail in the US you become a 'fugitive', and you basically lose all of your rights until you are caught or you turn yourself in. Bounty Hunters can do all sorts of things that cops cannot. When you sign a Bail Bonds contract, you basically sign over your civil rights to the bondsman.
-
Many thanks to everyone commented, especially to SHL! (ah, Steven, I really hope you actually know what my name sounds like and "Kesnii" is just a typo!). So, jails are for people awaiting trial and serving short sentences, and prisons are for long-term incarceration. At least in the US. Got it.
And you have bounty hunters! Amazing.
Sorry, Kseniia, yes that was a typo.
You scratched out the part about bounty hunters. Yeah, we really do have those people. Just like the Wild West. So, if you „jump bail“ as we call it you`ve got the cops AND a bounty hunter looking for you.
You know the expression „it´s time to get out of Dodge“? Dodge is like somewhere in the midwest, like Kansas or someplace (Susan could tell you) and back in the 1800s, like the cowboy era, if you were wanted and in the City of Dodge, it was time to leave, and fast. Hence, the expression „get out of Dodge.“ So, if someone jumps bail, I`d say it`s time for that person to get out of Dodge.
One thing that´s different about the US and Europe, (I think this is true for all of Europe, not sure) but we have no registration of residency requirement here (like in Germany where they have the Einwohnermeldeamt). So, you can just pack up and move anywhere you want and never tell anyone and then settle in any town you want and never tell anyone. So, in a sense I`ve heard it`s easier to go underground in the US. If you rent a house or apartment, no one is going to expect you to register your new address with any government office. But, we sort of get around that by requiring people keep addresses on drivers licenses current. That sort of thing. And your banks and credit cards are going to want current addresses on you. So, there are little differences like that.
-
Many thanks to everyone commented, especially to SHL! (ah, Steven, I really hope you actually know what my name sounds like and "Kesnii" is just a typo!). So, jails are for people awaiting trial and serving short sentences, and prisons are for long-term incarceration. At least in the US. Got it.
And you have bounty hunters! Amazing.
-
Sofia,
I just checked a German article about bailing out on a criminal charge in Germany, and you are correct. It really is the exception rather than the norm, unlike in the US. Although German law technically allows for it, it is rather uncommon, quite rare in fact, except in cases of doubtful criminal charges.
So, it’s possible it seems, but pretty unusual. And it would seem they don’t have bailbonds men in Germany either.
https://www.focus.de/finanzen/experten/tobias_klingelhoefer/untersuchungshaft-eine-kaution-fuer-verdaechtige-ist-eher-selten_id_8470891.html
-
Steven can you explain what “bailing out means”? We do not have that on Europe.
Sure, Sofia. That`s just the bond/deposit someone pays to get out of jail while awaiting trial. In a way it´s a bit like the Pfand (deposit) you pay on a returnable bottle of something at the store. You get the deposit back when you bring the empty bottle back.
They have that in Germany I believe, it`s called a „Kaution“, which is just some sum of money to guarantee you won`t disappear while free on bail before being convicted or acquitted. „Bailing out“ is just the verb for posting the bond (bail, it´s the same thing) to get out of jail pending trial. If you can`t „bail out“, that just means you are stuck in jail the whole time awaiting trial.
A „Bailbonds man“ is like an insurance person who charges 10% as a bond fee. The bond is like an insurance policy. In other words, if the bail amount is $5,000, the person arrested pays the bailbonds man $500 for the $5,000 bond fee. That $500 is never recoverable. If the person shows up for trial and other pre-trial hearings, as he or she is supposed to, then bond at some point is what we call „exonerated“ and the $5,000 is paid back to the bondsman/insurer. The bondsman keeps the $500 as his fee. That´s how they make their money. If the accused skips town, and never shows up to court, the $5,000 is lost (forfeited) and then the bondsman can hire a „bounty hunter“ to find the person and bring him back. That´s what a bounty hunter is.
-
It´s hard to compare 3rd world prisons to those in the US, but US prisons are not much better. Different, but not necessarily in a more humane way.
I`ve watched several German YouTube videos under a series called „Hinter fremden Gittern“, behind foreign bars, which deals with German nationals who are imprisoned in Latin American jails, normally over drug smuggling offenses. Often the guys were set up, offered something like 10,000€ in Germany to fly to say Lima, Peru, to pick up drugs to smuggle. They were to be paid the money when they get back. The airfare is paid for in advance, as well as like 2 nights in a cheap Lima hotel. Then, of course, the smugglers get caught at the airport in Lima trying to get back.
This is frequently done as a cover for real smugglers to make it easier for them to get through. So the guys getting caught were just decoys (I thought there was an English word for this, but I can`t seem to think of one at the moment. There might not be one. If anyone knows, let me know. I thought it might be „patsy“, but the German translation doesn`t seem to fit. It just matches the English Webster’s definition). Sending the guys in to get caught as a cover for the real smugglers is what I`d call in German a „Ablenkungsmanöver“ or a diversionary tactic. That seems to be the only word that fits.
But, the series shows the conditions of 3rd world prisons. There was a segment on 5 or 6 German guys in a prison in Lima serving a various number of years, from like 4-10, but they were lucky in that they were housed separatedly from the local Peruvians, who had it worse off. The food was pretty awful, and the overcrowding was pretty terrible- like a prison built for 750 housing 2500?
It´s an apples and oranges comparison, but in some ways the Peruvian prisons were better, in some ways worse than the US ones. Like in the Peruvian prisons there was virtually no medical care (except for a really ridiculous little clinic), where in the US there is some semblance of some medical care, even if it is poor. And the Peruvian food looked deadly, where in the US, it might not be good, but it is not likely deadly. The positives about the Peruvian system was the prisoners got to wear their street clothes, so there was no sense of perpetual humiliation, and the guards didn`t abuse them. They just demanded bribes for everything (better food, a bed, etc). In the US, many of the guards are just sadists.(see Neal`s Riker`s Island article.)
Plus, in the Peruvian prisons, the prisoners are allowed to just wonder around the prison all day. They`re just locked up at night. This may increase the risk that they harm one another, but at least they don`t spend 23 hours a day in a cell. That seems more humane to me, to be allowed to wonder around all day. They were also allowed to earn a tiny bit of money by working in woodworking shops.
Plus, in Peru they had weekly conjugal visits, or entire family visits, where the families would show up with little kids and bring the inmates food and supplies. That doesn`t happen in US prisons. And, there was always a long line of prostitutes at the Peruvian prison to pay visits to the inmates. It was technically not allowed but all it took was 50 cents to pay a guard to look away. Again, that doesn't happen in the US.
-
Steven can you explain what “bailing out means”? We do not have that on Europe.
-
For anyone who has looked at this thread, I would encourage you to read Neal`s link to Riker`s Island. It´s an appalling story.
This is classic 3rd world country prison stuff. Here`s a brief piece (only partial excerpt) from the Economist, from a 2017 story about the place. Let´s hope they close the „torture island“ down soon.
„KALIEF BROWDER was 16 years old when he was arrested for allegedly stealing a backpack. When his family could not pay bail, he was sent to Rikers Island, New York’s largest jail. There he spent around 800 days in solitary confinement; he was beaten by guards and other inmates and tried several times to kill himself. Because his hearings were delayed, he ended up spending three years on Rikers, all the while claiming his innocence. His case was dismissed in 2013 and he was released. But the damage had been done, and he eventually killed himself. His tale, not an unusual one, provoked a campaign to close the “torture island”, as inmates call it, altogether. Bill de Blasio, New York’s mayor, agrees. On March 31st he vowed to begin a ten-year process to shut it.
Three-quarters of the roughly 9,400 people held in New York City’s jails have not been convicted of anything. Most are housed on Rikers. The place has become a warehouse for people too poor to post bail or suffering from addiction or mental-health problems (jails, unlike prisons, are locally operated and hold people serving short sentences or awaiting trial). Because of backlogs, many wait months for their day in court. Even a short stay behind bars can be very disruptive. It can mean loss of job, home and custody of children.....“
-
I know Angola, that has a reputation. And of course New York's Attica.
Rikers is NY City's jail, you can also serve short sentences there. Has a reputation of being scary and violent. It is an Island between Long Islands Queens Borough and the Bronx Borough.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rikers_Island
The Mayor wants to close it down, I dont know where he will build a new Jail but I imagine the land would be very valuable. Sort of like San Quinten by you. Years ago Oceanfront was where the poor people lived and you put Jails and Hospitals. New York's rough "Hell's Kitchen" neighborhood had a lot of waterfront space.
-
Rikers is New York City's Jail. You don't want to go to Rikers.
I have always heard Federal time was rougher. Perhaps the facilities are nicer, but as far as I know there is no time off for good behavior in the Penitentiary, and things are VERY regimented. But I dont know for sure.
I am sure like everything else, Prison depends on the state. Some of NY State's Prisons are old, supposedly very cold in winter but otherwise we are a liberal state and I am sure NY Prison is better than most of the South. In New York we even allow "conjugal visits".
And as for the rate of incarceration, that is Clinton's legacy.
That’s interesting Neal. I didn’t know Rikers was just a NYC jail. I thought it was a NY prison. Plus, it’s really old and I believe it’s on an island, isn’t it, because the name is Rikers Island? But, it’s got a reputation thoughout the country as being pretty bad, like one rivialing Alcatraz.
You’re right about the State prisons probably being more liberal than the federal ones, at least in the more liberal States (they’re all bad, but I guess you can say there are degrees of bad). And, you are right. The prisons in the US South are outrageously horrible, the worst being Angola State Prison in Lousiana. I heard it’s run like a old Southern style slave plantation from 1850. I’m sure it has all the comforts of an old Soviet style Gulag.
That’s the thing about the US. There’s a veil of silence over certain bad things here that you don’t talk about.
The rate of incarceration, whoever started it (and I have a hunch it was really Reagan with his mandatory minimums from the 80s), is something someone should do something about. Prison reform is needed and the US needs to enter the 21st century, like Europe.
-
Rikers is New York City's Jail. You don't want to go to Rikers.
I have always heard Federal time was rougher. Perhaps the facilities are nicer, but as far as I know there is no time off for good behavior in the Penitentiary, and things are VERY regimented. But I dont know for sure.
I am sure like everything else, Prison depends on the state. Some of NY State's Prisons are old, supposedly very cold in winter but otherwise we are a liberal state and I am sure NY Prison is better than most of the South. In New York we even allow "conjugal visits".
And as for the rate of incarceration, that is Clinton's legacy.
-
They’re all horrible, although I heard that same thing Susan mentioned about the feds.
The good O US of A. The highest incarceration rate in the world. Nothing to be proud of. I wonder if there might be something wrong with the system in the „Land of the Free“? And overcrowding in prisons? It’s a scandal.
In Holland the incarceration rate is so low, they ship prisoners in from Belgium just to fill up the empty spaces. Tells you a lot about the American mentality.
Neal, is Rikers Island still in operation in NY? Heard it was like a modern day Alcatraz.
-
Neal, I thought the Federal Prisons have a reputation of being a little less rough than most state ones. That isn´t the impression you have had?
Leavenworth KS and Lansing KS are pretty near each other in location. Leavenworth has the medium security penitentiary (and two military prisons) and Lansing has a state prison. I had always heard Leavenworth was the nicer, although it was built in the late 1800s.
-
There is also the word "Penitentiary", which usually refers to a Federal Prison - laws broken on the Federal level. You don't want to go to the pen.
-
@Kesnii:
I think you are on to the right answer. Every US State is divided into multiple counties (we have something like 58 different countries in California, or 56, I can`t recall at the moment, but I know it is in the 50-range. San Francisco is both a County and a City. It might be the only one with that status). And, every County runs its own jail system. A jail in the US is NOT synonymous with a prison.
Jails are for what are considered less serious offenses (usually misdemeanor crimes) that carry a maximum sentence of 12 months.(But in California you automatically get one day taken off the sentence for good behavior, so a 12 month sentence usually means a real 6 months incarceration period.)
By contrast, a prison is where the bad guys go, usually the really bad guys. They are for serious felonies (bank robberies, murder, drug trafficking and other things. Their inmates serve longer than one-year sentences, but they have parole boards to allow early release in most cases (jails don`t have parole). The State of California runs its own prison system known in California as the „Department of Corrections.“ It has nothing to do with jails. Jails are operated by the local County`s Sheriff`s office.
They are totally different and should never to be confused.
California had a prison overcrowding problem years ago and was under was under a court order to reduce its prison population. To remedy the problem, they enacted a law to move some of the non-violet offenders with longer than 12 month sentences from prisons to jails. And, they are still doing that to this day. So, now the local jails are fuller than they used to be. And the jail is usually right next to the court house for easy access to court proceedings. All cases start out with the defendant in a jail, (or on bond) and then at sentencing the person, if convicted, gets sent to jail or the Department of Corrections (prison), and the CDC (California Department of Corrections) has prisons all over the State.
Neal is correct that in the standard vocabulary of Americans, we often just banter about the words prison and jail as if they were the same, but they are not and never have been in a true legal sense.
I can`t speak to the use of the terms in other English speaking countries, but in the US they are definitely NOT the same thing. Not by a long shot.
-
Officially Irena is right, and anyone involved with law enforcement will use the words that way. In actuality people throw the two words around interchangeably
-
I was under the impression that jail is for people awaiting trial, whereas prison is for people who are serving a sentence. I think. SHL?
-
Hi SHL (hopefully you're reading this), I have a small question for you. You're a lawyer, so I just thought that you might know the answer. In American English, do the words "prison" and "jail" have different meanings? Like, "jail" is a place for serving a short sentence, and "prison" — for serving a sentence of longer than a year? I told one person from England about this distinction and was assured that I was talking nonsense because the terms are actually interchangeable. So I'm just wondering if this distinction really exists in AmE and the author of my textbook didn't make it up.