Just Punishment… Should Drug Offenders be Sent to Prison?

Posted on April 6th, 2006 by Christine.
Categories: Current Events & Politics.

In the U.S., our prison system leaves a lot to be desired. Whether you feel the purpose of a prison sentence is to exact restitution, or to keep law-abiding members of society safe from criminals, or a combination of both, the truth is… we are currently reaching maximum capacity at our prisons nationwide.

Between 2001 and 2002, the national average of inmate population growth grew by 1.5 %. That may not seem like much, but when most state and private penal institutions are already at full capacity, even 15 additional inmates can create a housing problem. There are multiple reasons for the increase of the inmate population… increased ability to secure convictions (based on better DNA evidence, etc.), the adoption of “Three Strikes Laws” where the sentence for a third felony conviction automatically means a life sentence regardless of what the sentence would be for that particular felony, and a general trend toward “upping” sentences, changing some from 25 years to life, to mandatory life sentences.

Regardless of the reason the prisons are filling, the problem at hand is that there simply isn’t space to house all these convicts. States like New Mexico are considering preparole programs that actually release prisoners up to a year before they would be eligible for parole (eligibility is limited to non-violent offenders only).

Yesterday, I read an article in the Daily Breeze put out by the Associated Press. They reported that a study performed by UCLA’s Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior found that taxpayers save almost $2.50 for every dollar invested in drug treatment in the first 30 months since implementation of a law passed in 2000 that allows drug treatment as an alternative to imprisonment for drug offenders. This equated to a savings of $173 million in tax money that would have been spent on housing inmates, probation, parole, re-arrests, and future court fees.

Based on numbers alone, it seems to make undeniable sense that not only would we save dollars by putting drug offenders in treatment facilities, it would open up space in prisons to house violent offenders and keep them there until their entire sentence is completed. Which… would in turn, keep violent criminals off the streets longer, and make our cities safer.

Opposition to the renewal of a bill in California that would allocate $120 million toward drug treatment centers so that first and second-time drug offenders could be sentenced to treatment programs other than prison is based on the notion that not all participants in treatment facilities finish their programs, making them more likely to re-offend and end up back in the penal system anyway. While that makes sense, if we operate under the assumption that a drug addict in prison gets no treatment for his/her drug problem, wouldn’t they be just as likely to re-offend once they’re released on parole or worse yet, in preparole programs like New Mexico’s? And at a savings of $2.50 on the dollar for those who successfully complete the programs and do not re-offend, or having a longer period after release before relapsing, doesn’t it save money? Every day that a drug addict who completes a treatment program can go without falling off the wagon, is a day’s worth of the cost to tax payers to keep that individual in prison. Now… another point. Sure we save money on not housing that individual, but we’re paying anyway for the individual that we are keeping in prison for his/her full term. But isn’t society willing to pay that price to keep violent offenders off the streets?

In my opinion, drug offenders (not those who commit violent crimes under the influence of drugs or for money to buy drugs or even those who profit off of others by selling drugs, but those who are caught and convicted for use and possession) don’t belong in prison. From a budgetary standpoint, and coming from the view that the intention of prisons are to keep society safe as opposed to exacting restitution or to deter individuals from committing crimes, treatment centers seem to be the way to go. Housing non-violent offenders with those who’ve committed violent offenses seems about as smart as throwing a group of kindergarteners in with a class of 7th graders. They’re not the same and shouldn’t be treated as such.

That’s just my take on the subject, and I’d be happy to hear yours…

19 comments.

Some Crazy Cats! »« This is Sooooo True… LOL!

aJ the Zen Master up'n wrote this

I agree with most of the points. If the drug offenders are willing and do show a sign of wanting to improve and change their ways, then they should be given a small chance, hell a large chance cos every recovered addict is a huge victory.

April 7th, 2006

Ben the Kingpin commented

There can be only one of two effective methods for handling drug use:

1) Total legalization. You remove drugs entirely from the realm of crime and ensconce it within the realm of corporate domination and government regulation. (Arguably worse, but at least violent crime.

2) Enforcement through extreme prejudice. Kill everyone who uses drugs. Caught with drugs? Police read you the little card on in their wallet, walk you behind the police station and put a .38 round through your skull. No ifs, no ands, no buts, no appeals, no mercy.

There is no middle ground unless you’re willing to live with drugs as a primary violent crime motivator, crack whores, pushers, mafiosas, tunnels under your borders and every other method of smuggling in the stuff.

Personally, I like the legalization idea. I have several caveats to it, however.

Drugs are absolutely, 100%, totally legal…. with a license.

They are taxed heavily.

A “DUI” conviction is, essentially, a death sentence. (Yes, alcohol is a drug, too.)

Those who have a license to drink, smoke, shoot up or otherwise become intoxicated are forbidden from having children and must submit to sterilization.

My theory is that with these measures in place, there will be minimal loss of worthwhile life and those who die off (or, indeed, have a license) will weed out their genetic proclivities to be wastes of skin within a couple generations.

But, all this crap about alcohol being “acceptable” but Molly Jane and coke are evil incarnate is poppy-cock. The most deadly and horrific drug available today is alcohol.

April 7th, 2006

Christine the Lioness remarked

Except that there are people (myself included) who are responsible when they drink, drink only in moderation, have never been arrested for a DUI, and actually enjoy being able to have a glass of wine or champagne or a cocktail every now and then and don’t feel we should be punished or subject to sterilization because other people are irresponsible. What happened to personal freedoms? Should everyone be forced to get a license to be a parent because one out of fifty parents neglect their kids? Should no one be allowed to have a credit card because some people run up too much debt? Come on…

Anything used in excess and irresponsibly can be a problem. You start limiting personal freedoms because one jack ass can’t handle the responsibility and you become guess what… a country like Afghanistan. People should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as they don’t let it infringe on the rights of someone else. Period.

April 7th, 2006

Keith the Director pontificated

I don’t think drug offenders should be put in jail at all…I believe that the legalization of drugs would actually lowered the usage… Most teens and people in general do drugs or smoke because they “can’t? It?s the rebellious nature of humans especially adolescents. If you tell a person they cannot do something?they are going to do it. If drugs are legal you will still have your users who just can?t seem to get by without a fix. But the experimentation by teens will decrease because it?s a known and you can do what you choose. Everyone can drink when they turn 21 unless you live in New Orleans or outside the United States. Does everyone drink b/c they can? No. Does everyone drink irresponsibly? No. You are going to have bad apples everywhere who abuse it?s a given.

Also if you legalize drugs you will eliminate a lot of criminals i.e. the pushers and dealers and kingpin drug lords. They will be out of business therefore no need to risk putting them away and taking up space. Legalize everything, and tax the hell out of it accordingly. The worse the drug or dangerous tax it higher and make it more expensive to deter use.

April 8th, 2006

Keith the Director spake, and sayeth

I think we should jail the drug dealers and kingpins, but the average user should just pay a fine and go into rehab. That would be like jailing all the people who drink and drive. They say inpairments happenes with the first drink..fuck that for one thing off the rip…I feel no different after drinking 1 Vodka and Cranberry or 1 Corona than I did when I first sat down at the bar. The point is our system convicts ppl and sends them to jail for trivial shit like DUI yet a friend of mine was car jacked at gunpoint 2 weeks ago and the police haven’t even made an arrest, and in fact the incident report was stapled to the back of a non-arrestable traffic report. hrmmm… The fucking police only arrest good hard working people who have the money to pay the fines and the poor ghetto hood trash out there doing all the shit that should land them in jail don’t even get pursued!

April 8th, 2006

Christine the Lioness hunt n' pecked this

Well… you’re comparing apples to oranges. There’s a difference between the police being motivated enough to catch a carjacker and the District Attorney being motivated enough to try to convict someone already in custody on a DUI charge. The DA will obviously be more motivated.

DUI’s are pretty serious… driving drunk puts other peoples’ lives at risk. Now the truth is… most of us have, at some point or another, driven drunk. Some of us were lucky enough not to get caught, and some weren’t. But either way… it’s different than smoking pot. Smoking pot only affects the pot smoker. Driving intoxicated affects everyone on the road.

That’s a bummer about your friend btw… I hope they catch the asshole who jacked him or her. Because those are the types of people who can end up behind bars and if they forgot to let ‘em out on parole… I probably wouldn’t lose a minute’s sleep over it.

April 8th, 2006

eric the Lil' Devil asserted

look at it this way, you can car jack anyone anywhere you like right? well drug dealers typicalllly stay close to their st in order to be able to limit the amount of drugs they have on them and make reloading easier. that is why most dealers that are caught get little time until their second or third offense, or if they are caught in transit.

April 8th, 2006

eric the Lil' Devil got all philosophical

My point is that you can pin point dealers easier, random crimes rarely are caught unless a pattern is established in their choice of targets and surface area. besides, the drugs are always top news stories and it makes it look as if the force is working and investigating to create leads

April 8th, 2006

Keith the Director remarked

Actually smoking pot affects ppl around the smoker as well…second hand smoke etc. Also if that person then decides to drive while high? What then? Now that person is endangering the lives of other just as the drinker is!

April 8th, 2006

Keith the Director uttered

Eric you said random crimes are raely caught and convicted! yes I agree totally, but the fucking po po know exactly where these alledged pop up crimes are taking place. It’s the same 1100 block of the city thats been getting terrorized since last year…They just won’t arrest their asses b/c the have no money to pay the fines! It’s complete shit, and now my buddy says he’s out of a car… The jackers were apparently fucked up or just can’t drive, b/c they wrecked the car 50 yrds down the road and crashed it into a telephone pole. This is why I have no respect for the police…they fucking arrest the wrong ppl for lesser shit. Then when there is real crime being committed they look the other way.

April 8th, 2006

Christine the Lioness thought this

Yes… smoking pot and driving endangers other people. But it’s the act of driving combined with being high. Being high in and of itself is a crime why??? That would be like making drinking alcohol in and of itself a crime… or owning a gun in and of itself a crime… they’re not. It’s when you decide to do something that puts other peoples’ lives in danger that it becomes a crime… and reasonably so.

Regarding random crimes… I agree with Eric. Basically, any of us could go kill someone we don’t know tonight and probably never get caught. Random crime whether it happens far from where you live, or there is no connection between the criminal and the victim, is just hard to solve. It’s much easier to solve crimes that take place over and over (like drug dealing) and the people knew each other on some level.

Keith… I really don’t think the police intentionally turn a blind eye to crimes like car jackings. There’s no reason for them to. Solving those kinds of crimes actually helps their public image which in turn justifies more money for the department which in turn means bigger salaries. Public scrutiny– particularly in cases where there are elected officials– like the police commissioner– largely affects which crimes get solved. If resources are limited, it makes more sense to put your force on trying to hunt down a rapist or killer (high profile, lots of media) than a carjacker who didn’t hurt anyone. There are lots of reasons why certain crimes are given more attention than others… but to just think police prefer to let real crime go and arrest people for lesser shit, isn’t seeing the whole picture. And quite frankly, if people are doing lesser crimes, they’re still committing a crime and the law says they can be arrested. So in that case, the police are actually enforcing the law which is what you are complaining they don’t do. You can’t have it both ways.

April 9th, 2006

Keith the Director added

Oh I can have it both ways…law is fucking law…if u break the law u should pay the consequences… there are ppl out there not even committing a real crime and getting in serious shit. If I can get arrested for dui while sleeping in my fucking car in the middle of an empty parking lot b/c it’s 10 degree outside and I needed the heat on, the fucking police can sure as fuck arrest someone for sticking up someone and carjacking them! The police know its a problem area..I have a friend on the force… you could patrol it more often, or stake it out whatever it is they like to do. They know what goes on and don’t lift a fucking finger, but sure as fuck if someone is is doing 45 in the 35 on the same street in broad daylight they are getting a ticket.

Fuck all that shit..I don’t ask for anything but equal justice…and there’s more serious crime gettig pushed to the bottom of the pile…mind you there haven’t been any murders or reported rapes here recently to occupy anyones time as far as a what you call “high profile” crime. Plus like I said the report was stapled to the back of a non-reportable traffic vilotaion…. not by accident either I’ve been told!

N.W.A said it best in the 90’s FUCK THA POLICE! they have never once helped me or anyone I know of in a good way…protect and serve my ass! [-(

April 9th, 2006

Christine the Lioness uttered

Maybe it’s a conspiracy and they’re out to get you and your friends… :-?

April 9th, 2006

Keith the Director stated

Thats what i thought as well… :-? But then reality set in, and i realize I know we aren’t the only ppl who have been victimzed bythe police! There are a lot of ppl who have needed the police for soemthing and it never got done, but they are always there to make sure they get a parking ticket for staying in a 2 hour time spot for 2 1/2 or 3 hours, and for speeding 75 in a 65! :-w

April 9th, 2006

Christine the Lioness added

Well… what can I say? Being a meter maid or a traffic cop, your job is a thousand times easier than actually having to solve real crime. And like I said… money is the motivating factor. If they ticket you for $30 for getting to plug the meter, that’s $30 more than they’d get if they caught a car jacker. I think I’m sensing a pattern here… :-?

But wait until you have the experience of a cop stopping you and then coming up with some bullshit reason to stand there and talk to you because he’s trying to pick you up. That actually happened to me. Talk about abusing power! If he hadn’t been in a cop uniform, I never would have even talked to him when he pulled up next to me.

April 11th, 2006

Ben the Kingpin hunt n' pecked this

I think that all alcohol and drugs should be legal–and heavily taxed and regulated for quality.

I also think that there should be licensing involved that regulates the users to prevent them from becoming a danger to or a medical burden on society.

I would further posit that punishments for violating what society deems to be “appropriate use” (like DUIs, working under the influence, use during pregnancy, etc.) to have much more scrict repurcussions.

By doing these things, you would:

1) Eliminate the criminal control of the industry.
2) Generate taxes while controlling quality.
3) Reduce an already severe burden of acceptance for reprehensible behavior.

Is it a perfect plan? No, but I think that’s part of it’s charm. )

April 13th, 2006

Keith the Director pontificated

Well Ben Alcohol is already taxed enough as it is…how you don’t know this is beyond me unless you don’t drink or you live in a very small town! In fact there are ways to correct said issues as you have stated! There are breathalizer devices that are installed in cars of repeat DUI offenders that inhibit the car to start if the person blows over the limit. these devices could be installed factory on every car if the gov. wants it! Which would be complete bullshit unless they change the limit number to something reasonable!

By that I mean .08 is a fucking joke! If you can’t drive a car with the accuracy you did at .00 when you are .08 you are a fucking lush! They seriosuly need to overhaul the whole legally drunk to conform to fit a person by the height and weight factor!

April 17th, 2006

Max the Virgin up'n wrote this

Those traffic wardens are just a nightmare.

October 26th, 2009

law the Virgin thought this

me i went to DVI is a prision here in tracy california and wat i saw was that they give inmayes a toon of leway with punishment they have programs for get this welding,bulding planes that you and ride

February 25th, 2010

Feed for Battle of the Sexes : Chris vs Chris

Leave a comment

Names and emails are required (emails aren't displayed), url's are optional.

) (w) (u) p (y) (n) d (*) o) 8) ( (f) (g) (t) o (8) (l) (i) x (~) (e) $ (&amp) (c) ( s (d) (o) (@) (p) (^) (b) [