Over the past forty years the United States has seen a drastic increase in its prison population in favor of mass incarceration and incapacitation as the preferred model(s) of sentencing over ideologies such as restoration and rehabilitation. Of the variety of possible reasons for this, notable are the War on Drugs and the growing intolerance that Americans have for criminality in a highly individualistic westernized nation where “choice” and accountability for personal actions are the basis for success and failure.
The nation’s inmate population in 1910 was about 112 thousand people. (Justice Policy Institute, 2000) Over the last hundred years, this figure has grown exponentially and in 2009 the total number of inmates in county, state and federal custody was over 2.6 million. (United States Department of Justice)
California is one of the states at the forefront of this incarceration epidemic operating at almost double the capacity of its correctional system. In August of 2009 a panel of federal judges addressed this issue with a ruling that required the California prison system to release 27% of its inmate population. In May of 2011 the United States Supreme Court has upheld this decision which will result in the release of up to 46,000 inmates from the California correctional system. (Zagger, 2011) This mass exodus of inmates is of obvious concern for California residents and when the people feel that their personal safety is in jeopardy, they turn to law enforcement for help. In a state crippled by budgetary problems which has resulted in police layoffs, law enforcement agencies operating at reduced staffing not adequately prepared cope with the mass return of convicted criminals into county jails and the communities they protect. In addition they are still adjusting to other stipulations impacting their ability to protect the public which restricts the capacity in which law enforcement handles released inmates.
In October of 2009 a law was added into the California penal code allowing released prison inmates to be placed on “non-revocable parole.” (California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation) Non-revocable parole is granted to released convicts providing that a parolee fits into a set of criteria classifying him/her as “lower risk” for re-offending and, as the name suggests, his/her parole status cannot be revoked for the same reasons as someone who is on regular parole; such as any violation for the conditions to that parole. In addition, released inmates are not assigned a supervising parole agent to whom they would normally be required to check in with. As a result, if a parolee on non-revocable parole does recidivate , he/she cannot be sent back to prison as simply being in violation of his/her parole, but rather he/she will separately tried for the new charges.
Aside from the burden placed on law enforcement, there is a significant detriment to the well-being of the persons being released from correctional custody. Reentry and reintegration is extremely difficult for prior inmates recently released from prison. Jobs are hard to find for convicts, it is hard to adjust to “life on the outside” and many parolees are released into the neighborhoods from which they came making them susceptible to returning to old habits, old friends and, as a result, criminal behavior.
Nationally, close to two thirds of parolees violate their parole and will most likely be returned to prison within a relatively short period of time. (McShane & Emeka, 2011) In addition, parolees on non-revocable parole are not supervised by a parole agent, who can at times, act in a social worker capacity as someone whom parolees can turn to should they feel pressure to return to anti-social behavior. As a result, communities where a large amount of parolees reside develop a prison subculture and incarceration, which was originally intended to reduce criminality through incapacitation, instead creates one more problem for law enforcement through the decline of neighborhoods overrun by a prison mentality.
One of the primary functions of law enforcement is the detection and apprehension of criminals. An arrest, a concept which completely coexists with policing tactics, is literally a form of incapacitation and “getting the bad guys off the street” is largely the preferred method of dealing with criminality for law enforcement organizations. A large frustration retained by police officers is the apparent “revolving door” policy of the criminal justice system; officers continuously see the same offenders entering and exiting county jails. As a result law enforcement is sure to be frustrated as they face increasing difficulty incarcerating persons who they truly feel are a danger to society.
The mass release of prisoners in California coupled with the significant loss of “tools,” in the form of legal authority with the restrictions put in place by non-revocable parole status, leaves law enforcement officers faced with much more difficultly in carrying out the role that we as a society expect of them. Considering that most of the released inmates will be classified as “low risk,” there is a high probability that they will be released on non-revocable parole meaning they will be largely unsupervised and law enforcement looses the tools that come with handling a parolee; coupled with shrinking budgets and staffing, the next decade is sure to be a roller-coaster for the men and women in the policing profession.
References:
1) California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. (n.d.). Non-Revocable Parole. Retrieved November 14, 2011, from California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation: http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Parole/Non_Revocable_Parole/index.html
2) Justice Policy Institute. (2000, May). The Punishing Decade:. Retrieved November 14, 2011, from Justice Policy Institute.org: http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/00-05_rep_punishingdecade_ac.pdf
3) McShane, M., & Emeka, T. (2011). Community Corrections, Rehabilitation, Reintegration and Reentry. In M. Maguire, & D. Okada, Critical Issues in Crime and Justice (pp. 309-318). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
4) United States Department of Justice. (n.d.). Total correctional population. Retrieved November 14, 2011, from Bureau of Justice Statistics: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=11
5) Zagger, Z. (2011, May 23). Supreme Court upholds order to reduce California prison population. Retrieved November 14, 2011, from Jurist.org: http://jurist.org/paperchase/2011/05/supreme-court-upholds-order-to-reduce-california-prison-population.php
No comments:
Post a Comment