Harsh Prison Sentence Willprevent People from Committing Crime

There are many people who are critical of the US‘s prison sysetm; the idea of locking up those who commit crimes against a society simply to keep them from doing harm. Many say that more rehabilatation is necessary to improve these individuals and, therefore, society as a whole. What are some ways of doing this? Do you agree/disagree with this view and why? Is the prison system currently in place the best option for society? 2 pages, double spaced, 12pt. font.

For example there have been amendments in under provision of crimes amendment act 1982 in New South Wales and section 8 of the crimes amendment act 1986 in Victoria to enable judges to impose less severe sentencing. Also in Victoria and South Australia life sentencing prisoners can apply for minimum set terms in court. Of course it relies on their good behaviour, but punishment does not help in changing their criminal attitude or behaviour. Though abolition of prison is not something can be achieved overnight, of course it is a very long term goal. We have example of Sydney siege, the worst offenders should be behind the bars to protect society. An article by Carol Lawson outlines the strategies for reducing recidivism by focusing on reforming prisons conditions and to turn them into more rehabilitative place, encourage prisoners’ transition to society that is to support ‘throughcare programs’ and to divert offenders from prisons to alternative punishment. Self- report also helps to measure the level of stress and discomfort of prisoners in

Those criminals need to be corrected and helped, and then brought back into their societies and Imprisonment is thus not meant to be an avenue for inhumane treatment for members of the community who err in their behavior.

“It’s really clear that the most effective way to turn a nonviolent person into a violent one is to send them to prison,” says Harvard University criminologist James Gilligan. The American prison system takes nonviolent offenders and makes them live side-by-side with hardened killers. The very nature of prison, no matter people view it, produces an environment that is inevitably harmful to its residents.

Also Mr. Muer’s proposal is a good thing because he is also trying to make the United States incarceration rates to decreased. Being one of the top country with a lot of people in jail, Marc Mauer wants America to be like other countries. In the article Marc Mauer says “ control cost bring the United states more in the line with other industrial nations” ( 42). The jail systems itself are already over packed. If nothing being done to put a stop in incarcerating people for longer sentences then there would be simply more and more American in prison. Prison does exist for a reason to remove violent criminals from the streets and to punish them for the violence they have committed. A significant number of people offenses are not violent people.

To ensure the space is available for violent offender who represent risk to the communities According to James Q. Wilson, “a good way to reduce crime is to make its consequences to the would-be offender more costly (by making penalties swifter, more certain, or more severe), or to make alternatives to crime more attractive (by increasing the availability and pay of legitimate jobs), or both” (1983). I don’t agree with his argument, by providing severe punishment will reduce crime. We have seen from decades harsh punishment had created more problem to the criminal justice system we incarcerate more people than other countries, the cost to house inmates is higher and that the Supreme Court had ruled that California should reduce their prison population. to and Reducing social inequality, give opportunity for minorities group to receive adequate skills, education and job opportunity in addition, eliminate discrimination in the criminal justice system can help prevent crimes. Good example of harsh sentences are death penalty that now voter prefer life without parole for those who will be sentence to death

What is the expectation when someone commits a crime? Many would say that offenders require strict punishment including harsh sentencing moreover that rehabilitation is without value. Two conflicting views are being examined from Eugene H. Methvin, who is a supporter of mandatory sentencing as well as ‘three strikes’ sentencing that can result in life sentences being mandatory for repeat offenders even if they are non-violent crimes. On the other hand, is David Shichor, who supports sentencing that is efficient and fair especially since harsh sentencing does not reduce crime. Two works are reviewed, Eugene Methvin is his paper Mugged by Reality and David Shichor in his Three Strikes as a Public Policy.

term incarceration is not considered suitable. Applying mandatory minimum sentences for violent offenders, recidivists or habitual offenders, sex offenders and offenders targeting the weak, children or elderly is considered appropriate as they increase the level of risk in society if let free.

Currently as a nation we use severity as our biggest form of deterrence; our threat of imprisonment has grown dramatically over time. In 1985 the average release time for a conviction of robbery was 32 months and in 2002 it jumped to a minimum of 53 months (Incarceration and Crime). We focus heavily on severity and longer incarceration rates; the idea is that a 10% increase in incarceration would lead to a 1.6%-5.5% decrease in crime (Lieka 2006) but this is not true. Prison rates have increased tenfold since 1970 and yet the crime rates have not dropped near those percents.The leading argument against increase in incarceration uses other states as examples of how ineffective it is; for example Florida heavily focuses on imprisonment to reduce crime with no effect (Incarceration and Crime). This idea would be great and a good mode of deterrence if those who go to prison actually learn their lessons and mend their future ways. Also if the unwanted effects of prison were at least tolerable this might deter crime but sadly even after experiment and evidence it is not a well functioning theory. The cost of funding our mass incarceration does balance out the decrease in overall crime. Besides when we have a nation who is majority hard on crimes compared to other crimes we end up severely punishing people who probably would respond better to rehabilitation than jail.

However, what we should do and what we can do are not always as clear cut. The Scandinavian penal system works due to the economic and political ideologies they instil within their culture and egalitarian society. These are historical beliefs and ideologies that could not be easily transferred or accepted within British culture never mind on a global scale. To take just the penal philosophies without the whole system would more than likely fail. For Britain and the rest of the world these notions of prison reform would be hard to accept and adopt. That is not to say they should not or could not be integrated within the penal system and political and economic policies. A long-term strategy and small steps could see a significant change in the way the UK and even the rest of the world use their penal systems and how they treat their offenders. Just because we could not adopt their penal system and philosophies now doesn’t mean we shouldn’t

One in every two criminals commit another crime within one year of being released from prison. Almost 70% of people aged under 18 who are given a prison sentence will reoffend within a year of being released which shows putting children in prison is extremely ineffective and shows they have not changed. There is also a higher chance someone will commit another crime if given a shorter sentence with 58% recommitting within a year of release. If the aim of a prison is to stop people committing crimes then it’s not really working from looking at these statistics. It does not look like they have an effective way to reduce the amount of criminals especially young offenders. However, offenders put on community sentences are less likely to reoffend than those put into prison from the start but this cant be an option for everybody. Would you want a murderer working in the

There should always be consequences of bad behavior and crimes committed but prison is a terrible idea in that prospective. Prison system clearly doesn’t work. One important reason is throwing a bunch of badly behaved people together where the only options are to learn and be good at the game, or to become a never ending victim of the more dangerous people. Living conditions in prison are brutally terrible. Overcrowding , therapy programs, education system and such

Hi Frances I agree the actions that some criminals do take are completely out of their hands. That being said I agree with the text its stated that the key issue in correctional therioes is effectiveness. Measuring something based of the effect it has on individuals in a correctional institutions (p. 6). Just like you stated in your post laws are set on more so of punishment bases rather then rehabilitating. In order for criminals to change we need to put in place more effective ways to eliminate repeat offenders. Such as, individual track plans that will identify and resolve root problems in each criminal. According to our text we still are uncomfortable with evidence based corrections (p. 12). Image the possibilities of a crime free society

Creating a program to rehabilitate the criminal should be the more ideal way to keep others out of prison for life. A program such as, rehabilitating the criminal by sending him to help the family of the victim, volunteer them to help in their community, or be a big brother.

As everyone on Earth lives in a society, people in societies are divided into classes between richness and poorness. Poor people need money to continue living and the easiest way to gain is to be a criminal. As a result, crimes increased and societies are trying to tackle that. This naturally leads to an argument, whether applying longer prison sentences or other methods like employing criminals is the ideal way to reduce crimes?.