For no particular reason at all, except, well, this one English assignment, I was pondering America's prison system. Just thinking about its virtues and its faults. And then, like a flash, there was this one specific statistic, once filed away in the recesses of my mind, that really struck me with full force. Sixty-seven percent of former inmates released from U.S. state prisons in 1994 were back in jail within three years, according to a study conducted by the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).
Well, if inmates aren't used as free labor, and they aren't learning their lessons in jail, what ARE they doing? I figure they're eating, sleeping, and entertaining themselves for free without the pressures of the outside world to bother them until they can get out, commit another crime, and get back in again. After coming to this conclusion, I was flabbergasted (yes, flabbergasted) that criminals weren't undergoing a comprehensive rehabilitation program in order to address the problem and prevent criminals from repeating their mistakes, because, obviously, free food and housing wasn't doing the trick.
Now, I'm under the impression myself that most crimes are caused by deeper problems than just innate evilness. Sometimes those problems are socioeconomic, and sometimes they are mental. If we would take the time to figure out why Johnny likes to steal cares, and we address the problem, then maybe that's one less bad apple to worry about. Repeat offenders aren't my cup of tea. When they go IN jail, I expect that they come back OUT without an agenda to repeat the same crime and do a better job of not getting caught. Maybe then our prison facilities won't be so crowded (over 2,000,000 incarcerated).
Oh, and check out this list of statistics for more:
http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa060702a.htm
I think the biggest way to fix the prison system is to decriminalize drug use, as a majority of inmates are in prison for drugs, and they aren't being helped when they're just in jail.
And i really haven't, but i guess that you have a point there. if alcohol is legal, why not drugs? and keeping it in the open would helpfully keep people from overdosing or having to deal with dangerous drug dealers and stuff, i guess... but wouldn't there be adverse affects on our society as well? i'll think about that some more.
Decriminalizing and legalizing are two very different things. Decriminalizing means no arrest, just a fine. Legalizing, well, you were talking about legalizing.
I think legalizing everything would be safest, but I don't see it happening. Pot and hemp would give us a better economy. The other drugs, well, they are really addictive and I'm not sure where I stand on that issue. Then again, tobacco is highly addictive and that's legal.
A high majority of drug overdoses are accidental. The strength of the drug is what causes it. If a person is used to a weak drug, they do more. Sometimes that person would get something a lot stronger than what he's used to but do the same amount, causing an overdose. If it was mandated by the government, those kinds of drugs would be all the same strength, reducing the possibility of overdose.
I think drug dealers are against legalization or decriminalization because their products would go down in value. If everything was legalized, they would be out of the picture entirely.
I think everyone is well aware of the dangers of harder drugs. I don't even consider marijuana in that category. It's not addictive and is less harmful than alcohol or tobacco. Obviously, there would have to be an age limit to all of it, and that should definitely be pushed. I think generally the people that would do the drugs (usually addictive personality types) would try it whether or not they were legal. Very few drugs are addictive by experimenting a few times, but teenagers tend to overdo everything they aren't supposed to do.
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
One of the main reasons of overcrowding in prisons is due to legislation changes during the Regan era (if I remember correctly), making it much easier to get into prison (i.e. war on drugs). Most of our money (at least in michigan) is going into the correctional system, and well it's not rehabilitation programs, sadly. I agree with you, we need some programs to help these people out because when they come out of prison they are affecting our society And let's just say that I would rather have a better society, then one filled with crime (for whatever reason that crime was committed). I would also put my money in some preventive programs as well.
i wish that everyone loved preventative as much as i do... preventative healthcare, preventing students from dropping out with better school programs, preventing debt... the list goes on. thanks for your opinon!
p.s. reagan sucks.
Alright, I'm gonna try not to drone on with this one, but its one of those (many) subjects I feel very strongly about.
First and foremost, the Correctional System is used for Economic Stimulation. States and businesses have a vested interest in creating more prisons. In order to create more prisons, guess what? You need more prisoners. Why is it considered economically advantageous?
Well, consider everything that goes into a prison. There's the prison itself. If you're having to build a new one, that's a multi-million dollar investment into Construction, Electrical, Plumbing and other sorts of businesses like that. Even if you're not building a new one, chances are you're overcrowded (if its state) so you've got to build additions or improve the dilapidated buildings you already have. The prison employs Security Guards, Administrative Staff, and Medical Staff. Then there's, of course, the nearly free labor.
But the investment doesn't stop there. You need nearby resources for ALL of the people working at the prison. Up goes the supermarkets, the gas stations, the liquor stores. You get the idea. Towns and rural areas compete to have new prisons built in their area for just these reasons.
Now all of this sounds all well and good, except get this:
States around the country spent more building prisons than colleges in 1995 for the first time. That year, there was nearly a dollar-for-dollar tradeoff between corrections and higher education, with university construction funds decreasing by $954 million to (2.5 billion) while corrections funding increased by $926 million to (2.6 billion). Around the country, from 1987 to 1995, general fund expenditures for prisons increased by 30%, while general fund expenditures for universities decreased by 18%. http://www.cjcj.org/pubs/classdis/classdis.html
The states, in their money-making endeavors, have become more concerned with imprisoning young adults than educating them. I apologize for having such old statistics (I still can't find my darn Diversity textbook), but according to the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, in California in 1998, 5 students could afford 1 year of tuition at a state college for what it cost to house 1 inmate. 5 to 1.
Many cops and criminal justice majors I've spoken with say that instead of Prison being there for rehabilitation purposes, inmates actually learn new skills for committing crimes. Some gain criminal contacts they otherwise would not have had. Our society, or at least our governments do not promote the idea of rehabilitation in our prisons, but instead of punishment and segregation.
And then you could get into the race/class dilemma, which I highly doubt anyone on here can deny is a real problem. But its late. And this is too long already.
"In 2006, the FBI estimated that 14,380,370 arrests occurred nationwide for all offenses (except traffic violations), of which 611,523 were for violent crimes, and 1,540,297 were for property crimes. Law enforcement made more arrests for drug abuse violations in 2006 (an estimated 1.9 million arrests, or 13.1 percent of the total number of arrests) than for any other offense." (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/arrests/index.html) I realize not all of these people went to jail or prison, and some did get out of it (rich people can hire great lawyers, to add to your classism point).
I posted a blog a couple of days ago:
http://progressiveu.org/165208-reefer-madness
It's about the legalization of marijuana. (Read it before you think you know anything about me, please.) It goes into the number of pot arrests, and how many people are actually in prison only for pot. I don't believe pot smokers need rehabilitation, but hard drug abusers (meth, cocaine, heroine) DO. The money is being sucked up in building and repairing prisons to house people instead of any sort of rehab.
You are absolutely right. I had a friend that went to prison for a short time. He had never done meth before he went in there... He was always just a pothead. They do learn new tricks of the trade, if you will. We need prevention and rehabilitation, not a free school to learn more tricks of the trade.
This can also be an argument for universal health care. People would be able to afford treatment (whether it be for drugs, violence, or whatever) BEFORE they mess up their lives.
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
apparently, the clinton administration opened the most prisons of any other administration. it was a reality check for me, because where i come from, clinton is glorified. it just goes to show that every politician has a hidden agenda.
I had no idea about any of that! i'm appalled. when i think of schools like fisk university that are millions of dollars in debt, it makes me a little sick.
5 to 1? that sucks. i never knew that so much went into prisons. i knew it was a lot, but...
I had never really thought about this until last week, when I heard a story on NPR about New York prison closings. The reduced crime rate in New York has allowed them to close a few prisons (I can't remember how many) and the towns that have the prisons are protesting the move because the prisons are their livelihood. Until I heard that, I couldn't imagine WHY a town would want a prison in it.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
Excellent, excellent post. *applause*
thanks! i try not to write crap, and i'm glad you enjoyed.
Our jails are becoming over crowded. We need to either start using the death penalty more or building more jails. You are getting meals and sleeping like you say but it's not exactly a vacation resort. People get stabbed, beaten, raped, and even killed by otehr inmates in jail. So I mean let's not act like jail is a wonderland where you just chill all day. You have to watch your back or you'll get hurt.
+mspin
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/weezyf
Neither of those are good options. First, the death penalty would really not decrease the prison population since most people in prison do not deserve the death penalty (under law). And second, building more prisons will not decrease prison populations either. If anything, i will just be another chance to arrest more people (thinking that there is room) and then overcrowding the new prison. Why not take a more proactive choice, then a reactive one?
weezyf, i get your point. jail is not that nice of a place to be. but it still remains that there are people who commit crimes just to get into jail because they figure it's better than the life they lead. and at this point in time, it seems like it's a place where criminals go just ot bide their time, and as JadePnk noted, a place to learn new tricks. i think that prison reform is in order. killing off inmates isn't necessarilly going to solve the real problems here.
I suppose that's one way to stop the revolving door that is prison/jail.
It's not a good place to be, but a big portion of people stay in there long enough to forget what the outside is like. Have you seen Shawshank Redemption?
I think there needs to be a lot more rehab services available inside and outside of prison and a proper counseling service coming out to reduce repeat offences.
The number of addicts in prison is astounding. I think if drugs (use, not production and sales) were decriminalized, it would decrease the overpopulation. Why are child molesters and wife beaters often doing less time than heroine addicts? The addict is only hurting her/himself.
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
I don't understand some criminals. You would think they would learn their lesson and want to better themselves but no. I especially hate the ones that say " I got saved while I was in jail " and then get out and do eitheir the same thing that they did before or worse. Makes you wonder if they should stay in there for life. Then wouldn't the whole 3 strikes your out thing make them want to not go back. We all know that the 3rd time they go to jail,they will stay there. The part that I liked the most was :
Well, if inmates aren't used as free labor, and they aren't learning their lessons in jail, what ARE they doing? I figure they're eating, sleeping, and entertaining themselves for free without the pressures of the outside world to bother them until they can get out, commit another crime, and get back in again.
You took the words right out of my mouth. Good job.
I like the idea about decriminalizing drugs. If drugs were legal they would be a lot cheaper and there would be a lot less crime committed to obtain them. Taxpayers would save a ton of money and drug users would be on their own to support their much cheaper habits and drug dealers would be out of business.
With all the drug dealers out of prison there would be much more prison space to give real criminals much longer sentences. As far as I'm concerned, I am willing to give offenders against property (thieves and whatnot) a break and a chance at building a new life but violent criminals should never get a chance to re-offend. Rapists and anybody who uses a gun in a crime should never get a second chance.
And I agree with the poster who suggested more liberal use of the death penalty. I see no reason to spend money on a life sentence at the cost of 5 college educations every year when a big jolt of electricity only costs a buck or two and a .22 calibur bullet costs less than a dime.
Drug dealers would be out of business with legalization, but would probably lose so much money out of decriminalizing that half wouldn't bother. Maybe they'd start (or focus on) dealing guns, but that's worthy of prison time. Decriminalization would mean fining people for drugs instead of arresting them. The fine money could go to drug treatment and real rehabilitation.
Even if drugs were legal, I think regulation and taxation would have to come into play, keeping drug prices the same, but safer, and the taxes could go, again, to treatment. It seems like an endless cycle, but I think it's a necessary one. Few prisoners, if any, are getting serious rehabilitation.
I don't like the idea of no second chances. I heard of a case where a woman charged that her husband molested their daughter when she filed for divorce. Come to find out, she just wanted full custody and coached her daughter to say it all. That's not the only time someone lies about violent crime. How many cases have you heard of where long-term prisoners were freed through DNA proof?
I'm covered in bruises from a really good mosh pit. I could call the cops and say it was the result of a domestic dispute. It's that easy to ruin a life.
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
i didn't know the difference between decriminalize and legalize either, and yes, second chances are great.
I'm mostly concerned that prisons are part of an industry; one that's negative effects contribute to our GDP. Ugh.
"Children, parents, senior citizens (with a good back and great kneecaps) neeed to get on a BIKE!!!
A BIKE!!!!!
A BIKE!!!!!
A BIKE !!!!!" -- NASAscifi
"I understand that this
Now that most jails and prisons are privatized, there's a huge market. They don't want crime rates to go down, and therefore don't want rehabilitation in prisons.
I live in Indiana. One of our prisons has Arizona prisoners. Indiana gets paid to "store" prisoners. My thought is that if you have visitors, it gives you more of an incentive to redirect your life. Hell, even if it's a life sentence, I still think it's important to have contact with family and friends. How many people are going to go to IN from AZ to visit a loved one? I think it's pretty ridiculous.
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
excons are treated like dirt. They do not get jobs or a chance for an education. Yes, those people can not get an education such as a pell grant if they comitted a felony. SO they are basicall screwd
Published Author and Poet
Teacher Education Student.
I'm much less concerned about their availability of Pell grants than I am the lack of job opportunities. Few markets will even consider hiring an ex-con, regardless of the circumstance or actual liability, and even fewer employers within those markets will actually hire. Common sense would tell me that if they can't even get a minimum wage job, what would keep them from going to, or going back to a life of crime?
Many prisons do offer education while there. I saw a show that was talking about how in one women's prison program, they could get an actual certificate to be a mechanic. They also offer education in food industries and GED training. Nowadays, it's nearly impossible to get a job without a GED, minimum. I think these are good programs, but the reality is that the likelihood of getting a good job after prison is slim. It really infuriates me that people who were found guilty but later proved innocent by DNA still have the crime on record.
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."