In 2002, over 600,000 individuals left state and federal prisons. According to a national study, however, within 3 years alomost 7 in 10 will have been rearrested and half will be back in prison, either for a new crime or for violating conditions of their release. Released offenders are responsible for a large share of violent crime, proving that past approaches to correction and release have done little to prepare criminals for life outside of prison.
an individual's transition from prison back into a community is a difficult one, as they are faced with challenges including finding jobs and housing, reconnecting with family members, and avoiding crime. in recent years, the federal government has created an unprecedented national response to help states better use their correctional resources to reduce recidivism with the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative. Funding for this program supports the creation of a three-phase continuum of services that begins in prison, moves to a structured reentry phase during the early months of release, and continues for several years as released prisoners become reintegrated into their communities.
I think this sounds like a good idea because it protects us from those criminals that were let out and are likely to repeat a crime. However, could this infringe upon civil liberties, sort of like having big brother down your back all the time. I think not because when you commit a crime, you give up a lot of those civil liberties. However, it takes a lot of money to fulfill these goals so, do we increase law enforcement funding for this one aspect and create a greater risk by reducing enforcement in other aspects of crime? I don't know, I think it's deciding which risk is worse and in my opinion, this is definitely it.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
I actually debated on this topic in highschool. I think that offender re-entry programs are critical to make sure the person stays on track and is able to fit back into society.