Justin Forbes

Dr. Rand
UWRT 1102
April 2, 2015
Does Incarceration/Imprisonment Lead to Lower Crime Rates?
In America, there is a growing problem that is taking over the country. In 2004, there
were a striking 2.2 million people incarcerated in the United States prisons and jails which was
about eight times the number in 1975 (Jacobson, 215). Prisons today are more overcrowded than
they ever have been in the history of the United States. Most of the people incarcerated are
repeat offenders who have been in and out of jail their whole lives. The prisons in the United
States are at about 99 percent capacity in todays time and this is merely because once they get
out (which is rather quickly) they arent deterred and commit the same or sometimes worse
crimes than ones they just out for (Caumont). I believe that incarceration does not work simply
because there are so many repeat offenders that are incarcerated at one time and inmates will
more than likely get out of jail/ prison before their sentence is up.
According to Michael Jacobsons Downsizing Prisons: How to Reduce Crime and End
Mass Incarceration, 5% of the prison population is sent to life without possibility of parole,
executed, or die of natural causes. In addition, 95% of all prison admissions are released and
80% are released on parole or some other after-prison supervision program (Jacobson, 131).
This proves that just about everyone who is tried, convicted, and sentenced for a crime is
released at some point in their lives, if they dont die of natural causes. Even if they get out of

prison based on good behavior and get put on parole, most of them will go right back because
of a rule or parole violation.
Along with the overpopulation of prisons, correctional facilities also force states to spend
millions of dollars, sometimes some they dont have. In 2003, thirty-nine states faced budget
gaps, and in 20 of those states the gaps were over 10% of the general fund budget (Jacobson,
81). This results in the states cutting their corrections facilities because they believe their
education and highways and other departments go before corrections. I am making these points
because states and even the federal government spend so much to keep their prisoners as
comfortable as they can while being humane and trying to get them to change. In those states,
crime hasnt gotten better, it has only gotten worse and worse over the years.
I have chosen to talk about some cases that have led states to recognizing that parole and
sometimes even incarceration doesnt work. These cases are hard to look at and understand
because we dont know why those people decided to end other peoples lives in that way, but
they are necessary for my argument:
In 1993, a 12-year old girl named Polly Klaas was abducted from her home in Petaluma,
California during a slumber party with her friends (Jacobson, 18) The abductor, named Richard
Davis, raped and killed Polly and then dumped her body like a piece of trash. You know what
the sad thing was? Richard Davis was a CONVICTED sex offender who got out of prison
because of good behavior and was put on parole. Being convicted doesnt mean that he was
accused by some crazy woman or child. Instead, it means that he was proven guilty by a jury of
his peers in the United Stated. Davis, before Polly, had twice been convicted and sentenced for
the rape of little girls under the age of 10, but had never killed them before (Jacobson, 18).

During the trial, Davis showed signs of a psychopath which means that he never showed
remorse. He never once looked at the family as if he was telling them that he was sorry. Instead,
he smiled and acted nonchalant while the prosecution tried to get something out of him that
would lead to his conviction. Once he got to the stand to say why he did what he did, he got
defensive and claimed that Polly said just dont do me like my dad right before he killed her
(Jacobson, 18).
This case led Californians to enact a 1994 law called the three strikes law which
requires that once a person gets charged with their third felony conviction, they must get
sentenced to life in prison no matter which felony it is. I think that the three strikes law should
have been enacted a long time before 1994 because many people and children get their lives cut
short due to convicted felons getting released. This proves that incarceration does not work
because the felons dont try to turn their life around, they just wait until their parole period
comes around so they can gain their freedom and commit more crimes.
The second case that I will look at involves a 7-year old girl named Megan Kanka. In
1994, Megan was walking around in her neighborhood when a twice-convicted child molester
lured her into his house, which was in the same neighborhood as her (Jacobson, 18). He told her
that he had a puppy he wanted to give her and, once inside the house, he proceeded to molest and
kill her. This man (whom I dont have his name) was also on parole at the time of this terrible
incident. Less than two years after this, President Bill Clinton signed into federal law Megans
Law, which required communities be notified when sex offenders return to their neighborhoods
(Jacobson, 18).
The third and final case I will be looking at was in 1997 and involves a nursing student in
Albany, New York (Jacobson, 18). She was walking home one night by herself and was

murdered by parolee out on good behavior once again (Jacobson, 18). He was previously
convicted of a violent crime (I dont know the exact crime) and was out on parole. A year later,
the governor of New York (George Pataki signed Jennas Law into effect, which ended
discretionary release on parole (Jacobson, 18). This basically means that anyone who is
convicted of a violent felony cannot be released early on parole in New York. I think every state
needs this law, too because everyone who is convicted of a violent crime is most likely going to
be violent their whole life. These cases led people as well as lawmakers from all across the
country to see that maybe the corrections system is not working the way people would like it to
be.
I think the solution to these cases along with others that werent talked about is that there
should be longer prison sentences along with a more severe parole sentence. Another thing that I
believe is an important issue with the corrections/criminal justice system is that a lot of people
are wrongfully convicted, then sentenced to prison or even put to death. This means that they
take up most of the cell block or solitary confinement while a violent sex offender is out on
parole somewhere lurking little girls like Polly Klaas. I think the criminal justice system should
conduct more in-depth investigations instead of assuming someone is guilty because someone
accused them of doing wrong.
Ray Krone was convicted of a 1991 murder of a Phoenix bartender that led him to a death
sentence in a maximum security penitentiary somewhere in Arizona. In 2002, he was exonerated
for the murder after new DNA evidence proved it was not him who committed the crime
(Jacobson, 42). As of December 2003, 112 prisoners were found innocent and released from
death row and more than half of these releases have happened during the past decade (Jacobson,
42). This information proves that the criminal justice system needs to be more thorough with

their investigations of alleged violent crimes and murder. Allowing DNA evidence to be used for
evidence has help this problem of convicting the wrong people for crimes they did not commit.
Many writers have called for less spending on incarceration and, as an alternative, more
spending on economic or community development, 8 preventive, educational, or early childhood
development programs. The argument is that spending now on prevention will result in greater
social justice, reduced incarceration, and less spending on criminal justice and corrections down
the road. Yet, despite such overwhelming and persuasive criticisms, the growth of prisons and
prison spending has continued (Jacobson, 8).
I chose to put this quote from Mr. Jacobson because I could not have said it better myself.
We need to stop spending money on the corrections and prisons and parole and instead spend
more money on education, child development programs, and even community development
programs. I would say almost half of the violent offenders, the murders, the sex offenders, as
well as the child rapists/molesters, lived a terrible childhood growing up. They might have been
beat or molested or even raped by their own parents when they werent able to defend
themselves. Then when they grow up, thats all know how to do. Instead of spending millions
of tax dollars on keeping violent criminals comfortable in an 8 foot by 10 foot cell, we should
be putting that money towards something they can benefit people from. If we spend money
toward child therapists and they talk about something that is going on at home, we can put the
true monsters away forever: the parents who hurt their own children. This will decrease the
crime rates dramatically and will also help people to feel safe in their own neighborhoods, like
Megan Kanka should have felt walking alone in her neighborhood, where she grew up.
In New York from 1993- 2003, the number of reported violent crimes declined by 64%;
homicides fell by 69% while robberies and assaults dropped by 70% and 55% respectively

(Jacobson, 186). Two people got the credit for these reductions; William Bratton (New York
Citys Police Commissioner from 1994 to 1996) and the two-term mayor Rudy Giuliani. These
two people were called the crime-stoppers of New York in the 90s. No one knows the exact
cause for this decline in New York and there are a number of possible explanations, but I can tell
you what wasnt a factor: incarceration or parole/probation. Between 1993 and 2001, many
more people arrested for committing low-level offenses were given short-term pretrial jail stays,
and many fewer were given post-trial long-term prison sentences (Jacobson, 108). The reasons
I, as well as Mr. Jacobson believe it was because of the police departments development of the
zero-tolerance policy towards crime.
In conclusion, I want to stress the idea that while incarceration is a good idea, I just dont
think it should be our main focus to lower crime rates and decrease murders across the country.
Another thing, I do not want anyone to think that I am against a serial rapist or serial killer going
to prison for the rest of his life because they should, but I think people need to focus on the
things that could be causing these people to do these horrific things to other people and do little
children.

Works Cited
Jacobson, Michael. Downsizing Prisons: How to Reduce Crime and End Mass
Incarceration. New York and London: New York University Press, 2005. Print.
Caumont, Andrea. "Chart of the Week: The Problem of Prison Overcrowding." Pew
Research Center RSS. N.p., 02 Aug. 2013. Web. 02 Apr. 2015.

Reflection
1. The most interesting thing I learned was how many people were wrongfully
convicted in one year alone. This means that many others were too and that there
are people out there who actually committed the crimes and havent been caught
yet.
2. The biggest issue I had during the research/writing process was citing properly
and knowing when to use the citations. I overcame this obstacle by going to the
Purdue Owl website and figuring out when to do it correctly.
3. Over the course of this project, I think I changed my research topic about five or
six times (Im not kidding). The first one I had just didnt fit me like the way I
initially thought I had and I couldnt find the right research to back my argument
up. The other five I just couldnt find enough evidence to support the topic
question.
4. It is important to look at a historical view of my topic or question because it lays
down the background that people will need in order to understand where I am
coming from when I talk about my topic. They will then understand what point of
view I have and be able to see why I believe what I believe. Then they will
appreciate the time and effort I put into the research and the writing that I did for
this paper.
5. I think my analytical and evaluation skills have definitely evolved because I am
now able to look at other sources and translate what I read in order to support my
argument. They have also evolved because I can look at other sources and depict
what that author had originally thought so I can use it in my paper.

6. I am most proud of the way I was able to find sources that helped me support my
argument in a way that makes my readers understand how I can feel that way.
7. I would like to know more about how many people arent convicted of a crime
that they did commit even though the exact number isnt probably known by
anyone.