U.S. has most prisoners in world due to tough laws

mimo2005 · 12-09-2006, 10:45 PM

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Tough sentencing laws, record numbers of drug offenders and high crime rates have contributed to the United States having the largest prison population and the highest rate of incarceration in the world, according to criminal justice experts.

A U.S. Justice Department report released on November 30 showed that a record 7 million people -- or one in every 32 American adults -- were behind bars, on probation or on parole at the end of last year. Of the total, 2.2 million were in prison or jail.

According to the International Center for Prison Studies at King's College in London, more people are behind bars in the United States than in any other country. China ranks second with 1.5 million prisoners, followed by Russia with 870,000.

The U.S. incarceration rate of 737 per 100,000 people in the highest, followed by 611 in Russia and 547 for St. Kitts and Nevis. In contrast, the incarceration rates in many Western industrial nations range around 100 per 100,000 people.

Groups advocating reform of U.S. sentencing laws seized on the latest U.S. prison population figures showing admissions of inmates have been rising even faster than the numbers of prisoners who have been released.

"The United States has 5 percent of the world's population and 25 percent of the world's incarcerated population. We rank first in the world in locking up our fellow citizens," said Ethan Nadelmann of the Drug Policy Alliance, which supports alternatives in the war on drugs.

"We now imprison more people for drug law violations than all of western Europe, with a much larger population, incarcerates for all offenses."

Ryan King, a policy analyst at The Sentencing Project, a group advocating sentencing reform, said the United States has a more punitive criminal justice system than other countries.

MORE PEOPLE TO PRISON

"We send more people to prison, for more different offenses, for longer periods of time than anybody else," he said.

Drug offenders account for about 2 million of the 7 million in prison, on probation or parole, King said, adding that other countries often stress treatment instead of incarceration.

Commenting on what the prison figures show about U.S. society, King said various social programs, including those dealing with education, poverty, urban development, health care and child care, have failed.

"There are a number of social programs we have failed to deliver. There are systemic failures going on," he said. "A lot of these people then end up in the criminal justice system."

Kent Scheidegger, legal director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation in California, said the high prison numbers represented a proper response to the crime problem in the United States. Locking up more criminals has contributed to lower crime rates, he said.

"The hand-wringing over the incarceration rate is missing the mark," he said.

Scheidegger said the high prison population reflected cultural differences, with the United States having far higher crimes rates than European nations or Japan. "We have more crime. More crime gets you more prisoners."

Julie Stewart, president of the group Families Against Mandatory Minimums, cited the Justice Department report and said drug offenders are clogging the U.S. justice system.

"Why are so many people in prison? Blame mandatory sentencing laws and the record number of nonviolent drug offenders subject to them," she said.

© Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...wsOne-7&rpc=92

~~jeffdrummer~~ · 12-10-2006, 07:04 AM

My grandfather got shot in the head in Canada by three guys breaking into his home to stal his Ferrari. One got probabation (didn't shoot), one got 6 mos. (didn't shoot but was armed), the guy who shot my grandfather twice got 1.5 years. Not very fair to him or his family. He survived. But now he has mental problems, and stuggles to even run his businesses. He went from one of the top businessmen in Canada, to having trouble coping with life. And the people got less than 2 years. That is what happens when liberalism runs rampent in your society.
I am glad America goes hard on the scum of the Earth, criminals are degenerats of society for the most part (there are few honest stupid mistakes) and they deserve to be put away for as long as is necessary in order for them to stop committing crimes. That is why I love California's three strike law.

**40sondacurb** · 12-10-2006, 08:45 AM

The problem with that jeff is that theory liberals here are the toughest on crime because they're all in bed with the police union. This is how it is hear in California anyways; democrats are always trying to pass some new law.

Not all politics are universal.

~~jeffdrummer~~ · 12-10-2006, 11:00 AM

Very well said... What about Arnold not giving clemancy to Tookie?

**40sondacurb** · 12-10-2006, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffdrummer

Very well said... What about Arnold not giving clemancy to Tookie?

Are you saying a democrat would or something; I don't understand.

~~Girderman~~ · 12-10-2006, 11:41 AM

The problem is that the notion that aggressively imprisoning criminals is a good idea is that it simply doesn't work.

It's an emotional catharsis for crime victims and their advocates, but it's not a solution. It's a short-term, feel-good "fix" that allows people to have the illusion of resolution without having to actually invest much time or effort into implementing other strategies that actually do reduce crime in an objective and measurable way.

And anyone that thinks otherwise is not only wrong, but simple-minded, and emotionally invested in a dynamic that actually perpetuates the problem rather than alleviates it.

This is my primary objection to neo-conservatives that use the isse of crime (and it's victims) as a means of gathering popular support for their other political objectives that are equally void of any intellectual substance. Such as the War in Iraq.

And when confronted with their failures, their manipulative methods (and intents) are proven by their delibarate avoidance of the reality of their failure to achieve their stated objective.

Their response is "So what would YOU do ?" as a means of deflecting attention away from their own inability and creating a dynamic of conflict rather than a cooperative effort to achieve real progress.

Hurt, petulant and with a back-pocket full of suspicion that a detractor might actually be in FAVOR of crime, they say "We've incarcerated them, executed them, increased the lengths of their imprisonment and placed them in tent cities living on bread and water. If we've failed in some way, at least our intentions are good. Perhaps the real reason why you object to our methods & strategies is because YOUR intentions are not as noble as ours."

Simply put, conservatives don't really want to solve crime, they want to feel good about it, any way they can. And in this regard it makes them very much like the drug-crazed criminal class that will commit heinous acts as means of achieving minor and short-lived gratification.

~~jeffdrummer~~ · 12-10-2006, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Girderman

The problem is that the notion that aggressively imprisoning criminals is a good idea is that it simply doesn't work.

Has anyone in your family had their life dramatically changed for the worse because of a violent crime? I think that you would feel the same as me if you had experienced what I have. I hope you never have to experience it, but if someone in your family can barely function because of a crime, you would understand, the value of prison.

In all honesty, before you break the law and commit a crime, think of the consequences.

mimo2005 · 12-26-2006, 07:03 AM

According to Paul Craig Roberts, one of the problems is that America’s Injustice System Is Criminal:

Quote:

The criminal justice (sic) system today consists of a process whereby a defendant is coerced into admitting to a crime in order to escape more severe punishment for maintaining his innocence. Many of the crimes for which people are imprisoned never occurred. They are made up crimes created by the process of negotiation to close a case.

http://joecrubaugh.com/blog/2006/12/...ustice-system/

**40sondacurb** · 12-26-2006, 01:18 PM

I think one of the biggest problems is that there is no sense of community in America. People don't feel that a crime against one is a crime against the whole.

mimo2005 · 12-28-2006, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 40sondacurb

I think one of the biggest problems is that there is no sense of community in America. People don't feel that a crime against one is a crime against the whole.

here 40 , if you got some time , watch this british documentary :

Torture Inc. America's Brutal Prisons

50 min 7 sec - Jul 8, 2006

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...ocidfeed&hl=en

A must see !

Not Safe For Work = for strong language and shocking video .

~~Girderman~~ · 12-28-2006, 07:02 PM

Quote:

I think one of the biggest problems is that there is no sense of community in America. People don't feel that a crime against one is a crime against the whole.

I agree. This is the down-side to "tolerance" and "diversity". We Americans put great effort into not attempting to establish universal "cultural" values, as this is a two-edged sword that can be used against the one that weilds it.

Further, once Public Discourse on the establishment of "values" is initiated, in a Democratic Society people that may believe the exact opposite as we do may-well be in the majority, and the risk of politically activating THEM (whoever "they" are) is too great.

We spend our efforts doing what we can to succeed, and minding our own business.

mimo2005 · 12-28-2006, 07:10 PM

Girdeman
i had to read it more than 5 times in row , i think there is some truth in your post .

yustr · 12-29-2006, 07:22 AM

I have an Uncle who was a judge in CA. One of his duties was to try to get the accused to agree to a crime before trial - preferably one that had a sentence of less than a year. Why? Trials are expensive. And if they agreed to one with more than a year and a day they HAD to go to prison. I'm sure it carries over to other sentences as well - two years instead of 5 -10...So the author of the original story is correct; there are certainly a lot of people in jail for crimes that never occurred.

Add to that the 1000’s who are in prison for drug crimes…that you Nancy Reagan…

Regarding 40's point; how often have you heard of "victim’s rights"? Well guess what? The victims have no rights - and purposely so. The crime may have been committed against a person but the PEOPLE (society) do the prosecuting and sentencing. So this is just another case of the politicians prostituting to the ignorant masses.

Here’s a question for all:

Have you ever exceeded the posted speed limit?
Have you ever been with a gang that performed a drive by shooting?
What’s the difference?

Certainly there’s a difference in degree but in both cases the person took it upon himself to decide if the law applied to him. That’s not how a civilized society functions. That same uncle once gave a large fine to a guy who was riding solo in the traffic lane reserved for car pools (actually it was the metered on ramp – 40 knows what I’m talking about but the rest may not. And for this discussion it doesn’t matter…). When his colleagues asked him why such a stiff penalty he responded “He thought that the Law did not apply to him. That’s far worse than some inadvertent oversight.”

mimo2005 · 12-29-2006, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Have you ever exceeded the posted speed limit?
Have you ever been with a gang that performed a drive by shooting?
What’s the difference?

Excellent Yustr , the way you put it is real good .
i can add also the guy who get arrested for speed will share the cell with a murderer or a drug dealer .

Quote:

One of his duties was to try to get the accused to agree to a crime before trial - preferably one that had a sentence of less than a year. Why? Trials are expensive.

the same stuff happened in this movie , if you can rent it yustr , it s a must see .

mimo2005 · 01-02-2007, 07:22 AM

The story of Willie Bosket, where politic collide with justice and society ,
a fascinating story .

http://www.crimelibrary.com/notoriou.../bosket/1.html

~~Girderman~~ · 01-02-2007, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Have you ever exceeded the posted speed limit?
Have you ever been with a gang that performed a drive by shooting?
What’s the difference?

I don't think I understand this at all, because if my interpretation of what is meant is accurate, I think it's ridiculous.

There are "shades of grey"; some crime is worse than others.

IF there is some substantive point here, I do not think these particular words convey it very well.

Drive-by shooting = speeding ?

I've been shot at in a drive-by (or at least my house was), and have had various other experiences with gunplay. (LOL, "PLAY")

I'd rather get passed by a speeding motorist than be shot at by the Mexican Mafia.

And while on occasion I have been known to have a lead-foot, I've never tried to shoot anyone. And I think that makes me a better person than someone that has.

yustr · 01-02-2007, 09:44 AM

My point is that it is not the individual who gets to decide which laws he will obey and which he won't. To you, speeding falls into the gray zone that says its OK to do. For some others that shade may stretch to cover cheating on their taxes. Still others may say it still in the OK region to shoplift a CD or two. Then there are the gang-bangers who have decided that the law against random shootings doesn't apply to them. Now do you see how I can say they're related? Surely they're different in magnitude - which I said was the case in my original post - and the latter would be universally considered wrong, they're just on different ends of the same line- different shade of the same color if you will.

Do courts use judgment every day? Absolutely. In fact that's why we call them Judges!

But my point stands: it's not for the individual to decide. Its for society to decide.

sir subaru · 01-19-2007, 02:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yustr

Here’s a question for all:

Have you ever exceeded the posted speed limit?
Have you ever been with a gang that performed a drive by shooting?
What’s the difference?

Severity, they're both breaking the law. Don't speed & don't shoot people
If you were comparing two people exceeding the speed limit there wouldn't be a difference. Likewise if you were comparing two gangs who just did a drive by shooting. But you're not so all that's left is severity of the crime which determines the punishment, be it money into the black hole called treasury or multiple years in prison.

Also on a lighter note the police here have a tolerance when it comes to people exceeding the speed limit (to count for speedometer error, drivers ability to maintain a constant speed under the limit etc) which from memory is up to 5kph over the posted limit, they don't tolerate drive by shootings

bry623 · 01-19-2007, 08:59 AM

If we executed more of them, the totals would go down.

12-09-2006, 10:45 PM	#1 (permalink)
mimo2005 Manager, Emeritus Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 11,142 OS: xp	U.S. has most prisoners in world due to tough laws WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Tough sentencing laws, record numbers of drug offenders and high crime rates have contributed to the United States having the largest prison population and the highest rate of incarceration in the world, according to criminal justice experts. A U.S. Justice Department report released on November 30 showed that a record 7 million people -- or one in every 32 American adults -- were behind bars, on probation or on parole at the end of last year. Of the total, 2.2 million were in prison or jail. According to the International Center for Prison Studies at King's College in London, more people are behind bars in the United States than in any other country. China ranks second with 1.5 million prisoners, followed by Russia with 870,000. The U.S. incarceration rate of 737 per 100,000 people in the highest, followed by 611 in Russia and 547 for St. Kitts and Nevis. In contrast, the incarceration rates in many Western industrial nations range around 100 per 100,000 people. Groups advocating reform of U.S. sentencing laws seized on the latest U.S. prison population figures showing admissions of inmates have been rising even faster than the numbers of prisoners who have been released. "The United States has 5 percent of the world's population and 25 percent of the world's incarcerated population. We rank first in the world in locking up our fellow citizens," said Ethan Nadelmann of the Drug Policy Alliance, which supports alternatives in the war on drugs. "We now imprison more people for drug law violations than all of western Europe, with a much larger population, incarcerates for all offenses." Ryan King, a policy analyst at The Sentencing Project, a group advocating sentencing reform, said the United States has a more punitive criminal justice system than other countries. MORE PEOPLE TO PRISON "We send more people to prison, for more different offenses, for longer periods of time than anybody else," he said. Drug offenders account for about 2 million of the 7 million in prison, on probation or parole, King said, adding that other countries often stress treatment instead of incarceration. Commenting on what the prison figures show about U.S. society, King said various social programs, including those dealing with education, poverty, urban development, health care and child care, have failed. "There are a number of social programs we have failed to deliver. There are systemic failures going on," he said. "A lot of these people then end up in the criminal justice system." Kent Scheidegger, legal director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation in California, said the high prison numbers represented a proper response to the crime problem in the United States. Locking up more criminals has contributed to lower crime rates, he said. "The hand-wringing over the incarceration rate is missing the mark," he said. Scheidegger said the high prison population reflected cultural differences, with the United States having far higher crimes rates than European nations or Japan. "We have more crime. More crime gets you more prisoners." Julie Stewart, president of the group Families Against Mandatory Minimums, cited the Justice Department report and said drug offenders are clogging the U.S. justice system. "Why are so many people in prison? Blame mandatory sentencing laws and the record number of nonviolent drug offenders subject to them," she said. © Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...wsOne-7&rpc=92 __________________ TSF has outgrown its server, again. Please help "Gutta cavat lapidem, non vi sed saepe cadendo"

12-10-2006, 07:04 AM	#2 (permalink)
~~jeffdrummer~~ Register user Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Buffalo, NY Posts: 870 OS: MAC OS X 10.4.8, and 10.5!! WinXP SP2	My grandfather got shot in the head in Canada by three guys breaking into his home to stal his Ferrari. One got probabation (didn't shoot), one got 6 mos. (didn't shoot but was armed), the guy who shot my grandfather twice got 1.5 years. Not very fair to him or his family. He survived. But now he has mental problems, and stuggles to even run his businesses. He went from one of the top businessmen in Canada, to having trouble coping with life. And the people got less than 2 years. That is what happens when liberalism runs rampent in your society. I am glad America goes hard on the scum of the Earth, criminals are degenerats of society for the most part (there are few honest stupid mistakes) and they deserve to be put away for as long as is necessary in order for them to stop committing crimes. That is why I love California's three strike law. Last edited by jeffdrummer; 12-10-2006 at 07:34 AM.

12-10-2006, 08:45 AM	#3 (permalink)
40sondacurb Don't be a menace Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 6,285 OS: Vista sp2	The problem with that jeff is that theory liberals here are the toughest on crime because they're all in bed with the police union. This is how it is hear in California anyways; democrats are always trying to pass some new law. Not all politics are universal. __________________ Donate to keep the forum running

12-10-2006, 11:41 AM	#6 (permalink)
~~Girderman~~ Troubled Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 2,096 OS: XP Pro	The problem is that the notion that aggressively imprisoning criminals is a good idea is that it simply doesn't work. It's an emotional catharsis for crime victims and their advocates, but it's not a solution. It's a short-term, feel-good "fix" that allows people to have the illusion of resolution without having to actually invest much time or effort into implementing other strategies that actually do reduce crime in an objective and measurable way. And anyone that thinks otherwise is not only wrong, but simple-minded, and emotionally invested in a dynamic that actually perpetuates the problem rather than alleviates it. This is my primary objection to neo-conservatives that use the isse of crime (and it's victims) as a means of gathering popular support for their other political objectives that are equally void of any intellectual substance. Such as the War in Iraq. And when confronted with their failures, their manipulative methods (and intents) are proven by their delibarate avoidance of the reality of their failure to achieve their stated objective. Their response is "So what would YOU do ?" as a means of deflecting attention away from their own inability and creating a dynamic of conflict rather than a cooperative effort to achieve real progress. Hurt, petulant and with a back-pocket full of suspicion that a detractor might actually be in FAVOR of crime, they say "We've incarcerated them, executed them, increased the lengths of their imprisonment and placed them in tent cities living on bread and water. If we've failed in some way, at least our intentions are good. Perhaps the real reason why you object to our methods & strategies is because YOUR intentions are not as noble as ours." Simply put, conservatives don't really want to solve crime, they want to feel good about it, any way they can. And in this regard it makes them very much like the drug-crazed criminal class that will commit heinous acts as means of achieving minor and short-lived gratification. Last edited by Girderman; 12-10-2006 at 11:44 AM.

12-26-2006, 01:18 PM	#9 (permalink)
40sondacurb Don't be a menace Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 6,285 OS: Vista sp2	I think one of the biggest problems is that there is no sense of community in America. People don't feel that a crime against one is a crime against the whole. __________________ Donate to keep the forum running

12-10-2006, 11:00 AM	#4 (permalink)
~~jeffdrummer~~ Register user Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Buffalo, NY Posts: 870 OS: MAC OS X 10.4.8, and 10.5!! WinXP SP2	Very well said... What about Arnold not giving clemancy to Tookie?

12-28-2006, 07:10 PM	#12 (permalink)
mimo2005 Manager, Emeritus Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 11,142 OS: xp	Girdeman i had to read it more than 5 times in row , i think there is some truth in your post . __________________ TSF has outgrown its server, again. Please help "Gutta cavat lapidem, non vi sed saepe cadendo" Last edited by mimo2005; 12-28-2006 at 07:20 PM.

12-29-2006, 07:22 AM	#13 (permalink)
yustr Asst. Manager, The Conversation Pit Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Connecticut shore Posts: 6,052 OS: XP Pro My System	I have an Uncle who was a judge in CA. One of his duties was to try to get the accused to agree to a crime before trial - preferably one that had a sentence of less than a year. Why? Trials are expensive. And if they agreed to one with more than a year and a day they HAD to go to prison. I'm sure it carries over to other sentences as well - two years instead of 5 -10...So the author of the original story is correct; there are certainly a lot of people in jail for crimes that never occurred. Add to that the 1000’s who are in prison for drug crimes…that you Nancy Reagan… Regarding 40's point; how often have you heard of "victim’s rights"? Well guess what? The victims have no rights - and purposely so. The crime may have been committed against a person but the PEOPLE (society) do the prosecuting and sentencing. So this is just another case of the politicians prostituting to the ignorant masses. Here’s a question for all: Have you ever exceeded the posted speed limit? Have you ever been with a gang that performed a drive by shooting? What’s the difference? Certainly there’s a difference in degree but in both cases the person took it upon himself to decide if the law applied to him. That’s not how a civilized society functions. That same uncle once gave a large fine to a guy who was riding solo in the traffic lane reserved for car pools (actually it was the metered on ramp – 40 knows what I’m talking about but the rest may not. And for this discussion it doesn’t matter…). When his colleagues asked him why such a stiff penalty he responded “He thought that the Law did not apply to him. That’s far worse than some inadvertent oversight.” __________________ If there are lawyers or politicians involved, logic may be a very poor tool for reaching a conclusion.

01-02-2007, 07:22 AM	#15 (permalink)
mimo2005 Manager, Emeritus Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 11,142 OS: xp	The story of Willie Bosket, where politic collide with justice and society , a fascinating story . http://www.crimelibrary.com/notoriou.../bosket/1.html __________________ TSF has outgrown its server, again. Please help "Gutta cavat lapidem, non vi sed saepe cadendo"

01-02-2007, 09:44 AM	#17 (permalink)
yustr Asst. Manager, The Conversation Pit Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Connecticut shore Posts: 6,052 OS: XP Pro My System	My point is that it is not the individual who gets to decide which laws he will obey and which he won't. To you, speeding falls into the gray zone that says its OK to do. For some others that shade may stretch to cover cheating on their taxes. Still others may say it still in the OK region to shoplift a CD or two. Then there are the gang-bangers who have decided that the law against random shootings doesn't apply to them. Now do you see how I can say they're related? Surely they're different in magnitude - which I said was the case in my original post - and the latter would be universally considered wrong, they're just on different ends of the same line- different shade of the same color if you will. Do courts use judgment every day? Absolutely. In fact that's why we call them Judges! But my point stands: it's not for the individual to decide. Its for society to decide. __________________ If there are lawyers or politicians involved, logic may be a very poor tool for reaching a conclusion.

01-19-2007, 08:59 AM	#19 (permalink)
bry623 Manager, The Conversation Pit/Analyst, Security Team Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: NW Territory circa 1787 Posts: 11,692 OS: winxp pro sp2	If we executed more of them, the totals would go down. __________________ "If you aren't a liberal when you're 20, you have no heart. If you aren't a conservative when you are 50, you have no brain"