Better Alternatives Other Than Control and Punishment
Society has other alternatives to decreasing crime than simply locking
people in prison. Preventative programs focus on the community, school, family,
employment and places. In addition, there are rehabilitation and restorative
justice programs that can also be used to decrease crime. Prisons are the only
alternatives we hear about from politicians because of the notion that prisons
are "tough on crime." In reality, the method that reduces crime the
most is the "toughest on crime,"--and many research studies
demonstrate prisons are not the best alternatives.
Over 65% of the people convicted for 3-Strikes are for drug-related
offenses. There is great evidence that putting many 3-Strikers in
rehabilitation programs costs much less to society overall than simply putting
them in prison for 25 years or more. In addition, there are preventative
programs that can be used rather than the prison cell. Each $1 we spend on
prisons is a $1 that we could spend elsewhere (or not be taxed in the first
place).
The problem with only addressing crime by locking people in prison is that
it has done nothing to alleviate the roots of the problems that cause crime in
our society. Other people are born and grow up in the same areas where the
previous offenders lived and will probably commit the same acts because the
underlying problems still exist.
There is much evidence that the gap between the wealthy and the poor is
growing in the United States. Unfortunately, the U.S.'s response to the problem
has been: "The rich get richer, and the poor get prison." To focus on
street crime and drug-related crimes can be considered a hidden way to set up
concentration camps for the poor and minorities. There is much evidence that
white-collar corporate criminals cause much more economic wealth to be
illegally distributed and can result in many more deaths and injuries than
street crime (e.g., violating safety standards in employment, emission of
environmental hazards). Does society spend as much to enforce the laws on them?
Are they sent to prison for the same sentences as the poor street criminals?
Are wealthy users of drugs ending up in our prisons?
The "control" and "punishment" models adopted by the
U.S. may cause other problems. Social rebellion and deviance among the young
may increase. And, in an opposite manner, some of our youth may embrace
"control" and "punishment" as the answers to all our
problems. A growing devision among these two groups could cause extreme
problems in the future.
An excellent place to find alternatives to controlling crime other than
through incarceration in prison can be found on the web and is contained in a
document created by the the University of Maryland called "Preventing Crime: What
Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising."
The following are some statistics and comments from books and articles on
alternatives to prison, the growing gap between the wealthy and the poor, and
the U.S.'s lack of effort to stopping the root causes of crime. PLEASE SEND US
NEW DATA AND ARTICLES IF YOU HAVE THEM.
University of California criminologists calculate that diverting offenders
convicted of using or possessing drugs to community-based programs would cut
state prison costs by 17 percent. Including all of those convicted of drug
crimes would boost the savings to 26 percent. And diverting offenders serving
sentences shorter than nine months--which takes in 44 percent of all prison
inmates--would also lower prison costs by about 25 percent.
In 1997 the Legislative Analyst's Office estimated that the demand for
additional prisons over the next decade could be reduced by 30,000 beds if
certain categories of offenders received state-funded and locally administered
intermediate sanctions. The proposal estimated an annual state savings of $670
million plus $1.36 billion in one-time capital outlay savings. The ten
nonviolent crimes the LAO suggested could be locally sanctioned are: petty
theft with a prior, driving under the influence, perjury, bookmaking, bribery,
drug possession, marijuana offenses, receiving stolen property, drug possession
for sale, vehicle theft, grand theft, forgery and fraud.
Little Hoover Commission Report, Jan. 1998, p.
50.
Job programs upon release from prison
Of the 110,000 parolees released in 1996-97, fewer than 10,000 received
help finding a job. Fewer than 10 percent receive pre-release services to help
them prepare for re-entry.
An example of these services is the Jobs Plus program. The program combines
social services with job placement, serving parolees through six
community-based subcontractors in 18 parole offices and 23 institutions
throughout California. Services provided include pre-employment training and
placement assistance, clean and sober workshops, work clothing and tools,
transportation, meals and housing.
The program is outcome-based: Providers receive $500 for every parolee they
help find a job. In 1996-97, the program placed 947 parolees in jobs and
reports that recidivism for the program's employed participants is only 3.5
percent. Yet, despite its success--and even though officials say the program
could serve three times more parolees without changing its structure--CDC
continues to fund the program to serve only 1,000 inmates a year.
Little Hoover Commission Report, Jan. 1998, p.
73.
Please send questions or comments to factsla@sbcglobal.net.
Everything on this web site can be distributed to the general public,
reprinted, or reposted without permission of Families to Amend California's
3-Strikes.
Date last modified: 3/1/98.
