Even Before the 3-Strikes Law, The U.S. and California Were Among the Greatest Incarcerators in the World

What is particularly amazing about the 3-strikes law is that it was passed when crime rates were decreasing and we in the United States already had one of the highest incarceration rates in the world (especially for property and drug offenses). What were we thinking? Do we want to lead the world in the oppression of our poor people?

There is a good argument that the U.S. prison population is much higher than other countries because the U.S. tends to have much higher rates of homicide and violent crime. That may be true, and firearms appear to be the reason why. However, when looking at crime rates for property offenses, the U.S. does not appear to be that different from other countries--yet we certainly incarcerate them at much higher rates. Is this the best environment to put our nonviolent and non-serious offenders? Is there a criminogenic effect by putting people in prison that teaches them to become more violent? Is there something that we can learn from other countries?

The following are some statistics and comments from books and articles on how the U.S. and California compare in crime and incarceration rates relative to other countries. PLEASE SEND US NEW DATA AND ARTICLES IF YOU HAVE THEM.

	Prison figures from selected countries 1979, 1989 and 1993.
	U.S. leads the way in homicides through use of handguns
	U.S. among leaders in crime rates for lethal violence but not for property offenses.
	U.S. leads other countries in length of sentences for property offenses in the 1980s
	U.S. leads other countries in length of sentences for drug offenses in the 1980s

Prison figures from selected countries 1979, 1989 and 1993.

Nils Christie, 1994, "Crime Control as Industry," 2nd enlarged edition, New York: Routledge, p. 191.

In 1996, the United State's overall incarceration rate grew to 645 inmates per 100,000 and California's grew to 685 per 100,000.  (Based on prison and jail populations of 1.7 million for the United States and 225,000 for California).  LATimes, 3/5/98.

U.S. leads the way in homicides through use of firearms

A 1990 study by Fingerhut and Kleinman finds that a much higher percentage of homicides in the United States are committed with firearms than in any other nation, including those nations most institutionally similar to the U.S. The U.S. rate of homicides with handguns is 14.6 times that of Canada. The gross homicide rate in he U.S. for 1988 was 7.4 per 100,000 population, while the gross rates in England and Wales were 1.31 for the same year. When homicides due to firearms are excluded from the rates, the British rate is 1.22 per hundred thousand and the United States rate is 2.92 per hundred thousand. When gross rates are used, citizens in the U.S. are 5.6 times more likely to be victims of homicide as persons in England and Wales. The evidence is mounting that firearms and especially handguns are an important determinant of the high homicide rates in the U.S. relative to other, institutionally similar nations. James Lynch, "Crime in International Perspective," in James Q. Wilson and Joan Petersilia, (eds.), "Crime: Twenty-eight leading experts look at the most pressing problem of our time," 1995, San Francisco, ICS Press, pp. 22-23.

U.S. among leaders in crime rates for lethal violence but not for property offenses.

"Newly available data on the prevalence of crime cross-nationally and some of the analyses of these data can make cross-national comparisons more useful for informing policy. First, these data indicate that the United States is not the most crime-ridden of industrial democracies. The fact that the United States does not differ from other common law nations with respect to minor violence and serious property crime casts doubt on global indictments of the United States as having a criminal culture. The United States stands alone, separate from even other common law countries, not in the prevalence of violence but in its lethality. Differences between the U.S. and other nations are crime-specific, and the search for understanding and remedies should be equally specific. James Lynch, "Crime in International Perspective," in James Q. Wilson and Joan Petersilia, (eds.), "Crime: Twenty-eight leading experts look at the most pressing problem of our time," 1995, San Francisco, ICS Press, p. 16 and 25.

U.S. leads other countries in length of sentences for property offenses in the 1980s

"In the case of property crime, it is clear that the United States incarcerates more and for longer periods than other similar nations." James Lynch, "Crime in International Perspective," in James Q. Wilson and Joan Petersilia, (eds.), "Crime: Twenty-eight leading experts look at the most pressing problem of our time," 1995, San Francisco, ICS Press, p. 34 and 37.

U.S. leads other countries in length of sentences for drug offenses in the 1980s

The U.S. has been changing the way it uses its prison system by increasing its use against drug offenders. In the U.S., the proportion of the state prison population in custody for drug crimes increased from 8 percent in 1986 to 22 percent in 1991.

A much larger proportion of inmates sentenced for drug offenses in the U.S. received sentences in excess of ten years than inmates serving sentences in England and Wales. 26% of inmates sentenced for drug offenses in the U.S. had sentences in excess of ten years while only 8% of persons serving sentences for drug crimes in England and Wales had such sentences. James Lynch, "Crime in International Perspective," in James Q. Wilson and Joan Petersilia, (eds.), "Crime: Twenty-eight leading experts look at the most pressing problem of our time," 1995, San Francisco, ICS Press, p. 34 and 37.

Return to Index.

Please send questions or comments to facts@attbi.com.

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: 3/5/98.