Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For non-violent crimes, don't put them in prison put them in halfway houses and require them to work to repay their victim, plus the cost of their housing plus the costs the court and police incurred.
For non-violent crimes, don't put them in prison put them in halfway houses and require them to work to repay their victim, plus the cost of their housing plus the costs the court and police incurred.
One time police officer here. Only did 10 years before going to a different career path although it kept me close to the field I left. But if you've never lived around halfway houses you may think differently if you did. We had quite a few in our area with some so bad they finally had to be shut down. I remember one victim telling me he left his car doors open with his keys under his seat even though he lived on the same street as one halfway house. His car was stolen and he didn't know it until we went to stop the driver and he fled and eventually crashed. His offense that got it all started and into a halfway house? Stealing cars. So many in these halfway houses were reoffending and going back to prison that we had to wonder why even have the homes.
I don't profess to have the answers but some of the suggestions I see in here all sound good on paper but in the real world it can be problematic.
One time police officer here. Only did 10 years before going to a different career path although it kept me close to the field I left. But if you've never lived around halfway houses you may think differently if you did. We had quite a few in our area with some so bad they finally had to be shut down. I remember one victim telling me he left his car doors open with his keys under his seat even though he lived on the same street as one halfway house. His car was stolen and he didn't know it until we went to stop the driver and he fled and eventually crashed. His offense that got it all started and into a halfway house? Stealing cars. So many in these halfway houses were reoffending and going back to prison that we had to wonder why even have the homes.
I don't profess to have the answers but some of the suggestions I see in here all sound good on paper but in the real world it can be problematic.
I am not talking about poorly run so called "halfway-houses" which do nothing more than give an address to a parolee who would get charged with a violation without an address (I worked in LE too so I am aware of what you are referring to) But VOA runs a lot of halfway houses (or whatever you want to call them) and do a good job of it. The Salvation army is another example of an organization running successful programs. Or if a non-violent offender has a legit address (not a trap house) release them there with an ankle monitor. The point is to make them responsible for their crime and require them to repay the victim and the system for what has been invested in them because of their bad choices. Yolo County runs a restorative justice program for non-violent offenders you might be interested in reading about it. https://yoloda.org/progressive-progr...e-partnership/ I think it's a sound concept and it's been successful in Yolo County, but there is a caveat, it's not as 'progressive' as it might seem. Reisig is a very conservative DA and an attorney friend told me that he refers cases to Restorative Justice that are so sketchy that no other county wouldn't even file on them.
You can drill down into the details if you like.. Mainly burglary. Though he did call in a bomb threat to a place he worked to get the day off.. He just got out (time served) for charges in three different counties.. One was carjacking, which they dropped for a guilty plea.
I am not talking about poorly run so called "halfway-houses" which do nothing more than give an address to a parolee who would get charged with a violation without an address (I worked in LE too so I am aware of what you are referring to) But VOA runs a lot of halfway houses (or whatever you want to call them) and do a good job of it. The Salvation army is another example of an organization running successful programs. Or if a non-violent offender has a legit address (not a trap house) release them there with an ankle monitor. The point is to make them responsible for their crime and require them to repay the victim and the system for what has been invested in them because of their bad choices. Yolo County runs a restorative justice program for non-violent offenders you might be interested in reading about it. https://yoloda.org/progressive-progr...e-partnership/ I think it's a sound concept and it's been successful in Yolo County, but there is a caveat, it's not as 'progressive' as it might seem. Reisig is a very conservative DA and an attorney friend told me that he refers cases to Restorative Justice that are so sketchy that no other county wouldn't even file on them.
The point remains that they are out here and residents of the area likely suffer the most. I am all in for rehabilitating offenders but often the system is letting folks out thinking they are rehabilitated when in fact they are not. We all know that cons are some of the best actors in the world meaning they can convince their PO's, judges and so on that they've "seen the light" and will go out and do well in the world. I don't know the numbers but I have to believe less than 50% actually do go out and do well once released. Depending on who/what you believe up to 25% of sex offenders reoffend and wind up back in prison. I realize sex offenders are not in the non-violent offender group but the point still remains regarding criminals. Sometimes people just get sick and tired of criminals being let back out only to reoffend over and over. And because of the desires of some to see fewer in prisons we see these offenders back to their old ways in no time. Not sure why society should feel guilty for wanting to see criminals locked up.
The point remains that they are out here and residents of the area likely suffer the most. I am all in for rehabilitating offenders but often the system is letting folks out thinking they are rehabilitated when in fact they are not. We all know that cons are some of the best actors in the world meaning they can convince their PO's, judges and so on that they've "seen the light" and will go out and do well in the world. I don't know the numbers but I have to believe less than 50% actually do go out and do well once released. Depending on who/what you believe up to 25% of sex offenders reoffend and wind up back in prison. I realize sex offenders are not in the non-violent offender group but the point still remains regarding criminals. Sometimes people just get sick and tired of criminals being let back out only to reoffend over and over. And because of the desires of some to see fewer in prisons we see these offenders back to their old ways in no time. Not sure why society should feel guilty for wanting to see criminals locked up.
I am not talking about sex offenders, but since you brought it up, a 25% recidivism rate is really pretty darned good since overall the US felon recidivism rate is 50%-64% (over 3 years). I am not going to argue this with you, but if you worked 10 years as a cop and didn't notice that youngsters going to prison at 18 or 19 come out worse than they went in, then there's nothing more I can say to you.
Prison is not the 'go to solution' for reducing crime, in fact crime sort of marches to it's own drummer. In the 90's there was a mad rush to pass 3 strikes laws; but what's funny is that since it took a year or two to introduce and vote on the legislation, if you look at stats crime had already begun to decline before the bills were passed and continued to decrease after they were passed at about the same rate in states with 3 strikes laws and those without.
I am not talking about sex offenders, but since you brought it up, a 25% recidivism rate is really pretty darned good since overall the US felon recidivism rate is 50%-64% (over 3 years). I am not going to argue this with you, but if you worked 10 years as a cop and didn't notice that youngsters going to prison at 18 or 19 come out worse than they went in, then there's nothing more I can say to you.
Prison is not the 'go to solution' for reducing crime, in fact crime sort of marches to it's own drummer. In the 90's there was a mad rush to pass 3 strikes laws; but what's funny is that since it took a year or two to introduce and vote on the legislation, if you look at stats crime had already begun to decline before the bills were passed and continued to decrease after they were passed at about the same rate in states with 3 strikes laws and those without.
Was only making a point about those we call criminals. That recidivism rate may be lower but it is still an awful number. Especially for the victims and their families. And you say that the younger folks came out "worse than when they went in." Not always true but in many cases some took on the persona of a bad a** convict and kept it and some went on to reoffend. But many did not. Before moving I used to take part in hosting meetings at our church where recently released offenders could come in and meet with business leaders and/or just talk to us about how to reenter the world and hopefully do better for themselves. In some cases it worked and in others they were back in jail. No easy answer here for sure but many in society do not like the idea of being victims or not having those convicted serve an appropriate sentence.
We had an inmate who was convicted of 3 felony convictions for drug trafficking. And three strikes resulted in a life sentence without parole.
Even if you conservatively calculate that it costs approximately $50 a day for incarcerating an inmate at a medium-security prison. That is approximately $18,000 a year and approximately $821,000 and change for 45 years, which is what we (State prison) used to measure a life sentence.
You have a guy who selling drugs and you get taxpayers shelling out over $800,000 to keep him incarcerated for life. Taxpayers pay his medical bills and feed him, blah blah blah.
I think it's a stupid rule unless it's a violent crime. On the other hand, the felon knew the consequences of his actions.
Career criminals just don't change. At least most of them don't oh, you're not speaking from experience. And I have worked at several halfway houses and they all suck. Instead of going out and looking for jobs at least half of them go out and look for dope or alcohol or they go out and do crimes.
As the nation becomes poorer, it will be less able to sustain huge prison budgets. The death penalty may be used more as whatever is left of the criminal justice system runs out of other options. Stealing anything becomes more severe as everyone lives closer to starvation, so thieves may get immediate hangings. Other crimes on the books now may be dropped as not worth anyone's time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
