With less than 5 percent of the world's population, the US has 25 percent of the world's prisoners. The US incarceration rate, which remained stable for much of US history, increased by seven fold with the late 1970s movement to get tough on crime.
Today's New York Times highlights explanations offered by criminologists:
[H]igher levels of violent crime, harsher sentencing laws, a legacy of racial turmoil, a special fervor in combating illegal drugs, the American temperament, and the lack of a social safety net. Even democracy plays a role, as judges — many of whom are elected, another American anomaly — yield to populist demands for tough justice.
As a result of this combination, 2.3 million criminals are behind American bars. That means about one in 100 Americans are locked up. China, which has four times as many people, has 1.6 million criminal prisoners. San Marino, which has a population of 30,000, has one prisoner.
With tougher sentences, a drop in crime has followed. But causation is not clear. Ups and down in Canada's crime rate has mirrored the US's; however, there has not been a surge in Canada's imprisonment rate.
What is your reaction to this American anomaly, and the decision to not follow the rest of the West? Is tough sentencing the best way to make America safer?
Antik Batik
what would be a social safety net?
1How many of the criminals behind bars in America are Americans?
2Here is a post we did a while back. 304,000 US prisoners are eligible for deportation.
3do you know what a social safety net is?
4could it be... an attitude adjustment?
5
but really, what the heck is it?!
6From Wikipedia:
7"The social safety net is a term used to describe a collection of services provided by the state, such as welfare, unemployment benefit, universal healthcare, homeless shelters, the minimum wage and sometimes subsidized services such as public transport, which prevent individuals from falling into poverty beyond a certain level."
Thanks Steph!
8In my opinion it is impossible for sentencing to make America safer because sentencing comes weeks sometimes months and in some cases more than a year after a crime has been committed.
If someone has it in their head that they are going to commit a crime the compelling point will always out shadow any consequence that (might) be suffered if said crime is committed.
Our society has a very foolish habit of wrapping our selves in false security whether it is stricter sentencing laws, larger and stronger military, the death penalty, fencing international boarders etc. I could go on and on.
Again we're not stupid this isn't rocket science. Every one of us knows whether you politic on the left or the right what needs to be done to reduce crime on a consistent basis. This is a matter of giving into common sense and not fear.
9I think a social safety net sounds vaguely liberal. Like something that would consider all the suffering a person has been through, and give them an excuse of some variety...For whatever crime they commited, or whatever trouble they are in. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind helping people in trouble, or out of tough circumstances. But I can't imagine a social program that is broad enough to be called a safety net. Really I don't know what it means either. Obviously you can send people welfare checks and they can spend it on beer.
10i see. thanks Stephley! I guess all of those things together can be considered a social safety net, if they are used they way they are intended. not to get down on people who really need those services, use them wisely and fairly and benefit from them. I just think maybe there are too many holes in the net.
11Apparently locking up more criminals doesn't seem to work, since ... uhm ... we have the most criminals.
12I guess they fell through a hole in the net, Raccoon. (it was me)
When I say that, I mean it's just a net that's failing. and a lot of people expect the safety net, and when they fall through, they're like "where was my safety net? society failed me!" when in fact, personal accountability is part of the equation. So I'm not saying all social programs are bad, it's just that they don't work well enough together, and they are abused or taken for granted.
13how can raccoons look so cute but be so mean?
14(referring to avatar, not rac the person)
15kill 'em all and let god sort 'em out!
16"fanatic war on drugs"?
Why exactly is enforcing drugs laws considered fanatic? So we should legalize them all then?
17It is fanatic when you spend billions of dollars over decades with no positive result.
18Well I agree that it should be revamped, but I don't think that makes it "fanatical" esp. since it seems the only acceptable solution to some is to legalize it.
19I agree Jillness, instead of spending billions on tracking down and locking up drug dealers, perhaps the money would be better spent researching the social inequalities and injustices that lead to drug use and finding ways to combat these issues...
20"social inequalities and injustices that lead to drug use"
I dunno about that... the biggest druggies I ever knew were the ones with the most disposable income!
21Great idea, Neecalle, but in the meantime what do you do about the meth dealers who are selling to the kids in my hometown? do we just let them keep at it until we get a counseling program for the drug dealer to go to? Or can we just lock his butt up and keep our kids from an addiction that they will fight for the rest of their lives?
22obviously the answer is more than just black and white. whatever we are doing is not able to deter people from using or selling drugs.
i think the users are typically the ones with money, and the sellers are the ones who are doing it because it's easy money, or they think they had no other choices.
23I also think the users are the ones who are escaping from something through their addiction. they may be dealing with personal injustice rather than social. so to approach them in the same way we do dealers is not really intuitive.
24There has to be a solution somewhere between what we've been doing and legalizing it.... The solution lies somewhere in the middle I think...
25I don't think we should approach drug users in the same manner we approach dealers, but I think that putting at least as much money into prevention as we do for punishment would have a positive impact.
and cabaker, I was more so referring to the demographic of drug users/dealers that end up incarcerated...usually minorities from low socio-economic backgrounds where social inequalities are rampant.
26This statistic alone doesn't mean much. It doesn't mean we have more "criminals" than other societies it means we lock more "criminals" up. Maybe we have the resources/space. Maybe we're better at finding them.
I personally think that we should reconsider what a criminal is. I don't think activities of consenting adults that don't impact others should be prison-worthy offenses.
Another aspect to this, one that's been somewhat touched on in the Dem debates, is that prisons = jobs in some parts of the country.
I wonder if there is pressure to keep the prisons opened and filled from an economics standpoint.
Also, I think racoons are really cute and don't look mean.
27I just reread the post, and came across this bit: "What is your reaction to this American anomaly, and the decision to not follow the rest of the West?"
What does that mean, "the decision to not follow the rest of the West?" Am I missing part of the post? I don't remember reading anything in there about our decision to break away from the West.
28i don't know what it means either, pop. also i don't know that i ever discovered what the "American temperament" is from reading the related article. is there a collective American temperament? because it seems like half of us are poised to reach out and care for all of our fallen angels and the other half thinks they should get what's coming to them. obviously it's not that black and white for each of us as individuals, nor is it for the prisoners.
29locking someone up in jail because they are addicted to drugs is the stupidest thing you can do. they can get more drugs in there then they can on the streets! what they need is treatment. i agree that the "war on drugs" is pointless - its been going on for what, 30 years? and what are the results? we have more people in prison now than when we started. but thats how america deals with problems - we are reactive rather than proactive.
30I think categorizing drugs like pot with drugs like Meth, heroin, and crack is very harmful to our policies and our national discussion on drugs.
31Why not include pot? It is considered an illegal drug.
32I would like to point out that China probably just shoots people instead of sending them to jail, if recent events are any indication.
33Pot has far more in common with caffiene and tylenol than it does with heroin, crack, or meth.
It became illegal because after prohibition ended, the alcohol companies wanted this new popular alternative to be knocked out. The drug czar actually wrote that he didn't know how he was going to be able to justify making "this harmless plant illegal". So they resorted to racism and misinformation to get it done. It is all very well documented.
The science doesn't support the idea that pot should be treated like these other drugs. They are drastically different.
34Ha.....I also feel bad for San Marino's one prisoner....
35Dave, It's considered an illegal drug in this country. In most "western" countries, pot is not considered an illegal drug. In Europe you don't have to worry about the Polizei or the Policia pulling you over for a broken taillight, then wanting to search your entire car, and then arresting you because they found a roach in between your seats. It's not one of the main focus of law enforcement in Europe.
36The bloody past weekend in Chicago would tend to indicate that, at least in urban areas, we are not particularly safe, despite apparently having soooo many dangerous criminals locked up.
37So 15% of our prison population aren't even Americans? I wonder how that compares to countries like China and San Marino (lol).
Criminal justice is not a subject I know much about. But, comparing Cool Hand Luke with Oz makes me wonder what the hell happened in between the two that changed our prison system so drastically. And did that actually work?
I agree with a lot of the comments on the drug war. I'd be really interested in reading a breakdown of crimes committed by prisoners. What percentage of our prison population are violent offenders? What percentage are drug users vs. drug dealers? The only statistics I'm familiar with are recidivism rates which don't seem to indicate that our prison system has a lot of efficacy.
38Nee - I see what you mean now.
I would disagree to those who say that drug use doesn't affect others... I think all you need to do is talk to someone who has had a family member killed by someone in a DUI or DWI to disagree with that... Alcohol is prolly the worst drug of all (in terms of availability and impairment) and look how well the average person handles that!
39Is anyone else disturbed by prisons being corporately owned?
I think it is a threat to justice when people profit from others being imprisoned.
40Agreed, Jillness. Privatization is not always the solution.
41Wait...my comment got flagged? I wasn't cursing or posting links or anything...
42I was just trying to say that I agree with you, Jillness. Privatization of any part of the criminal justice system seems quite dangerous.
43In China, life isn't worth much. They don't keep all their criminals in prison, they shoot quite a few of them on the way to lock up.
The problem is that we don't kill our death penalty criminals fast enough nor make the death public so that people would get an idea of how much a wimp most criminals really are.
We have allowed our nation to slide down the slippery slope of liberalism. After all, "the criminal is a victim, too" they whine. Well, if he's caught and DNA proves he did it, then . . . shoot him. He won't do it again and someone who was thinking of doing the same thing will think twice about it.
I have a right to life from birth to natural death. If someone takes that right away from me by killing me, then that person forfeits his right to life. Period. And the death penalty should be swift and sure, no sitting in jail for ten or twenty years reading law books and watching television. I don't have a television, why should a criminal have more luxuries than I? Criminals belong in stocks at least twelve hours a day.
And while we're at it, every criminal in jail should NOT be fed three meals a day at public expense. He better have family or friends to bring him his meals, Just Like They Do In Central American Countries.
Why should the USofA pander to criminals? They've destroyed someone's life, so why are they still around?
As for druggies, they should be placed together and given whatever they need to create their drug of choice and left alone until they finish the job of killing themselves. They want to die, let them die. If they want to rehabilitate, they'll have to prove it.
BUT that's not the real problem. The people have lost the faith, hope and love they had back in the day. There are no loving families raising loving kids. And the result is what we have today. A bank robber jumps over a barrier and shoots a woman eight months pregnant with twins in the abdomen (missed the babies). For WHAT? Bank robbers routinely are not violent. So who was this numb skull? What was his problem? Why didn't he follow the "gentleman's rules of criminal conduct?"
Life to him must have been worthless. Where was his mother when he needed nurturing? But that's no excuse. At some point in his life, he was loved. So sad that he decided the love wasn't enough. Because when all is gone, all we have left is love.
I'm shaking my head and worrying about the world my grandchildren will inherit.
44Purposes sought to be achieved in sentencing in Az are: retribution, deterrence, restraint and rehabilitation.
I think we are MUCH safer with the scary murderers and sex offenders in prison. I know sentencing is sometimes a year later, but in violent or sexual cases where there is a strong case those offenders are held during the case. A coworker of mine just sentenced an 18 year old to 20 years in prison for murder - and the psych eval said he was likely to kill again when released. I have cases right now where the defendant was sent to prison for sex offenses, released, and is continuing with a new generation of victims. When these people are not free, we are safer. Restraint matters with them.
With the rest of the people, what else can we do when the drug or nonviolent offenders keep offending? Someone steals a car, is put on probation, keeps stealing cars - that person is going to prison. Someone blows probation off, won't go, tries to disappear - that person is going to prison. Not because they're scary, but because they aren't taking the other opportunity the state is giving them. We aren't safe when someone keeps breaking into houses or hitting their wife or driving drunk for the 'n'th time or stealing cars, because these situations are highly risky and can blow up and harm innocent bystanders or law enforcement.
Does anyone have alternative ideas? There are lots of things states try - including electronic monitoring or mandatory work service - but in the end, people convicted of serious crimes will either comply with probation and the amped up requirements or they will end up in prison.
ps - I am all for the social network helping families and kids before they end up in prison... education, aid, the foster system, available counseling to address the huge mental health problems we have are all needed... and all cost money that voters would rather put into those private prisons...
45I shake my head and worry, but for vastly different reason.
46Everytime a person gets put in prison for 10 years for something trivial, I can practically feel my parents' taxes increasing. It costs so much money to maintain a prisoner for a year, so why keep making me pay for it when the punishment is not deserving of the crime.
47I shake my head and worry, but for vastly different reason.
Isn't it nice to find common ground?
I don't have a general objection to privatization. Generally, I find the government excels at screwing up much more than private business. With privatization, at least there is the option that a company can lose its prison contract whereas when the government runs a prison into the ground, what can happen?
48Frontline actually did an excellent story on the Meth epidemic. They also have a really good website on it.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/
The story was really eye opening because it implicated makers of cold and cough medicine and their refusal to inact stricter controls on epephedrine and psuedoephedrine because they were afraid it'd affect their sales.
Interesting for anyone who want to check it out.
49If over 300,000 of them are eligible for deportation then that sounds like a really great way to help with the overcrowding issue in our prisons...send them back.
50Post New Comment
Please share your opinion with our community, but make sure it is on topic and follows our Community Rules. We moderate comments and prohibit personal attacks, threats, spam, lewd images, or the promotion of your personal website.