Environmental Problems Essay Research Paper THE NEED

Environmental Problems Essay, Research Paper

THE NEED FOR EXTREME CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM IN CALIFORNIA

ORIENTATION

FACTORS:

I.Basic Introduction and description – Introduce basic sides of Criminal

Law and Elaborate

II.General History and Development

- Discuss the history and modifications of Reform Laws in California

III.Main Problems and Concern Stimulants

- Point out real life statistics and point out incidents

IV.Conclusion

- Point out the need for an extreme reform and what can be done

SENTENCE OUTLINE

I. An analysis of Department of Corrections data by the Center on Juvenile and

Criminal Justice in San Francisco, CA, in Nov, 1995 indicates that since the

enactment of California’s “Three Strikes” law two years ago, 192 have “struck

out” for marijuana possession, compared to 40 for murder, 25 for rape, and 24

for kidnapping.

A. I have a strong proposition for the California Legislature…and that is a

strict and logical reform to the present Criminal Justice System in California.

B. “The California Legislature is to be commended for its stance on crime. Not

for their “get tough” policies such as the “Three Strikes” law but for their

enactment of a little known section of the Penal Code entitled the “Community

Based Punishment Act of 1994.” (Senator Quentin Kopp, Time Magazine Feb 14,

1996) C. By passage of this act, the State of California has acknowledged the

limitations of incarceration as both punishment and a deterrent to criminal

behavior. D. The legislature has in fact declared that “California’s criminal

justice system is seriously out of balance in its heavy dependence upon prison

facilities and jails for punishment and its lack of appropriate punishment for

nonviolent offenders and substance abusers who could be successfully treated in

appropriate, less restrictive programs without any increase in danger to the

public”

II.More facts, Opinions and Developmental Ideas

A. In essence, this law proposes a community based system of intermediate

restrictions for non-violent offenders that fall between jail time and

traditional probation such as home detention with electronic monitoring, boot

camps, mandatory community service and victim restitution, day reporting, and

others. B. Pilot programs are to be developed as a collaborative effort between

the state and counties requiring a community based plan describing the sanctions

and services to be provided. C. A progress report on an actof this kind would be

made by the California Board of Corrections on January 1, 1997 and annually

thereafter to selected legislative committees.

III.Informatives

A. “It seems clear that the California Legislature has determined that

incarceration is not appropriate for many criminal offenses and that alternative

sanctions are preferable for non-violent offenders. ” (Randy Meyer, Political

Official) B. But while this approach is to be applauded, its spreading prevents

the fulfillment of its true potential. C. “By retaining those non-violent

offenders that are currently in state prison and continuing to pursue defensive

punishment at the local level in the form of short term “shock incarceration”

and bootcamps, the costly and ineffective methods of criminal behavior

correction remain intact.” (Charles Calderon-US News) D. By immediately

eliminating incarceration for all non-violent offenses and requiring victim

compensation and community service, resources can be committed to preventing

crime rather than to the feeding and housing of offenders. E. This is consistent

with the findings of the legislature and is cost efficient, requires minimal

systemic change, and increases public safety and security.

IV.The Proposal

A. “Our current criminal justice system appears to be based upon the Old

Testament proverb that “your eye shall not pity; it shall be life for life, eye

for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.” Revenge thus plays a

part of the punishment model.” (LA Official Boland) From a societal standpoint,

we expect punishment to prevent the offender and others from further criminal

behavior. Incarceration of offenders as the punishment of choice thus

theoretically provides revenge, individual incapacitation, and restriction.

But I submit that such a philosophical foundation is flawed. Revenge while

understandable from an individual human perspective is not a proper basis for

society’s response to the misbehavior of its laws. This human urge to punish

should be removed from the current system and replaced with methods of

restrictions that utilize the offender’s potential to benefit his victim and

society at large. In other words, in a free society the end desired is the

correction of behavior that utilizes the least force . This conforms to the

principles of limited government, efficiency, red

Внимание, отключите Adblock

Вы посетили наш сайт со включенным блокировщиком рекламы!
Ссылка для скачивания станет доступной сразу после отключения Adblock!

Скачать