1. Michael Rushford the president of CJLF (Criminal Justice Legal Foundation) is for supporting Incarceration to all criminals. In this article he based all his information on California statistics, saying that incarceration helps bring down crime rates. 2. The majority of “nonviolent offenders” that go to rehab end up re-offending. Crime rates will increase if “nonviolent offenders” are released early. California statistics of crime rate are slowly increasing. 3. We agree and disagree there are some factors that we agree with and some that we don’t. In some cases the “nonviolent offenders” are not re offenders while some are. There are factors that are important that are left out.
1. The article goes over the programs implemented to keep individuals out of the prison systems around the country. It goes over the success rate of one of the programs. It also talks about the need to end mass incarceration. 2. The 3 main points made in the article are, alternatives to the imprisonment systems in the US. He also goes in to say that where the communities are of poorer upbringing, that crime is more likely to happen. Finally, he says that the continence of punishment for crimes will just multiply the crime unless something is done to help correct the problem. 3. We would have to agree because it is true that the poorer areas around the country are related to increases in crime. Also, we feel that if more and more programs are made available that the individuals will have a better chance to have one on one mentoring and help to better their lives and futures.
Soares, a district attorney from the state of New York argues that diversion programs work and that they should be used. He writes about a specific case, a man named Tyrone Howard who was an unlikely candidate for a diversion program. He is back on the streets after being in drug treatment and we agree that diversion works and should be used to reduce incarceration. Jail sentences for drug charges are very long and we believe that they need to be given a chance for treatment and for a reduced sentence to help jail overcrowding.
1. This article is about sending criminals to diversion programs rather than jail. They have seen success throughout the diversion programs and crime has gone down. Safety and justice are the main goals and through these programs they are achieved. 2. The three main points we found are diversion programs have a strong success rate, the track record of diversion programs shows that they prevent and reduce crime overall, and only 3 percent of people who enrolled in treatment were re-arrested for a violent crime. 3. We agree that diversion programs can help people depending on the crime they committed.
1. This article, Mass Incarceration is a Horrible Failure, by Allegra M. McLeod, details how difficult it is for people released from prison to find jobs, provide a home, and create a reformed life for themselves so they can acclimate back into society. It is also about what steps could be taken to keep people from falling back into the behavior that got them in prison. 2. A main point is how hard it is for people to get back into society after being in prison. Another is, how high the percentage of incarcerated inmates are, and how the government has goals to lessen that amount each year, and what preventative measures that can be taken to reduce the number of people imprisoned over small crimes. 3. We agree because of the bias of the crimes most people are committed for, are things that shouldn’t have such an impact on their lives in such a negative way. For instance, people going to jail for small things like marijuana who have to have that on their record for life (or until it’s expunged). This effects their ability to find suitable jobs, provide for their family legally, and be able to function in mainstream society, leaving them to do whatever they can to make ends meet and this often means conducting illegal acts.
People assume that prisons are filled with harmless drug offenders. However, more than half of the prison's population are serving time for violent crimes. Due to the growing prison population, there have been programs implemented to divert offenders from prison. The writer feels that nearly all of the programs today have been tried and found ineffective.
1. Prisons are assumed to be filled with harmless people. 2. They have implemented ways to try and keep people of out prison. 3. These programs are ineffective.
Our group is in agreement that the although these programs might have started with good intentions, they are ineffective. We feel that if we eliminate the fear of consequence, then the crime rate will increase.
Summary (and three main points): Although there are many factors that can affect crime rates over periods of time, it is known that the consequences of a crime can be a major factor. If large masses of prisoners are released early and are jailed for shorter periods of times after they repeat crimes, crime rates will increase. A reform that would do this would encourage chaos.
Cooperative Response: By lessening the punishment for crime, you encourage repeat offenders to strike again. Furthermore, even those who are not repeat offenders would see the opportunity to cause chaos.
In “Mass Incarceration Is a Horrible Failure” by Allegra McLeod in The New York Times, she defends her view on the cycle of crime and what should be done about it. The author believes that too many Americans are behind bars and it’s leading to a never ending cycle of violence.
The three main points in the article include not moving fast enough to reduce incarceration, how it leads to more violence and incarceration, and how we should handle it compared to how we are handling it.
We agree that something should be done about the number of people behind bars but we do not agree with the author’s idea of how to accomplish this. For example, she says we can try to handle this by, “… funding drug treatment and quality health care, investing in education and shelter fit for human beings, and ending our shameful practices of mass incarceration.”(Par 5). While it would be a dream come true if this country came up with a surplus of money we could put towards these ideas, unfortunately that’s not where we are.
1. The Article is stating that the new ways they are trying to keep people from going to prison are not working. They state that most offenders are violent offenders not drug-related. They also state the return rate from prisoners are increasing and more arrest are being made. 2. Drug offenders are not the primary offenders in prison. Intensive supervised probation programs did not lower recidivism, if anything they worsened it They are trying alternative prisons or types of supervised incarceration 3. We disagree on the points of this article, Due to the fact that one of us has experienced this first hand. If you set certain guideline within the judicial system that are achievable many people would be striving to stay out of prison. Prison is a money farm and free labor (Slavery) ran by the states for their own personal greed. The Prisoners are being treated unfairly by the officers who are to paid to protect and serve the inmates and the safety of the compound.
In the article “Don’t Let a Hero’s Death End a Vital Program to Cut Incarceration”, the author David Soares writes about how he believes that diversion programs work. He states that just because it didn't work for one certain person, it doesn't mean it won’t work for the rest. I agree with Soares and believe that everybody should have a chance to receive treatment. A lot of inmates are sentenced for a very long time and I think its fare for them to be giving a chance to get treatment and with this treatment they can learn from their mistakes and possibly get their sentenced reduced.
1. Michael Rushford the president of CJLF (Criminal Justice Legal Foundation) is for supporting Incarceration to all criminals. In this article he based all his information on California statistics, saying that incarceration helps bring down crime rates.
ReplyDelete2. The majority of “nonviolent offenders” that go to rehab end up re-offending. Crime rates will increase if “nonviolent offenders” are released early. California statistics of crime rate are slowly increasing.
3. We agree and disagree there are some factors that we agree with and some that we don’t. In some cases the “nonviolent offenders” are not re offenders while some are. There are factors that are important that are left out.
1. The article goes over the programs implemented to keep individuals out of the prison systems around the country. It goes over the success rate of one of the programs. It also talks about the need to end mass incarceration.
ReplyDelete2. The 3 main points made in the article are, alternatives to the imprisonment systems in the US. He also goes in to say that where the communities are of poorer upbringing, that crime is more likely to happen. Finally, he says that the continence of punishment for crimes will just multiply the crime unless something is done to help correct the problem.
3. We would have to agree because it is true that the poorer areas around the country are related to increases in crime. Also, we feel that if more and more programs are made available that the individuals will have a better chance to have one on one mentoring and help to better their lives and futures.
Soares, a district attorney from the state of New York argues that diversion programs work and that they should be used. He writes about a specific case, a man named Tyrone Howard who was an unlikely candidate for a diversion program. He is back on the streets after being in drug treatment and we agree that diversion works and should be used to reduce incarceration. Jail sentences for drug charges are very long and we believe that they need to be given a chance for treatment and for a reduced sentence to help jail overcrowding.
ReplyDelete1. This article is about sending criminals to diversion programs rather than jail. They have seen success throughout the diversion programs and crime has gone down. Safety and justice are the main goals and through these programs they are achieved.
ReplyDelete2. The three main points we found are diversion programs have a strong success rate, the track record of diversion programs shows that they prevent and reduce crime overall, and only 3 percent of people who enrolled in treatment were re-arrested for a violent crime.
3. We agree that diversion programs can help people depending on the crime they committed.
1. This article, Mass Incarceration is a Horrible Failure, by Allegra M. McLeod, details how difficult it is for people released from prison to find jobs, provide a home, and create a reformed life for themselves so they can acclimate back into society. It is also about what steps could be taken to keep people from falling back into the behavior that got them in prison.
ReplyDelete2. A main point is how hard it is for people to get back into society after being in prison. Another is, how high the percentage of incarcerated inmates are, and how the government has goals to lessen that amount each year, and what preventative measures that can be taken to reduce the number of people imprisoned over small crimes.
3. We agree because of the bias of the crimes most people are committed for, are things that shouldn’t have such an impact on their lives in such a negative way. For instance, people going to jail for small things like marijuana who have to have that on their record for life (or until it’s expunged). This effects their ability to find suitable jobs, provide for their family legally, and be able to function in mainstream society, leaving them to do whatever they can to make ends meet and this often means conducting illegal acts.
People assume that prisons are filled with harmless drug offenders. However, more than half of the prison's population are serving time for violent crimes. Due to the growing prison population, there have been programs implemented to divert offenders from prison. The writer feels that nearly all of the programs today have been tried and found ineffective.
ReplyDelete1. Prisons are assumed to be filled with harmless people.
2. They have implemented ways to try and keep people of out prison.
3. These programs are ineffective.
Our group is in agreement that the although these programs might have started with good intentions, they are ineffective. We feel that if we eliminate the fear of consequence, then the crime rate will increase.
Summary (and three main points): Although there are many factors that can affect crime rates over periods of time, it is known that the consequences of a crime can be a major factor. If large masses of prisoners are released early and are jailed for shorter periods of times after they repeat crimes, crime rates will increase. A reform that would do this would encourage chaos.
ReplyDeleteCooperative Response:
By lessening the punishment for crime, you encourage repeat offenders to strike again. Furthermore, even those who are not repeat offenders would see the opportunity to cause chaos.
In “Mass Incarceration Is a Horrible Failure” by Allegra McLeod in The New York Times, she defends her view on the cycle of crime and what should be done about it. The author believes that too many Americans are behind bars and it’s leading to a never ending cycle of violence.
ReplyDeleteThe three main points in the article include not moving fast enough to reduce incarceration, how it leads to more violence and incarceration, and how we should handle it compared to how we are handling it.
We agree that something should be done about the number of people behind bars but we do not agree with the author’s idea of how to accomplish this. For example, she says we can try to handle this by, “… funding drug treatment and quality health care, investing in education and shelter fit for human beings, and ending our shameful practices of mass incarceration.”(Par 5). While it would be a dream come true if this country came up with a surplus of money we could put towards these ideas, unfortunately that’s not where we are.
1. The Article is stating that the new ways they are trying to keep people from going to prison are not working. They state that most offenders are violent offenders not drug-related. They also state the return rate from prisoners are increasing and more arrest are being made.
ReplyDelete2. Drug offenders are not the primary offenders in prison.
Intensive supervised probation programs did not lower recidivism, if anything they worsened it
They are trying alternative prisons or types of supervised incarceration
3. We disagree on the points of this article, Due to the fact that one of us has experienced this first hand. If you set certain guideline within the judicial system that are achievable many people would be striving to stay out of prison. Prison is a money farm and free labor (Slavery) ran by the states for their own personal greed. The Prisoners are being treated unfairly by the officers who are to paid to protect and serve the inmates and the safety of the compound.
In the article “Don’t Let a Hero’s Death End a Vital Program to Cut Incarceration”, the author David Soares writes about how he believes that diversion programs work. He states that just because it didn't work for one certain person, it doesn't mean it won’t work for the rest. I agree with Soares and believe that everybody should have a chance to receive treatment. A lot of inmates are sentenced for a very long time and I think its fare for them to be giving a chance to get treatment and with this treatment they can learn from their mistakes and possibly get their sentenced reduced.
ReplyDeleteRaquel and Alina