Reducing Overcrowding In Prisons

After analyzing and evaluating all three alternatives, it presented some optimistic and undesirable outcomes. In regards obtaining the most positive outcome financial feasibility should be considering top priority. As stated by Schmitt et al. (2010), “the financial costs of our corrections policies are staggering”. The following alternatives focuses on ways of reducing overcrowding in prisons system. Given the advantages and disadvantages of these alternatives, this plan to assist policymakers and practitioners to tackle overcrowding in a systematic and affordable way. The results should help to ensure that incarceration is only used when proportionate to the offence committed and where there are no other appropriate options.

First alternative,
Adversely, saving the “government corrections systems $23,000 to $25,000 per inmate per year”, the average cost of about $25,500 to $26,000 per year to probation or parole (at average cost of $1,300 to $2,800 per year)” (Schmitt et al., 2010). Many countries have systems of diversion, such as referral to mental health or drug treatment. In countries like Sweden, which have far lower incarceration and crime rates, prison is about rehabilitation. And it works far more effectively. As detailed by Erwin James (2014), “the implication in the Swedish model is that sentenced individuals are still primarily regarded as people with needs, to be assisted and helped”. One pitfall of this outcome is giving these minor offenses wrongdoers the wrong idea, thinking that by committing a crime they will not be any repercussion. The political acceptance, it has been demonstrated a superior chance of being political accepted on the grounds that it will affect the prison capacity by reducing overcrowded
This alternative is least valuable outcome of all the three outcomes. This alternative lack political feasibility, the good time credit is under time under 18 U.S.C. §362, it would requires a lot of convicting to change this alternative.As mention per, the good credit time, “prisoners who are serving a term of imprisonment of more than 1 year, other than a term of imprisonment for the duration of the prisoner’s life, may receive credit toward the service of the prisoner’s sentence, beyond the time served, of up to 54 days at the end of each year of the prisoner’s term of imprisonment” (Legal Information Institute). Families Against Mandatory Minimums (2016), “This “good time credit” encourages and rewards rehabilitation and discourages rule-breaking in prisons. It also shortens sentences and saves taxpayers money”. In addition, the article additionally stated that, “because of a mistake in the way the good time statute (18 U.S.C. § 3624(b)) was written, prisoners actually earn only 47 of the 54 days of good time credit for which the law says they are eligible”. In order for the alternative to work congress will have to fix it and it will take a lot of persuasion to have congress fix the error which is one of the reason it is the least effective