Alternatives to Prison and Capital Punishment
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
A slight offering
In another topic, I posted some information from a recent paper called "Why Are So Many Americans in Prison?", by Steven Raphael and Michael A. Stoll, and published through the University of Wisconsin's Institute for Research on Poverty. The full post with all extracts, citation data, and links is available if you click here.
But, to pull from the extract a relevant part:
In another topic, I posted some information from a recent paper called "Why Are So Many Americans in Prison?", by Steven Raphael and Michael A. Stoll, and published through the University of Wisconsin's Institute for Research on Poverty. The full post with all extracts, citation data, and links is available if you click here.
But, to pull from the extract a relevant part:
Assuming that our characterization of the increase in incarceration is correct, the obvious question that this research raises is whether the benefits of this policy experiment justify the costs. In 2004, the nation spent roughly $60 billion on corrections, with roughly two-thirds of these expenditures attributable to prisons. Several states' corrections systems currently operate under severe overcrowding (California being the most salient example) and face pressing choices regarding whether and by how much to expand prison capacity and whether to alter sentencing in a manner that diverts a greater portion of offenders to alternative sanctions. Certain states, New York, for example, as described in Jacobson (2005), have chosen the latter route and have presided over recent declines in their state incarceration rates. Clearly, the "correct" choice depends on the extent to which marginal changes in incarceration at this point in history impact crime rates and the value we place on crime-abatement relative to the value placed on the benefits from alternative public investments or private expenditures. The choice also depends on whether there are other viable options, such as early childhood interventions, job trainings, or even public works campaigns, that may have similar crime-abating effects at lower public cost (as explored by Donohue and Siegelman, 1998). (Raphael and Stoll, 59-61)
L
laughing weasel
Guest
I do not believe in punishing people. I think that is gods job not mine and definitely not societies. I think the judicial system should be about prevention and protection. I feel that most first time criminals should get whatever rehabilitation money we are going to throw at them. they should get counciling and job training and placement assistance. It would be even more effective if we could identify these high risk types before they committed a crime and intervened but that is a hippie utopian dream. The first offence if not something horrendous should be in sealed records as hypocritical as it is I would not hire a criminal and most people I know would not judging from stories of criminals that I have known it is very difficult to get any job with a record. The second offense should result in an attempt to scare the criminal straight. Six months bread and water on a chain gang. The third offense should be a very long prison sentence maybe life. I think that this system modified on a case by case basis would alleviate a lot of prisons over crowding and would save the lives and restore a whole lot of oops I was stupid now I ruined my life kind of criminals to good productive citizenhood. it could be fine tuned for murderers etcetra. One of the major problems with prisons today is I go to prison for being a young punk and stealing a car and I come out with a degree in criminal studies with no chance to ever get a real job. This pattern serves no one.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Dream on, it all sounds great but it s never going to work.