• Nougat@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Putting a paywall between an incarcerated person and their ability to communicate with anyone, especially when the ability for the inmate to earn income to overcome that paywall is extremely limited, is at least predatory, and arguably cruel.

      Edit @5↑: And to be clear, there would absolutely be situations where an inmate’s ability to communicate with specific people should be restricted. The blanket restriction on communication with anyone is where the problem is.

  • miniu@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Never thought about it, but I didn’t expect they have to pay for calls. Would think that they just have limited time for them.

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      In many places, either they or the one contacting has to pay. And the prices and fees are outrageous.

      $5 to load money on, even if you’re only loading on $20. The calls are charged by the 15 minute and range in cost all the way up to over $14.

      It is absolutely insane.

  • John_Coomsumer@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Massachusetts one of very few states to acknowledge that first amendment exists” fixed. Forcing a paywall for the ability to speak with the outside world as an incarcerated person is unconstitutional no matter how many conservative judicial mental-gymnists want to pretend it isnt.

  • TheMage@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Pro Tip: Dont commit crimes and then you wont be in jail. mmm Kay? Cool, glad we sorted that out.