help4

1)

Discuss the case for intermediate sanctions and the impediments to effective intermediate sanctions.

Intermediate sanctions is a group of programs that are usually administered by probation departments. It is a middle ground between jail and probation. Programs include  intensive probation supervision, house arrest, electronic monitoring, restitution orders, shock probation or split sentences, and residential community corrections. 

The pros of intermediate sanctions:

· Increased control-Intermediate sanctions can be designed to increase control over probationers whose serious or repeat crimes make a straight probation sentence inappropriate, yet for whom a prison sentence would be unduly harsh and counterproductive.

· Cost benefits-Though somewhat more costly than traditional probation, intermediate sanctions are far less expensive to run than prisons or jails.

· Reduced overcrowding.-Intermediate sanctions can reduce the number of convicted criminals who might otherwise be incarcerated but who either pose a low risk of recidivism or are of little threat to society (such as nonviolent property offenders).

Are there some crimes that should not be eligible for intermediate sanctions?

· Murder

· voluntary manslaughter

· aggravated assault

· Kidnapping

· Rape

· Statutory sexual assault

2)

How employment programs affect the behavior of offenders and former offenders.

Job-related programs involve helping inmates to obtain jobs before they are released and to keep them once they are on the outside. Some programs maintain community correctional placements in sheltered environments that help inmates bridge the gap between institutions and the outside world. Services include job placement, skill development, family counseling, and legal and medical assistance.

Are you in favor of these rehabilitative efforts made at correctional institutions?

Yes, it will cost more sure, but if it works in the long run why not make more of an effort. I think that it is a good idea to help inmates while they are in prison, so they can live a better life after they get out. 

Do you think these programs work?

Despite challenges to the efficacy of rehabilitation, many experts still believe in the rehabilitative ideal. Evaluations of education, vocation, and work programs indicate that they may be able to lower recidivism rates and increase post release employment. So, I do think that these programs will work.

3)

1. Do you think the methodology used to complete this study was valid?

I think the methodology wasn’t valid.  It did have some major flaws in proving some points. They just had too many variations. However, I think that problem oriented policing is more of a sub category under community policing. 

2. What limitations do you see, if any, in the way the study was conducted?

One of the limitations is, it  did not provide a clear operational definition of what problem-oriented policing was . According to Goldstein (1979), the concept was difficult to define because it applied differently depending on the community and the specific problem. 

3. Based on your knowledge and experience do you think this study's findings are still valid? Why or Why not?

No, they aren’t still valid.  Problem oriented is under the umbrella of community policing.   Problem-oriented policing was introduced during a time when police departments were becoming more community-oriented.  Community policing continues to be an integral part of police work.