Discussion response to 2 students 150 words each

Do not grade or critique students work be respectfully and add to the discussion

First response to Tyler

Though there is no direct connection found between the decrease in crime rate and the increase in incarceration. Research has uncovered some reason as to why this may be happening; however, over the years as crime rate has decreased, research shows that it has decreased because of the increased sentencing and length of incarceration (Mallory, 2007). The thought as to the reason as to why crime rate has fell is not just because those that break laws are sentenced longer now, but repeated offenders are no longer part of the equation as well meaning that the reason crime rate has decreased so much is not because of the incarceration increase but because of sentencing (Mallory, 2007). Though there is seemingly a connection between crime rate and incarceration the text book says, “that there is little evidence to support either side (Clear, Cole, & Reisig)”. When looking at the policies made over the past 40 years especially the get tough which has been the center point. There are others as well, such as, the three-strike rule that California has and more. Polices such as the get tough and three-strike rule have caused a cut back on crime because it stops repeated offenders and after a certain point most people incarcerated are there permanently which could have lead to the decrease in crime rate and the increase in incarceration rate.

References

Clear, T., Cole, G., & Reisig, M. American Corrections (Cengage, 12th Edition)

Jason L. Mallory (2007) Mass Incarceration, Democracy, and Inclusion, Socialism and Democracy, 21:1, 97-122, DOI: 10.1080/08854300601116795

Second response se to Alana

While the crime rate in the United States has decreased the rate of incarceration continues to increase (Andrews and Bonta, 2010). In 1992 the incarnation rate in the United was 505 per 100,000, however this grew in 2007 to 756 per 100,000 (Andrews and Bonta, 2010). 

Evidence shows that the "get tough" policy has been a disastrous failure (Andrews and Bonta, 2010). This is a result from the various truth in sentencing laws and sentencing guidelines, that require that minimum sentences be served before release is possible which has led to longer sentences (Andrews and Bonta, 2010). This problem has been increased even more due to the three strikes laws that cause more prison growth and does not reduce recidivism (Andrews and Bonta, 2010).

Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, has ordered federal prosecutors to "pursue the most-severe penalties possible, including mandatory minimum sentences for people convicted of drug-related crimes" (Clear, Reisig, & Cole, 2017, pg. 16). This is a major factor in why the sentencing policies continue to be set up the way they are. 

References:

Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). Rehabilitating criminal justice policy and practice.Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 16(1), 39-55. doi:10.1037/a0018362

Clear, T.R., Reisig, M.D., & Cole, G.F. (2017). American Corrections. 12th Edition. Cengage. United States of America

OrigiOriginal topic

Despite decreased crime rates, incarceration rates have risen over the past 40 years. Debate whether the public, including policy makers, has accurate views of crime and discuss what factors – excluding actual crime rate data – have influenced the “get tough” policies and practices that have resulted in increased sentence lengths.