I learned alot in this passage. California is no longer the highest prison state it’s now Texas. And while reading I didn’t get that crime was down but I did get that they have found other ways to help these inmates instead of locking them all up. I believe this is what the inmates need. Help whether it is consoling or rehab instead of jail. Thanks eddie123
True there needs to be more sociable assets for those who are in jail/prison so that when they do get out they can be a more productive member of society. If parole and probation had a better way to keep those who are on the system from wanting or needing to go back in to have a sense of belongingness, then maybe the jails/prisons wouldn't be so overcrowded. anonymous 123
I think that they are trying to do that by changing the parole and probation laws but I think the systems themselves should also make an attempt to better their services to their clients. I think that we need to incorporate more programs that help parolees, probationer, and convicts to get back out into society and find work. Really make them belong in the community agian. James Meyer 123
The problem is, is that state and government officials only want to point the finger at the problem, of course california is going to have an overcrowding issue, they are one of the biggest states in the union. If the jail/prison systems in cali could justly cut the minor offenses, minor drug charges etc the rate would be cut to less than half of the population in jail/prison. So if someone could truly step in and make a difference and put into place a set way to run the court system and use the parole/probation as a positive tool for inmate alike, then maybe there wouldn't be an issue, for all 50 states.
I really agree with that it just seems that they assume lock people away so they dont have to deal with the issues at hand until its out of control.Then they have no choice but to do something.
you are absolutely right on that behalf of this tough issue. Now hopefully our government can see the same thing but they only care to point the finger at some one to blame.
The state of California modified parole and probation laws to reduce the prison population. This effort was a success and managed to get a 17 year low in prison population and taking them out of the highest prison population in the country. I think that it is a good thing California adjusted these laws to reduce their prison population. The majority of prisoners are drug offenders. Some of these offenders would be better off with rehab and counseling than to be thrown in a cell. There was an obvious problem in California with prison populations growing so rapidly. I agree with their decisions to modify some laws to reduce their number of inmates.
I think its great that they have changed their parole and probation procedures to help with prison population. are they helping the inmates with the help they really need so that way the population doesnt go back up. I always thought that locking them up for just a simple drug charge was stupid to do that, because that what alot of these prison are filled with now a days. I really think that if they would just get the help they need to get them off the drugs or even help them find jobs they would not end up in there. Tonya123
I see the corrections system in Cali. is trying to fix the overcrowding issue. However the problem I feel the corrections system has as a whole is that if they can’t evolve with the rest of the criminal justice system it will never change. The only real drastic changes the corrections system has made is from the Pennsylvania and the New York systems in the nineteenth century. To add to my point is we study to evolve or views in criminology to better understand the causes of crime and today know the extent of most, but don’t utilize what we learned from it to our corrections system to better improve the human being. That for me is like learning what we know about child development and not utilize it to improve the future of our children, or better yet lets go with the juvenile delinquents. To back what I’m concerning is that we study the root cause (positivism, social disorganization, strain theories, and etc.) but don’t commit as a whole through the evolution of the corrections system. In the same, we also send these offenders back to their subculture without the PROPER tools and psychological treatment they will need to lead a socially acceptable standard of living. Which in turn will never really change the outcome of the revolving door issue or the fact that we will never control crime altogether. But we could change how we view corrections as we have changed our views on crime itself. Terry R.123
I agree with you Terry that we need to re-evaluate how we are dealing with this problem in our country. We have the tools to fix many of the ills in our society, but instead we just put nearly 2.4 million of our citizens behind bars. Out of sight, out of mind, right? And even when the inmate manages to make it out, like you said, they go right back to the environment that helped put them in prison in the first place, without any help or hope for a better existence. Kruck123
The 2011 California Supreme Court ruling seems to have good intentions, but really also seems to lack the for site to understand the idea of recidivism. It seems that they do what to try to rehabilitate prisoners but they do not seem to get the idea that they (the offenders) will more than likely re-offend. It seems that the California government doesn’t want to be number one on a list that would hinder tourism, jobs or any program that would bring money to their state. So instead they released some people to lower their numbers which may put them at a risk to have those people to come back.
It's a good thing that California is trying to make laws different to decrease the overcrowding population in their prisons. With counseling and rehabilitation hopefully they wont end up back in prison. Also, is it possible that because of California's ruling for Marijuana to be legal, that less people are ending up in prison thus resulting in smaller population levels in their prisons. I feel that rehabilitating criminals that are charged with drug possessions or selling, would be a great means of stopping reocurring offenders, to stop them from coming back to prison. That would help decrease the overcrowding in prisons. 123
I definetely agree. Most of the offenders in prison for Marijuana have sold it or were selling it when they were caught in the act. This is probably the only way of making a living that they know of. Some rehab and job training and or job placement could change alot of these offenders into hard working Americans. Runyon123
While I am on the fence with the legalization of marijuana debate, I do also agree that legalization of the drug could definitely be beneficial to the number of those incarcerated within California for drug related offenses. I believe they probably make up a decent portion of those currently serving time within a correctional facility, so a reduction of prison inmates convicted for it would alleviate some pressures on the correction system of the state. If it is not a crime against property or humanity, I do not believe they would pose a direct threat if given the chance to prove themselves on probation or parole instead of serving time locked up and not being a chance to be a productive member of society through prevention programs, rehabilitation programs and work-force training. This could be related back to Prohibition when alcohol was illegal, but today is seen as a regular part of society. Cody123
I agree upon what everybody has said about california getting rid of overcrowding in Prison. Here is my statement to this situation why I agree California made the right decision I hope in the near future other states will follow and realize how much money they have saved tax payers. the fiancial burden of the criminal Justice can benefit in prevention programs than wasting it on petty crimes such a criminal with an ounce of weed. we can get on with our selves catching the real criminals in America. 123
I think that it is great that the state of California has made changes to it's parole system and has done some serious prison realignment. However it is unfortunate that that it took the U.S. Supreme Court to order the state legislatures to make a change or find a way to build more prisons. On average 4 new prisons are built a month in the U.S. and California is just a prime example of a state that cannot afford to keep building more prisons. Most of these inmates are locked up because of drugs. These offenders should be helped by being enrolled in rehabilitation programs in order to conquer their drug addictions. Their problems will only get worse while being locked in a cell for years with more violent offenders. The numerous amount of drug offenders in the prison system have the ability to change and ultimately be a positive contribution to society but they need the proper rehabilitation and counseling in order to do that. Runyon123
I completely agree. You make a good point that it took the Supreme Court getting on them to make any changes. If they were doing it for the right reason it would be done already but either way at least its done. We also agree that rehabilitation is a better option than hardening these drug offenders in a cell. TerbushC 123
I think it is a good thing that California has rethought the state’s patrol system and prison realignment to decline the number of prison inmates. This can help with multiple aspects of the criminal justice system. With fewer inmates in the prisons they could use the extra money towards rehabilitation for the inmates, which is what they really need. Rehabilitation will help the drug offenders, which is most of the prison population, so they will not re-offend and end up in prison again. Many of the other states have a major overcrowding problem and some inmates do less than half of their time to make room for more serious offenders which is not what the justice system is supposed to do. 123
The idea that California is restructuring their prisons along with the parole systems is fantastic. There are many better ways to solve the drug problem which creates most of the overcrowding. I believe a lot of money could be saved if the states used rehabilitation programs. That sounds better than building a new prison every day. Even if it does not save us money, it is still worth a few extra bucks to turn a life around. Someone changing from a convicted felon to a person that can support a family is a great thing compared to hardening someone in prison. TerbushC 123
I believe that the realignment of California’s correctional system is a much needed change. It doesn’t do them any good to be placed in a cage. Instead of learning how to become a functioning member of society their social skills become diminished while incarcerated. There is no arguing that some people need to be locked up. But the majority of the offenders, who are nonviolent, could exponentially improve not only their quality of life but of others as well by means of rehabilitation. The next problem with the correctional system (the main issue) is that of finances. We spend a ridiculous amount of money housing and feeding these inmates who can be improved by means other than imprisonment. Raigy123
First, I think this article is slightly misleading in how it portrays the amount of prisoners in the state of California. It lists the total amount of prisoners in the state, but it does not take into account the number of prisoners in relation to the state population. It makes it seem as though California locks up a lot of people, but in reality they rank 17th among the states in prison population. I do find it sad that the Supreme Court had to force them to reduce the prison population because the overcrowded conditions amounted to cruel and unusual punishment. What this amounts to is that California wanted to lock up all these individuals, but not spend the money to build enough facilities to house them all. Looking at it logically, if they had just done what the court has now forced them to do, they would be saving more money in the long run. You would think a state like Calfornia, which has some serious budget issues would be looking for any possible means to trim its spending. Why lock up all these non-violent offenders for what amounts to a corrections officer's salary every year? We as a nation need to seriously re-think how we are handling the drug problem in this country, because locking up drug offenders with violent offenders only serves to harden them as well, compounding our problems. There is a solution, but stuffing as many of these guys into a can as possible on the taxpayer's dime is not it. The system is built to keep them in the system, it's time to change that, and get these people the help they truly need. Kruck123
I do not see how you thought the topic of discussion was "misleading" due to it being ranked "17th" as you say. Was it given this ranking from the correlation of the overall populous of the state vs. the prison population? If so I could see how it would be ranked 17th. However, you have to remember that California is the most populated state in the nation, having a head count of over 38 million citizens. So even if it ranked 17th in that aspect, the fact of the matter is it WAS housing more convicts than any other state in the country at the time and was obviously enough cause for the U.S. supreme court to become involved in the matter. I would like to see the sources for this if possible. However, minus that small part I found that the rest of the paper had very solid points. Overall I agree with you. ChiefO'Keefe123
The Realignment of California's state prisons was not only influenced by the U.S. Supreme Court demands, but it was an economical and very logical decision. It would help pull California out the debt that they have gathered over the decades. In fact, California runs 1st in the nation for the most debt accumulation. To prove my point, it was stated in California's Criminal justice homepage (www.lao.ca.gov) that the "average cost to house a convict in the state of California is roughly over 47,000 dollars/year." In 2006, California's prison population was right at about 171,000, an all time high. However since then it has dropped to 135,519 (all stated by this post). This means that the state of California in the year of 2013 is saving over 1,667,607,000/year from the realignment. Now we must remember that the state of California is currently 612 billion (roughly) in the hole. It's still a long way off from getting the state back to even, but at least it's a heartwarming thought, and a good start nonetheless. That money can be well spent in other State departments, or even be put back into rehabilitation programs, or parole and probation programs. By doing this, the state is saving tremendous amounts of money, decreasing the amount of inmates that inhabit the state prisons, reintegrating inmates back into society and gets them back out into the social world and teaching them the social skills they need to survive in an ever changing world. Overall very beneficial to the State of California. ChiefO'Keefe123
Personally I believe that this effort by the state of California to reduce it's inmate population count is extremely beneficial to many of their departments, including corrections, finances, rehabilitation, parole and the entire viewpoint of the criminal justice system. Instead of locking up everyone for every conviction, this process allows people to stay out of the prison system longer, so they are not deprived of society for so long that they experience culture shock when they are released. I believe when a person experiences that, they do not know how to react and they resort back to what they last knew outside the prison walls, which was violence and criminal acts. There is also, of course, the benefit of spending less money on less inmates, which can save the state money to introduce more effective rehabilitation and prevention programs. By reducing the number of inmates at their correctional facilities, California is also increasing the security of the facilities themselves. With less inmates to worry about, security guards can focus on a smaller group with more individualized attention for those that need it more. It would also eliminate the need to use recreational areas, such as gyms, to house more inmates, which alone allows a greater opportunity for inmate-inmate violence. I believe that if the correct approach is taken, this system can continue to be an effective tool for the state of California and how they handle their criminal justice system. Cody123
Another thing that more than likely has contributed to the over crowding in california prisons and jails.is the legalization of marijuana in the state. In a typical jail, if I were to ask by a show of hands how many inmates were jailed for a marijuana related offense, im sure that over half of that population would raise their hand. Some laws need to be reevaluated for the safetey and the sake of prison inmates. For example, i would rather see someone who stole a car go to prison than see someone who sold pot to a few people. There are added factors that contribute to the overcrowding in jails, however i belive that the efforts put through from California are on the right track. When someone is jailed for a crime and its not extremely.serious, there should be programs like theft rehabilitation or voilence rehabilitation. Enrolling offenders in these programs would greatly.reduce cost, overcrowding and the general well being of the inmates.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI learned alot in this passage. California is no longer the highest prison state it’s now Texas. And while reading I didn’t get that crime was down but I did get that they have found other ways to help these inmates instead of locking them all up. I believe this is what the inmates need. Help whether it is consoling or rehab instead of jail.
ReplyDeleteThanks eddie123
True there needs to be more sociable assets for those who are in jail/prison so that when they do get out they can be a more productive member of society. If parole and probation had a better way to keep those who are on the system from wanting or needing to go back in to have a sense of belongingness, then maybe the jails/prisons wouldn't be so overcrowded. anonymous 123
DeleteI think that they are trying to do that by changing the parole and probation laws but I think the systems themselves should also make an attempt to better their services to their clients. I think that we need to incorporate more programs that help parolees, probationer, and convicts to get back out into society and find work. Really make them belong in the community agian. James Meyer 123
DeleteThe problem is, is that state and government officials only want to point the finger at the problem, of course california is going to have an overcrowding issue, they are one of the biggest states in the union. If the jail/prison systems in cali could justly cut the minor offenses, minor drug charges etc the rate would be cut to less than half of the population in jail/prison. So if someone could truly step in and make a difference and put into place a set way to run the court system and use the parole/probation as a positive tool for inmate alike, then maybe there wouldn't be an issue, for all 50 states.
ReplyDeleteI really agree with that it just seems that they assume lock people away so they dont have to deal with the issues at hand until its out of control.Then they have no choice but to do something.
Deletethis makes a lot of sense. It does not seem that the state of CA doesn't want to address the problem as a whole.
DeleteMonsterMike123
you are absolutely right on that behalf of this tough issue. Now hopefully our government can see the same thing but they only care to point the finger at some one to blame.
DeleteI think that Calfornia's/America's drug laws need a serious revision. In the end it will save them oodles of money, time, and aspirin. Raigy123
DeleteThe state of California modified parole and probation laws to reduce the prison population. This effort was a success and managed to get a 17 year low in prison population and taking them out of the highest prison population in the country. I think that it is a good thing California adjusted these laws to reduce their prison population. The majority of prisoners are drug offenders. Some of these offenders would be better off with rehab and counseling than to be thrown in a cell. There was an obvious problem in California with prison populations growing so rapidly. I agree with their decisions to modify some laws to reduce their number of inmates.
ReplyDeleteJames Meyer 123
DeleteI think its great that they have changed their parole and probation procedures to help with prison population. are they helping the inmates with the help they really need so that way the population doesnt go back up. I always thought that locking them up for just a simple drug charge was stupid to do that, because that what alot of these prison are filled with now a days. I really think that if they would just get the help they need to get them off the drugs or even help them find jobs they would not end up in there.
ReplyDeleteTonya123
I see the corrections system in Cali. is trying to fix the overcrowding issue. However the problem I feel the corrections system has as a whole is that if they can’t evolve with the rest of the criminal justice system it will never change. The only real drastic changes the corrections system has made is from the Pennsylvania and the New York systems in the nineteenth century. To add to my point is we study to evolve or views in criminology to better understand the causes of crime and today know the extent of most, but don’t utilize what we learned from it to our corrections system to better improve the human being. That for me is like learning what we know about child development and not utilize it to improve the future of our children, or better yet lets go with the juvenile delinquents. To back what I’m concerning is that we study the root cause (positivism, social disorganization, strain theories, and etc.) but don’t commit as a whole through the evolution of the corrections system. In the same, we also send these offenders back to their subculture without the PROPER tools and psychological treatment they will need to lead a socially acceptable standard of living. Which in turn will never really change the outcome of the revolving door issue or the fact that we will never control crime altogether. But we could change how we view corrections as we have changed our views on crime itself.
ReplyDeleteTerry R.123
I agree with you Terry that we need to re-evaluate how we are dealing with this problem in our country. We have the tools to fix many of the ills in our society, but instead we just put nearly 2.4 million of our citizens behind bars. Out of sight, out of mind, right? And even when the inmate manages to make it out, like you said, they go right back to the environment that helped put them in prison in the first place, without any help or hope for a better existence. Kruck123
DeleteThe 2011 California Supreme Court ruling seems to have good intentions, but really also seems to lack the for site to understand the idea of recidivism. It seems that they do what to try to rehabilitate prisoners but they do not seem to get the idea that they (the offenders) will more than likely re-offend. It seems that the California government doesn’t want to be number one on a list that would hinder tourism, jobs or any program that would bring money to their state. So instead they released some people to lower their numbers which may put them at a risk to have those people to come back.
ReplyDeleteMonsterMike123
It's a good thing that California is trying to make laws different to decrease the overcrowding population in their prisons. With counseling and rehabilitation hopefully they wont end up back in prison. Also, is it possible that because of California's ruling for Marijuana to be legal, that less people are ending up in prison thus resulting in smaller population levels in their prisons. I feel that rehabilitating criminals that are charged with drug possessions or selling, would be a great means of stopping reocurring offenders, to stop them from coming back to prison. That would help decrease the overcrowding in prisons.
ReplyDelete123
I definetely agree. Most of the offenders in prison for Marijuana have sold it or were selling it when they were caught in the act. This is probably the only way of making a living that they know of. Some rehab and job training and or job placement could change alot of these offenders into hard working Americans.
DeleteRunyon123
While I am on the fence with the legalization of marijuana debate, I do also agree that legalization of the drug could definitely be beneficial to the number of those incarcerated within California for drug related offenses. I believe they probably make up a decent portion of those currently serving time within a correctional facility, so a reduction of prison inmates convicted for it would alleviate some pressures on the correction system of the state. If it is not a crime against property or humanity, I do not believe they would pose a direct threat if given the chance to prove themselves on probation or parole instead of serving time locked up and not being a chance to be a productive member of society through prevention programs, rehabilitation programs and work-force training. This could be related back to Prohibition when alcohol was illegal, but today is seen as a regular part of society.
DeleteCody123
I agree upon what everybody has said about california getting rid of overcrowding in Prison. Here is my statement to this situation why I agree California made the right decision I hope in the near future other states will follow and realize how much money they have saved tax payers. the fiancial burden of the criminal Justice can benefit in prevention programs than wasting it on petty crimes such a criminal with an ounce of weed. we can get on with our selves catching the real criminals in America.
ReplyDelete123
I think that it is great that the state of California has made changes to it's parole system and has done some serious prison realignment. However it is unfortunate that that it took the U.S. Supreme Court to order the state legislatures to make a change or find a way to build more prisons. On average 4 new prisons are built a month in the U.S. and California is just a prime example of a state that cannot afford to keep building more prisons. Most of these inmates are locked up because of drugs. These offenders should be helped by being enrolled in rehabilitation programs in order to conquer their drug addictions. Their problems will only get worse while being locked in a cell for years with more violent offenders. The numerous amount of drug offenders in the prison system have the ability to change and ultimately be a positive contribution to society but they need the proper rehabilitation and counseling in order to do that.
ReplyDeleteRunyon123
I completely agree. You make a good point that it took the Supreme Court getting on them to make any changes. If they were doing it for the right reason it would be done already but either way at least its done. We also agree that rehabilitation is a better option than hardening these drug offenders in a cell. TerbushC 123
DeleteI think it is a good thing that California has rethought the state’s patrol system and prison realignment to decline the number of prison inmates. This can help with multiple aspects of the criminal justice system. With fewer inmates in the prisons they could use the extra money towards rehabilitation for the inmates, which is what they really need. Rehabilitation will help the drug offenders, which is most of the prison population, so they will not re-offend and end up in prison again. Many of the other states have a major overcrowding problem and some inmates do less than half of their time to make room for more serious offenders which is not what the justice system is supposed to do. 123
ReplyDeleteThe idea that California is restructuring their prisons along with the parole systems is fantastic. There are many better ways to solve the drug problem which creates most of the overcrowding. I believe a lot of money could be saved if the states used rehabilitation programs. That sounds better than building a new prison every day. Even if it does not save us money, it is still worth a few extra bucks to turn a life around. Someone changing from a convicted felon to a person that can support a family is a great thing compared to hardening someone in prison. TerbushC 123
ReplyDeleteI believe that the realignment of California’s correctional system is a much needed change. It doesn’t do them any good to be placed in a cage. Instead of learning how to become a functioning member of society their social skills become diminished while incarcerated. There is no arguing that some people need to be locked up. But the majority of the offenders, who are nonviolent, could exponentially improve not only their quality of life but of others as well by means of rehabilitation. The next problem with the correctional system (the main issue) is that of finances. We spend a ridiculous amount of money housing and feeding these inmates who can be improved by means other than imprisonment. Raigy123
ReplyDeleteFirst, I think this article is slightly misleading in how it portrays the amount of prisoners in the state of California. It lists the total amount of prisoners in the state, but it does not take into account the number of prisoners in relation to the state population. It makes it seem as though California locks up a lot of people, but in reality they rank 17th among the states in prison population. I do find it sad that the Supreme Court had to force them to reduce the prison population because the overcrowded conditions amounted to cruel and unusual punishment. What this amounts to is that California wanted to lock up all these individuals, but not spend the money to build enough facilities to house them all. Looking at it logically, if they had just done what the court has now forced them to do, they would be saving more money in the long run. You would think a state like Calfornia, which has some serious budget issues would be looking for any possible means to trim its spending. Why lock up all these non-violent offenders for what amounts to a corrections officer's salary every year? We as a nation need to seriously re-think how we are handling the drug problem in this country, because locking up drug offenders with violent offenders only serves to harden them as well, compounding our problems. There is a solution, but stuffing as many of these guys into a can as possible on the taxpayer's dime is not it. The system is built to keep them in the system, it's time to change that, and get these people the help they truly need.
ReplyDeleteKruck123
I do not see how you thought the topic of discussion was "misleading" due to it being ranked "17th" as you say. Was it given this ranking from the correlation of the overall populous of the state vs. the prison population? If so I could see how it would be ranked 17th. However, you have to remember that California is the most populated state in the nation, having a head count of over 38 million citizens. So even if it ranked 17th in that aspect, the fact of the matter is it WAS housing more convicts than any other state in the country at the time and was obviously enough cause for the U.S. supreme court to become involved in the matter. I would like to see the sources for this if possible. However, minus that small part I found that the rest of the paper had very solid points. Overall I agree with you. ChiefO'Keefe123
DeleteThe Realignment of California's state prisons was not only influenced by the U.S. Supreme Court demands, but it was an economical and very logical decision. It would help pull California out the debt that they have gathered over the decades. In fact, California runs 1st in the nation for the most debt accumulation. To prove my point, it was stated in California's Criminal justice homepage (www.lao.ca.gov) that the "average cost to house a convict in the state of California is roughly over 47,000 dollars/year." In 2006, California's prison population was right at about 171,000, an all time high. However since then it has dropped to 135,519 (all stated by this post). This means that the state of California in the year of 2013 is saving over 1,667,607,000/year from the realignment. Now we must remember that the state of California is currently 612 billion (roughly) in the hole. It's still a long way off from getting the state back to even, but at least it's a heartwarming thought, and a good start nonetheless. That money can be well spent in other State departments, or even be put back into rehabilitation programs, or parole and probation programs. By doing this, the state is saving tremendous amounts of money, decreasing the amount of inmates that inhabit the state prisons, reintegrating inmates back into society and gets them back out into the social world and teaching them the social skills they need to survive in an ever changing world. Overall very beneficial to the State of California. ChiefO'Keefe123
ReplyDeletePersonally I believe that this effort by the state of California to reduce it's inmate population count is extremely beneficial to many of their departments, including corrections, finances, rehabilitation, parole and the entire viewpoint of the criminal justice system. Instead of locking up everyone for every conviction, this process allows people to stay out of the prison system longer, so they are not deprived of society for so long that they experience culture shock when they are released. I believe when a person experiences that, they do not know how to react and they resort back to what they last knew outside the prison walls, which was violence and criminal acts. There is also, of course, the benefit of spending less money on less inmates, which can save the state money to introduce more effective rehabilitation and prevention programs. By reducing the number of inmates at their correctional facilities, California is also increasing the security of the facilities themselves. With less inmates to worry about, security guards can focus on a smaller group with more individualized attention for those that need it more. It would also eliminate the need to use recreational areas, such as gyms, to house more inmates, which alone allows a greater opportunity for inmate-inmate violence. I believe that if the correct approach is taken, this system can continue to be an effective tool for the state of California and how they handle their criminal justice system.
ReplyDeleteCody123
Another thing that more than likely has contributed to the over crowding in california prisons and jails.is the legalization of marijuana in the state. In a typical jail, if I were to ask by a show of hands how many inmates were jailed for a marijuana related offense, im sure that over half of that population would raise their hand. Some laws need to be reevaluated for the safetey and the sake of prison inmates. For example, i would rather see someone who stole a car go to prison than see someone who sold pot to a few people. There are added factors that contribute to the overcrowding in jails, however i belive that the efforts put through from California are on the right track. When someone is jailed for a crime and its not extremely.serious, there should be programs like theft rehabilitation or voilence rehabilitation. Enrolling offenders in these programs would greatly.reduce cost, overcrowding and the general well being of the inmates.
ReplyDeleteKavery123