The Logic Behind Tougher Sentencing

mandatory sentencing removes the possibility of judicial discretion: the punishment should fit the crime. Each case differs enormously in the details of the crime and the circumstances of the convicted defendant, which include the risk of their reoffending and the possibilities of rehabilitation. Judges must have the power to weigh all these complicated factors carefully in determing a just sentence. The annual increase in growth was projected at 14%, which places an enormous strain on already overcrowded prisons. In addition, most states will find it difficult, at the least, to pick up the slack for increased costs, as the burden of "New Federalism" falls upon them.

Since the begging of any form of judicial system there has been some way to hold those who break the law. Prisons have never been something that held a positive ideal, to most people they are dark, grey, and clinical. Differing opinions on how to treat prisoners have been around probably just as long as prisons themselves. However, because of recent increase in prison populations as well as the tightening of the laws, treatment of prisoners has gone from rehabbing them to just locking them down and leaving them there to rot. Not only do I think that rehabilitation is a vastly better system, treating them as cretins just makes them worse off than when they went in.

When an inmate gets to point in human development where death may be near and they can no longer function as smoothly day to day without assistance, keeping them in prison becomes more of a burden than a benefit for everyone. The prison staff will no longer have to use their limited time and resources to assist these individuals or lose patience waiting for them to comply with their commands. Instead, these fragile individuals will have the opportunity to receive treatment from health professionals in the community as well as receive assistance from supportive family or friends if available. For those nearing death, they can spend that time with loved ones. This takes some of the financial burden off the state to provide accommodations like

There are restrictions placed on judges when it comes to what kinds of punishment they can give to people accused of breaking the law. Typically, people convicted of certain crimes must be punished with at least a minimum number of years in prison. They limit judicial discretion, requiring that people who are convicted of certain crimes must be punished a certain way. There are powerful arguments on each side of Mandatory sentencing.it has got both advantages and disadvantages, but more pros than cons. the first advantage of mandatory sentencing is the drop in crime, it is one of the biggest reason of why people approve of mandatory. It stops sympathy and by that it means that it is believed that by demonizing the crime, people will stop doing it. mandatory sentencing removes personal bias as the judge is the only one that is able to give someone the sentence they deserve. They ensure that justice is served. They also discourage people from committing crimes by showing them what the punishment is for doing the wrong action. Another advantage is that It makes it possible to keep

“Over the past three decades, the United States has built the world’s largest prison system. This system is ten times larger today than it was in the mid-1970s.” (Lynch, 2007)As America’s prison population has grown there has been a lot of debate on whether or not prison is working. Arguably, all intents and purposes of a prison system are to deter crime. The hopes of our criminal justice system, all of its judges, lawyers, and even the American people is that either someone will not commit an offense with fear of going to prison or that if they do, they will not do it again once they have stepped foot inside a correctional institution. Is this the case? Do prisons in fact act as deterrents and reduce crime rates? Lynch goes on his book after a review of several studies

Lastly, a more punitive justice system would cause overcrowding within our justice system, making a more detrimental environment for the offenders to live in. The purpose of prisons should be to rehabilitate offenders and prepare them to reenter society. Rather, what prions are doing is locking inmates away in atrocious environments, making them live with less resources and less space to function. This is not a suitable environment for any human being. Cook & Roesh (2012) contend that, “double-bunking inmates increased because of overcrowding, and there are more segregation-like units which have limited offenders’ access to rehabilitation programs” (p. 220). By limiting offenders rehabilitation programs, prisons are not offering their inmates a chance at improving themselves, when the inmates are released, there is still a chance of recidivism. Furthermore, overcrowding showed signs of poor mental and physical health (Cook & Roesh, 2012, p. 220). If a more punitive justice system were to come into place, mass incarceration would develop putting prisons at a higher risk of overcrowding. Through overcrowding there are health issues pertaining to the inmates and leaves them with a higher risk of recidivism when leaving prison. The job of prisons should be to turn offenders into productive members of society, not subject them to inhumane living conditions. Although offenders are incarcerated as a punishment to their crimes, it does not show progressive results when the

The United States needs to crack down on crime and punish criminals to set an example. This is a very unpopular notion that is “backwards” however The United States prisons have not been doing a good job with punishing and rehabilitating criminals. Life is fairly comfortable, free cable, access to educational opportunities and psychiatric counseling in prisons, on average 52% of criminals return to crime. These people that committed horrible acts and need to be separated from society gets a life where everything is paid for and they worry about very little. Before recent time’s people avoided prison because they knew it would be hard. Why? Because it was not nice inside. Today however prison is easier to live in and it’s an easy life.

Michael Tonry’s Thinking about Crime: Sense and Sensibility in American Penal Culture suggests that the crime rate trends do not shift because of harsher punishment, but due to periodical changes in society. He states that harsh punishments like truth in sentencing and three-strike laws do not decrease crime because the states that have these programs have similar crime rates to those that do not have them (Tonry, 2004, page 119). Therefore these programs are not the solution to preventing future crime. An increase in arrests, incarcerations and sentences does not benefit the country or the criminal justice system. It overwhelms the system, which leads to an increase in prison facilities to house these more criminals.

Day a day, the rate of crimes in the world is increasing. The question is, will we be able to use prison like a punishment?

Statistics show more than 2 million mentally ill people are sent to prisons each year. Most of them spend twice as long in these facilities as compared to those that are mentally stable, this is because the mentally ill can’t follow rules and end up having more time added to their sentence. 13% of the mentally ill in prison spend an average of 2 years in solitary confinements during their stay in prison. Such individuals are bound to be volatile when released into the general population. While incarcerated they should regularly check on their mental health and put under medication when and if necessary. This will serve to better their mental health as well as reduce cases of defiance to the prison rules. In some cases instead of incarcerating all people found guilty of committing a crime, in case of mentally challenged people, they should either be taken to mental facility for better care and treatment or for the less severe cases, given medication and having an officer of the mental health care checking on them every now and then. These methods are better than incarceration as the problem which is their mental health is being treated rather than being prevented from

One of the significant benefits of longer prison sentences is long. This means criminals will be isolated from societies longer and police can concentrate on other crucial basis in communities, it is also better for others who live in the same societies to relax because crime rates will decrease and people will be

People usually think that prison will teach individuals a lesson, which it really does not. If they are locked up and never get the chance to learn from their mistakes, how will they ever make a change? They will be influence by more criminals. People should be punished, but it is not always good. Prisons today are lacking space. If the burglar was told that his time was reduced; he would probably not commit that crime

There should be tougher sentencing for crimes because it would scare criminals, crime rate will decrease, and we would save money. Have you ever thought about the sentencing for criminals, or if they should be tougher? The National Bureau of Economic Research states that, “the law requiring longer sentences has been effective in lowering crime. Within three years, crimes covered by the law fell an estimated 8 percent. Seven years after the law changed, these crimes were down 20 percent” (Sentence Enhancements). There should be tougher sentencing for crimes because there are less criminals on the street, criminals will learn their lesson, and less people would commit crime. By addressing the following justifications, it goes to show that tougher sentencing will reduce crime.

Criminal punishments have been a fragment of society for centuries, either to discipline individuals or overpower political opposition. Different eras over time established numerous forms of punishments for crimes. There is no morality or exceptional guarantee that punishment is a substantial process of humane penalty besides political officials that believe that it is feasible. In my opinion, punishment is not a proper method of crime control, however, some sanctions should be attainable in current day living. Courtroom officials portray punishments as desirable methods of crime control to distort community citizens’ perception, so they may trust that crimes are decreasing. Criminal punishments are solely based on rehabilitation, criminal analysis, and deterrence. Numerous theories of punishment have become inhumane because sometimes individuals have been incarcerated for years for crimes that weren’t even harsh.

One problem in mandatory sentencing laws is, they do not reduce crime as well as they are supposed to. One may argue that mandatory minimums actually do