Three Strikes has its fair share of issues as it applies to the prison system, but overall it has done well to reduce crime. Reoffenders are being locked away, meaning many crimes are being prevented, saving local governments millions of dollars. Yet, crimes still take place. Younger offenders are being introduced to the system every day, and those offenders will serve time for crimes they have committed. However, they will one day be released into society. Are we to trust that our young inmates will learn their lesson, on their own, from inside a prison cell? It is naive to believe that prison time is a strong enough deterrent of crime. Prisoners need some form of guidance to make them beneficial members of society when they are released. There is a reason why our recidivism rates are as high as they are.
When offenders break the law and are caught doing so, their lives are placed on hold. Time for the offender essentially stops while they are inside prisons. Jobs they may have had are lost, education ceases (if they are in school), and acquaintances continue on with their lives. Non-incarcerated people and technology changes while the incarcerated are stuck inside a controlled world. After an inmate has served their time and are released, the world outside of can seem wildly different from when they were last a part of it. Losing out on the changing environment places the inmates at a huge disadvantage when compared to non-felons in the job market. The only skills the felons have come from before they were incarcerated. Without training those skills can deteriorate or prove outdated when they are released. Felons can’t hope to compare to non-felons in the job market. Thus, jobs and opportunities are immediately limited to felons. They are left to make their own opportunities with the means they have. Often they turn to criminal activity to get by.
If prisons were to initiate more work related programs, where inmates can become trained and certified in a variety of jobs, we would see a large reduction in the amount of recidivism. “Employment also provides a stabilizing routine, occupies time that might otherwise be used for illegal activity, keeps individuals responsive to employer’s behavioral demands, and provides a nonstigmatized social role.” [1] Those felons become reincorporated into society where prison time truly does become a deterrent from crime. Studies have shown that work programs in prisons have reduced recidivism anywhere from 9% to 22% [2]. The major problem is that not all offenders care about attaining the opportunity to better themselves and the community.
Work and rehabilitation problems don’t work for everybody. Career criminals certainly wouldn’t care about job opportunities provided for them. Drug dealers, burglars, and other criminals with high risk, high reward criminal skills can easily make more in a day than a minimum wage worker does in a week. This is where the Three Strikes law does well. Those career criminals obviously have no will to rehabilitate and will continue to commit crimes. If that is their attitude, then they can be considered a menace to society and locked away with extended sentences. Not all criminals wish to make a career out of crime. By providing work opportunities in prison we can help lower recidivism rates and improve society in the long run.
[1] McKean, L., Ransford, C., (Augest, 2004) "Current Strategies for Reducing Recidivism" ImpactResearch accessed (3/17/2010) from: http://www.impactresearch.org/documents/recidivismfullreport.pdf
[2] Gaes, G. (April, 2008) "The Impact of Prison Education Programs on Post-Release Outcomes" Florida State University accessed (3/17/2010) from: http://www.jjay.cuny.edu/TheEffectivenessofPrisonEducationProgramsNov_09.pdf
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
First Step, Three Strikes
How is it that our prisons have ended up the way they are? Simple, it’s not that we Californians are habitual criminals it’s that our laws are in place to be tough on crime. Since 1994 we have begun a hardline attack against crime. That year the Californian people passed the most significant referendum to affect the prison system of our time. It became known as the Three Strikes Law. It alone has been more responsible than anything else for the overcrowding, over-paroling, and for the overall declining stability of our prisons. The Three Strikes Law was originally designed to keep violent criminals off the street by inflating their sentences. The idea of criminals serving 25 to life sentences after two previous bouts of prison time generally means they won’t be willing, or able, to commit crimes. This idea appealed to California voters and Proposition 184, Three Strikes Law, passed by a landslide.
Three Strikes was originally intended to only target violent offenders. However, it was written so that any felon who gets a third felony or misdemeanor/wobbler on his or her record is sentenced to the lengthy punishment. It has worked. Violent felons have been removed from the streets because of this law. In 2002, a report showed that there were a grand total of two million fewer crimes over a nine year period after Three Strikes compared to the nine years before it [1]. Those same criminals are still locked away in our prisons serving 25 to life. While these offenders are off the streets the state is saving money by not having to pay costs for criminal damages associated with murder, robberies, and burglaries. Keeping those criminals off the streets saves an estimated $24 billion. The problem occurs when inmates are well into their older years. The costs of health care problems outweigh the money saved by incarceration. By the time the inmates are dependent on medical care their risk of reoffending drops significantly.
We currently have 8,400 inmates serving possible life term sentences. Of those, 1,300 are because of drug offenses and 2,500 of them are there because of a property crime [2]. This means that 3,800 of the 8,400 inmates have life sentences because of non-violent reasons. People are spending their life in prison for crimes such as stealing donuts.
In 2004, Proposition 66 aimed to reform the Three Strikes Law by redefining what constituted a serious crime deserving of life imprisonment, essentially disallowing offenders from being incarcerated for misdemeanor/wobbler offenses. It also intended to redirect drug abuse felons to treatment centers and encompass more sexual offenders under the Three Strikes Penalty [4]. Voters did not feel as though changes needed to be made to the Three Strikes Law and therefore voted it down 53% to 47%. If the measure would have passed we would have reduced the 3,800 people serving life terms on drug offenses down to a more manageable number. This would have reduced the number of people we would have had to support in their senior years. Drug offenders are particularly more expensive to keep healthy since they have already abused their bodies with harmful drugs. Our first step in fixing our prison system should be to reintroduce legislature similar to Proposition 66. Three Strikes is currently a burden and a blessing on our government, it helps keep violent offenders off the streets but also costs the state millions on nonviolent offenders. We can also extend reforms that help release terminal or elderly inmates earlier on parole. A bill or proposition like Proposition 66 with a few minor changes would allow California the benefits of locking away violent offenders while not wasting time and money on the less risky nonviolent offenders.
[1] Reynold, Mike. (2004). "3-STRIKES 1994 to 2004 A DECADE OF DIFFERENCE" Three Strikes.org Accessed (2010, Mar 1) URL: http://www.threestrikes.org/TenYearReport04.pdf
[2] Leonard, Jack. (2009, May 13) "Law Students help free three-strike offenders" Los Angeles Times. Accessed (2010, Mar 1). URL: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/13/local/me-threestrikes13
[3] Smarter Voter. (2004, Dec 15) "Proposition 66" Accessed (2010, Mar 2). URL: http://www.smartvoter.org/2004/11/02/ca/state/prop/66/
Three Strikes was originally intended to only target violent offenders. However, it was written so that any felon who gets a third felony or misdemeanor/wobbler on his or her record is sentenced to the lengthy punishment. It has worked. Violent felons have been removed from the streets because of this law. In 2002, a report showed that there were a grand total of two million fewer crimes over a nine year period after Three Strikes compared to the nine years before it [1]. Those same criminals are still locked away in our prisons serving 25 to life. While these offenders are off the streets the state is saving money by not having to pay costs for criminal damages associated with murder, robberies, and burglaries. Keeping those criminals off the streets saves an estimated $24 billion. The problem occurs when inmates are well into their older years. The costs of health care problems outweigh the money saved by incarceration. By the time the inmates are dependent on medical care their risk of reoffending drops significantly.
We currently have 8,400 inmates serving possible life term sentences. Of those, 1,300 are because of drug offenses and 2,500 of them are there because of a property crime [2]. This means that 3,800 of the 8,400 inmates have life sentences because of non-violent reasons. People are spending their life in prison for crimes such as stealing donuts.
In 2004, Proposition 66 aimed to reform the Three Strikes Law by redefining what constituted a serious crime deserving of life imprisonment, essentially disallowing offenders from being incarcerated for misdemeanor/wobbler offenses. It also intended to redirect drug abuse felons to treatment centers and encompass more sexual offenders under the Three Strikes Penalty [4]. Voters did not feel as though changes needed to be made to the Three Strikes Law and therefore voted it down 53% to 47%. If the measure would have passed we would have reduced the 3,800 people serving life terms on drug offenses down to a more manageable number. This would have reduced the number of people we would have had to support in their senior years. Drug offenders are particularly more expensive to keep healthy since they have already abused their bodies with harmful drugs. Our first step in fixing our prison system should be to reintroduce legislature similar to Proposition 66. Three Strikes is currently a burden and a blessing on our government, it helps keep violent offenders off the streets but also costs the state millions on nonviolent offenders. We can also extend reforms that help release terminal or elderly inmates earlier on parole. A bill or proposition like Proposition 66 with a few minor changes would allow California the benefits of locking away violent offenders while not wasting time and money on the less risky nonviolent offenders.
[1] Reynold, Mike. (2004). "3-STRIKES 1994 to 2004 A DECADE OF DIFFERENCE" Three Strikes.org Accessed (2010, Mar 1) URL: http://www.threestrikes.org/TenYearReport04.pdf
[2] Leonard, Jack. (2009, May 13) "Law Students help free three-strike offenders" Los Angeles Times. Accessed (2010, Mar 1). URL: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/13/local/me-threestrikes13
[3] Smarter Voter. (2004, Dec 15) "Proposition 66" Accessed (2010, Mar 2). URL: http://www.smartvoter.org/2004/11/02/ca/state/prop/66/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)