Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Benefits of reducing recidivism
Reducing recidivism who benefits
Reducing recidivism who benefits
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
As a member of the criminal justice system, I would support a half-way house being opened in my neighborhood. I would even be willing to donate some of my free time to help with the half-way house. The pros to a half-way house far outweigh the cons in my opinion based off of what my father has told me about the half-way house that he runs. One of the biggest pros that I see is that half-way houses give a newly released ex-offender a place to stay. According to the NIJ, limited housing opportunities for ex-offenders plays a major role in a person recidivating and returning back to jail or prison (2018). Having more half-way houses within the community will help cut down on the re-offending rate in theory. Another pro that I see in regards to a half-way house is that it gives the person structure and rules that they must abide by in order to maintain their residency and freedom. My father has told me that this is vital because most have been incarcerated for an extended period of time and they are used to structure and rules and …show more content…
providing those to them outside of jail or prison is essential to their success. Another pro is that members of a half-way house are residing with, along with the staff are people and professionals who can relate to how they are feeling and thinking and know that no one there will pass judgement on them. According to Integrity Way, the “most positive experiences that people describe is that you appreciate the consistently supportive environment” (2016). The biggest con of a half-way house will be the safety of the community, and that will only become a factor if one of the residents falls off of the wagon and reoffends close to the neighborhood.
The biggest fear would be that a citizen or citizens is seriously hurt by one of the residents because that would be counterproductive in regards to the program as well as an innocent citizen or citizens getting hurt. Another con that I would see with opening up a half-way house in my neighborhood would be that the housing market may take a hit since no one will want to live around a bunch of ex-convicts for fear of falling victim to one. Another con would be that not all ex-offenders would qualify to live in a half-way house because of the crime or crimes that they committed. I would think that there would not be a neighborhood in the country that would want a half-way house in their community that housed violent offenders and sex
offenders.
One of the biggest issues with jails and prisons is how crowded they are. In jails and prisons, they are way too over populated in the number of inmates that they can hold. Drugs are the main cause of jails and prisons being way overcrowded. I do not agree with how overcrowded the jails and prisons are. Morgan showed the result of overcrowded jails and prisons. Jails and prisons are way to over populated so therefor, inmates have to sleep on floors or find a spot to rest, because there are not enough beds to hold the number of inmates that are committed into the prisons and jails anymore. I also disagree with how their running their disciplinary strategies because if they did a better job, then two of three prisoners would not be back to jail shortly after leaving. What they do on the inside should help to where more inmates will not be back after being released from jail or
Unlike a Sober halfway houses are many times a voluntary places for residence where most residents may have no criminal records whatsoever. There is more often opposition from neighborhoods where families are fearful of halfway houses attempted to locate in there neighborhoods.
For the offenders they get the chance to learn the basic skills they need to survive the harsh condition of society. Based on their case report and how much time they have before their release period they can join the program. If they pass all the requirements the program will have a list of company’s who will hire them and the company will get a tax decease for the offender. For the Criminal Justice Professionals it will help to reduce the number of inmates we have in prison, jail, or holding areas. Anyone that is waiting for early release will be sent to OAOM for the reaming of their time period, which will give them more space for incoming inmates. If the offender gets a mister minor the judge can appoint them to the program for a shorter sentencing or send them to jail. For the public or community it will give them some kind of relief knowing that the ex-offender is a better person with a better mind. The offender will have to join a community based program to give them a chance to show that they have changed and will not have that outbreak again. Open Arms Open Mind program will show society that even though offends have committed the crime, done their time and is working to improve not just themselves but their image society has of
In contrast to this, community-oriented programming such as halfway houses cost less than the prison alternative. Community programming costs five to twenty five dollars a day, and halfway houses, although more expensive than community programs, still remain cheaper than prison (Morris, 2000). Tabibi (2015c) states that approximately ninety percent of those housed in prison are non-violent offenders. The treatment of offenders in the current system is understood to be unjust. By this, Morris (2000) explains that we consistently see an overrepresentation of indigenous and black people in the penal system.
This will cause lower income residents to move out of their homes. It is also stated that the action of restoring damaged property would be a positive because it attracts those who can afford the newly renovated homes. This also includes the physical rehabilitation of certain neighborhoods that are in poor conditions. Once these neighborhoods are renovated this will invite those who choose to invest in this area and new businesses will open. However, the negative would be that lower income residents will still be forced to move out because rent prices would increase due to the new demand.(Atikinson, 2004, p.
Obviously a question that will arise is where the funding will come from, well mainly from the lovely thing called taxpayers’ money. Its time they put a stop to seemingly wasteful projects and integrate it to ones beneficial to the society as a whole. Thereafter, once they are housed the assistance program will continue their support by linking them with employment, and attaining rapid access to other needed services such as Medicaid, and food stamps. Some people simply require a little push to get them back on their feet. Once affordable housing is made more available along with the assisting that helps maintain it, all excuses should be out the door.
Staten Island's community structure is not fit for a new jail. We are comprised mostly of tight-knit suburban neighborhoods with long-standing cultural
The problem is that the people who are being incarcerated don’t need to be incarcerated. Instead of trying to do what is best for the offenders and help them we are just throwing them in prisons for so many years and hoping it will help. Yes, this idea is working in some cases, but in other cases throwing the person in for many years is actually making it worse. They are not getting the help or treatment they need. I spoke with a man who was in prison for many years and he said getting drugs in prison is so much easier than getting them outside of prison. He also said that most drug offenders go back to prison, because they do not get help with their addictions. They are being put into a place that is just making their addictions worse.
In recent discussions of prison reform, a controversial issue has been whether diversion programs are more beneficial than not. On the one hand, some argue that diversion programs give convicted criminals a chance to hopefully better themselves and get back into society. On the other hand, however, others argue that these programs are allowing dangerous criminals back into the streets with no guarantee of them changing their behaviors. In sum, then, the issue is whether society and the government should allow these unguaranteed hopes to continue. While some believe that diversion programs may be a good substitute for prison, diversion programs are not an efficient substitute because they release potentially dangerous criminals and felons out onto the streets.
Maybe if I saw more reports on how prison has improved our society and the criminals who live among us, I would see why we should work on reforming our prisons. Until then, it does not seem to be working. We trust in the government to provide for our safety, but we must take responsibility among ourselves. To understand that the current system does work and that its intent is not to provide a safe society. History has shown us that. What we have done or continue to do will not make this a safer place to live. The problem is not to reform our prison system, for this won't stop criminals to commit crimes, but to find ways and means to deteriorate them from doing the crime.
Since crime keeps occurring, more and more prisons need to be built and kept running for the increasing numbers of inmates that are pouring into prisons. Prison may be part of the solution, but there are other alternatives to help criminals. If we were to incorporate facilities like drug rehabilitation and job training into the criminal justice system, then crime would be greatly reduced. Prisoners would commit fewer crimes after the experience of these facilities, therefore reducing the cost of building and maintaining prisons. The end result will be that the American taxpayer's dollars will be available to go to more productive things than prisons.
Re-Entry issues and challenges, for a numerous amount of years they have been people incarcerated for crimes and released after consequences faced like time spent in jail or probation. They were concern because you would think people would learn from their mistakes and does anything in they power to try to avoid putting themselves in a situation like that again. On re-entry program web it states “Offender reentry, which is also know as reentry, prisoner reentry, or re-entry refers to the return of offenders from incarceration back into the community. In general and for the purposes of this guide, reentry involves any programs, initiative, or partnership that addresses the issues necessary to ensure that offenders successfully transition and
All countries are different and you can’t expect the same results as one country that isn’t like ours at all. Implementing this system in the US might have no results at all. This might very well be true, but even so it would do no harm to experiment and see it the system would work or not. I propose that the system be tested in one or a few prisons, give the prisoners the opportunity to learn, rehabilitate, and focus on reentry, after this see how many of these prisoners that followed these programs have found themselves back in prison after 3 years. If the numbers are lower than the expected rate, then I would say this system is beneficial and helps prevent crime. It would only cost a bit more money to test this system out, but if proven successful, this system will cost taxpayers way less money and the community would be a safer place. Now who doesn’t like the sound of that? Less crime and potentially more people at work, generating more tax-money, instead of costing more
This new policy has eliminated much of the problem of overcrowding in state prisons, such as a prison in Tracy, CA where nearly 700 men were sleeping on triple bunk beds in a gymnasium. Since the Prison Realignment has been introduced the state of California has made progress in reducing its prison population, however there is no sure way to tell yet if the 70 percent recidivism rate, which was stated by Governor Brown, has changed at all due to the
This has been proven to be the best way in reducing recidivism rates. Ex-convicts are less likely to become repeat offenders when presented with rehabilitation programs. States such as California and Louisiana offer some of the best rehabilitation programs and have the listed recidivism rates in the United States. Lower in the recidivism rates in Nebraska would dramatically decrease the prison population due ex-convicts going back to prison less frequently. Not only would this method reduce prison overcrowding, it would also reduce crime rates and assist ex-convicts in getting back on their