Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Brave Montana Town Says They’ll Take Gitmo Prisoners – Gutless Montana Representatives Say Not So Fast

Hardin, Montana, population 3,400, needs jobs.  Two years ago, Hardin borrowed $27 million in bonds to build the state of the art Two Rivers Regional Correctional Facility, which has yet to house a single inmate.  Meanwhile, President Obama says he is going to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay.  That means a whole bunch of alleged terrorists need detaining.  Hardin, knowing they have a brand new prison just waiting to be populated says, “we’ll take ‘em!” 

It couldn’t be a better arrangement, right?  A poor, small town builds a prison with the hopes of creating jobs and stimulating the local economy.  A whole bunch of prisoners need a place to live and here’s a brand new, 464 bed lock-up with nobody in it.  What’s the problem?

The state's congressional leaders have lined up against the plan. "Housing potential terrorists in Montana is not good for our state," Max Baucus, the state's senior Democratic senator, wrote to (Hardin's economic development director Greg) Smith. "These people stop at nothing. Their primary goal in life, and death, is to destroy America."

Adds Sen. Jon Tester, "I just don't think it's appropriate, that's all. I don't think they know what they're asking for."

Don’t know what they’re asking for?  Really?  They built a prison!  I think they fully knew what they were asking for!  They were asking for prisoners to come and live in prison they just built!  Prisoners are dangerous people, period.  Prisoners have wronged society, cannot be allowed to live in society, so we, as a society LOCK THEM UP!!! 

As an American, I am completely embarrassed.  This chicken shit mentality has got to stop!  There is absolutely no reason to fear these men.  The whole reason of putting them in jail is so they don’t do anybody any harm ever again.  If we can’t control them in jail, then we have much bigger problems.  That said, this nation handles hundreds of thousands of prisoners daily, with no incident.  I’m confident we can handle the inmates at Gitmo.

If I need to start practicing my “drop to fetal position and play dead” maneuvers, then please let me know.  Until then, let’s be American’s about this and toughen up.


  1. All prisons are not the same. This one was built, not to "hold prisoners" but in fact to make money. The Texas promoters made millions and the town got shafted.

    It is a minimum security facility and shouldn't have been built in the first place, as state law prohibited its operation. No available population existed to fill it.

    If you can't figure this out for yourself, perhaps you could arrange for a tour of federal prisons: A supermax at Marion, Indiana or Florence Colorado, and a tennis camp for white collar criminals at Lompoc, California, Eglin AFB Florida or Allenwood, Pennsylvania. Hardin is one small step above the "tennis camp" level.

  2. Fair enough. If Hardin can't handle the security, then don't send them there.

    My bigger point is why can't we lock these terrorists up in the US? You point to a number of places that can handle them. Why do our representatives argue that they these inmates are more dangerous than the inmates already incarcerated in this country? Do they have so little faith in our prisons that we couldn't possibly control the situation? I find this to be insulting.

    Frank, thanks for your comment and insight. It is much appreciated!

  3. The only ethical thing to do is to give these men fair trials in the US. If they are not found guilty then they should be free to go home, unless that would now be dangerous for them, in which case they should be allowed to live in the United States.
    If they are found guilty, they should be properly sentenced and sent to Federal Prisons here in the States.

  4. Agreed, Mr. Ferrell. We wouldn't be in this mess if that is what happened in the first place.