Criminal Justice Theory and Policy Discussion Chapter

Pages: 7 (2584 words)  ·  Bibliography Sources: 5  ·  File: .docx  ·  Level: Master's  ·  Topic: Criminal Justice

Criminal Justice Theory and Policy

The Prison Industrial Complex

Download full Download Microsoft Word File
paper NOW!
The national correction-commercial complex is an institution governed by a number of participants who have the power to make certain decisions. The participants are not ordinary individual rather, they are other firms established by the government to work under and part of the criminal justice department. The participants include the federal agencies that work hand in hand with the for-profit corporations besides other professional organizations. These participants carry out their duties within an enclosed network and ensure that the kind of information they hold about the correction-commercial complex remains secured (Kraska & Brent, 2011). The key participants have certain principles that they need to follow in order to ensure that there is no bridging of information within their systems. These participants make decisions together and they have characteristics that act as principles to guide them through influencing of policies as well as decision-making process. The relationship between the participants has to be together with this at all times to guarantee effectiveness during decision-making processes. They, however, rely on each other for a steady substitute of data, convenience, manipulate, personnel in addition to funds. The participants ensure that they carry out their duties away from the public's awareness to ensure that a low profile is a guarantee. Exposure to the public is likely to raise awareness and unavoidable cases of public interest (Kraska & Brent, 2011). There are instances when the key participants tend to have arising issues mostly relating to decision-making. Superiority is a major reason why there arises a difference between the participants.

TOPIC: Discussion Chapter on Criminal Justice Theory and Policy Assignment

The federal as well as state organizations have privileges that most of the private industries lack making them more advantageous. The correction budget cannot be at an equivalent level for all institutions since the government organizations depend on material and other applicable facilities provided by the government (Hancock & Sharp, 2004). The private industries are disadvantageous in that they depend on material in addition to facilities at their own cost. Baring this fact in mind, it will be unfair to award all the organizations equivalent funds on preparation of the budget. The best solution is to be considerate because of resources to prepare a budget that does not suppress one party and favor the other. Deciding over such issues requires intelligence since the outcome in terms of performance has to be at an equivalent level. To add to that, it is unjust for one to issue funds in terms of a performance degree. Preparing a budget on such kind of basis results to poor decision-making processes, which eventually influences the outcome where one organization will present excellent performance yet the other poor results despite the fact that they dwell on the field.

To Maintain or to Abolish

Richard Wright supports the idea of retaining the prison systems in that they are correction centers that have the mandate to put away individuals who go against the lawful requirements of the state. He considers the fact that these individuals commit unspeakable criminal acts and the best solution is to reinstate them in the prison system where they have to undergo extremely unbearable life circumstances to survive. According to Richard Wright, the individuals deserve the harsh hostile environments in order for them to be feel penitence for the unjust and inhuman acts that they cause to the community (Miller, 2008). With these reasons in addition to others, Richard Wright argues in support of retaining the prison systems.

Harold Pepinsky is a social science researcher who argues in support of the abolition of present day penal system. The way of life within the penal system is in regard as in human since the individual restrained in the facilities endure a brutal livelihood. Within the penal systems, there is no guarantee of safety that leads to deaths and disappearance of people. The way of survival within the present day penal systems depends with who one associates with as well as the relation with other individuals with the power to offer security within the facilities. There are various gangs dealing drugs within the penal systems and Pepinsky farther points out that the rate of bribery is at its best. The officer on duty at these penal systems engage in the illegal businesses like getting involved in the drug transaction taking place within the systems.

According to the issues tabled by Harold Pepinsky, I agree with the fact that the current penal systems require abolition. It is true that the rate of corruption within these penal systems heightens gradually and it is getting worse with time. The transactions taking place within the penal systems is getting worse in that it extend to the public (Miller, 2008). The chain of command comprises of officers who should be ensuring that there is law and order inside these penal systems. Quit a number of penal systems have corruption issues which is a concrete reason for their abolition since they are turning to corruption centers instead of correctional facilities.

An example of an article that is significant to the reason why I support abolition of the present day penal systems is an article in the New York Times focusing on the increased rate of corruption. The articles publication was on 23/04/2008 titled U.S. prison population dwarfs that of other nations. On the article, there is evidence of the statistics on the prison population in the U.S. In comparison to the entire globe. On the same article, the prison systems are in reference as horrific with an infinitely harsher living condition. The prison systems are the reason why the U.S. is in indication as a rogue nation according to the article.

California Prison System -- How to Fix it

The Bills AB109 as well as AB117 signing was at the beginning of the year two thousand and eleven. The signing of the bills was to facilitate the state of California with the right to put an end to the gyrating low-level prisoners who constantly came in and out of the state prison. This turned out to be the ultimate solution to dropping the population of inmates inside the state prison. The problem that the policy aimed at was to stabilize and cut down the population of inmates within the state prisons from a one hundred and thirty seven percent that was an over population in the facilities (Sonneborn, 2007). The Bills, inmates in state prisons were under strict obligation not to get transfers to county jails, there were no prisoners living the state prisons early as well as the felons in state prisons to continue serving their time without getting transfers.

The social, political as well as the criminal justice had insinuations on the policy presented regarding the methods to handle the overpopulation within the prison systems in California. There were suggestions that the state had to ensure that up to thirty thousand inmates were out of the state prison to mobilize the current state in that the inmates who frequently in and out be released living the felons with sentences to spend their entire conviction at the facilities. This was however, the best solution of guaranteeing that the state prison population is under proper control and a number that is manageable. An executive committee put the implementation plan forward and it comprised of the chief of police, a probation officer, District Attorney, in addition to a Public defender.

Data relating to the policy alongside the problem was important and the figures had a greater influence on the strategy for the control process. It took the committee quite some time to try figuring out appropriate policies and the only way forward was through a consideration of the current data about the prison population and inmates' records. The data contained the most reliable sources in relation to an essential solution. The alternative solution was to lower the numbers to approximately thirty thousand within a period of two years (Sonneborn, 2007). The alternative solution was coming up with the two Bills that permitted individuals facing non-violent, non-serious, in addition to those with sex offending charges to face imprisonment at the county jails.

M7A1 Case Study 3: California Prison System -- How Do You Fix it?

The origin of the Bills AB109 and AB117

The founding of the AB 109 and AB 117 arose from the need to reduce the population of the prisoners in the United State by more than 30000. In order to achieve the reduction in the number, need arises to transfer the responsibility besides the supervision of certain low-risk offenders from the state to the other 58 counties (Egelko, 2011). The transfer of the responsibility depended on the legislation of the Assembly Bill 109/AB117. The combination of the AB109/AB117 acts as the Public Safety Realignment Act. Further, the strengthening of the AB109/AB117 arose from the changes in the penal code which applied that the sentencing o the new offenders should occur at the local jail and not the state poison.

The main objective of AB109 and its companion… [END OF PREVIEW] . . . READ MORE

Two Ordering Options:

Which Option Should I Choose?
1.  Download full paper (7 pages)Download Microsoft Word File

Download the perfectly formatted MS Word file!

- or -

2.  Write a NEW paper for me!✍🏻

We'll follow your exact instructions!
Chat with the writer 24/7.

Criminal Justice Theory and Policy Discussion Chapter

Criminal Justice Theory and Policy Discussion Chapter

Criminal Justice Theory Discussion Chapter

Change About the Criminal Justice System Term Paper

Criminal Justice Administration Taking Into Account Term Paper

View 200+ other related papers  >>

How to Cite "Criminal Justice Theory and Policy" Discussion Chapter in a Bibliography:

APA Style

Criminal Justice Theory and Policy.  (2013, February 19).  Retrieved September 21, 2021, from

MLA Format

"Criminal Justice Theory and Policy."  19 February 2013.  Web.  21 September 2021. <>.

Chicago Style

"Criminal Justice Theory and Policy."  February 19, 2013.  Accessed September 21, 2021.