Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formattingExcerpt from Essay:
Reduction of Prison Population
Effectiveness of Policies
Efficacy of the strategies
This paper highlights the prison system and relates multiple factors to it. It gives a brief background of the topic and then describes the U.S. crises of prison system. In addition to this, it highlights various factors related to the prison population of Indiana. After that, this paper focuses on the present situation of the prison system and then gives light to the affected population due to this reason. Beside this, it describes different types of policies and strategies of the government in this regard, reforms in these policies and suggests some useful strategies. In the end, conclusion is provided which tells the need of bringing positive change in the society.
United States prison crisis
a. U.S. being the largest jailer in the world
b. Indiana facing the challenge of prison population
II. Current impact
1. Role of Department of Correction
a. Statistics of prison population
III. Population effected
1. Prank causing felony charges
a. Issue of Tyell Morton
b. Unfair verdict of 8 years imprisonment
2. Rehabilitation centers
a. Indiana's effort for community development
3. Release of older criminals
a. Statistics from the report of ACLU
4. Employment opportunities
a. Provision of employment by the state
IV. Governmental policies
1. Governor's press release
a. Criminal Code Evaluation commission
b. Council of State Government's Justice Center
2. Reduction in prison population
a. Governor's reform
b. Rehabilitation centers
3. 107 times amendments in Indiana's code
a. Current spending on inmates
b. Future spending on inmates
V. Effectiveness of policies
1. Reforms in Indiana
a. Reform "Smart on Crime"
b. Drug addiction
c. Approval form legislation
2. Eighth amendment
a. United States constitution
b. Law violation by Californian government
1. Strategy for low risk offender
2. Assessment based on evidence
3. Back-end strategy
4. Offender treatment
5. Research for treatment
6. Risk aversion
VII. Efficacy of the strategies
1. Improvement of public safety
2. Increasing parole eligibility
3. Risk assessment
4. In-prison programming
5. Parole for older people
1. Requirement of the community correction
Reduction of Prison Population
In United States, the judicial system is available to provide safety and justice to the people. Unfortunately, the U.S. criminal justice system has failed to perform its duty properly. It has not stopped the criminal activities nor is it cost effective. About 25% of the world's prison population is in U.S. that makes U.S. The largest jailer of the world (Kirchoff, 2010).
One of the densely populated U.S. states is Indiana that comes on 15th position according to its population out of the 50 states. Indiana has a sustainable economy, it reported largest surplus among all the U.S. states having $1.2billion.
One of the biggest challenges that Indiana is facing is to reduce the prison population. Like many other U.S. states, Indiana is also trying the best to reduce its prison population that has constantly proved to be an unprofitable burden on the Indiana's economy.
1.2 CURRENT IMPACT:
The current scenario about the prison population is quite troublesome. Its population is increasing day by day, civilians are reporting about the criminals and the police are unable to stop this horrified situation. As the problem continued, Indiana's state government is now looking towards other states' strategies to overcome this problem as soon as possible. The state's department concerning this matter is "Department of Correction (DOC)" that has allocated up to $1.4 billion to meet the needs of imprisoned and more funds are required to maintain and run it. Within the seven years, the prison population of Indiana has increased from 24,230 to 29,370. This drastic increase of about 29% is really a matter to think about because if it continues then the state government will not be able to control the crime rate.
In order to control the situation temporarily the Department of Correction (DOC) has increased the internal capacity of the prison. The Department of Correction (DOC) has increased the internal capacity by adding more space to the prisoners' building. The Department of Correction (DOC) has expanded the territory of the jail with new housing units. Moreover, the state government is trying to admit lesser criminals and release more prisoners.
1.3 POPULATON AFFECTED:
The residents of Indiana are highly concerned about this problem because the increasing crime rate and the increased prison population is a potential harm to the economy of the state. If the state government and Department of Correction (DOC) will not take some prompt action about the situation then there is a threat that people might think to migrate form their state to somewhere else. A report by the Pew center on states have declared that even after adopting all the preventive measures, the Indiana's prison population have increased more than any other U.S. states that is 5.3% continued increase within two years.
Indiana's Governor Mitch Daniels thinks the imposition of the strict rules and further law imposition in the near future will stop the severe offenders from committing crimes. In addition, if they do so, they will live behind the bars. He believed that this is necessary for the protection and safety of the Hoosiers. He further declared that he is pleased to put forward this thought in front of the General Assembly as well. Therefore, he believed that short-term incarceration is necessary for the people who commit crime and interrupt the peaceful lives of the civilians. According to Indiana's Governor Mitch Daniels, this project has fulfilled all the needed law enforcements and criminals' judicial requirements.
Prank causing Felony charges:
The most eye-catching issue that persisted for a long time is the felony charge against a teenage boy named Tyell Morton, of Indiana high school who just made a senior prank and got punishment more than he deserved. The boy put a blow-up doll in the girls' rest room. The security guards took that thing as a terrorist act that the boy was carrying some kind of explosive stuff within the school. However, later the security guards find out that the packet only contained a blow-up sex doll. State trial took place and the jury sentenced him for eight years imprisonment.
Is Morton mischief so dangerous that he got the incarceration for almost a decade? Have the state's jury thought for a moment that what will be the impact of the criminals' and rapists' company on his personality? After the completion of his punish, what the state can expect from him? A person who has led his youth especially the teenage among such people can never be able to grow as a healthy and prosper civilian. What type of society we are making that our children even fear to do any prank just because the law will catch them guilty.
It is unfair to treat a teenage boy's prank and a professional criminal's sin as it is. This brutal treatment of the jury will only burst the people anger against the law. The state needs to make difference in the law and some leniency as well for small mischief. It can be reasonable to give him punishment at the school level, a few days detention or to pay back the expenses that school has incurred due to his prank. However, giving a student multiple years' imprisonment will only destroy his future career and a precious asset of the state will be lost. Morton is still waiting in a country jail for the verdict of his trial. Once it is justified that the packet has nothing that can harm anyone then surely, there is no point for incarceration of the boy. Even without having a justified reason, the state's jury has continued its trial with a long-term imprisonment as punishment (Mooney & Scott, 2012).
It is the need of time that the "Department of Correction (DOC)" along with the Criminal Code Evaluation commission should separate the laws for the non-violent crimes and the serious violent assaults. The recommended way will help to decrease the Indiana's prison population that has expected to have an expense of $1 billion until 2017 if it continues to increase the number of the incarceration. The basic problem with the law is that it cannot make difference between the severities of crimes. According to Indiana Journal Gazette, a person stealing just a DVD and another person stealing things of thousand dollars worth have the same punishment by the law. Until the government will not make different laws for the non-violent offenses and the sever ones, the state will not have control over its prison population.
Indiana is making many efforts to reduce its prison population but it might not be a successful effort until it will not observe that which steps should get more concern to sustain the solution. The problem is a solution may work for a couple of months but it would last in a very short time and the after effects of the rapidly…[continue]
"Prison Reduction Of Prison Population Current Impact" (2012, August 09) Retrieved October 25, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/prison-reduction-of-population-current-81510
"Prison Reduction Of Prison Population Current Impact" 09 August 2012. Web.25 October. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/prison-reduction-of-population-current-81510>
"Prison Reduction Of Prison Population Current Impact", 09 August 2012, Accessed.25 October. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/prison-reduction-of-population-current-81510
Prisons An analysis of the purposes for prisons in the U.S. justice system. The corrections system in America has historically fluctuated between being dedicated to incapacitation, rehabilitation, and to being punitive in nature. They can serve all three of these functions at the same time. Current trends in criminal justice remain focused on punitive justice that fosters prison environments lacking rehabilitative services, but recent scholarship and public policy have indicated a slight
Prison Funding Finding Funds for Fighting Crime: Financial Contingency planning for California's Prison System Prisons have always been a controversial aspect of society, and far more so in the modern era of sociological and psychological inquiry into the nature of crime, punishment, and rehabilitation. Deciding precisely what function prisons are meant to serve and how they should go about serving it has been the cause of a great deal of social and
This view stresses a sociological approach to crime, suggesting that the behavior of criminals is more easily adapted and changed when law enforcement agents understand the circumstances and immediate environment an offender lives in that may contribute to offensive behaviors, and to one's behavioral characteristics. Literature Review The purpose of the preliminary literature presented is to provide an overview of the historical foundations leading to prison overcrowding, an exploration of the populations
The average felony sentence imposed upon federal and state offenders in 1996 was 62 months, or just over 5 years. On average these prisoners actually serve 45% of a state sentence for a mean prison stint of 2 years and 4 months, and 85% of a federal sentence for a stint of 4 years and 5 months. Once they are released, the recidivism rates are high. According to Lin
Prison overcrowding is indeed a grave problem that many states face. It is a phenomenon that both the international and national parties have faced for decades (Howard,1996). Overcrowded correction facilities may lead to the failures of programs in the prisons, violations of civil rights and also violence between inmates. Prison overcrowding may develop as a result of steady, regular, continuous increase and enlargement of prisoners which then develops to what
Prison Life and Recidivism Generally, recidivism in the justice system context entails the tendency amongst former prisoners or criminals to go back to their criminal lives mainly upon release from prison. In this case, recidivism rates are measured by having a look at the number of former prisoners re-incarcerated within a given time period. It can be noted that in basic terms, high recidivism rates are in most cases associated with
Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 Supreme Court has held that deliberate indifference to the substantial risk of sexual assault violates inmates' rights under the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause of the 8th Amendment to the Constitution. In response, the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 is designed to systematically study the incidence of offender-on-offender and staff-on-offender assault in correctional facilities throughout the United States and to propose standards for preventing