US Justice System: Causes and Impacts of Mass Incarceration

Introduction 

The current practice of mass incarceration raises more questions than answers. Perhaps, it is time to pause and ask questions such as; can we say that all people in jails are held before trial? How much incarceration will fight crimes such as drugs and violent crimes? And if so, does the current system of confinement reflect justice? What are the real drivers of mass incarceration? These are just are just some of the core questions that would be addressed in this study. The focus of the study would be to analyze the trends of mass incarceration in America’s criminal justice system and link the trend to the causal factors that support the trend. Handling this subject is critical considering the millions of people in prisons and other incarceration centers who have to be taken care by the state through the public’s tax money. At the same time, this subject is critical to handle considering the challenges that that prisons have had in changing the behavior of criminals as cases of recidivism increase. The system of mass incarceration in the United States has been sharply criticized over its failure to lead to the restitution of behavior and rehabilitation of criminals who are taken into prison custody. As a society that is concerned by justice and need for the effectiveness of the criminal justice system, it becomes necessary to find means to analyze the criminal justice system as currently instituted and the trend of mass incarceration in the country. 

Analysis and Discussion 

It is important to map out the trends of mass incarceration in the United States as a means to validate the idea of a sharp increase in the numbers of incarcerations in the last 50 years. Statistics reveal that the last five decades have been characterized by an unprecedented increase in the rates of incarceration in the United States as compared to many other countries. From the year 1962, the growth in the rates of incarceration in the country because of crimes such as homicide was in an upward trend. In the period 1962 to 1972 alone, there was an increase in the number of annual reported homicide from 8,530 to 18,670. On overall, the crime rates doubled in that season. However, at the time, civil rights action and conservative reaction had led to violent politics that created a thin line between protest and disorder. The civil rights at the time outlawed discrimination in labor and housing markets nationally. Following the need to deal with the rising riots and protests, as well as, criminal offending, the government across all departments developed clear policies on that expanded the use of incarceration. Incarceration became a common norm for prison time was offered for even the minor offenses (Alexander, 2010). Prison sentences were increased for people found to commit violent crimes, drug abuse, as well as, repeat offences. The then changes in the punishment policy, especially the enactment of the minimal mandatory sentence laws for some offences, as well as, the longer sentences for violence and repeat offenses laid the background for mass incarceration as seen today. 

On this background, one would see the rationale behind the changes in the prison policies that were adopted by the courts of law. This explains why more than a million non-violent citizens are behind bars. Unfortunately, the nation has had to keep over a million non-violent people behind bars at the cost of the taxpayer (Massoglia and Warner, 2013). The core factor behind this trend is the enactment of the mandatory sentencing laws on certain types of non-violent crimes. Cases where non-violent drug offenders are made subject to these laws contribute further the situation where the local prison facilities have to accommodate millions of people who are possibly not violent and would serve other alternative modes of punishment available. Analyzing the horror at the sentencing laws enacted for low-level defendants reveals those justice gaps still present in the current criminal justice system as constituted (Alexander, 2010). While efforts have been made to address this issue, it continues to bulge the budget allocation set apart to run the country’s prison and incarceration facilities. 

In addition, citizens continue to ask ‘’does jail do more harm than good?’’ And the question to this answer is jails and prison sentences do more harm in general than good. Different criminal justice experts have expressed outrage on the way prisons are built and operated by taxpayer’s money yet an increased number of prisoners are abused within the facilities that have come with tax money (Hinton, 2016). On the contrary, some would justify the system of mass incarceration claiming that prisons do exist in order to punish wrongdoers, and successfully remove the danger criminals would otherwise pose to the wider world. Notwithstanding this view, the growing culture of mass incarceration in the United States seems to have created problems than solutions to the issues of offending and effective correction. The state of these facilities for people who have committed minor offences is not good. As a matter of concern, offenders who are incarcerated for minor offences would come out of the prisons after being introduced to more severe criminal behaviors by other incarcerated persons within the prison facilities. 

The American prison system as currently constituted has been said to do more harm than good by making the criminals stigmatized as they undertake the new life behind bars. Many of the incarcerated individuals who never expected to get into the prisons would be stigmatized for life and this makes it difficult for such persons to integrate back into the society. The prison system has the focal focus on working as a correctional facility, which means that it should lead to the restitution and rehabilitation of offenders. However, the case where the system gets to stigmatize the people in prisons making them to face difficulty in integrating back to the society is a concern that cannot be put under the carpet. The difficulty by which the ex-convicts find after being released from the prisons as they work to integrate back into the society is a major institutionalized issue. For instance, the laws on the continued listing of convicted ex-prisoners after release makes it difficult for such persons to find jobs after they are released from the prison facilities (Massoglia and Warner, 2013). This indicates the bigger problem of the system as one that is not concerned to safety restitutes people back into the society so that they may continue with their normal life after the prison punishment. 

In addition, the current prison facilities are operated through grouping of prisoners together. Increased trends in mass incarceration involving more than a million Americans under bars indicate that the facilities are strained. The fact that the current facilities are strained makes it a necessity for the grouping together of criminals who are sent by the courts of law into prison. This culture of grouping prisoners together has been found to be one that has increased the violence and rebellion that is seen in many American prison facilities. Increased violence and rebellion in the facilities has seen the development of the reported cases of violence, rebellion and offending within the facilities (Hinton, 2016). An increased number of reliable witness accounts of ex-convicts from prison reveals that a good number of convicts have suffered in the hands of other core criminal gangs within these facilities, as well as, in the hands of the prison officers. The tale has not been good for many of the ex-prison convicts who have completed their terms in court. This is evidenced by the millions of money that is paid to ex-convicts who have sued the state and prison facilities for damages and pain that was inflicted on them by other prisoners. 

In fact, it would be more prudent for offenders with minor offences to be provided with probation punishment that would help them begin a path for correction while contributing to the society. Engaging these convicts to social and forced manual works for a season would make them not only learn from their mistake but also contribute to the society. However, the US criminal justice system has remained stiff on the policy on mass incarceration, which has come with social and economic costs. It is unimaginable to see the continued practice of mass incarceration in the country even as an increased number of ex-prison convicts who have completed their terms go to court with cases of being bullied, raped, and tortured at the prison facilities (Clear, 2007). A rational thought by the citizens are that the prisons would be a safe haven for the offenders who are not needed in the free society. However, this seems not to be case, as many offenders would come out of the prisons with more social and mental damage than they were before being taken custody. 

In the event the goal to reduce recidivism is to be actualized, changes must be made on the mass incarceration policy that continues to see millions of non-violent offenders being held under bars. It is important for the policy makers to come back to the drawing board and consider the purpose of the prison and imprisonment. The focus of the development of the prison facilities was to keep dangerous offenders away from the public for their own safety, and the safety of the citizens in the free society. Analyzing the trends in the way mass incarceration continues to be menace reveals that the two intentions of keeping the prisoners safe from themselves, and safe from the public are not met. For instance, the reported cases of bullying and rape as common occurrences in the prison facilities are sad for a democracy such as the one in the US. These revelations make it clear that insecurity issues internally plague the prison facilities (Alexander, 2010). While it criminal offences such as rape are treated with due seriousness in the free society, the same offences in the prison facilities are condoned even as the prison systems find means to keep such information from the public domain. Successful cases lodged in the courts of law of ex-offenders who sue prison facilities and governments have made it clear that these facilities are not safe and suitable centers for correcting people with non-violent crimes. Putting convicts of non-violent crimes into prison facilities where violence is practiced only means that the criminals would come out worse than they went. 

Conclusion 

Conclusively, the mass incarceration problem in the US that has seen over a million non-violent convicts under bars would continue to do harm than good if not handled in a timely way. Criminal behavior has been found to be contagious due to the influence that hard-core criminals have on other minor offending criminals. Unfortunately, the US has in excess of a million people who are minor offenders who are put into custody. The issue of poor policy on minimal mandatory sentencing needs a revisit. While such laws were developing during the times of civil riots and violence where the government had to develop such laws for peace and order, the times have greatly changed. Owing to the changing times, policy makers would need to reconsider revising the laws to put the criminal justice system in shape. The current punitive political climate in regards to the laws on prison sentencing has seen increased incarceration, increased offending, increased reoffending, and ultimate increase in the rates of recidivism. To deal with this trend would require key policy reforms in the criminal justice system aimed at ensuring that only violent offenders get to be incarcerated while the rest are given alternative punishments permitted by law. 

References 

Alexander, Michelle. 2010. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New York: New Press. 

Clear, Todd R. 2007. Imprisoning Communities: How Mass Incarceration Makes Disadvantaged Neighborhoods Worse. New York: Oxford University Press. 

Hinton, Elizabeth. 2016. From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 

Massoglia, M., and Warner, C. (2013). Racial variation in the effect of incarceration on neighborhood attainment. American Sociological Review, 78, 142-165.