Should Prison Offenders Be Abolished?

Like Angela Davis, I believe that the prison system needs to be abolished. The prison system which is a significant part of punishment is incompetent and deeply flawed in the United States. Prison system reform needs immediate attention while abolition permanently will require time. Nietzsche’s theory of punishment explains how punishment come about in society and Davis’s critique of the prison system helps back my argument that the prison system needs to be abolished.

One of the main barriers that inmates face when they are released from prison is limited cognitive skills, limited education and work experience, and substance abuse or other mental health problems. Substance abuse and other mental health problems limit employability because it limits the job readiness that is required for employment (Holzer, Raphael & Stoll, 2003). Another issue that is faced when inmates are released into society is that any skills that they did have prior to conviction has diminished greatly and they face lower pay due to their diminished or lack of skills, and the attitudes that have been developed during their time in prison deeply affects their attitude during their search for employment. Offenders also face another barrier when searching for employment. Many businesses can be held legally liable for any criminal action that their employees may cause (Holzer, Raphael & Stoll, 2003). These barriers that offenders face upon release is why solid solutions and planning must be implemented when considering the integration of ex-felons into society and preparation for reentry must begin well before the scheduled release date in order to successfully reintegrate an inmate into society and reduce the rate of recidivism.

One of the primary problems in Kentucky is the unemployment rate of people with criminal backgrounds that caused the use of 'ban the box’ by employers in all but one city in Kentucky and among many other states. Former inmates often face restrictions in different situations that may include housing, voting and employment (Hoskins, 2014). The problem does not affect only those people in Kentucky, but also other states in the United States and even in other countries. The majority of the employers show reluctance to absorb people who have criminal records. Some of the studies show that more than half of the employers will discriminate an individual due to their incarceration records (NIJ, 2013). Even in a situation that they find employment,

Incarceration can sabotage a worker’s success in the working force by making them less productive, lack work experience, and impaired social interactions. Employers are less likely to hire an applicant with a criminal record because of the preconceived notion that by serving time in prison it makes inmates less productive. Also, time incarcerated and away from the labor force prevents inmates from earning work experience and job skills. According to Amanda Geller in The Effects of Incarceration on Employment and Wages “behavioral adaptations to the conditions of penal confinement may leave an inmate withdrawn, uncommunicative, and unable to accept

Not only are ex-felons denied housing and public assistance, they have an even harder time getting jobs or receiving loans and work study programs. African Americans already have a hard time trying to get a job with no prison record so with a prison record there is basically no chance that African Americans will get work.

Would-be employers frown heavily on felony convictions. Family members who are law abiding citizens may ostracize felons. Punishing offenders in these ways can ultimately slow recovery. All we seem to be providing is a continual revolving door for offenders. “Most drug prisoners will return to the community after a couple years away, and will then return to prison because we have not dealt with the complex set of core issues that lead to them ending up incarcerated in the first place” (McVay). We cannot simply arrest our way out of the nation’s drug problem. There must be programs developed which incorporate the structure of prison along with individualized rehabilitation.

Employment is always an issue when it comes to an ex-offender. Not only is it hard for the everyday person in society to find employment due to a poor economy, but it is much harder for an ex-offender. While in prison, prisoners are usually made to work. Unlike other programs such as counseling, prison work programs can be justified for reasons other than rehabilitation of the individual offender. From the perspective of the policy maker in the criminal justice system, they can help manage the population by occupying the time of the prisoners, aid in the operation of the prison, create revenue (maybe), and provide a

Mass incarceration is such a factor. It is a general term; however, because of the “historically extreme rates of incarceration” in the United States, mass incarceration today is almost explicably linked with American society (Wildeman). The rates of incarceration are in fact extreme in America as it has only 5% of the world’s population within its borders, but 25% of the world’s prison population (“Mass Incarceration”). This prison population is troubling when data shows that the people who make up this group, made 41% less money annually before they were imprisoned than people who are not imprisoned (Rabuy). Assuming these people are eventually released from prison, entering the workforce, even just to regain the little that they earned before incarceration, is near impossible. According to Dr. Devah Pager, “A snapshot of ex-offenders one year after release reveals a rocky path of reintegration, with rates of joblessness in excess of 75 percent and rates of rearrest close to 45 percent,” (xx). This is mostly because of the criminal record, which is a form of a label that these people must take with them on any job hunt. Employers rarely knowingly hire persons with criminal records, and are not willing to take the time to learn the situations of the incarceration, or even what the conviction was (Pager xix). Not only this, but when the American prison system is analyzed by race it can be determined that one in three black men and one in six Latino men will be imprisoned in their lifetime, while just one in 17 white men will meet the same fate (“Mass Incarceration”). Therefore, in America not only are racial minorities disproportionately poor, but also disproportionately

Ex- felons should have the right to vote. A felon is someone who has committed a serious crime. A felony is “a serious crime, characterized under federal law and many state statutes as any offense punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year” (“Convicted”). Felon disenfranchisement is “Disenfranchisement is the taking away of voting rights” (“-Felon”). Ex-felons having served their debts to society should be treated like humans and doing that they should have their God given right to vote. When a person commits a crime, depending on the severity of the crime they can go to jail, or even prison, but the punishment does not always end there. In some states felons lose many rights, from rights to owning specific items to even losing money from paying fines. One of the most important rights they can lose is the right to vote; “states decide who is a criminal and whether or when that group can vote” (Manza 21). While leaving the power to the states Congress has imposed very important limitations on the state’s allowance to disqualify citizens from their right to vote. However the treatment of ex-felons varies from state to state. Felon disenfranchisement is deeply rooted in history, going back to ancient Greece and Rome. None of this making it okay, just simply a problem that needs to be solved. Ex-felons should have the right to vote.

In lawmaking, there must be objective rights and wrongs. If not, than how can the disenfranchisement of nearly six million United States citizens be considered right? If those citizens have been convicted felons, many of which on multiple accounts- is their lack of sound judgement worthy of the right to vote alongside the rest of the law-abiding population? Many polls show that Americans feel that criminals shouldn’t be punished with disenfranchisement in addition to their initial sentence. Supporters of felon enfranchisement argue that disenfranchisement would institutionalize racism and many of the felons achieve rehabilitation once they are released from prison, thus they live honest lives after prison and have the right to vote. However, eleven states have passed laws in which convicted felons lose the right to vote permanently. The growing number of states passing disenfranchisement laws correlates with growing support of the idea, however accusations of racism and trusting felon judgement raises debate.

Most male prisoners take advantage of such programs, it’s not fair that females are unaccounted for these valuable programs.

For centuries, criminals have been punished in ways not limited to physical incarceration. In Babylonian times, the Code of Hammurabi guaranteed justice by ensuring the perpetrator’s punishment was commensurate to his or her crime; for example, “an eye for an eye.” A punishment such as that was the cornerstone of justice because it removed what the culprit robbed from his or her victim. In other cases, much like the one currently in place in the United States, a convicted felon is not only physically imprisoned, but also civilly and mentally incarcerated. Even after a citizen convicted felon is released from prison, his or her civil duties are no longer required by society, duties such as voting, a fundamental part of the American democratic

For many years this topic has been back and forth whether it is a good thing. The topic about whether or not parole should in place has also became a very controversial topic. The debate is usually fifty-fifty on whether it is a good idea or not a good idea. Many people believe in the idea of allowing someone to have a second chance and for them to be able to show that people do change if given an opportunity to show it. While others believe that no matter how many chances you give someone they will still do what they want and keep breaking the rules. I would say I am on the side of those who believe parole should not exist and that the criminal should serve their full sentence not just a percentage of their sentence. Many innocent people

Everyone deserves a second chance. You should never judge a book by its cover. These are some of the things that should be considered when an employer considers hiring an ex-offender reentering society after release from the prison system. Once a criminal, always a criminal is not always the case. Some ex-offenders have proven to be loyal and trustworthy employees. As well as tax-paying individual who open their own businesses. There are positives and negatives to hiring someone with a criminal background. There are many concerns by employers to hire an ex-offender, such as negligent hiring. An ex offender is a person who has been convicted of criminal offense. Over 600,000 people are being released from prisons

When a convicted felon is released from prison, their lives become more limited. They are no longer allowed to vote or own a firearm. They will also have a hard time finding employment due to their felony conviction. Having a criminal record, reduces a person’s chance of getting a callback or job offer by almost 50 percent (NAACP, n.d.). Convicted felons also have a more difficult time receiving an education due to the government not awarding them grants or funds to return to school. The fines that they have been charged with will also cause them to have a difficult time because what money they are able to gain has to go toward paying them instead of towards things such as bills or luxuries. This also makes the felons’ families suffer as well as if they are being punished for something that their loved one took part in. Some criminals will