Corrections Process
Question One
Pennsylvania and Auburn prison styles were beliefs established on criminal conduct reinforced and learned from other criminals. Research shows that the prison system in
Pennsylvania, a Philadelphia society, used to be a penal technique focusing on solitary confinement. The system fostered the penitence principle and supported reformation. The earliest Pennsylvania institution was the Walnut Street Jail, built in 1790 (Rubin, 2018). The prison was primarily meant to transform the wrong treatment of inmates. The Auburn system was also known as the Social and Silent system. It is a penal technique that existed in the 19th century, where individuals worked day and night and were kept in solitary confinement during the night. These two prison styles have varying advantages and disadvantages. For instance, in the Pennsylvania system, the inmates were not forced upon irksome and painful practices compared to the Auburn system, where inmates were exposed to difficult practices, including working in the gullies, mines, and treadmills. The Auburn system was cheap to introduce in many states and countries. It provided a good opportunity for vocational prison training and increased production for the state's revenue (Rubin, 2018). The Pennsylvania system was expensive to establish in states and the nation compared to the Auburn system. The Auburn system offered a more oriented factory setting that permitted mass production through economies of scale which was more cost-effective than the Pennsylvania system.
If the two systems were to be introduced today, the Auburn system would be more effective than the Pennsylvania style. Auburn generates more income for both state and the nation and provides the inmates with vocational training, which would be important in their lives after the sentence (Rubin, 2018). However, the system might have had some significant legal pressure against its practices. For instance, there could be pressure on inmates' rights regarding solitary confinement, which denies them socialization.
Question Two
Surety bond is the most effective and reliable form of bail. It includes purchasing a bond from a bond company, which controls a non-refundable first rate of 10% of the total bail amount. In most cases, those in need to purchase a bond would pay 10% upfront (non-refundable) and puts some collateral (including valuable personal property, vehicle, or title deed). For example, if the court or the police set bail at $10,000, an offender can purchase a bail bond by paying $1,000 and putting up collateral valued at $10,000 (Zirbel, 2021). If the offender does not appear in court, the bond company has to pay the court the bail amount. Surety bail is the best because it helps manage prison overcrowding. For the states to manage the jail population, they need a responsible and proven release mechanism as part of the mix that will correctly promise appearance.
Surety bond is still more effective for the lower and middle classes since it allows families and offenders who cannot afford to meet total bail to be released for a small percentage of the total cost. The bail bonds company provides surety bonds. Offenders select surety bonds as their preferred one since, in most cases, the bail amount is set at a dollar value that exceeds the average individual's budget (Zirbel, 2021). Because middle and lower-class individuals cannot afford to settle the amount by themselves, they rely on a bail bond company, purchase a surety bond and then pay it back with time.
Question Three
Based on research and reports from the nations' rates of drug incarceration and drug issues, the expansion of incarceration has not yet helped solve the national drug prevention issue and approach. This gives room to other alternative methods, such as probation for drug possession crimes. I think the method would help reduce drug possession issues in the country.
Reports from a National Research Council provided that compulsory minimum sentences for drug and other defendants have few, if any, preventive effects (Alarid & Rangel, 2018). The results were established based on periods of surveillance that when street-level drug sellers are arrested and imprisoned, they are rapidly changed. The same results also found reduced jail terms for particular federal drug defendants reduced recidivism rates.
For instance, in 2007, the Sentencing Commission retroactively reduced the punishment of many cocaine perpetrators. A seven-year observation revealed no rise in recidivism among defendants whose punishments were reduced than the ones who did not undergo the practice (Alarid & Rangel, 2018). Such reports and different other findings show that the most operational reaction to drug abuse and possession is a mixture of police officers to limit trade in and stop the development of the new market, alternative punishment to avert nonviolent drug defendants from expensive incarceration, treatment to decrease reliance and repetition, and efforts to prevent possession that can detect people at great risk for SUD. For instance, in 2010,
South Carolina extended probation and parole occasions for individuals sentenced to drug crimes. Since the law was approved, the prison population in the state has been reduced to 14%, and individuals sentenced to intense crimes make up a larger prison population in the state (Alarid & Rangel, 2018). The rate of violence also dropped by 16% between 2010 and 2015.
Question Four
Shock probation has been successfully used across the country for above six decades. The primary aim of this system is to "shock" felonious defendants with a measure of truth about the penalties of their conduct. Instead of just sentencing an offender to a term of probation, the court demands that the individual be imprisoned. The aim is that taking the offender away from their family and making them spend time in prison is a shock to the program (Lehmann, 2022). Such shock is a warning that helps deter criminals from committing illegal offenses again. Shock probation is meant to function as a great warning and assist offenders in realizing the penalties of their acts. Shock probation is not the best technique to punish all offenders. It is best reserved for circumstances where a significant chance exists for an offender to be rehabilitated. This program is best used in cases that involve young offenders, juvenile offenders, those convicted for minor crimes such as drug offenses and theft, and first-time offenders. Split sentencing in the U.S. is a program where an offender serves up to half of his maximum sentence outside the prison. This means an inmate would spend a relatively short period in jail and spend the rest on probation (Lehmann, 2022). During their time outside the prison, the offender may be needed to do several errands, like meeting the officer in charge of the probation, finalizing a treatment session for drug or alcohol, or performing community service. The offender may also be demanded to abstain from involving in particular conduct, including driving a car, alcohol consumption, or being involved in another criminal act. In those cases linked to alcohol and drugs, the offender might be instructed to join an electronic checking program throughout the probation period. Split sentences are mostly reserved for individuals who are first-time or involved in minor offenses.
Question Five
The prison environment and culture are significant to public health and safety. Even though plenty of the rule discussion and public consideration of jails concentrates on private sectors, about 83% of above 1,600 U.S. prisons are held and run by states (Gotsch & Basti, 2018). This indicates that states are the important unit of examination in accepting the extensive effects of incarceration and the site of possible resolutions. However, for many years there has been an increased budget shortfall for states' management of correctional faculties. The states have failed to effectively manage correctional facilities hence risking the future of correction in the hands of private organizations and mass incarceration. There has been an increase in the overall population of inmates for years now. Even though there are some reductions in prisons, the occurrence would not last long. The issue of privatization will not be new shortly. Privately owned and run prisons have existed in the U.S. since the 19th century. Prisons were even profit-driven from the day, whether the government or the private sector controlled them. Supporters of private facilities suggest that such programs provide better services at lower costs than state-owned prisons. Advocates of privatization have had several mechanisms to justify their position. For instance, they argue that private prisons utilize non-union labor compared to state prisons which mostly employ union workers (Gotsch & Basti, 2018). Non-union labor saves on the cost of wages and benefits, which are not even negotiated over shared bargaining. Others argue that private jails donate to local tax bases by paying property and income taxes or sales taxes throughout the building of prisons.
Question Six
Supermax prison indicates maximum security, defining the most protected jails and divisions that keep cruel convicts. The United States Penitentiary Administrative Maximum
Facility (ADX), located in Florence, Colorado, is the most secure prison in the country (Labrecque & Mears, 2019). The ADX has over 400 of the most daring and ferocious defendants in the federal jail. The circumstances in these prisons are full-time private imprisonment with restricted communication between convicts and staff. The windows and entertaining spaces have restricted views to reduce any efforts to escape. When the inmates vacate their cubicles, they are accompanied by several sentinels and always wearing handcuffs, leg irons, and stomach chains.
The main advantage of supermax prisons is that they hold many extremely dangerous and violent criminals. They also provide safety, improve inmate conducts and punishment, maintain order, and are goal-oriented. The disadvantage of having supermax prisons is that they are too expensive to establish since they involve many guards, more space, and very expensive safety mechanisms (Labrecque & Mears, 2019). Supermax prisons also conduct inhuman punishment and prison conditions, which might lead to mental and physical issues among inmates. No rewards for good behaviors or any correctional aspect in supermax prisons. There has never been any rehabilitation in such prisons since the punishment is mostly harsh, and inmates endure supersized portions of psychological punishment due to extended solitary confinement.
