Public Policy Memo to President Barrack Obama, Essay Example

Summary

The United States prisons are severely overloaded with people who have committed heinous crimes and some who have committed simple misdemeanors who cannot make bail. Some are first time offenders who could not afford an attorney and some are repeat offenders who seem to want to make prison their home away from home. What exactly is the solution to keeping the prison or jail population lower and putting our tax dollars to work in a more efficient manner? The current penal system simply does not work! Currently, the penal system is set up to house prisoners like animals and cage them until their time is served or for life for more heinous crimes. Would not a more credible and reliable means to an end be to rehabilitate those prisoners that could return to society if given proper guidance not to offend again? The key to making this happen is to understanding why criminals commit crimes and become repeat offenders. A criminologist, policeman or anyone in this line of work must understand the psychology behind what makes a person commit a crime and gives them the potential to commit a crime again? It is only through education can one educate others to rehabilitate themselves. Everyone is entitled to make mistakes in life. I am not stating to let murderers or rapists free. I am simply stating to provide a better system for minor offenders or those who have served their time with education and rehabilitation necessary to go back into society as a healthy emotional person to lower the chances of them being repeat offenders. I will discuss the various theories of crime causation and hope to explain how each one is important to understand to prevent future offenses by those who commit crimes. I try not to call someone who commits a single crime a ‘criminal’, for that is a stereotype that stays with someone for life. It would be the same as telling someone who told ‘one single lie’ in their life that ‘they are a liar’ for the rest of their life. Would that be fair to say? So why do we call a person who committed a single crime, ‘a criminal’? Well, probably because it is either a stereotype or the stigma is simply not socially accepted in today’s society. Does society have to change its view? Maybe! But still again, the person committing the crime has to take responsibility to change his/herself and can only do that if given the chance. Instead of locking a person up with mundane duties day in and day out, why don’t we spend time and effort with rehabilitative programs. This is an effort for a long term effect that will make our world a safer and better place to live in. True there will not be success for everyone because some people simply cannot be rehabilitated but that is not true for the majority of all.

Hypothesis

The dependent variable is the rise of crime in the past years in relation to the independent variable of the various theories of crime causation as reflected by the criminologists. The various theories are built around the premise that either they are influenced by either a genetic pre-disposition or an environmental factor which influences a person’s tendency to commit crime. An alternative to incarceration is rehabilitation through recidivism in order to prevent re-offenders. Studies show that the fear of re-incarceration in some instances does prevent re-offenses.

Background and History of Overcrowding and Lack of Rehabilitative Services

“Correctional officers in local jails admit and process about 13 million people a year, with nearly 800,000 offenders in jail at any given time. Correctional officers in State and Federal prisons watch over the approximately 1.6 million offenders who are incarcerated there at any given time. Typically, offenders serving time at county jails are sentenced to a year or less. Those serving a year or more are usually housed in state or federal prisons.” (Bureau of Labor Statistics).  In the last ten years the Bureau of Labor Statistics has reported a rise in people on some kind of probation in the United States. By October 2006 the State of California state prisons had reached their all time high maximum capacity with a total prison population of 170,000 inmates. Prisoners’ safety and health were at risks and further prisoners were being forced to sleep three to a bunk designed for one. As a result of this situation the state of California had to issue a State of Emergency Proclamation. (“Proclamation”).

Some murders and other crimes as a result of overcrowding increased in these California state prisons due to the overcrowding issues during 2006.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation annual report, Crime in the United States, reports “the majority of all non-misdemeanor crimes are crimes related to crimes against property.” (Harrison, 2005). These include crimes of a non-violent nature including: larceny, motor vehicle theft and burglary. Crimes such as forcible rape, murder and aggravated assault are much lower than crimes against the property offenses.

Proposal for Change and Criminological Theories

The question at hand is “How criminal offenses tie into theories of criminology and how do these theories of criminology influence the current overcrowding in the prison systems which may or may not be directly related to re-offenders?”  In order to effectively postulate on whether the rise in crimes both felony and misdemeanor over the past years have risen due to collaborative thinking of the various theories of criminology, I will discuss and thoroughly analyze the theories of criminology which include both biological and psychological aspects of committing crimes. Then I will apply statistics of crime from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Uniform Crime Report and further postulate theories of why the crime rates have risen and/or dropped in some cities and why the prisons are overcrowded in most cities with relation to re-offenders. The UCR receives report from the local police stations and the FBI receives reports “from more than 17,000 police departments serving a majority of the U.S. population.” (Siegel, 2008).  FBI reports on crimes such as murder, manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, larceny, arson, etc. UCR reports data broken down into segments according to age, race and gender. “Any infractions that are found to be false or negligible are not reported.” (Siegel, 2008). There is also a report of how many crimes are ‘cleared’ by police agencies each ‘month’. For legal and law enforcement purposes, ‘cleared’ is defined as “when a person is arrested and turned over to the court system for prosecution.” (Siegel, 2008).

“The violent crime data as of 2005 has shown an increase to 1.4 million from the previous year including crimes of rape, murder, assault and robbery. That is at the rate of about 466 per 100,000.” (Siegel, 2008). What was very disturbing is the murder rate rose nearly 5%, robberies increased nearly 5% and aggravated assaults increased nearly 2%. There was no typical distinction of increase due to geographical preference though. The increase took place in urban, suburban and rural areas. It was interesting to compare during the “years of 1995-2005 the crime rate had decreased almost 20% prior to this sudden increase.” (Siegel, 2008). Teenagers contributed to the crime increase because generally the crime trend normally follows the proportion of young males in the population without avail. Criminologists without doubt fear there will be a rise in juvenile detention centers in the next decade or so. Further as single parent households increase so will violence, crime and social strains. The economy is troubled and sometimes people turn to crime to attempt to live their lifestyle they are accustomed to. The availability of guns has attributed to some of the crime in the U.S. but controversial issues state that the criminals are the ones that use guns to commit crimes for they gain access to ‘hot or illegal’ guns. The violent media that is easily available to teens and easily influenced adults contributes to the rising crime rates. The television contributes to aggressive behaviors which can influence people to live in a fantasy world and influence them to commit crime. The crack epidemic influenced much crime during the 1990’s and led to drug-trafficking in the larger cities. Constant drug use and trafficking will continue to keep crime on the rise to an extent.

In contrast, the addition of law enforcement in prime crime areas has improved the quality of life for many Americans. Aggressive police departments have led the way and attributed to lowering the crime rates in some developed areas. It is very possible to deter criminals from re-offending by imposing very lengthy sentences. Of course, if the population increases dramatically, statistically the crime rates should decrease somewhat.

Hence, the property related crimes in relation to the violent crimes have decreased over the five year span of 2000-2005. Criminologists predict that the future is very difficult to predict but they posture the trend may rise in the future due to instability in homes such as divorce and single parenthood. As teenage crime rates increase the seniors may depress the crime rate somewhat reducing the crime rate. Crime rates rise in the summer because of the heat. Violent crimes such as rape and domestic assaults tend to rise during the summer months. “Typically the Midwestern states and Northeastern states have lower crime rates than the Southern and Western states.” (Siegel, 2008). The jails and prisons are becoming overcrowded because of repeat offenders and the rise in violent crimes not related to property offenses.

Youths account for about 17% of all arrests in the United States. Adults of the age 45 and over account for about 32% of all arrests in the United States. Typically male crime rates are much higher than those of females at the rate of 4:1 and at the rate of 8:1 for more serious crimes such as murder and rape.

Now let’s take a look at the different theories of criminology to peer into the biological and psychological make-ups of criminal minds so that we may posture theories on how to prevent future crimes and re-offenses. Our goal is to understand why people commit crimes in order to prevent future crime or lower future crime. The Rational Choice Theory gained its influence from both Europe and the United States. The criminologists during this period “focused primarily on internal and external factors such as poverty, IQ, education-rather than personal choice and decision making.” (Siegel, 2008). During the 1960’s criminologists again pushed forward with the theory that criminals could think rationally and plan their crimes. With that in mind, criminals could be deterred from offending for fear of being punished for their crimes. According to theorists, any crime is the basis of well-thought out planning for the sake of either money, revenge or some sort of thrill or entertainment. Only an irrational person would commit a crime under these circumstances. Most of these crimes are said to be ‘offense-specific’ because a person decides to commit a crime for a reason for a certain yield or return. This crime is not simply a random crime; rather it is thought out and planned very carefully. The crime may also be committed for lack of economic resources. Criminals appear to be very spontaneous or impulsive and they seem to be unaffected by punishment in many circumstances. Many often report learning certain techniques to avoid capture by the police. Crime is the product of great risk taking and many criminals are very selective when choosing their targets to minimize the risks associated with the crime. Most who choose to commit a crime believe there is no other alternative than to commit the crime or suffer from some form of mental impairment. “Further they suffer from an elevated emotional state which negates the fear of punishment.” (Siegel, 2008). Research has found that ‘specific deterrence’ rather than ‘general deterrence’ such as proactive arrests does lower the possibility of recidivating. Though, these results were not able to be duplicated by a Minneapolis study. This is only a theorized hypothesis.

The Trait Theory states crime is hereditary or in a person’s blood to offend. Lombroso’s theory is just that and not fact. Neurological and blood chemistry disorders contribute to a person’s ability to become a criminal. Social influences such as parents’, peers, school and a person’s neighborhood influences contribute just as equally. Biochemical factors influence a person’s behavior patterns. The infamous “Twinkie Defense” was used with the San Francisco murder in 1979 to lower the charge from murder to diminished capacity manslaughter. A person’s diet can contribute to an imbalance in their diet as well. A lack of Zn, Fe as well as poly-saturated fats can lead to problems with crime. An excess of female hormones or PMS has suspect leadings to problems with crime. Environmental factors such as Cd, Cu, Hg and inorganic gases have led to neurological problems leading people to committing crimes.

The biological side of the Trait Theory suggests people are either born criminal like or are not. This would explain why some people can commit a small crime one time and never re-offend and why others continue to be life-long criminals. Others feel some people are simply pre-disposed to commit crime and presently are no empirical data to support either side. “The research samples are too small to support the findings. Researchers cannot distinctly tell if the research applies to all criminals or those who have been placed in some type of treatment.” (Siegel, 2008).

The Behavior Theory states that humans develop their actions through experiences of learning. Many of their experiences are simply reactions from others or perceptions received from others. “Behaviors are supported by positive or negative reactions or punishments.” (Siegel, 2008). Further violent acts are not necessarily representations of abnormality or decisions of lack of morality; rather they represent learned responses to life situations. Albert Bandura argues people “are not born with the ability to act violently, rather they learn to act aggressively through their life experiences. They may include personally observing others acting aggressively or watching people on television or in movies acting aggressively.” (Siegel, 2008). Theorists believe a person may be predisposed to violence through mental and physical traits but the determining factor is environmental factors. Social learning specifically determines the specific aggressive behavior they will exhibit. Often pain producing events trigger violent acts. Verbal taunting has been linked to aggressive behavior also. The expected belief is that aggression will somehow be rewarded with a positive experience. It is a fact that children learn from their observations just as they learn their cognitive and social skills from their parents and friends.

When media violence is viewed by children and young adults that are not emotionally old enough to understand the concepts they view this act as acceptable behavior and normal learning experiences are not introduced and learned properly.

The Cognitive Theory has been recognized as being focused on mental processes and how people “perceive and respect the world around them.” (Siegel, 2008). The theory encompasses how people encode, process and manipulate information to solve situations and problems. With this reasoning, people who use information in a useful manner are better informed to make good decisions in life. These people can make better decisions when it comes to antisocial situations and are less likely to commit crimes. They may have less cognitive deficits and have a greater obedience to the law.

The Social Structure Theory suggests the key to understanding why people commit crimes is to understanding the economic make-up of a person’s family. There is an unequal distribution of wealth in the United States and with that comes the desire to want more. People who live in the poverty level are constantly struggling for survival passing the poverty to the next generation. The lower class is also subjected to depression and low self-esteem and motivation. Low socioeconomic class levels lead to lives of crime and destruction and is traced to the root of the problem for the socioeconomic disadvantaged. Involved with this theory are the social disorganization theory which suggests that urban conditions affect crime rates, strain theory which suggests that crime is “a function between the conflict between people’s goals and the means they use to obtain them” and the cultural deviance theory which suggests that elements of both strain and disorganization theories are equally important in contributing to the crime rate with respect to socioeconomic problems in the United States.

The final theory is the Cultural Deviance Theory which suggests the social disorganization theory and the strain theory are to be tied together to explain how the people that live in disorganized and degenerated neighborhoods react negatively and turn to crime as a result of such deprivation. The very poor cannot meet the demands of the middle class society and clash with the norms of the values hence they turn to crime as they see as an only way to try to compete. Violence and illegal behavior is seen as the only means to try to compete. A tough inner and outer identity is seen as trying to stay ahead of the game by often joining gangs which brings the morale of the lower class even further down with the middle class. The lower class actually takes a step backwards by taking this action.

All the different theories explain different motivations by psychologists and biologists that theorize why people turn to crime. The behaviors have been studied but no true factual tests are certain because of lack of appropriate sample size to make valid conclusions.

Policy Recommendations

Considering the issues and various theories of crime causation presented in this research paper the following policy recommendations are warranted in order to (1) reduce the current overcrowding prison population (2) reduce recidivism (3) limit repeat offenders and (4) rehabilitate criminals and put them back into society safely:

• Have psychologist visit with prisoners regularly and implement a plan to implement them back into society.
• Have prisoners participate in a work study program to gain useful skills and promote self-esteem levels.
• Look to rehabilitate rather than imprison offenders.
• Implement a formal policy of counseling so that prisoners can share their feelings with regard to the crime committed.
• Ensure prisoners receive regular medical and psychiatric care so that they can return to society as productive citizens.
• Ensue prisoners participate in regular religious studies.
• Treat prisoners with respect and encourage them to treat guards and other inmates with respect.
• Allocate funding to ensure these programs are maintained by professional and are adhered to.
• The goal is to rehabilitate and not to imprison forever.

Prisons are overcrowded and the solution is not to incarcerate all criminals. The better solution would be to rehabilitate criminals to the extent that they can enter society as productive citizens. The key variables used in the matrix were the criminal theories and the media violence and increased police power. The criteria used to make my choices were based on data from criminology books stating basis of criminological theory ideas and facts.

References

Bureau of Labour Statistics. Bureau of Labour Statistics. 7 12 2009. 8 3 2010 <http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos156.htm>.

Proclamation (2006) Retrieved April 6, 2010 from, http://gov.ca.gov/proclamation/4278/

Harrison, R. (2005) What are the most common crimes committed in the U.S.? Retrieved April 7, 2010? from, http://ask.yahoo.com/20050111.html

Siegel. L. Criminology:  The Core New York: Thompson Wadsworth Publishing, 2008.