Crime Rate And Its Effect On The Incarceration Rate

The purpose of this abstract is to critically review the primary data sources used in the criminological research. The two key factors that measures crime are distinguished: official crime statistics, which are based on the compile data records of offenders and offenses processed by the police, courts, and corrections agencies; and unofficial crime statistics, which are produced by people and agencies outside the criminal justice system whom can add value to the data source (Regoli, Robert M., and Hewitt, John D., 2008, p 62). This abstract will discuss the strengths, weaknesses and differences of both data sources using arrests and self-reports to calculate the prevalence of crime in the United States.

As mentioned in American Corrections, the effects can be separated into three categories, namely, the effect on crime, the effect on society, and the effect on the pursuit of justice (Clear 6). Data shows that the “experiment” has had little effect on crime itself. The crime rate has not significantly changed since the 1970s, when the “experiment” began, so it does not

On the other hand, others argue that disproportionality in arrest decisions is commensurate with the racial distributions in offending rather than residential distribution in the population (D’Alessio & Stolzenberg, 2003; Sampson & Lauritsen, 1997). Putting it differently, proponents of this group hold that differential involvement in crime commission leads to higher arrest rates. For this reason, employing frequency of crime involvement as a baseline measure would yield different findings as opposed to relying only population as a baseline measure (Golub et al., 2007).

There are some limitations to the use of UCR data is the fact that crimes that aren’t reported to the police are not taken into consideration. This is commonly known as the “dark figure of crime”. Another limitation that the data contains is the hierarchy rule which takes place when an incident that contains multiple offenses labels the most serious crime and is tallied only once. For example, if a crime involving motor vehicle theft and murder were committed in one incident then only motor vehicle theft would be reported. Regardless, three strikes laws should be shown affecting the rates of crimes that are reported. The UCR has been in place for over 70 years allowing us to extend previous research dating from 1980 to 2010. Drawing data from the interrupted time series design can be done by considering the average rates of crime before and after the implementation of three strikes laws and comparing them. Benefits of using this method allows certain variables within the state to affect both of the groups being compared. Maturation could be a potential variable that would affect the outcome of the results. Creating a previous trend of crime from the pretest group allows us to control

Criminal Justice is a science that uses facts, experience, and opinions to develop standards that help shape the decision-making process. Legal empirical researchers are using statistical analysis to categorize crime data. Combining both data and legal analysis, this concept led to a new movement of a development of law. Statistics show there are 2.3 million incarcerated in correctional facilities in the United States. At the State and Federal prison systems, one in five prisoners is incarcerated for a drug offense (Peter Wagner). Maryland has more than 20,000 inmates, 58% were for nonviolent offenses, costing the state close to 1 billion dollars per year. On average one inmate costs the state over 37,000 dollars

In some states, citizens elect their judges based on their views of the death penalty. Enns states, “citizen preferences can directly influence the incarceration rate through ballot initiatives and indirectly through the behavior of legislators” (Enns 2014, 859). Judges and police officers want to be respected, so they tend to listen to public opinion on certain matters. The way the public reacts to crime and imprisonment of criminals is related to how it affects them personally. In recent cases, such as Ferguson, the public has had a large amount of influence (mostly negative) on what happens during the time of the verdict and after. For instance, in the United States political system citizens from certain states can use ballots to directly influence incarceration rates by voting for certain laws to be put into place. “…Citizens have enacted “three strikes laws,” which impose mandatory minimum sentences on repeat offenders” (Enns 2014, 859). This in turn can influence neighboring states to do the same, which leads to a domino effect of citizen’s influence on the incarceration rates. However, budgetary appropriations play a vital role in the amount of people who are incarcerated. If the budget has room, or the budget quota has not been met, then there is room for more people to be

When we get into how society and people look at crime, it happens in every city, every neighborhood, people are victims every day, businesses, and even property. Crime dates back since colonization and the rates have varied over time, believe it or not, crime has decreased over the years. As a matter of fact, the United States has been on a decline. The crime rate for the year 2000 was a total of 11,608,072 a declining year in 2015 with a total of 9,225,197. (U.S. Department of Justice)

Prominent among them is the reduction of the prison sentences for nonviolent and low-level drug crimes. However, this is not enough. “Even if we released everyone imprisoned for drugs tomorrow, the united states would still have 1.7 million people behind bars.” That massive statistic comes as a great shock to readers, as they only now realize the true urgency of the issue. The authors acknowledge that “half the people in state prisons are there for a violent crime.” However, “not all individuals convicted for a violent crime are alike.” They are convicted for different levels of violence: some are mass murderers or serial killers, while others are “battered spouses who struck back at their abusers.” Mauer and Cole also refer to studies that found that longer sentences are not better deterrents, as most serious offenses were committed under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The authors call for acknowledgement that excessively long sentences are merely a waste of money and totally

Johnsons (2012) paper is very similar in design to this study in that it attempts to estimate the effect of changes in incarceration rates on changes in crime rates using state provided data [1]. Johnson investigates how responsive a change in the incarceration rate is correlated with a change in the general crime rate. He models the response as either elastic or inelastic. In this context if an increase in incarceration leads to a similar or larger reduction in crime rate than the defined “crime-prison elasticities” is large. If the change in crime rate is unresponsive to a change in incarceration rate, then this value is small. Johnson found that over time the marginal impact of incarcerating one additional prisoner has declined over the past several decades. He states that incarcerating a prisoner in the 1980s led to a larger reduction in the crime rate than incarcerating a prisoner in 2004. Thus, the marginal benefit of society maintaining such a high incarceration rate has decreased over

Since the 1990s and the crime drop, there has been many questions to the reason why. Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner thoroughly looked through the different theories but came to a conclusion that the main reason crime had fallen is abortion (117-145). One of the reasons they discuss is whether or not the increase of incarceration affects the fluctuations in crime rates. Levitt and Dubner suggest that the crime system became relaxed due avoid racism; however, the crime rates then began to rise (122). “Between 1980 and 2000, there was a fifteenfold increase in the number of people sent to prison on drug charges” (Levitt, Dubner 123). The purpose of this review is to evaluate the validity of the incarceration effects on crime rates.

The Urban Institute Study also studied the effect of a variety of Truth in Sentence reforms that were put into practices in the States for the period of the early-to mid-1990’s on their prison population. The study conducted a quantitative examination of crime, arrest, population, and corrections data from seven States that focused on whether State Truth in Sentence reform actually paved the road to changes in punishments for offenders who were violent and also increased the prison population. The study found that possibility of a prison admission given arrest for serious violent offenses did not automatically increase. However, the use of incarceration augmented in four States, but diminished in the other three. But, there was an increase in expected stay depending on the severity of punishment for serious

2. Many researchers say deterrence data is “fraught with technical and conceptual errors, including inappropriate methods of statistical analysis, and failures to consider all relevant factors that drive murder rates.”

shows the two categorical variables: democrat in control of the Upper houses and death penalty. It is possible to see that the frequency of death penalty in Upper Houses in which the control is democrat is actually high, conversely in the states in which the Upper houses control is not democrat, the frequency is

Defenders of the death penalty often claim that the execution of criminals will teach others not to do bad, initially decreasing crime rates. This hasty form of generalization statistically proves to be wrong. “When it comes to criminals, Texas has the toughest punishments along with a strict court system. The state of Texas spent four hundred and seventy million dollars in 2001 just for punishing convicts. Despite all that money and stern punishment, the crime rate is still twenty four percent higher than the national average, according to 2003 data” (Gonzales). This supports the fact that tough punishment doesn’t necessarily help crime. Ironically, the harshest state in the U.S continues to house the maximum number of criminal acts. The death penalty, a harsh form of punishment, clearly doesn’t lower crime rate.

Crime and poverty often seem to go hand in hand in the modern world, or so is the perception. With poverty rates edging higher this is even more important in our modern day. The unemployment rate is one of the key indicators of the health of our economy. The standard of living for most people falls greatly once they have reached the poverty rate, which makes people live nervously, frantically, and gives greater incentive for them to commit a crime possibly just to get by. In 2007 when the major economic recession took place, the unemployment rate started to rise steadily, peaking at an annual average of 10% in 2009, which was 5% higher than the average the four years prior.1