Is Public Safety Assured or Threatened - Essay Example

Public safety is often the greatest concern, when deciding whether incarceration or alternative sentencing programs are suitable. “National statistics indicate that roughly 50% of those imprisoned every year are there for non-violent crime” (Petersilia & Sherman). In such instances, prison terms are far more costly and less effective than alternative programs. Effective alternative programs, regardless of intensity, are still the less costly option. There are other sanctions and programs available, such as probation, treatment programs, work-release programs and a host of combined services that, when combined and applied appropriately, may prevent crime without the expense of prison. Criminologist James Q. Wilson believes that prison has been overused as states have Expanded their incarceration programs. “They have dipped deeper into the bucket of persons eligible for prison, dredging up offenders with shorter and shorter criminal records.” Wilson argues that the costs to society may far outweigh the benefits. Increased incarceration does little to increase public safety. The cost of America’s correction system “now exceeds $60 billion per year” (Austin & Fabelo 7). Those who have violated their probation for convictions of alcohol and drug use, unemployment and failure to pay court fees has also increased, as a result. The increased cost ultimately is passed on to taxpayers, with little return for their investments. Crimes related to drugs, property and public disorder have little to no connection with pain and suffering to victims. Yet , “over 90% of crimes committed are of this nature” (Austin & Fabelo 9). Public safety is not even an issue. Effective alternative programs, which could include job training, education, rehabilitation and other services based on ability to pay would likely save taxpayers and communities money. “Studies by leading researchers have show that alternatives reduce jail time and treat people in the community without compromising public safety”(Copperman). Programs keep offenders active in their families and communities, which reduces the need for additional programs and services, such as foster care, juvenile offender programs and many others. There has been an increase in young adult males committing crimes, though often they are those that do not harm others. Often lack of a male role model or male support in the home is the root of the problem. By keeping older adult males in the home and community, younger adults see a more positive message. Family, work and community involvement are more important. It also makes little sense to send a person to jail for non-payment of court fees, which reduces employability and the likelihood of repayment with each incarceration. Crime is often geographically centralized in urban areas. By providing such communities with alternatives, such as increased employment and educational opportunities, crime can be reduced. At the same time, safety of residents in such urban areas is increased. Austin and Fabelo point out that even as the rate of those imprisoned increased in many states, the rate of crime increased, indicating that prison is not a deterrent. There are many alternatives to prison, for most offenses. Most are considered more severe than traditional probation but less serious than a prison term. Instances of such penalties include intense supervision that may include drug treatment and testing, suspended or deferred sentence, boot camps, house arrest and/or electronic monitoring, denial of benefits, and community service. Probation involves the ongoing contact between the offender and an officer of the court, or probation officer. The offender reports to an officer periodically and may be required to meet specific goals, such as employment, drug testing and community service. However, with few employable skills or little education, such programs are not as effective as when they are combined with additional services. Electronic monitoring has associated costs, which are difficult to meet when an offender lacks the ability to earn a steady income. Probation alone or with simple monitoring are probably less effective, as they do not address the underlying social causes of crime. Montgomery et al describes a host of interventions or alternative programs across the US that “was designed to document this variety of effective prevention and treatment programs.” What Works is a detailed list of programs, based on geography and the types of services included in each program. While many are geared toward teens and young adults, they also include programs for older adults as well. Such programs are called ‘Alternatives to Incarceration’ in many jurisdictions. Copperman believes that ATIs reduce crime. “For those concerned about public safety, the results of such programs are positive. They show that many felony offenders can be sent to rigorous community programs, rather than jail, without increasing public risk.” In addition to sentencing alternatives, efforts to recidivism or return to prison of parolees can be effective. Many of those on parole have returned to prison on technical violations which have nothing to do with committing a crime. Failure to report an address change, new employer or to meet a probation officer are all technical violations. The New Mexico department of corrections has addressed the issue of technical violations by providing education and a variety of programs to prisoners, prior to release. A study by the department indicates that “The net result of these activities has been a dramatic reduction in technical violators being returned to prison” (Austin & Fabelo 19). The types of crime that are typically eligible for alternative programs include drug offenses, theft and other non-violent crimes, in which there is no victim or where harm to others is unlikely. In California, 1st time and 2nd time drug possession offenders do not receive jail time. “In lieu of prison, the court can order these “low-risk” drug offenders to receive one year of drug rehabilitation treatment followed by six months of follow-up aftercare” (LA Criminal Defense Blog). Treatment programs and additional services are required for this type of alternative. In order for alternatives to be implemented, crimes committed must be those that a judge will allow sentencing alternatives for. This can vary from state to state and even from one county to another. In Eldorado County, Colorado, a Sherriff’s work program and weekend jail are some additional alternatives to full time jail sentence. The work program is obviously geared toward non-violent offenders as “individuals convicted of, or with pending charges of sex crimes against minors, felony sex crime, arson, acts of violence against police, violent felonies, stalking,  a criminal history, or manufacturing of illegal drugs are ineligible for program participation” (www.co.el-dorado.ca.us). Some courts use a specified monetary value to determine whether those who have committed theft or property damage are eligible for alternative sentencing. While alternative sentencing programs can be effective, they should not be automatically initiated in each case. Every person who commits a crime is not motivated by the same circumstances. Youths often get caught up in group activities that are illegal, though one may show total disregard for humanity or the law. This type of individual may require more intensive services from an alternative program than are available. This does not mean that society should just use prison as a deterrent. Some services are also available in jail. Other alternatives include delaying or postponing jail, based on how well the offender follows treatment and other programs ordered. There are many factors that should be taken into account, so alternative sentencing should occur on a case by case basis. A study on restorative justice programs indicates that “a diversion effect and significant reduction in offender recidivism” (Bonta et al. 318) have resulted. The focus on restorative programs involves victims of crime. Therefore, such a program is not right for every type of offense or offender. Those who have been assaulted may suffer ongoing effects. It is difficult to place a monetary value on physical and emotional consequences to Victims. Despite hesitation of some jurisdictions to develop alternative sentencing programs, they can be effective for drug crimes and lesser offenses, if coupled with effective services. “From 1977 to 2004, the number of women incarcerated for drug crimes increased 575%” (DiLoreto 15). Associated costs do not only affect taxpayers. Children or families with one or both parents incarcerated suffer as well. There are costs associated with alternative programs, though most jurisdictions that use such programs regularly report less crowding and much lower costs in operating correctional facilites. Though alternative sentencing programs are available, “it appears that, at most, 10 percent of all U.S. adult probationers and parolees are participating in alternative sentencing programs” (Petersilia & Sherman). Given the low participation rate and the high rate of non-violent crime reported by Petersilia & Sherman, it appears that many more offenders could be dealt with effectively through alternative programs. Such programs may not work for every offender, though recidivism does occur at a much lower rate when appropriate services are provided in alternative programs. Alternative programs can be effective for non-violent crime. The key is more thorough identification and development of effective programs. Drug testing alone, for drug offenses, is not enough. Counseling, treatment programs and education should also be mandatory. Probation alone is not enough for the teen or young adult who has committed a minor theft, assault or other non-violent offense. Drunk driving offenses can be reduced through such programs. Though failure to pay fines or follow orders of probation should be addressed, prison or jail time only increases the costs to society. Petersilia & Sherman indicate the disparities across the US, in the percent of non-violent offenders to the percent participating in alternative programs. Alternative programs may not be right for 40% remaining, though studies indicate that most of them could be better served in alternative programs, which also benefit communities and populations as well. The US justice system relies far too much on jail and prison sentencing, even where alternatives are permitted. Determining why this occurs is more difficult. Time constraints on the court system may not allow for linkage of offenders to appropriate alternative programs. Some regions may lack options in alternatives. Others simply provide basic alternatives, such as probation, without follow up or additional services needed to prevent recidivism. It is evident that most jurisdictions within the US can reduce costs associated with prison and reduce a large number of repeat offenses. Works Cited Austin, James & Fabelo, Tony. The Diminished Returns of Increased Incarceration: A Blueprint to Improve Public Safety and Reduce Costs. July 2004. 28 Nov. 2008 Bonata, James, et al. “An Outcome Evaluation of a Restorative Justice Alternative to Incarceration.” Contemporary Justice Review. 2002: 4/5, 319-338. Copperman, Joel. Alternative to Incarceration Programs: Cut Crime, Cut Costs and Help People and Communities. 2003. 29 Nov. 2008 DiLoreto, Rebecca B. “Disparate Impact: Racial Disparity in the Sentencing and Plea Bargaining Process.” The Advocate. May 2003: 3/3, 15-21. Eldorado County Sherriff’s Office. Aternative Sentencing. 29 Nov 2008 LA Criminal Defense Blog. Drug Offenders May Qualify for Alternative Sentencing. 26 Nov. 2008. 29 Nov. 2008 < http://www.lacriminaldefenseblog.com/drug-offenders-may-qualify-for-alternative-sentencing/> Montgomery, Imogene M. et al. What Works: Promising Interventions in Juvenile Justice. Oct. 1994. 28 Nov. 2008 Petersilia, Joan & Sherman, R. “Sentencing: Alternatives - Development And Characteristics Of Alternative Sentencing Programs, The Costs Of Alternative Sentencing Programs, The Effectiveness Of Alternative Sentencing Programs.” Crime and Justice: 4. 27 Nov. 2008 Read More