Reading this article informed me a little more about the HOPE and SAC programs, I remember the teacher mentioning those in class. I think it's great that the offenders are drug tested occasionally and if they don't pass something is done about it because that's the way it should be. These programs exist so these people can get the help they need after they've served their sentence in prison or jail, whichever the case may be. The article talks about how there was an 80% decrease in the failed drug tests, that's great news. That means that not only are the people working for these programs helping the offenders, but the offenders are helping themselves by not touching all the drugs that are out there. I also think expanding the SAC programs is a great idea. 612BIRD789
I agree with you 100% about the article. It informed me alot about the Hope and Sac programs that i didnt know before. I was also surprised about the 80% decrease in failed drug tests. I believe that by this it means that the programs are working and helping the offenders and they are staying away from the drugs.
I agree with you 100% about the article. It informed me alot about the Hope and Sac programs that i didnt know before. I was also surprised about the 80% decrease in failed drug tests. I believe that by this it means that the programs are working and helping the offenders and they are staying away from the drugs. ButterCup789
I agree with you. The HOPE and other SAC programs are effective, simply because they deliver punishments quickly, and efficiently. They do test several times a month, and if a person fails the test, then they are punished immediately. This will cause people to not mess around and do stupid stuff like drugs, because they know that if they get caught, then they will be punished very quickly. Ocho789
I agree with you guys. The HOPE and SAC programs are very effective programs and I think that we need more programs like this. That actually take the right actions on getting their participants the help that they need instead of sending them behind bars for messing up. BLUE789
I started to read the longer portion of this article and became really engulfed by how the responsibility of the Parole and Probation Officers are thought to be the bulk of blame for convicted offenders failures. I don't believe it is the Officers role to ensure the former inmates don't commit crimes, go back to criminal behaviors, or succeed in their positive direction in life. Probation and Parole Officers monitor parolees and try to give guidance to them if possible. Yes Officers can and do take released inmates back to prison for violations of parole or probation. Those are agreed terms of release to be sent back into society by the court and the inmate. Officers are not to hold inmates hands through life like you would a child. I know that when a cycle begins it is hard to break. The cycle of prison life and how a person gets there needs to be broken by the person. Counseling, rehabilitation, and pure will by the individual to succeed is what is needed. By giving them the tools or direction for success does not guarantee success. The only way for success is by the person using those tools and finding the strength to not settle for anything less. Swift and certain punishment is on the negative side and can produce the attitude of destined failure. The intent is good but the method is not so good when one does not follow the conditions set forth. It goes back to child like behavior of can I get away with it or am I going to get in trouble? For some people this is a game, for some it is just a cycle that is unbroken. Behavioral modifications through any means that works for the individual would be better. If a person has been doing the same thing for years it may take the same amount or more years to break that never ending cycle for them. It is up to the individual because they have to want it enough and be open to it. SAC programs may work for those needing the swift discipline it provides. But the flip side is that it may not work for some as well. Only time will be able to decide if these programs work over long periods of time. Tackleberry789
What they pay for in crime is doing their time and given that opportunity inmates should be subject to more mental rehabilitation because there is a better chance of changing the way inmates think and act than just locking all of them in a cage and letting them figure things out by themselves. Not all can be reshaped for societies benefit, but not all of them should be condemned against society either. Arnis789
I do agree that locking someone up in a cell and letting them figure tings out on their own is definitely not helping anyone. I do know some prisons in Illinois have programs to help an inmate while they are incarcerated. Towards the end of their sentence, some inmates get guidance before release into society of a path they can go forward with. It does not work for all inmates unfortunately. There will always be those that are incurable because that is how it is and that factor should not be discounted. Tackleberry789
After reading this article i felt that It informed me alot about the Hope and Sac programs that i didnt know before. I was also surprised about the 80% decrease in failed drug tests. I believe that by this it means that the programs are working and helping the offenders and they are staying away from the drugs causing them to become offenders in different areas. I also believe that the Sac programs could be expanded more to maybe be able to help more people all at one time then having to wait. All in all i feel like i learned alot of new things that i didnt know before reading this article. ButterCup789
I was also surprised in the 80% decrease. It is very refreshing and pretty cool to see SAC working. I also agree if we expand the scope and area of HOPE type programs we should see more people helped at a greater speed. I knew of programs like this but I did not know there were more than one program in more than one place. xsjado789
I agree I am glad to hear that they are expanding and not just located in one area of the United States. I believe it is important for these men and woman to continue getting the help that they need to stay clean and off of the streets. As long as they continue to help I truly believe that the percentage will change in a good way. GEMINI789
I agree with 612BIRD789. I think the article was very informative and interesting. I like the idea of SAC programs. They can instill in a persons mind that they will get caught instead of they may get caught. People are much less likely to commit crime if they know they will be caught by the police. I also agree with the fact that punishment/treatment is given for people who do not pass the drug test. It is important to help people who have drug addictions and lower crime rates. Marsh456.
The ideas behind the article is very interesting. The comment made about parole and probation officers failing at their jobs seems to be a bit of a stretch. It is obvious that many criminals fall under recidivism, the act of committing repetitive crime after already being a criminal. It is my understanding that parole and probation officers are supposed to help guide and watch criminals but there is only so much they can do. I have a feeling it would be very hard for the said officers to make sure that former inmates do not continue to commit crime. The idea of SAC and HOPE programs are amazing. I think that trying to help people overcome their issues, is a great way to start to tackle our society's crime problem. However, not all people need and deserve the treatment. Repeat offenders, to an extent, have had many chances to get their acts together and have failed to do so, I think they do not deserve the same opportunities as the people who have worked hard to overcome their addiction or those who have only been busted one time for non-violent offences. I think this can all relate back to Choice Theory. To an extent, most all criminals chose to commit crime, some are forced to due to their conditions. For example, with the Stain Theory a person would commit crime or revert to drug use because of stress in their lives. Overall, I feel the idea of the HOPE and SAC programs can be effective programs to help control the drug and crime rates. Marsh456.
Marsh456 I agree with you when you say there is only so much officers can do. You're right there isn't much they can do, and to be honest it isn't really their responsibility to "babysit" the offenders and make them make the right choice. The offender won't get better unless they want too. You can't force someone to stop doing something. I think these SAC and HOPE programs help tremendously when it comes to helping the offenders get on the right track, but as I said before, they won't better themselves unless they really want too. 612BIRD789
I agree. There is a lot of blame that goes to these officers when it is not there job to follow the offenders around. The officers can only do so much. I also agree that the SAC and HOPE programs are amazing. They are a great start to getting people to get off addictions. I also agree that not everyone deserves a treatment. When somebody who has come through the system multiple times comes back they should not be given the opportunity because they are just wasting the time and money.TrucksAreGreat789
It is refreshing to see programs of HOPE strive in the criminal justice system. I remember, not that long ago, watching a program on a “dateline” type show where a city/county had started a program like this. The judge was very particular in her offenders, because she came from a drug and alcohol addiction herself. She knew all their tricks and the way they could smooth talk themselves out of certain punishments. I think that if more of this type of Swift and Certain Sanctions are brought to the fore front of news and media that it will help de-clog the system and the jails/prisons as well as help those that need to get off drugs and in turn keep our correctional facilities at a lower than maxed out volume. I love this idea personally. Xsjado789
The idea behind the HOPE and SAC programs seems to be promising. The idea of sticking to the stated agreement is a really good thing. When they say that you will be drug tested occasionally and they come through with it you will know that every word they say is a promise not just to the well being of society, but to the improvement of the Parolee. Although HOPE and SAC are still in its early stages it does seem promising to be the solution of decreasing our overpopulated jails and prisons here in the United States. Being raised in a third world country I know the horrors that are made by an unjust justice system and when I compare it to the United States prison system it is definitely a whole lot better. The prisons where I lived in before were so overpopulated that 10 inmates were housed in just one cell, the sanitary living conditions were not that satisfying, and the treatment of inmates are subject to reconsideration to improvement. Arnis789
It is amazing that a program that is in place somewhere like this and is working as well as this one is not instituted everywhere. 80 percent is a big number when it comes to missed or failed drug tests. That is not something that has been accomplished everywhere. I do think that swift and certain punishment are a large part of being able to reform people who are doing wrong. It is all part of psychology. In classical conditioning the best way to reward a behavior is to give the reward immediately whether good or bad so the brain can associate the action with the reward. The same goes for corrections if the punishment is not given swiftly after the crime is committed there is no learning because they assume they have plenty of time before they have to go to court or go to jail. TrucksAreGreat789
I agree with your points here, giving them the reward for good behavior encourages them to do more good and turning them into a better person. Heisenburg789
As the teacher said in class, people aren't deterred by threats of a severe punishment, but rather more by how quickly and certainly they will be given a punishment. When it comes to a criminal, if they know they might get the death penalty, but it wouldn't be for another 2 years, they are more likely to still commit the crime, because they can probably get the punishment reduced, or the crime completely wiped with such a long process. However, if they were to be put to death in, say a week after committing the crime, then they are VERY likely to not commit that crime, because they have a very small chance of not getting out of it. The HOPE program has shown that swift and certain punishments can be a deterrence to criminals, because if they know that they will be tested a lot, and punishments for failing those tests are immediate, then they won't be fools and do stupid things. Ocho789
I agree that deterrence is a bit of discipline for some. How effective can the programs be on a massive level of program participants is the question. Sure the ones who may get out on parole for the first time may need and want this program to help them. Great if it works, but for those facing strike three in some states will this program work for them? I think it's great when a program can deliver what it preaches and be successful. I just wonder how it could help repeat offenders. Tacklberry789
I thought that the article was very interesting with lots of good information. I totally agree with the article when they called out the parole and probation officers on not doing their jobs keeping the drug addicts and the people who commits crime out of trouble. From family members and friends being in and out of jail or prison. I've witness parole/probation officers not doing their job. I had a family member that's a mother of 6 children that had recently been released from prison. Her parole officer barely came by to drop her and he never gave her assists with a job so that she could get her family back together. He always told her he didnt know of anything and that he'll trying and gather some information and get back to her, but never did. She went out and was getting some leads on programs but by the time for some programs here you had to contact them within 30 days of your release from prison so she really didn't get far. She eventually was released from parole and she moved out of state where she's now doing much better have a nice job and her own home. She's still working on getting her children back together under one roof. As far as the HOPE and the SAC program I think that it's great that they drug test their offenders several times out of the week I believe it said.I also liked the fact that if an participant fail or miss drug tests they send them to a mandatory treatment sometimes long term residental treatment. I think now we need to find a solution for the people that commit crimes as far as selling drugs, stealing, etc. That will help them out with finding a good job. BLUE789
Yes there are some POs that are not as proactive about their job, unfortunately resulting in cases like yours stated. However, there are still a good portion of parole officers who do their job well and are great figures in the community as well so I didn't really like the fact that the article kind of opened up "bashing" the parole officers when in all actuality, it takes more than one person to do multiple jobs so we have to respect that they are still human and has a many different cases to attend to. They get burned out as well, but any PO who doesn't do their job should not be working in the field their in because people's lives are at stake. LightBright789
I actually knew a little bit about the SACs program and I do think that it would help out those offenders who need that extra deterrence from repeating the offenses. I do believe that if this type of program is used continuously throughout the system in every state, there could be many improvements being made. I think that if this was something that could be implemented within all non-violent drug offense cases, it could help weed out the over population of those being incarcerated for drug offenses. I know some people who are in this program and they have made turn for the better which has helped them make a turn for the better. The individuals have started to get their lives in order and bring some type of positivity into their life rather than making bad decisions and causing self-destruct. KingMinaj789
I came into this reading not knowing about the SAC program and what they actually did. Upon further research I read into the HOPE program in hawaii, after one year in a controlled group study, probationers were 55% less likely to commit new crimes, 72% less likely to use drugs, 61% less likely to miss appointments with their supervisors and 53% less likely to have their probation revoked. These numbers are very shocking to me in how significant of an impact still having control after probationers in some way can affect their lives after prison. Heisenburg789
I think it is wonderful what these programs do and what they have to offer. 80% is a huge decline which is a good thing for the people on probation. I'm sure it is just common sense if someone on probation test positive once for any drug they will hopefully get their life together go to a rehab or something and go back testing negative every time. As for the HOPE program 25% testing positive out of 100 is definitely a start and hopefully the percentage continues to decrease over time. These programs seem great for the society and I hope they continue to make progress to better everyone's life. GEMINI789
I completely agree with you, those numbers speak volumes on so many level for the program. Especially if they rely heavily on federal or state funding. This also shows that the offenders are afraid of the celerity and certainty of their offenses. GreenOnions789
Before reading the article, I wasn't too sure of how I felt about the SAC programs but left with a better understanding. I thought it was pretty impressive that most members of the program in Hawaii only tested positive for drugs once. I think that knowing that testing positive for drugs means that they'll have to undergo treatment and possibly face more time in jail. I also thought that only 1/4 of the members tested positive for drugs, I think that looks great for the program on many levels. GreenOnions789
What I liked most about this article was that it shined light on the many under talked about programs that are available, but people are not reaching out in their communities or have no support system to take the next step. A serious problem is that there are not enough programs and houses for people to enter and be treated due to the lack of funding in some states. Depending on the state as a matter of fact, mental institutions and programs are often not even in the budget plan for the state. To me, this is an issue that needs to be taken up with a higher power because this program is one of other institutions that offer the help and treatment, people just don't know about it so I was excited to see an article dedicated to the uplifting of the community and also showing a solution in action to a problem. A lot of the time we always hear about the negative and everything bad going on in the world, but rarely hear or see any effort put forth to resolve anything. LightBright789
Reading this article informed me a little more about the HOPE and SAC programs, I remember the teacher mentioning those in class. I think it's great that the offenders are drug tested occasionally and if they don't pass something is done about it because that's the way it should be. These programs exist so these people can get the help they need after they've served their sentence in prison or jail, whichever the case may be. The article talks about how there was an 80% decrease in the failed drug tests, that's great news. That means that not only are the people working for these programs helping the offenders, but the offenders are helping themselves by not touching all the drugs that are out there. I also think expanding the SAC programs is a great idea. 612BIRD789
ReplyDeleteI agree with you 100% about the article. It informed me alot about the Hope and Sac programs that i didnt know before. I was also surprised about the 80% decrease in failed drug tests. I believe that by this it means that the programs are working and helping the offenders and they are staying away from the drugs.
DeleteI agree with you 100% about the article. It informed me alot about the Hope and Sac programs that i didnt know before. I was also surprised about the 80% decrease in failed drug tests. I believe that by this it means that the programs are working and helping the offenders and they are staying away from the drugs. ButterCup789
DeleteI agree with you. The HOPE and other SAC programs are effective, simply because they deliver punishments quickly, and efficiently. They do test several times a month, and if a person fails the test, then they are punished immediately. This will cause people to not mess around and do stupid stuff like drugs, because they know that if they get caught, then they will be punished very quickly. Ocho789
DeleteI agree with you guys. The HOPE and SAC programs are very effective programs and I think that we need more programs like this. That actually take the right actions on getting their participants the help that they need instead of sending them behind bars for messing up. BLUE789
DeleteI started to read the longer portion of this article and became really engulfed by how the responsibility of the Parole and Probation Officers are thought to be the bulk of blame for convicted offenders failures. I don't believe it is the Officers role to ensure the former inmates don't commit crimes, go back to criminal behaviors, or succeed in their positive direction in life. Probation and Parole Officers monitor parolees and try to give guidance to them if possible. Yes Officers can and do take released inmates back to prison for violations of parole or probation. Those are agreed terms of release to be sent back into society by the court and the inmate. Officers are not to hold inmates hands through life like you would a child. I know that when a cycle begins it is hard to break. The cycle of prison life and how a person gets there needs to be broken by the person. Counseling, rehabilitation, and pure will by the individual to succeed is what is needed. By giving them the tools or direction for success does not guarantee success. The only way for success is by the person using those tools and finding the strength to not settle for anything less. Swift and certain punishment is on the negative side and can produce the attitude of destined failure. The intent is good but the method is not so good when one does not follow the conditions set forth. It goes back to child like behavior of can I get away with it or am I going to get in trouble? For some people this is a game, for some it is just a cycle that is unbroken. Behavioral modifications through any means that works for the individual would be better. If a person has been doing the same thing for years it may take the same amount or more years to break that never ending cycle for them. It is up to the individual because they have to want it enough and be open to it. SAC programs may work for those needing the swift discipline it provides. But the flip side is that it may not work for some as well. Only time will be able to decide if these programs work over long periods of time. Tackleberry789
ReplyDeleteWhat they pay for in crime is doing their time and given that opportunity inmates should be subject to more mental rehabilitation because there is a better chance of changing the way inmates think and act than just locking all of them in a cage and letting them figure things out by themselves. Not all can be reshaped for societies benefit, but not all of them should be condemned against society either. Arnis789
DeleteI do agree that locking someone up in a cell and letting them figure tings out on their own is definitely not helping anyone. I do know some prisons in Illinois have programs to help an inmate while they are incarcerated. Towards the end of their sentence, some inmates get guidance before release into society of a path they can go forward with. It does not work for all inmates unfortunately. There will always be those that are incurable because that is how it is and that factor should not be discounted. Tackleberry789
DeleteAfter reading this article i felt that It informed me alot about the Hope and Sac programs that i didnt know before. I was also surprised about the 80% decrease in failed drug tests. I believe that by this it means that the programs are working and helping the offenders and they are staying away from the drugs causing them to become offenders in different areas. I also believe that the Sac programs could be expanded more to maybe be able to help more people all at one time then having to wait. All in all i feel like i learned alot of new things that i didnt know before reading this article. ButterCup789
ReplyDeleteI was also surprised in the 80% decrease. It is very refreshing and pretty cool to see SAC working. I also agree if we expand the scope and area of HOPE type programs we should see more people helped at a greater speed. I knew of programs like this but I did not know there were more than one program in more than one place. xsjado789
DeleteI agree I am glad to hear that they are expanding and not just located in one area of the United States. I believe it is important for these men and woman to continue getting the help that they need to stay clean and off of the streets. As long as they continue to help I truly believe that the percentage will change in a good way. GEMINI789
DeleteI agree with 612BIRD789. I think the article was very informative and interesting. I like the idea of SAC programs. They can instill in a persons mind that they will get caught instead of they may get caught. People are much less likely to commit crime if they know they will be caught by the police. I also agree with the fact that punishment/treatment is given for people who do not pass the drug test. It is important to help people who have drug addictions and lower crime rates. Marsh456.
ReplyDeleteThe ideas behind the article is very interesting. The comment made about parole and probation officers failing at their jobs seems to be a bit of a stretch. It is obvious that many criminals fall under recidivism, the act of committing repetitive crime after already being a criminal. It is my understanding that parole and probation officers are supposed to help guide and watch criminals but there is only so much they can do. I have a feeling it would be very hard for the said officers to make sure that former inmates do not continue to commit crime. The idea of SAC and HOPE programs are amazing. I think that trying to help people overcome their issues, is a great way to start to tackle our society's crime problem. However, not all people need and deserve the treatment. Repeat offenders, to an extent, have had many chances to get their acts together and have failed to do so, I think they do not deserve the same opportunities as the people who have worked hard to overcome their addiction or those who have only been busted one time for non-violent offences. I think this can all relate back to Choice Theory. To an extent, most all criminals chose to commit crime, some are forced to due to their conditions. For example, with the Stain Theory a person would commit crime or revert to drug use because of stress in their lives. Overall, I feel the idea of the HOPE and SAC programs can be effective programs to help control the drug and crime rates. Marsh456.
ReplyDeleteMarsh456 I agree with you when you say there is only so much officers can do. You're right there isn't much they can do, and to be honest it isn't really their responsibility to "babysit" the offenders and make them make the right choice. The offender won't get better unless they want too. You can't force someone to stop doing something. I think these SAC and HOPE programs help tremendously when it comes to helping the offenders get on the right track, but as I said before, they won't better themselves unless they really want too. 612BIRD789
DeleteI agree. There is a lot of blame that goes to these officers when it is not there job to follow the offenders around. The officers can only do so much. I also agree that the SAC and HOPE programs are amazing. They are a great start to getting people to get off addictions. I also agree that not everyone deserves a treatment. When somebody who has come through the system multiple times comes back they should not be given the opportunity because they are just wasting the time and money.TrucksAreGreat789
DeleteIt is refreshing to see programs of HOPE strive in the criminal justice system. I remember, not that long ago, watching a program on a “dateline” type show where a city/county had started a program like this. The judge was very particular in her offenders, because she came from a drug and alcohol addiction herself. She knew all their tricks and the way they could smooth talk themselves out of certain punishments. I think that if more of this type of Swift and Certain Sanctions are brought to the fore front of news and media that it will help de-clog the system and the jails/prisons as well as help those that need to get off drugs and in turn keep our correctional facilities at a lower than maxed out volume. I love this idea personally. Xsjado789
ReplyDeleteThe idea behind the HOPE and SAC programs seems to be promising. The idea of sticking to the stated agreement is a really good thing. When they say that you will be drug tested occasionally and they come through with it you will know that every word they say is a promise not just to the well being of society, but to the improvement of the Parolee. Although HOPE and SAC are still in its early stages it does seem promising to be the solution of decreasing our overpopulated jails and prisons here in the United States. Being raised in a third world country I know the horrors that are made by an unjust justice system and when I compare it to the United States prison system it is definitely a whole lot better. The prisons where I lived in before were so overpopulated that 10 inmates were housed in just one cell, the sanitary living conditions were not that satisfying, and the treatment of inmates are subject to reconsideration to improvement. Arnis789
ReplyDeleteIt is amazing that a program that is in place somewhere like this and is working as well as this one is not instituted everywhere. 80 percent is a big number when it comes to missed or failed drug tests. That is not something that has been accomplished everywhere. I do think that swift and certain punishment are a large part of being able to reform people who are doing wrong. It is all part of psychology. In classical conditioning the best way to reward a behavior is to give the reward immediately whether good or bad so the brain can associate the action with the reward. The same goes for corrections if the punishment is not given swiftly after the crime is committed there is no learning because they assume they have plenty of time before they have to go to court or go to jail. TrucksAreGreat789
ReplyDeleteI agree with your points here, giving them the reward for good behavior encourages them to do more good and turning them into a better person. Heisenburg789
DeleteAs the teacher said in class, people aren't deterred by threats of a severe punishment, but rather more by how quickly and certainly they will be given a punishment. When it comes to a criminal, if they know they might get the death penalty, but it wouldn't be for another 2 years, they are more likely to still commit the crime, because they can probably get the punishment reduced, or the crime completely wiped with such a long process. However, if they were to be put to death in, say a week after committing the crime, then they are VERY likely to not commit that crime, because they have a very small chance of not getting out of it. The HOPE program has shown that swift and certain punishments can be a deterrence to criminals, because if they know that they will be tested a lot, and punishments for failing those tests are immediate, then they won't be fools and do stupid things. Ocho789
ReplyDeleteI agree that deterrence is a bit of discipline for some. How effective can the programs be on a massive level of program participants is the question. Sure the ones who may get out on parole for the first time may need and want this program to help them. Great if it works, but for those facing strike three in some states will this program work for them? I think it's great when a program can deliver what it preaches and be successful. I just wonder how it could help repeat offenders. Tacklberry789
DeleteI thought that the article was very interesting with lots of good information. I totally agree with the article when they called out the parole and probation officers on not doing their jobs keeping the drug addicts and the people who commits crime out of trouble. From family members and friends being in and out of jail or prison. I've witness parole/probation officers not doing their job. I had a family member that's a mother of 6 children that had recently been released from prison. Her parole officer barely came by to drop her and he never gave her assists with a job so that she could get her family back together. He always told her he didnt know of anything and that he'll trying and gather some information and get back to her, but never did. She went out and was getting some leads on programs but by the time for some programs here you had to contact them within 30 days of your release from prison so she really didn't get far. She eventually was released from parole and she moved out of state where she's now doing much better have a nice job and her own home. She's still working on getting her children back together under one roof. As far as the HOPE and the SAC program I think that it's great that they drug test their offenders several times out of the week I believe it said.I also liked the fact that if an participant fail or miss drug tests they send them to a mandatory treatment sometimes long term residental treatment. I think now we need to find a solution for the people that commit crimes as far as selling drugs, stealing, etc. That will help them out with finding a good job. BLUE789
ReplyDeleteYes there are some POs that are not as proactive about their job, unfortunately resulting in cases like yours stated. However, there are still a good portion of parole officers who do their job well and are great figures in the community as well so I didn't really like the fact that the article kind of opened up "bashing" the parole officers when in all actuality, it takes more than one person to do multiple jobs so we have to respect that they are still human and has a many different cases to attend to. They get burned out as well, but any PO who doesn't do their job should not be working in the field their in because people's lives are at stake. LightBright789
DeleteI actually knew a little bit about the SACs program and I do think that it would help out those offenders who need that extra deterrence from repeating the offenses. I do believe that if this type of program is used continuously throughout the system in every state, there could be many improvements being made. I think that if this was something that could be implemented within all non-violent drug offense cases, it could help weed out the over population of those being incarcerated for drug offenses. I know some people who are in this program and they have made turn for the better which has helped them make a turn for the better. The individuals have started to get their lives in order and bring some type of positivity into their life rather than making bad decisions and causing self-destruct. KingMinaj789
ReplyDeleteI came into this reading not knowing about the SAC program and what they actually did. Upon further research I read into the HOPE program in hawaii, after one year in a controlled group study, probationers were 55% less likely to commit new crimes, 72% less likely to use drugs, 61% less likely to miss appointments with their supervisors and 53% less likely to have their probation revoked. These numbers are very shocking to me in how significant of an impact still having control after probationers in some way can affect their lives after prison. Heisenburg789
ReplyDeleteI think it is wonderful what these programs do and what they have to offer. 80% is a huge decline which is a good thing for the people on probation. I'm sure it is just common sense if someone on probation test positive once for any drug they will hopefully get their life together go to a rehab or something and go back testing negative every time. As for the HOPE program 25% testing positive out of 100 is definitely a start and hopefully the percentage continues to decrease over time. These programs seem great for the society and I hope they continue to make progress to better everyone's life. GEMINI789
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you, those numbers speak volumes on so many level for the program. Especially if they rely heavily on federal or state funding. This also shows that the offenders are afraid of the celerity and certainty of their offenses. GreenOnions789
DeleteBefore reading the article, I wasn't too sure of how I felt about the SAC programs but left with a better understanding. I thought it was pretty impressive that most members of the program in Hawaii only tested positive for drugs once. I think that knowing that testing positive for drugs means that they'll have to undergo treatment and possibly face more time in jail. I also thought that only 1/4 of the members tested positive for drugs, I think that looks great for the program on many levels. GreenOnions789
ReplyDeleteWhat I liked most about this article was that it shined light on the many under talked about programs that are available, but people are not reaching out in their communities or have no support system to take the next step. A serious problem is that there are not enough programs and houses for people to enter and be treated due to the lack of funding in some states. Depending on the state as a matter of fact, mental institutions and programs are often not even in the budget plan for the state. To me, this is an issue that needs to be taken up with a higher power because this program is one of other institutions that offer the help and treatment, people just don't know about it so I was excited to see an article dedicated to the uplifting of the community and also showing a solution in action to a problem. A lot of the time we always hear about the negative and everything bad going on in the world, but rarely hear or see any effort put forth to resolve anything. LightBright789
ReplyDelete