When Prisons Suffer We All Suffer

Grass 1

Prison Reform

By: Joel Grass

SC105-12H

December 10, 2008

Purpose: To convince listeners that our prisons are not doing what they are intended to do and must be reformed.

When Prisons Suffer We All Suffer

Introduction:

Since the 1970’s, prison populations in the United States have increased immensely.
In 1971, there were less than 200,000 people incarcerated in our countryaccording to author, Bryan Grapes.His figures mirror those of the book Downsizing Prisons,which noted that prison populationssubsequently exploded to over 2 million within the next 34 years.
Statistics from The United States Bureau of Justice help to clarify what this number means, indicating that in 2003, 482 United States residents out of every 100,000 are incarcerated.
That figures out to be almost one-half of a percent (0.5 %) of the total population, or, in other words, one in every 200.
Because of these dramatic increases in prison population, costs of imprisonment and correction have also increased considerably.
According to Grapes, yearly incarceration costs per prisoner average $30,000 and the total cost for our nation’s prisoners “exceeds 120 billion dollars per year”.
These dramatic increases in prison population and the escalating costs that ensue from these increases are both unnecessary for our nation.
[Thesis] The government needs to reform our prison system.
[Preview]To help control prison population and cut incarceration costs the government should encourage milder sentencing, especially for non-violent criminals, and emphasize rehabilitation for all convicts.

Body:

Despite many people’s objections, the government should levy lighter sentencing.
Many people object to lighter sentencing because they feel that criminals will begin committing crimes immediately following their release.
In addition, many people feel that tough sentencing helps reduce the crime rate.
One reason people feel this way is the simple fact that incarcerated people, by default, cannot commit crimes, according to author Dan Lungren.
Morgan Reynolds, a professor atTexas A&M University,feels that moderate, lenient sentences lead to increases in crime.
In fact, he directly attributes our nation’s increased crime rates to prisons.
Although it is true that a prisoner is not able to commit crimes, prisons often contribute to higher crime rates by breedingcriminal behavior in inmates.
A prime example of this is a story from the magazine Atlantic Monthlyabout a man named Robert Scully.
Scully grew up near San Diego and was introduced todrugs as a preteen.
His adolescent years turned into a downward spiral of pervasive drug use and persistent crime until, at age 22, he found himself behind bars in California’s San Quentin prison.
He assaulted another inmate while in San Quentin,was transferred to a maximum-security prison, Corcoran, and then was transferred again to a “supermax” prison at Pelican Bay.
Between his stay at Corcoran and Pelican Bay, he spent 9 years in solitary confinement.
Within five days of his 1995 release, Scully murdered a police officer with a sawed off shotgun and the next day was back in police custody.
Many psychiatrists ascribe his unlawful actions to the years he spent in solitary confinement.
Estimates from the same Atlantic Monthly article say that every month, about 35 similar prisoners are released directly from isolation into society.
This example shows that even though imprisonment prevents a criminal from committing crimes, incarceration is not beneficial to a prisoner and may serve to make him worse.
[Transition] One way to shorten prison terms would be a reduction in mandatory sentencing.
Instead of requiring mandatory sentences for many crimes, the government should impose new guidelines that will enable prosecutors to punish according to the crime.
Many crimes that people commit have minimum sentences attached to them.
Prominent examples of this are the Anti-Drug Abuse Acts of 1986 and 1988, which, according to an article in the National Journal, require a “5-year mandatory minimum sentence” for the possession of only five grams of crack cocaine.
Another example of mandatory sentencing is the “three strikes” laws.
According to Michael Jacobson,author of Downsizing Prisons, the State of California instituted these lawsin 1994, many of which require life prison sentencesfor criminals that are convicted of three felony offenses.
According to an article in the British news magazine, New Statesman, twenty-five more states followed suit and established similar laws.
In fact The United States Congress even passed comparablelegislationaffirming these laws for federal prosecution.
Problems occur with mandatory sentencing because criminals may receive an extremely harsh sentence for a relatively minor crime.
The same New Statesman article provides an example of this.
A man named Leandro Andradewas sentenced to a 50 years to life sentence for stealing $150 worth of children’s movies from a discount store.
This crime was his third strike, because he had committed drug related crimes in the 1980’s.
Our government has begun taking steps in the right direction to eliminate some of the disparities that exist in mandatory sentencing.
According to Stuart Taylor Jr., writing in the National Journal, in 2004the U.S. Sentencing commission decided to lower the prison sentences for crack cocaine offenders, many of whom have no record of violent crime.
The book Prisons notes that the State of New York passed legislation that same year concerning mandatory drug sentencing.
It lowered sentences for possession of drugs from 15 years toa sentence of 8 to 20 years.
[Transition]The government should continue to correct the problems that exist within our mandatory sentencing guidelines, which could reduce crowding in prisons.
The government should strive to eliminate the overcrowding that is prevalent in today’s prisons.
The Orange County Register reports on the overcrowded state of many of our prisons.
In California, prisons designed to hold 100,000 prisoners have over 170,000 inmates within their walls. A smaller prison has anormal capacity of about 3,000, but currently it is housing nearly 4,000 prisoners.
The article talked about prisoners’ claims that manyproblems result from overcrowding, including abuse by other inmates, inhumane treatment, and lack of proper rehabilitation.
Elimination of overcrowding will lead to better prison experiences for inmates, which will decrease their chances of returning.
Overcrowding is one of the biggest problems in our prison system, a problem that comes with many costs. It costs taxpayers financially because the government is forced to build new prisons or expand existing ones, which drains heavily on budgets.
Criminals are also at a disadvantage, because they experience neglect and bad conditions.
In some cases, inmates in overcrowded prisons are forced to share a one-person cell with another inmate, or live in gymnasiums and classrooms that have been converted to dormitories according to the Orange County Register article.
[Transition] Overcrowding diverts prison resources away from rehabilitationand towards providing basic needs for extra inmates.
The government should institute more rehabilitation programs for convicted criminals, which would result in lower recidivism rates for criminals.
Recidivism is when some reverts to old behavior, or returns to their old ways.
In this case, recidivism would refer to a criminal going back to prison after being released.
In 1998, according to Joseph Califano Jr., one in 144 Americans were in prison for drug or alcohol related offenses.
Every one of these criminals needs treatment.
Prisons should have programs to help inmates with substance abuse problems, and help to educate them for the job force.
Many prisons fail to do this and it forces the prisoner’s local community to deal with the prisoners problems, according to the American Journal of Public Health.
Many prisoners that are released from prison are unprepared for a normal life in society.
They still may have a lack of education, a craving for drugs, or a lack of job skills.
Drug and alcohol abusers are very much at risk for recidivism; in fact, 81 percent of criminals with five or more previous convictions are drug users according to an article by Joseph Califano Jr.
He goes on to say thatthese drug users should be helped if they can be; even if the only reason is to benefit the public.
In spite of this, there is still opposition to rehabilitation.
People feel that treatment for convicted criminals will cost taxpayers more.
Contrary to this belief, spendingmoney torehabilitate criminals will ultimately save money because it will contribute to “reduced recidivism” rates, according to Downsizing Prisons.
A reduction in this will lead to less spending for prisoners in the future.
Corrections departments throughout our county should not only imprison to punish, but, as their name suggests, attempt to change the criminals so that they will not commit crimes in the future.

Conclusion:

Our prison system has problems in it such as overcrowding and a lack of rehabilitation.
However, in spite of the problems that they have, prisons serve an important role in our society: to punish, rehabilitate, and correct those who choose to commit crimes.
All prisoners have two things in common: they did something wrong and they need help to get things right again.
This is where prisons should fit in.
They should be a place that seeks to rehabilitate those that are trapped in a cycle of crime.
People often forget that criminals are people too; their crimes should be condemned but the criminals should not.
Everyone has made mistakes and been given a second chance, why should they not as well?
Criminals should, by and large, get a second chance, which should be provided through our prison system.

Works Cited

Abramsky, Sasha. “Incarceration Exacerbates Criminal Behavior.” Grapes 46-47.

Califano Jr., Joseph A. “Prisons Should Rehabilitate Inmates.” Grapes 72-77.

Clash, James M. "Jailhouse Stocks." Forbes 180.4 03 Sep. 2007): 66-66. Academic Search Elite. EBSCO. Jefferson College, Mo. 4 Apr. 2008 <

"Gently does it." Economist 384.8539 (28 July 2007): 27-28. Academic Search Elite. EBSCO. Jefferson College, Mo. 4 Apr. 2008 <

Golembeski, Cynthia, and Robert Fullilove. "Criminal (In)Justice in the City and Its Associated Health Consequences." American Journal of Public Health 95.10 (Oct. 2005): 1701-1706. Academic Search Elite. EBSCO. Jefferson College, Mo. 4 Apr. 2008 <

Grapes, Bryan J., ed. Prisons. San Diego: Greenhaven, 2000.

“Inmates, California officials warn over impact of crowded prisons.” Orange County Register. 17 Feb. 2007. 9 Apr. 2008. <

Jacobson, Michael. Downsizing Prisons. New York: New York University Press, 2005.

Ferro, Jeffery. Prisons. New York: Facts on File, 2006.

Lungren, Dan. “Increased Incarceration of Criminals Benefits Society.” Grapes 32-39.

Merlo, Alida V, and Peter J. Benekos. "Prison Overcrowding Creates a Need for Prison Alternatives." At Issue: Alternatives to Prisons. Ed. Jennifer Skancke. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. MOREnet Jefferson College, Mo. 4 Apr. 2008 <

Redding Jr., Robert. "Health Care Behind Bars." World & I 21.9 (Oct. 2006): 1-1. MasterFILE Premier. EBSCO. Jefferson College, Mo. 4 Apr. 2008 <

Rentschler, William H. “The Prison System Does Not Work.” Grapes 40-44.

Reynolds, Morgan. “Imprisonment Is an Effective Deterrent to Crime.” Grapes 21-25.

Slaughter, Jane. “Prison Labor Is Not Beneficial.” Grapes 146-151.

Stephen, Andrew. "In California, a man stole a few kids' videotapes from his local Kmart. Now the US Supreme Court will decide if he must stay in prison for 50 years." New Statesman 131.4587 (13 May 2002): 10. Academic Search Elite. EBSCO. Jefferson College, Mo. 9 Apr. 2008 <

Taylor Jr., Stuart. "Mukasey Feeds the Prison Binge." National Journal 40.10 (08 Mar. 2008): 10-10. MasterFILE Premier. EBSCO. Jefferson College, Mo. 4 Apr. 2008 <