ARTICLE CRITIQUE:
PRISON PRIVITIZATION
1
Prison Privatization
Alexis Vick
Liberty University
2/22/2024
ARTICLE CRITIQUE:
PRISON PRIVITIZATION
2
Abstract
There are two articles thar are peer-reviewed within this essay. The articles are about prison
privatization within the United States. Both articles discuss how privatization is supported and
the benefits it gives to criminal justice. While it also discusses how privatization is opposed and
how it affects criminal justice. In recent decades privatization is gaining more attention.
Therefore, privatization needs to be analyzed to fully see how it affects the criminal justice
system. There are strengths and weaknesses in both articles that will be discussed in the essay.
There will also be personal reflection and discussion how it relates to the bible.
ARTICLE CRITIQUE:
PRISON PRIVITIZATION
3
Prison Privatization
In recent years United States privatization of prisons is gaining attention. This is not a new
concept. Privatization has been noticed since the start of America. Early colonists were able to
buy the prisoners’ labor. Prisoners are indentured servants until their punishments was completed
(Lindsey et al., 2016). Many people on either side of the privatization argument in today's
criminal justice system keep advocating and fighting for their position to be taken into
consideration. The ones for privatization state that taxpayer money is saved and overcrowding in
prisons is reduced. The ones against privatization state non-government employees are unable to
serve justice to society and corruption is more likely to happen. It must be determined if justice is
served effectively to keep prison privatization. The pros and cons of privatization will be
analyzed within this essay.
Article 1- Background
“The Privatization Debate: A Conceptual Framework for Improving (Public and Private)
Corrections” is the first article. This article states important points about privatization. This
article discusses the pros and cons of privatization. These important considerations include the
scope of the demand, the quantity and caliber of services provided, the effects on results, and
cost-effectiveness. The points of each side are argued passionately, the empirical data is limited
supporting these arguments. Research is encouraged to see if private or public prisons are more
effective. State and federal prisons are commonly applied to privatization corrections. “In
corrections, privatization has occurred in several ways. For example, privatization includes the
contracting out of specific services or programs, such as drug treatment and testing and prison-
ARTICLE CRITIQUE:
PRISON PRIVITIZATION
4
based education classes” (Lindsey et al., 2016, p. 309). In conclusion, the piece offers a structure
that can be utilized in privatized prisons to advance the field of correctional study and eventually
enhance rehabilitation to lower recidivism rates and improve society.
Article 1- Critique of Strengths and Weaknesses of the Article
Strengths
The first strength noticed is the benefit of privatization is clearly shown. Computer
systems software created by contracted companies is one example of the benefits. Since it is
unlikely that every organization will have a software design expert on hand, it is financially
beneficial to have a company design and preserve the software. The computer software improved
the criminal justice system, along with cutting the expenses of a full-time employee. An
additional example presented is the hiring of a medical professional to work with an offender with
a specific disability. A large expense would be unbeneficial due to a full-time specialist being
hired. The reason being a specialist would only be being directed towards limited offenders. It is
more beneficial for all parties involved to hire a professional for a fleeting period until the
prisoner can be transferred to a facility that has the resources available to treat his or her
disability. The second strength that is noticed is corrections can improve their research so
techniques can be improved. The creators note that open redresses are regularly bound to state or
government controls and arrangements that are bureaucratic and moderate to alter. This strength
shows how private prisons allow there to be direct contact with the higher-ups. Private prisons
create their regulations, so they are eligible to develop their policies and adjust them quickly to
reduce reincarnation rates. Once private organizations determine that best practices exist, they can
ARTICLE CRITIQUE:
PRISON PRIVITIZATION
5
share this information with public correctional institutions and both parties can benefit and amend
the theory and criminal justice policy.
Weaknesses
The first weakness is the article states several times that private correction and public
corrections are on the same level. Regarding this, there is very little empirical data about public
corrections. Whereas they lay out the potential benefits of privatizing redresses, such as higher
compensation for representatives which can instill more pride and exertion in employees' work,
as well as the capacity to have more centered restoration programs, it is troublesome to back that
hypothesis without the standard information from open adjustments. The conclusion of the paper
does not seem to go with the rest is another weakness. Uncertainty was concluded even though
the benefits of using private corrections were argued. “It is possible, for example, that continued
investment in privatization might produce worse outcomes and a range of unintended harms, as
compared with what otherwise would have occurred through public corrections” (Lindsey et al.,
2016, p. 323). There is very little conviction regarding the author's argument.
Article 2- Background
“African Americans’ Principled Opposition to Prison Privatization” is the second article. This
article talks about African American society’s viewpoints on using private prisons using data
collected during the 2013 National Black Crime Survey (NBCS). A brief history is given within
the article about the United States private prisons in the 1980s and how the data increased over
the last 30 years. The different ages and ethnic groups in private prisons as to public prisons are
discussed in the article. Historical data in private corrections of mistreatment of United States
African Americans within private corrections. Along with the struggles Americans endure in our
ARTICLE CRITIQUE:
PRISON PRIVITIZATION
6
criminal justice system in today’s time. The authors put all this data together and concluded that
African American society does not support prison privatization.
Strengths
The first strength noticed is the clear history given about the United States private
prisons. The author emphasizes the political environment that promoted taxpayer cuts after
adjustment costs increased due to overcrowding. They further explain that this increase in the
prison population is due to both the war on drugs and the desire for stricter criminal punishment
policies consistent with a "tough on crime" mentality. It was also noted how the conservative
antigovernment movement encouraged private prisons due to people giving less governmental
control and not as many taxes. The second strength is survey data is presented clearly. The
author discusses how members were selected for the survey and how the results were concluded.
The point value and the variables were also explained. The study was conducted in a way that
viably accumulated an exact test of the target gathering of people and the comes about are a great
sign of that audience's conclusions.
Weaknesses
The first weakness in the article is the words and phrases within the article are emotionally
charged. He presents realities such as imprisonment rates among distinctive racial bunches, but
at that point ties these actualities into conclusions of prejudice and ponders focusing on African
American people groups without noticing information or actualities that back that claim. The
article states that private jails do not give rehabilitation options, but private prisons do not have
to follow the Freedom of Information Act. “Thus, the public has limited information about what
goes on inside private prisons” (Ramirez, 2015, p. 220). Within the conclusion, Ramirez (2015)
ARTICLE CRITIQUE:
PRISON PRIVITIZATION
7
states many emotional phrases. “Instead, African Americans are used by the private prison
industry for the coercive production of goods and services. In this manner, slavery was not
abolished, but its nature has changed (Alexander, 2010, p. 233)”. The next weakness is the logic
of the data in this essay. “According to a recent study, African Americans are held in private
prisons at a rate 12% higher than other racial groups. Does this make you favor or oppose laws
that allow private companies to own and operate prisons?” (Ramirez, 2015, p. 227). Whereas this
measurement is genuine, this way and line of addressing is demonstrative of driving the
individual to a craved reply rather than permitting them to specific their uninfluenced conclusion.
The overview ought to be re-accomplished with more impartially worded questions so that the
legitimacy of the comes about cannot be brought into address.
Summary of Articles
“The Privatization Debate: A Conceptual Framework for Improving (Public and Private)
Corrections” is the first article. This article was efficient in highlighting the important points
about private prisons. The article displayed these focuses as well as successfully noticing the
major contentions of those in favor and those who contradict in a way that the peruser seems to
get how both sides feel and define their claim supposition. Secondly, examples are presented to
show that private prisons can offer rehabilitation services that are eligible to be offered in public
prisons. Moreover, the article displayed a clear system for how private jails and adjustments may
be utilized for inquiry about to advance create approaches and hones that will cultivate a more
compelling redressed framework for both open and private education. The objective of the
criminal equity framework is to hold the blameworthy responsible, see equity served and where
conceivable, get the blameworthy ready to return to society as a working citizen. Using private
prisons for further research to help limit recidivism rates was one of the article’s arguments.
ARTICLE CRITIQUE:
PRISON PRIVITIZATION
8
“African Americans’ Principled Opposition to Prison Privatization” is the second article.
This article discusses the United States' private prison history. Examples were given about
colonial and post-civil War era private prisons within the United States. The 1980s increased
private prison usage. The article also introduces the arguments made by proponents of prison
privatization and the potential cost savings of using private companies, and the author argues that
the use of private prisons is It points to the debate on how overcrowding can be alleviated and the
financial burden on taxpayers. African Americans were surveyed about if they were for or
against private prisons. The paper was ineffective in presenting its argument analytically.
Authors often expressed opinions on certain topics and supplemented them with weak or few
facts to support them., the author used emotionally charged words and phrases. While there is a
reference to the Reconstruction-era convict leasing system and how former slaves were released
from hard labor, there is no mention of the punishments imposed on non-slavery prisoners.
Personal Reflection. Position and Christian Worldview
My personal belief is that private prisons are not evil but reforming within needs to happen.
Private prisons act on behalf of the state and do not implement God within them. 2 Corinthians
11: 13-15 states “For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as
apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So, it is
no surprise that his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will
correspond to their deeds.” They cannot operate in an unregulated or uncontrolled manner and
must provide the same quality of services as public prisons. This can be done by providing
federal grants to private organizations and requiring officials to conduct periodic inspections to
ensure standards are met and to find organizations that do not meet those standards.
Implementing this allows States to have control over institutions ensuring justice is served to the
ARTICLE CRITIQUE:
PRISON PRIVITIZATION
9
society, while building cost and staffing of prisons would not be a worry. Despite the scrutiny of
private prisons, they have many potential benefits. Establishing federal regulations for private
prisons and enforcing those regulations would bring regulation under government authority and
follow the scriptures in Romans 13: 1-4. God has given the government the power to punish
those who commit crimes, as stated in Deuteronomy 16: 18-20 which says, “You shall appoint
judges and officials in all cities which the LORD your God will give you according to your
tribes, and they will judge all people with righteous judgment. You shall not show favoritism or
accept bribes, for bribes blind the eyes of the wise and destroy the cause of the righteous. By
maintaining some degree of control by those who have been given this power by God, we can
hope to prevent the corruption that would occur if private prisons were left to their own devices
and carry out God`s justice as He intended.
ARTICLE CRITIQUE:
PRISON PRIVITIZATION
10
References
Lindsey, A. M., Mears, D. P., & Cochran, J. C. (2016). The Privatization Debate: A Conceptual
Framework for Improving (Public and Private) Corrections. Journal of Contemporary
Criminal Justice, 32 (4), 308-327. doi:
https://doi-org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1177/10439862166600066
Ramirez, M. D. (2015). African Americans’ Principled Opposition to Prison Privatization.
Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, 13 (3), 217–236. https://doi-
org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1080/15377938.2014.997952
The Holy Bible
