Community Justice By David R. Analysis

Justice can be a controversial subject when it comes to what people want to get out of it. Victims of offences want offenders to be penalised accordingly for their actions, though justice does not always work in their favour. For some people in society, justice can vary from having to pay significant fines to incarceration but how can we truly achieve justice as a community? Communities should come together to work out processes and orders to achieve the type of justice they want to see, focusing on long term outcomes instead of the short term. ‘Priority is given to the community, enhancing its responsibility for social control while building its capacity to achieve this and other outcomes relevant

Part 1 of the book highlights chapter 1 and 2, which talks about politics and the consequences of incarceration while chapter 2 talks about the politics of being punished within the united states, some sub topics between chapter 1 and 2 include problem ownership, philosophies, historic changes with the corrections policy throughout time and the economic impact of being incarcerated. Chapter 2 talks about the process in which politics can affect the outcome on crime and punishment, throughout the 1960s the criminal justice system has changed a lot especially correctional professionals who have brought issues to crime and its political forefront.

The book explores the effect of mass incarceration on low-income areas, poverty places, and poor demographics. It explains that the high incarceration has a direct correlation to social problems of individuals that happen within these communities. It shows statistics of these poverty places having an increase in percentage of being sent to prison. I plan to use this in my research by providing the audience information on how individuals and citizens of communities

The criminal justice field faces the challenges of getting criminals off the streets, and prosecuting them, while using limited funds and manpower. Citizens expect results, and want to feel safe when they are in their own neighborhood. On the other hand, citizens in our democratic country expect people to be treated fairly, and feel the need to make sure that no innocent people are wrongly sent to jail. It is a balancing act of keeping the community safe on one hand, and on the other, making sure that no one’s rights are violated. It is like being told to do a job, but then having all these rules and obstacles you have to navigate around in order to do your job. The following paper is a study of the differences between due

Sometimes crime that has been committed in America leaves communities divided; and this sort of division could serve as the groundwork to start a peacemaking program throughout communities in America. When certain crimes are committed, blame can ensue; hatred, bitterness and feelings of resentment are many times felt throughout an entire community. Although the person who committed the act may have gotten arrested and even tried in a court of law, the victims, their families and many times a whole community are left with pain, hurt and unanswered questions. “Current systems create division within the community. Labeling an individual separates and isolates him from the community.

Incarceration disparity has exhibited a plethora of collateral effects which recent research indicates has led to an alarming increase in broken homes and disenfranchised communities (Dyer, 2005). These collateral effects are directly experienced by offenders, their families, and their children. These effects are persistent and pervasive and can include personal, social, financial, emotional, psychological, and physical concerns such as stigma, family disruption, financial burden and negative psychological impact on children (Crime Council on Justice, 2006). Social and economic structures of communities are affected as well, especially in areas where many residents are continually entering and exiting the criminal justice system. Concentrated crime and imprisonment, within communities, diminishes human capital (individual skills, knowledge), physical capital (infrastructures, material improvements), and social capital (social good embodied in relations) (Watts & Nightingale, 1996; Hagan & Dinovitzer, 1999; Clear, Rose, Waring & Scully, 2003). The aforementioned effects of imprisonment signal crisis and are the harbingers of a crippled community; which adds another lambasting blow to Communities of color that research has identified as the hardest hit by incarceration (Watts & Nightingale, 1996; Clear, Rose & Ryder, 2001).

This “war on drugs,” which all subsequent presidents have embraced, has created a behemoth of courts, jails, and prisons that have done little to decrease the use of drugs while doing much to create confusion and hardship in families of color and urban communities.1,2Since 1972, the number of people incarcerated has increased 5-fold without a comparable decrease in crime or drug use.1,3 In fact, the decreased costs of opiates and stimulants and the increased potency of cannabis might lead one to an opposing conclusion.4 Given the politics of the war on drugs, skyrocketing incarceration rates are deemed a sign of success, not failure. I don’t totally agree with the book (I think linking crime and black struggle is even older than she does, for instance) but I think The New Jim Crow pursues the right line of questioning. “The prison boom is not the main cause of inequality between blacks and whites in America, but it did foreclose upward mobility

As soon as I entered the class, there was a man sitting in our class. His name was Paul Shapiro, and he was from the Orange County Courts. He explained to us what the community court is, and what kind of effect it has on our society. During mid-1980s, crack cocaine was widespread and people kept going back to prison. To cut this infinite loop of incarceration, Orange County made the drug court. It is not like a real court, but rather similar to a program that helps drug addicts free themselves from drug dependence. Unlike other courts, the prosecutor, the attorney, the probation officer, and the judge in the drug court work as a team.

She argues that the reforms suggested by the conservative party would cause unintended harm to the people they are attempting to help. The author forms her argument by analyzing the prison reforms initiative put forth by republican politicians. Bruenig concludes that these attempts to bring needed modification to the criminal justice system have not improved the lives of disadvantaged people. By focusing on cutting prison costs the author states, the conservative’s suggestion for reform will fail to provide support to community programs that help people stay out of prison. This would make the reform meaningless. It would also rid communities of prevention programs.

The Justice system seeks to prevent crimes and to capture those who have committed crimes. But what are the causes of crime, maybe poverty, or greed, or is sometimes caused by the system. Is the risk worth the reward and is reward the worth risking the punishment? Power and influence is threaded deeply into the Criminal Justice System. Are all offenders caught and processed with the same demeanor and given the same punishment? The system needs to be impartial to all offenders regardless of the offender’s social position, job or yearly income. The general punishment for most crimes is incarceration in most states with a difference in duration to adjust per each crime. This is the deterrent against crime. This is what should be keeping

One of the most interesting things I learned from doing my research on community corrections in my jurisdiction is how the criminal justice system is committed to being fair and balanced. I have observed in a court arraignment how a judge briefed everyone in the court about proper protocols during the hearings .The judge said he could not start court hearings unless a prosecutor was present, and that he cautions the inmate the right to remain silent, and also discussed to the inmate his rights. Community-based corrections developed as a result of dissatisfaction with institutional confinement and in recognition of the problems encountered by inmates reentering society after prolonged incarceration. Belinda R. McCarthy, Bernard J. McCarthy, Jr,& Matthew C. Leone (4th edu.). (2001) Community-Based Corrections. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group. In writing this paper I will inform and discuss the various programs and rules applied to handle offenders who have violated state laws according to the criminal justice system in NC. I will write about the following subjects in the following order: 1) Parole and probation, 2) Community and drug courts, 3) Pretrial release, 4) Victim aid, and 5) Community service (as a function of service of sentence).

First, I want to discuss community justice as a progression to focus on safety to the community and its people. Community justice is an effort to reweave the fabric of the community by developing a partnership between local governmental entities, the private sector, and community groups to serve the performance by private citizens of the functions that were once performed by the extended family, neighborhood, and school. Its central focus is community-level outcomes, shifting the emphasis from individual incidents to general patterns, from individual conscience to social mores, and from individual goods to the common good. Community justice first offers a new way of thinking about police, courts, and corrections that emphasize problem-solving,

Within the criminal justice system, officials abuse their power. The officials of the justice system have a duty to protect and perform their duties with unbiased decision making. The abuse of power jeopardizes people’s lives who are not able to sustain oneself and their families. Some people do not understand that poorer people find themselves in jail more and once a person is released, that person is subjected to return to jail for the amount of money owed to the state. There are many obstacles for the poor, especially those of color. People of color are treated unfairly in the justice system, from the arrest, the sentencing, and the release. The criminal justice system is supposed to be just but that is not the case. The criminal justice system allows for the police, public defenders, and judges to bend the laws and not be punished for their actions or that apologizes can fix the wrong that has been done. This paper will discuss the abuse of power from the justice system and the solutions to rectify the damages.

Crime is defined as an act or omission that the law makes punishable. There are different ways in dealing with crime. One, our current system, is the criminal justice approach. Also known as retributive justice, this system is more offender directed than anything else. The other system, which many people think is better, is the community justice, or restorative approach. The restorative approach is much more victim oriented. There is a debate over which system should be used to deal with crime. The two differ in many ways.

Is the criminal justice system more effective as a method of bringing the guilty to justice or as a deterrent or a method of social control? It is unanimously agreed that the aim of the criminal justice system is to provide equal justice for all according to the law, by processing of cases impartially, fairly and efficiently with the minimum but necessary use of public resources. It is a complex process through which the state decides which particular forms of behaviour are to be considered unacceptable and then proceeds through a series of stages - arrest, charge, prosecute, trial sentence, appeal punishment -' in order to bring the guilty to justice' (Munice & Wilson, 2006 pIX) and is designed for a coherent administration