Rhetorical Box Outline
Intro One
Our judicial system is in dire need of a make-over. Time and again drug and alcohol offenders (numbering in the thousands per year), are pushed like cattle through the revolving doors of courthouses and jails; each, serving varying terms, only to be back in a cell on similar charges in no time at all. Ultimately, it is behaviors that must be changed. Regardless of the length of a prison or jail sentence; simply “doing time” does not change behaviors.
Intro Two
Rehabilitation needs to be added to the sentencing equation if we truly wish to make a dent in the underlying problem. Court mandated treatment (Drug courts) offer solutions to the multiple issues that have risen due to traditional sentencing structures. The alternative courts bring drug treatment more fully into the criminal justice system.
The first drug court opened in 1989 in Florida. Since its inception, it has paved the way for multiple others across the nation. The ever-present coercive arm of the law can still keep offenders “in check,” however; now, treatment providers can help offenders overcome the much stronger grip of active addiction.
However, there has been reluctance from most courts to embrace this new approach to sentencing. Choosing to overlook the ineffectiveness of the outdated legal module will only aggravate an already unstable system. If taxpayer’s money is simply funneled into this system, communities are not safer, and future criminal activity is not being deterred; is our legal system meeting its original purpose?
Addiction, at its core, is a social malady. It affects countless individuals and devastates families. However, the effects are felt by all, not just the addicts and their loved ones. Taxpayers a...
... middle of paper ...
...y’d stayed in for at least ninety days.” (p.157).
There are also the intangible benefits to society as a whole and for the individuals recovering from active addiction. These include reduced recidivism rates, increased employment rates, babies born drug-free, and reduced public welfare and hospitalization costs, to name a few. (Good Courts, 2005, p.158).
This is what addressing the underlying problem looks like. It is not simply minimizing repeat business for courts. It is not pushing court papers and locking individuals up who will eventually serve life sentences, thirty days at a time. It is safer communities. It is trust that the legal system does have society’s best interest at heart. It is individuals who are given a chance to evade the endless cycle of an institutionalized life, and actually given a chance to live lives free from alcohol and drugs.
After viewing the documentary: America's War on Drugs - The Prison Industrial Complex, it is clear that the Criminal Justice System is in desperate need of reconstruction and repair with policies such as the mandatory minimum sentencing act which has proven to be unsuccessful and unjust in its efforts to deter 'criminals from committing illegal acts' as seen with the increase of incarcerations of the American people and the devastating effect it has had on those in prison and the family members of those incarcerated.
The complex issues of dealing with offenders in the criminal justice system has been a point of ongoing controversy, particularly in the arena of sentencing. In one camp there are those who believe offenders should be punished to the full extent of the law, while others advocate a more rehabilitative approach. The balancing act of max punishment for crimes committed, and rehabilitating the offender for reintegration into society has produced varying philosophies. With the emanation of drug-induced crimes over the past few decades, the concept of drug treatment courts has emerged. The premise of these courts is to offer a “treatment based alternative to prison,” which consist of intensive treatment services, random drug testing, incentives
Within our society, there is a gleaming stigma against the drug addicted. We have been taught to believe that if someone uses drugs and commits a crime they should be locked away and shunned for their lifetime. Their past continues to haunt them, even if they have changed their old addictive ways. Everyone deserves a second chance at life, so why do we outcast someone who struggles with this horrible disease? Drug addiction and crime can destroy lives and rip apart families. Drug courts give individuals an opportunity to repair the wreckage of their past and mend what was once lost. Throughout this paper, I will demonstrate why drug courts are more beneficial to an addict than lengthy prison sentences.
As offenders are diverted to community residential treatment centers, work release programs and study release centers, the system sees a decrease or stabilization of the jail population. While the alleviation of overcrowding is a benefit it is not the only purpose of diversion. A large majority of crimes are committed while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Studies have shown that more than half of all individuals arrested in the United States will test positive for illegal substances (NCVC, 2008). Efforts to reduce crime through incarceration usually fail because incarceration does not address the main problem, the offender’s substance abuse.
Drug courts were first established in Miami in 1989 and have continued to grow today. Over the past twenty-four years, drug courts have provided a treatment-orientated approach to help defendants with drug-related crimes. The constant interaction of the drug court provides the needed structure for participants to maintain their involvement in the program. Understanding the overall goals of the drug court and the outcomes of participants in the drug court program are the key factors in measuring the success of the drug courts.
In recent years, there has been controversy over mass incarceration rates within the United States. In the past, the imprisonment of criminals was seen as the most efficient way to protect citizens. However, as time has gone on, crime rates have continued to increase exponentially. Because of this, many people have begun to propose alternatives that will effectively prevent criminals from merely repeating their illegal actions. Some contend that diversion programs, such as rehabilitation treatment for drug offenders, is a more practical solution than placing mentally unstable individuals into prison. By helping unsteady criminals regain their health, society would see an exceptional reduction in the amount of crimes committed. Although some
We need to change the way we look at drug abusers in our justice system the fact that approximately 50% of addicts that are released from prison will return. It seems...
Mandatory sentencing is not anything new. It began in the 1970s. The main purpose for mandatory sentencing was to try to get rid of the drug lords and to eliminate most of the nation’s street drug selling. It was to impose that the same crime would have the same sentence all over the nation. Some of the negatives that rose from mandatory sentencing were nonviolent drug offenders and first time offenders who were receiving harsh sentences. Inmate populations and correction costs increased and pushed states to build more prisons. Judges were overloaded with these cases, and lengthy prison terms were mandated to these young offenders. Mandatory sentencing is an interesting topic in which I would like to discuss my opinions in going against mandatory sentencing. I will show the reasons for this topic, as well as give you my personal brief on which I support.
In today's world, it seems like all too often we have woken up to another mass shooting, terrorist attack, or hate crime. However, the injustice does not end with the perpetrator. These acts of violence and hate are terrifying and receive a lot of media attention, yet there are many injustices that continue to permeate our society that are not often discussed. One of these is our incarceration system. The system is flawed and oversaturated with nonviolent drug offenders. Out of the approximately 2.2 million people in our nation’s prisons and jails, about one in four are locked up for a nonviolent drug offense (Criminal Justice Facts). According to the Department of Corrections, the largest single category of offense among prisoners is “drug
More are sentencing options are great because just like every person is different, so is the crime. Prison may not always be the most effective response for people, so If courts have options other than incarceration, “they can better tailor a cost-effective sentence that fits the offender and the crime, protects the public, and provides rehabilitation” (FAMM, 2011). Findings have also proven that alternative saves taxpayers money. “It costs over $28,000 to keep one person in federal prison for one year1 (some states’ prison costs are much higher). Alternatives to incarceration are cheaper, help prevent prison and jail overcrowding, and save taxpayers millions” (FAMM, 2011, para. 3). Lastly, alternatives protect the public by reducing crime. There is a 40% chance that all people leaving prison will go back within three years of their release (FAMM, 2011). “Alternatives to prison such as drug and mental health courts are proven to confront the underlying causes of crime (i.e., drug addiction and mental illness) and help prevent offenders from committing new crimes” (FAMM, 2011, para.
Across the United States and throughout the world there is an epidemic of epic proportion involving drug addiction. Here in North Carolina the majority of the Department of Corrections inmate population is known to have substance abuse problems. (Price, 62) Along with this epidemic is the growing problem of prison overcrowding. There is a correlation between the two. Many of today’s correctional facilities house inmates that have committed drug related crimes or crimes that they committed while under the influence. There is a solution that would help society and lessen the overcrowding of the penal system. The solution is to help those that are committing crimes because of an addiction disorder. There is viable evidence that this solution works such as statistics, causes of addiction and its ability to be treated, and studies that have been done with the focus on recidivism of recovering addicts. There is also the matter of the cost effectiveness of treatment versus incarceration. Of course there are opponents that make valid argument against treatment in lieu of incarceration. The argument against includes the fact that relapse can and often does happen to the addicted individual. In many segments of society providing treatment to stigmatized individuals is frowned upon.
Right now in the United States there are over 2 million people incarcerated in the country’s prisons and jails. Out of this population about one-quarter of these inmates have been convicted of a drug offense. With drug offense arrests increasing nationwide and the prison population increasing there is an alternative to incarceration has been used over the past two decades in many cities across the country. This alternative is in the form of local drug courts that are now found in most major cities in the United States. A drug court is a specialized court in which the judge, prosecutor, public defender or private attorney, probation officers, and treatment counselors work together to help chemically dependent offenders obtain needed treatment and rehabilitation in an attempt to break the cycle of addiction and further criminal offenses. Some argue that treatment rather than incarceration is a waste of time and valuable resources that could be used elsewhere. Research however has shown that court ordered treatment is the best option for drug offenders. Treatments through drug court has proven to be less expensive than incarceration and has also been shown to reduce crime and provide a lower relapse and re-arrest rate for offenders that are placed in drug courts as opposed to those that are not.
As the current prison structures and sentencing process continues to neglect the issues that current offenders have no change will accrue to prevent recidivism. The issue with the current structure of the prison sentencing process is it does not deal with the “why” the individual is an social deviant but only looks at the punishment process to remove the deviant from society. This method does not allow an offender to return back to society without continuing where they left off. As an offender is punished they are sentenced (removal from society) they continue in an isolated environment (prison) after their punishment time is completed and are released back to society they are now an outsider to the rapidly changing social environment. These individuals are returned to society without any coping skills, job training, or transitional training which will prevent them from continuing down th...
The United States criminal justice system is an ever-changing system that is based on the opinions and ideas of the public. Many of the policies today were established in direct response to polarizing events and generational shifts in ideology. In order to maintain public safety and punish those who break these laws, law enforcement officers arrest offenders and a judge or a group of the law offender’s peers judge their innocence. If found guilty, these individuals are sentenced for a predetermined amount of time in prison and are eventually, evaluated for early release through probation. While on probation, the individual is reintegrated into their community, with restrict limitations that are established for safety. In theory, this system
Perhaps most substance abuse starts in the teen years when young people are susceptible to pressure from their peers. One of the main concerns when dealing with substance abuse is the long term problems with substance such as addiction, dependency and tolerance. The physical state of an individual, who is addicted to a substance, will deteriorate over a long period of time. This is due to the chemicals that are being put into an individual body. One of the most important aspects of the effect of substance abuse on society includes ill health, disease, sickness, and in many cases death. The impact of substance abuse not only affects individuals who abuse substances but it affects our economy. Our government resources are negatively impacted by individual who abuse substances. According to (Lagliaro 2004) the implication of drug users extend far beyond the user, often damaging their relationships with their family, community, and health workers, volunteer and wider