Correctional facilities serve an indispensable role of rehabilitating offenders and promoting public safety. Nonetheless, the institution is largely marred with various critical issues that affect the local community. As such, a classic example of controversial subjects is the increasingly escalating prison costs that result in budget shortfalls, which consequently prompt early release programs. Nonetheless, the significance of these early release programs on society has been strongly debunked by overriding research that asserts that its demerits outweigh the merits.
In the recent past, the correctional department has realized a sharp influx of prisoners, and this upward trend has resorted in the formulation of the early release programs in California and many other US States. In turn, the large number of inmates exiting correction walls every year has precipitated renewed attention amongst policymakers and academics, especially with respect to the drawbacks associated with reintegrating offenders into the community. Since California State began releasing non-violent offenders early to decongest correctional facilities and close budget shortfalls, the ramifications of this move have since raised eyebrows. This is because inasmuch as it helps to alleviate the swollen correctional system millions of dollars, it also comes with a fair share of disadvantages that put public safety at great peril.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The early release of offenders does more harm than good to the local community, as it shifts the burden of convicts to local communities. According to a research article by NCBI, early release is dangerous to local communities as not less than 40% of released offenders return to detainment and imprisonment within three years, in a phenomenon dubbed the ‘revolving door.’ (Harding & Wyse, 2014) . A case in point is whereby a California inmate freed on the early-release initiative was a few days upon release, accused of rape in 2013 (LA Times, 2013). Therefore, public safety is an instrumental responsibility of state governments, and releasing offenders before the termination of their sentences solely for budgetary purposes poses an unwarranted threat to residents.
In the current economic times characterized by high unemployment rates and worryingly slow job growth, the early freeing of prisoners means releasing more job-seekers in the already bloated unemployed population, further creating an economic quagmire. Additionally, the released felons stand minimal chances to secure a job, further adding to their likelihood to return to crime. Noteworthy, the majority of these inmates tend to be both socially and economically disadvantaged even before being imprisoned. Therefore, it is a move that can be termed as adding gasoline to fire, especially to local communities that are already reeling from high crime rate and ballooning unemployment rates (Petersilla, 2000).
The early release program also shifts the expenses from state governments to the local community that would consequently have to finance the social amenities for recently freed prisoners. Additionally, the move will call for enhanced or increased police protection for the local communities since the existing enforcement would be rather inadequate specifically in handling a sudden upsurge of released inmates into the local community.
Conclusively, early release programs pose significant threats to the public safety and security of the local community, especially considering the released offenders are more likely to return to criminal behaviors. Therefore, while the move is well-intended, it will not realize the desired results if appropriate reforms are not undertaken. The efficiency of the program can, for example, be realized and revamped if state governments heavily invest in innovative programs wired at helping inmates reintegrate into the society. Statewide policies and programs formulated to reduce recidivism rates by considerable proportions would result in greater impacts on correctional expenses, relative to haphazard early-release programs.
References
Harding, D., & Wyse, J. (2014). Making Ends Meet After Prison. National Center for Biotechnology Information .
LA Times. (2013, September 01). The truth about 'early release.' Retrieved from articles.latimes.com: http://articles.latimes.com/2013/sep/01/opinion/la-ed-early-release-prisoners-california-20130901
Petersilla, J. (2000). When prisoners return to communities: Political, economic, and social consequences. Fed. Probation , 65 , 3.
