Argument for Keeping Repeat Offenders in Jail
Why do killers, rapists, and child molesters go free? A large portion of early release prisoners commit serious crimes after being released. In fact, "in a three year follow-up of 108,850 state prisoners released in 1983 from institutions in 11 states, within three years sixty percent of violent crime offenders were re-arrested. More than half of those charged with violent crimes were discharged within two years."(from Truth In Sentencing by James Wooton). These criminals are sent right back to the streets to cause trouble again. The laws and justice system has to stick to their guns when it comes to prison terms. If some person is charged with armed robbery and sentenced to 15 years in prison, why should they be released in five years or less? We must make criminals pay for their crimes. If individuals are incarcerated for the full length of their given sentence, I believe that there will be less repeat offenders and an overall smaller crime rate.
Some say that if we cut down on prison terms we will save loads of tax money. There will be less need to build, maintain, and expand existing staff if there are fewer prisoners. But how much more can we cut these sentences, aren't they short enough already? The average jail sentence is seven years and eleven months, but the actual average time served is two years and eleven months. I think there are better ways to save money. For example, we should cut back on the funding of foreign governments. We have plenty of our own problems in the United States that we need to take care of. We should take care of our own before we try to help others. The money we would save would not affect us directly either. The money the government would save would not reduce our taxes or anything like that, they would take the money and invest it in something else important, like maybe giving themselves a raise. How can you put a price on your child's safety? When a...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document