Crime and punishment. Those two words seem to go together, as one can be seen as the problem (Crime) and the other is the solution (punishment). But sometimes the punishment that is chosen for the offender is not always effective in community corrections. Especially when it comes to electronic monitoring. Electronic monitoring is not effective as a community corrections. In this paper it will cover what electronic monitoring is, and how it is not a deterrence in either location of the crime is where the offender is supposed to be or that offenders can commit crime while wearing the monitor or that it is not taken seriously as a punishment. It will also cover or how house arrest can restrict movements and limit job searches, and recharging problems …show more content…
It is a form of punishment that is handed down by the court intent on restricting where, when or how far the offender can go. It can limit an offender’s movements, or give an offender a curfew. Electronic monitoring has been around since the 80’s and technology has grown significantly since then; (giant cell phones with antennas that extended the height and qualified for its own seat on the rollercoaster, to the modern pocket sized mobile/cell phone that can download games and play apps.) It comes in an ankle bracelet with either GPS or a radio signal to track the movements of the offender by the police. According to Kilgore “In terms of actual devices, most EM systems currently employ some kind of ankle bracelet and an electronic box set up in the home which sends information to the monitoring authority through a land line telephone.” (Kilgore, 127) It is a form of punishment that is to attempt to keep prisons from overcrowding, tracking and restricting every movement of a criminal. But Electronic monitoring is not a criminal deterrence. The device and method of electronic monitoring appears to be safe, secure, and an effective way to prevent crime and recidivism from happening; a great deterrence of criminal behavior. And that gives people a false sense of security that since it can track the offender/parolee’s every moment, then surely it can prevent the crime …show more content…
(2012, November 23). Progress or More of the Same? Electronic Monitoring and Parole in the Age of Mass Incarceration. Critical Criminology, 21(1), 124-139.
• Wiseman, S. R. (2014, March). Pretrial Detention and the Right to Be Monitored. Yale Law Journal, 123(5), 1-56. Retrieved from http://www.yalelawjournal.org/essay/pretrial-detention-and-the-right-to-be-monitored
• Blackwell, B., Payne, B., & Prevost, J. (2011). Measuring Electronic Monitoring Tools: The Influence of Vendor Type and Vendor Data. American Journal Of Criminal Justice, 36(1), 17-28. doi:10.1007/s12103-010-9100-4
• Bloom, T. (2014, April 14). Sex Offenders Killed 4 Women While Wearing GPS Ankle Monitors: Police. In KTLA 5. Retrieved December 1, 2014, from http://ktla.com/2014/04/14/investigation-continues-after-2-arrested-in-suspicion-of-killing-4-o-c-women/
• John, O. (2013, February 9). Woman Fined for Blinging Out Her Electronic Monitoring Tag. In Time. Retrieved from http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/02/09/woman-fined-for-blinging-out-her-electronic-monitoring-tag/
• Roy, S. (2013). Exit Status of Probationers and Prison-Bound Offenders in an Electronic Monitoring Home Detention Program: A Comparative Study. Federal Probation, 77(3),
One of the big advantages of using technology in monitoring people lives, is keeping them safe and secured. While some people argue that it’s not the governments right to interfere in their privacy, they will appreciate the government act when the walk in the middle of the night, knowing that they
Lab, Steven P. “Institutional Corrections.” Criminal Justice: The Essentials. New York: Oxford UP, 2011. Print.
Prisons and correctional facilities in the United States have changed from rehabilitating people to housing inmates and creating breeding grounds for more violence. Many local, state, and federal prisons and correctional facilities are becoming more and more overcrowded each year. If the Department of Corrections (DOC) wants to stop having repeat offenders and decrease the volume of inmates entering the criminal justice system, current regulations and programs need to undergo alteration. Actions pushed by attorneys and judges, in conjunction current prison life (including solitary confinement), have intertwined to result in mass incarceration. However, prisoner reentry programs haven’t fully impacted positively to help the inmate assimilate back into society. These alterations can help save the Department of Corrections (DOC) money, decrease the inmate population, and most of all, help rehabilitate them. After inmates are charged with a crime, they go through the judicial system (Due Process) and meet with the prosecutor to discuss sentencing.
Drago, F., Galbiati, R. & Vertova, P. (2011). Prison conditions and recidivism. American law and economics review, 13 (1), pp. 103--130.
Harris, H. (2017, March). The Prison Dilemma: Ending America's Incarceration Epidemic. Foreign Affairs, pp. 118-129.
In the United States, prison, or rather incarceration, is the most common type of punishment that is dispensed to criminals by the criminal justice system once they have been convicted. Looking back half a century ago, the rate of incarceration in the united states was still low and almost similar to those of countries such as Denmark and Finland. However, the last three decades or so have seen the rise of mass incarceration as a punitive criminal justice measure in the United States to the extent where a greater proportion of the population are incarcerated than in any other country. Incarceration usually involves the locking up of offenders in prisons where they are subjected to harsh and restrictive conditions. However, the use of prisons to lock up offenders and punish them has been largely
In Western cultures imprisonment is the universal method of punishing criminals (Chapman 571). According to criminologists locking up criminals may not even be an effective form of punishment. First, the prison sentences do not serve as an example to deter future criminals, which is indicated, in the increased rates of criminal behavior over the years. Secondly, prisons may protect the average citizen from crimes but the violence is then diverted to prison workers and other inmates. Finally, inmates are locked together which impedes their rehabilitation and exposes them too more criminal
Mauer, Marc. 1999. The Race to Incarcerate. New York: The New Press National Research Council. 1993.
Zhang, S. X., Roberts, R. E. L., & Callanan, V. J. (2006). Preventing parolees from returning to prison through community-based reintegration. Crime & Delinquency, 52(4), 551-571.
Recent advancements in technology have had a huge impact on the current criminal justice system. These new developments have made it easier for those in the field to track down criminals and help provide better evidence to support their cases. Things such as fingerprint databases, DNA testing, GPS tracking, and many other things have made it easier for prosecutors or defendants to prove their cases in court. This is very beneficial because with this new wave of technology officials are now able to provide more reliable and credible evidence in court. This current upsurge of technology will help benefit a lot people in the field. People such as law enforcement, falsely accused criminals, prosecutors, defendants, judges, the list just goes on and on. Technology has been has had a major impact on the criminal justice system, it is now been made easier to track down and catch criminals and made it so that the evidence provided at court is more reliable and credible.
This essay has identified sanctions imposed on offenders including imprisonment and community corrections. Described how punishment is justified with the just desert and deterrence theory. Discussing the rate of individuals being imprison comparted to community, provided rates for assault which shows crime being maintained and community member feel safe enough to allow for this to
Ronald V Clarke originally developed the idea of situational crime prevention in the 1980’s (Brantingham & Brantingham 2005). This particular crime prevention theory addresses techniques that increase the effort required to commit the crime, increase the risks involved with committing the crime, reducing the reward gained by the offender after committing the crime, reducing the provocation between the offender and others and remove excuses (Brantingham & Brantingham 2005). Majority of crime is believed to be committed because there are no high risks of being caught and the rewards outweigh the risks (Brantingham & Brantingham 2005). Increasing the effort by controlling access to locations and target hardening can deflect many offenders, as more effort is needed to commit the crime (Brantingham & Brantingham 2005). Another main technique would be to increase the risks; this may be achieved by extending guardianship, creating natural surveillance or artificial surveillance such as CCTV (Brantingham & Brantingham 2005).
The data gathered in the Teplin, Abram & McClelland (1994) research was conducted in the Cook county jail in Chicago during a six year period, using interview techniques during the intake process of 728 inmates. They then tracked the participants over the six years by monitoring their rap sheets. What sets this research apart from the others is that they utilized the population of a jail versus a prison. Typically, once in prison, the time spent there is long whereas in jail, the incarceration time is usually much shorter as the inmates are in jail for lesser crimes or are awaiting trial. In any case, there is a larger turnaround and more opportunity to obtain diverse long term data.
The philosophy of probation has changed over the past several years. Originally, probation officers were considered social worker, able to focus on the individual offender, rather than statutory schemes of the legal system. This ideology aligned with the indeterminate sentencing structure that acknowledged individualization of the offender. However, today probation officers have been coined “the guardian of the guidelines” (Bunzel, 1995, para 2). Under this new philosophy, probation is a facilitator of the net-widening scheme that addresses governments’ main concerns of correctional facility overcrowding and high expenditures. The offender and the utilitarian motive fall second to the goals of net widening scheme. This has made the determinate sentencing model a mode to falsifying offenders’ rights to be treated with human dignity; by fulfilling the retributive goal of the justice models philosophy crime over criminal with the use of fix terms of supervision and sanction stacking practices.
Coyle (2005). The 'Standard'. To say whether using prison as a form of punishment has aid in the quest of tackling the crime problem, one must first consider the purposes of the prison.... ... middle of paper ... ...