1 in 100 in U.S. Jail

And if only 5% of those are innocently jailed, that means 75 000 (no shit) people are in jail for nothing!!

That's what I call apartheid!!! :)

Edit: I knew something was up with the numbers!! It is only .5% in jail, thus 1 in every 200 or so, because 300 million population with 1.6 million jailed.
 
Record-High Ratio of Americans in Prison

By N.C. Aizenman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 28, 2008; 5:10 PM

More than one in 100 adults in the United States is in jail or prison, an all-time high that is costing state governments nearly $50 billion a year, in addition to more than $5 billion spent by the federal government, according to a report released today.

With more than 2.3 million people behind bars at the start of 2008, the United States leads the world in both the number and the percentage of residents it incarcerates, leaving even far more populous China a distant second, noted the report by the nonpartisan Pew Center on the States.

The ballooning prison population is largely the result of tougher state and federal sentencing imposed since the mid-1980s. Minorities have been hit particularly hard: One in nine black men age 20 to 34 is behind bars. For black women age 35 to 39, the figure is one in 100, compared with one in 355 white women in the same age group.

While studies generally find that imprisoning more offenders reduces crime, the effect is influenced by changes in the unemployment rate, wages, the ratio of police officers to residents, and the share of young people in the population.

In addition, when it comes to preventing repeat offenses by nonviolent criminals -- who make up about half of the incarcerated population -- alternative punishments such as community supervision and mandatory drug counseling that are far less expensive may prove just as or more effective than jail time.

Florida, which nearly doubled its prison population over the past 15 years, has experienced a smaller drop in crime than New York, which, after a brief increase, reduced its number of inmates to below the 1993 level.

"There is no question that putting violent and chronic offenders behind bars lowers the crime rate and provides punishment that is well deserved," said Adam Gelb, director of the Pew Center's Public Safety Performance Project and one of the study's authors. "On the other hand, there are large numbers of people behind bars who could be supervised in the community safely and effectively at a much lower cost -- while also paying taxes, paying restitution to their victims, and paying child support."

About 91 percent of incarcerated adults are under state or local jurisdiction, and the report documents the tradeoffs state governments have faced as they have devoted ever larger shares of their budgets to house them. For instance, over the past two decades, state spending on corrections (adjusted for inflation) increased by 127 percent, while spending on higher education rose by 21 percent. For every dollar Virginia spends on higher education, it now spends about 60 cents on corrections. Maryland spends 74 cents on corrections per higher-education dollar.

Despite reaching its latest milestone, the nation's incarcerated population has actually been growing far more slowly since 2000 than during the 1990s, when the spate of harsher sentencing laws began to take effect. These included a 1986 federal law mandating prison terms for crack cocaine offenses that were up to eight times as long as for those involving powder cocaine. In the early 1990s, states across the nation adopted "three-strikes-you're-out" laws and curtailed the discretion parole boards have in deciding when to release an inmate. As a result, between 1990 and 2000, the prison population swelled by about 80 percent, increasing by as much as 86,000 per year.

By contrast, from 2007 to 2008, the prison population increased by 25,000 -- a 2 percent rise. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has issued decisions giving judges more leeway under mandatory sentencing laws, and a number of states, including Texas, are seeking to reduce their incarcerated population by adopting alternative punishments.

"Some of these [measures] would have been unthinkable five years ago," noted Gelb. "But the bottom line is that states have to balance their budgets."

Mod Note: N. C. Aizenman's article has undergone significant revision since this posting, and will appear on page A1 of today's edition of the Washington Post. The updated article is available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/28/AR2008022801704.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OK, here we have contradictory data, because according to the graphics in the first post the number of jailed was 1.6 millions.

More than one in 100 adults in the United States is in jail or prison,

With more than 2.3 million people behind bars at the start of 2008

According to the U.S. Bureau of the Census, the resident population of the United States, projected to 02/28/08 at 23:35 GMT (EST+5) is
303,529,892

OK, let's do the math, because apparently the article's author can't:

303.5/2.6= 116

So it is 1 in 116 and not more than 1 in 100.

Edit: OK, I got it, it is adults, and included people in local jails, thus the differences:

"Nationwide, the prison population grew by 25,000 last year, bringing it to almost 1.6 million. Another 723,000 people are in local jails."
 
Last edited:
Since many jails are private, the increase in prisoners should be seen as a sign of success. After all, they can lobby for laws that get more prisoners sent to them.
 
Splitting hairs...are we...?

The NYTimes messed it up...but Washington Times is OK. The key words are:

More than one in 100 adults in the United States is in jail or prison

It is not the population...it is the Adults....
 
Since many jails are private, the increase in prisoners should be seen as a sign of success. After all, they can lobby for laws that get more prisoners sent to them.

That is exactly why the rise. And those companies pay for the election of public officials....
 
Well, let's look at it as an employment issue. The jailed doesn't need to be employed and for every jailed there might be a job created. So let's say 500K extra jailed citizen takes off 1 million from the unemployed list...
 
Well, let's look at it as an employment issue. The jailed doesn't need to be employed and for every jailed there might be a job created. So let's say 500K extra jailed citizen takes off 1 million from the unemployed list...

Or, more like for everyone jailed, 3 will be on food stamps and welfare....and one in prostitution (direct or indirect)....
 
I think kmguru's emphasis on criminals that don't necessarily need to be jailed from the WaPo article is a very important one. I wonder how many of the prisoners are in there for minor drug related crimes?
 
Over 50 percent of those prisoners are there because they were arrested for drugs, either selling or using.
 
They should use the house arrest more often for non-violent crimes. Cheaper and healthier...
 
I think kmguru's emphasis on criminals that don't necessarily need to be jailed from the WaPo article is a very important one. I wonder how many of the prisoners are in there for minor drug related crimes?

You cannot just look at what the last crime was. They could have been arrested for 'minor' drug charge but the sentence is a reflection of other circumstances, the main one being prior history. Also, drug dealer usually only carry small amounts to avoid felony charges based on quantity.:itold:
 
It what should also be observed/ included in the numbers is the crimes committed by law enforcement and people running the legal and prison systems which according to the justice department accounts for 20% of all violent crimes for the United States.
The range of crimes commited by law enforcement cover the full spectrum of crimes commited, but the majority of crimes commited by law enforcement are crimes against the physcial person. rangeing from murder to child molestation, inaddition serial killers have a high incidence occurance of existing in law enforcment, (oddly serial killers usally have a background association with miltary,law enforcment or security services).
The reported incidence of spouseal assaulted is higher for law enforcement than it is for the rest of the population, so you can exspect that if your spouse is in law enforcement that you will have a physcial fight, or random occurance of child abuse.

DwayneD.L.Rabon
 
Back
Top