Mass Incarceration and Crime Rates

This assignment delves into the relationship between incarceration rates and crime in the United States. It examines the historical context of rising incarceration, the debate surrounding rehabilitation versus punishment, and the economic consequences of mass incarceration. The paper argues that increased incarceration has not demonstrably reduced crime and suggests alternative strategies such as diverting non-violent offenders and investing in reentry programs.

Running head: INCARCERATION RATES AND CRIME RATES
Incarceration Rates and Crime Rates
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1INCARCERATION RATES AND CRIME RATES
The criminal justice system of America is responsible for safeguarding the public from
crime and administering justice to victims. Two distinct ways lay foundation for the criminal
justice system where one emphasizes on rehabilitation and the other emphasizes on punishment
as a means to deter criminal behavior. According to Enns (2014), some people argue that
rehabilitation of offenders should be doe appropriately to prepare them lead a crime-free life and
succeeds in re-entering the community. While Simon (2014) states that, this objective can be
achieved only through severe punishment that would serve as a significant deterrent for both the
offender and the community. The US criminal justice system has adopted incarceration, as the
solution to criminal behavior but these policies tends to have minimum impact on reducing
crime.
The incarceration rate in the US is greater than any other country as the US incarcerates
about 750 inmates per 100,000 residents whereas Russia incarcerates 600 per 100000 and Cuba
incarcerates about 593 and 531 respectively. The incarceration rate in US today is often
described as ‘mass incarceration’ that results due to policy choices and not due to increased
crime rates. During the ‘80s and 90s’, laws were enacted which permitted more people to be
imprisoned and with mandatory minimum sentencing laws the offenders were required to stay
longer in the prisons. As a result of these policies, there are more than 2.3 million people in
orisons in the US as compared to the 200000 prisoners in 1972.
Sundt et al., (2015) believes that the overuse of mass incarceration is evident from the
‘war of drugs’ that is carried out in the country where arrests and incarceration were used as the
tools of law enforcement for even minor drug offences. The present drug laws are one significant
reason for mass incarceration, making it the highest than any other country in the world. Since
1990, there has been a decline in the crime rate in the US and the Federal and State government

2INCARCERATION RATES AND CRIME RATES
have enhanced harsh sentencing laws. However, Clear & Frost (2015) asserts that the decline in
the crime rate cannot be considered as the outcome of increased incarceration rate. In fact,
research demonstrated that incarceration have a diminishing impact on the crime rate in US.
Further, the expenses incurred on incarceration often prevails over the advantages of the crimes
that have been avoided, resulting in incline in the crime rates because of negative societal
impact. An incline in the incarceration rate leads to higher expenses on corrections as is evident
from the annual amount spent on correction, which is $68 billion, 88% of which is spent on
prisons. This implies that every dollar that is spent on higher education, 65 cents is spent on
corrections approximately.
However, two strategies could be adopted to reduce the growing costs of correctional
system and the damage caused to the communities. Firstly, less people should be sent to prison
using sentences that diverges non-violent offenders away from prison. Secondly, since almost
97% prisoners will be released one day, it is important to emphasize on time and resources to be
used in services provided to such prisoners for re-entering into the community.
Therefore, it can be stated that public welfare and safety should be given priority and it
seems that incline in incarceration rates is not an effective measure to reduce crime rates as it
have an adverse impact on communities and budgets. Hence, it is imperative that policy makers
presents themselves as being tough on crimes and develop policies that reduce prisoners while
ensuring public safety.

3INCARCERATION RATES AND CRIME RATES
Reference list
Clear, T. R., & Frost, N. A. (2015). The punishment imperative: The rise and failure of mass
incarceration in America. NYU Press.
Enns, P. K. (2014). The public's increasing punitiveness and its influence on mass incarceration
in the United States. American Journal of Political Science, 58(4), 857-872.
Simon, J. (2014). Mass incarceration on trial: A remarkable court decision and the future of
prisons in America. New Press, The.
Sundt, J., Cullen, F. T., Thielo, A. J., & Jonson, C. L. (2015). Public willingness to downsize
prisons: Implications from Oregon. Victims & Offenders, 10(4), 365-378.