Posted on 11/30/2006 2:04:02 AM PST by Mrs Ivan
A record 7 million people - or one in every 32 American adults - were behind bars, on probation or on parole by the end of last year, according to the Justice Department.
Of those, 2.2 million were in prison or jail, an increase of 2.7 per cent over the previous year, according to a report.
More than 4.1 million people were on probation and 784,208 were on parole at the end of 2005. Prison releases are increasing, but admissions are increasing more.
Men still far outnumber women in prisons and jails, but the female population is growing faster. Over the past year, the female population in state or federal prison increased 2.6 per cent while the number of male inmates rose 1.9 per cent. By year's end, 7 per cent of all inmates were women. The gender figures do not include inmates in local jails.
"Today's figures fail to capture incarceration's impact on the thousands of children left behind by mothers in prison," Marc Mauer, the executive director of the Sentencing Project, a Washington-based group supporting criminal justice reform, said in a statement. "Misguided policies that create harsher sentences for nonviolent drug offenses are disproportionately responsible for the increasing rates of women in prisons and jails."
From 1995 to 2003, inmates in federal prison for drug offences have accounted for 49 per cent of total prison population growth.
The numbers are from the annual report from the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics. The report breaks down inmate populations for state and federal prisons and local jails.
Racial disparities among prisoners persist. In the 25-29 age group, 8.1 per cent of black men - about one in 13 - are incarcerated, compared with 2.6 per cent of Hispanic men and 1.1 per cent of white men. And it's not much different among women. By the end of 2005, black women were more than twice as likely as Hispanics and over three times as likely as white women to be in prison.
Certain states saw more significant changes in prison population. In South Dakota, the number of inmates increased 11 per cent over the past year, more than any other state. Montana and Kentucky were next in line with increases of 10.4 per cent and 7.9 per cent, respectively. Georgia had the biggest decrease, losing 4.6 per cent, followed by Maryland with a 2.4 per cent decrease and Louisiana with a 2.3 per cent drop.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/dtdata.htm#demo
Demographic data.
That's a sudden bounce. I wonder if the trend has continued in that direction.
Depends on the region. NYC now has crime stats approaching the extremely low levels of the 1950s.
I'm not real sure what you are talking about. But I think I disagree. I don't know anyone who defines a "criminal" as someone you don't like or who simply offends you. (Except, maybe the ACLU.)
Right: I dont mind paying for prisons but I hate to see early releases to make room for more. Keep the criminals where they belong.
I really mind paying for prisons. It's like paying for a storage unit for a piece of furniture you'll never use.
and how many were illegals??
" I don't know anyone who defines a "criminal" as someone you don't like or who simply offends you. (Except, maybe the ACLU.) "
I envy you your sheltered existence, where you have apparently not heard of
"hate" crimes, in which the motivation (ie thought) behind a crime is, in-and-of itself, a crime......
"hate SPEECH" and its legitimate children "harrassment" and "hostile environment".........
Gun control legislation.......
Anti-smoking legislation.......
Trans-fat........
Martha Stewart.......
DUI laws and drug laws.......
And yes, you may argue that many of these activities *may lead* to the "perpetrator" causing harm to another -- and by doing so, you prove my original point.....
If you define "criminal" as "having the *potential* of causing harm, then you have, in one thought, criminalized each and every one of us......
LOL! I love the way that graph is drawn! By starting at 1360 and rising to 1440 it makes the drop look huge. If you start at 0 and go to 1440 for offences it's virtually a flat line! Still, either way it's good to see the offences declining.
So I assume you wouldnt mind having these folks in a home up the street from you?
You misunderstood my post. It advocated the elimination of criminals. Not by death sentence, but as an "occupation."
It would be interesting to see how many are Democrats, and how many are Republicans....
Now me, I define a criminal as "someone who breaks the law". Not complicated at all. Doesn't need to be.
Gasp! What a novel idea. Mother nature has already included crime preventative measures for breaking any of her laws. It's called "PAIN." The preventative measure is applied each, and every, time that you violate her rules. No excuses, no exceptions. Don't believe it? Go stick your hand in a wasp nest or give it to a tiger. You too, will become aware of how effective it is simply because you won't do it again...unless your brain is the size of a bean.
Now, I wonder if that could possibly be incorporated into our crime prevention system. What a novel idea! Simply make the breaking of our laws a horrible experience, one in which no one would want to experience again, and I think that there is a remote chance that the criminal won't want to go back to prison or jail again. If they are stupid enough to go for seconds, they qualify for the Darwin award and much more harsh measures should be administered (;-) wink-wink.
Now, exactly how would you suggest crime prevention? Group hugs?
I am talking about your assertion that people commonly use the word "criminal" to describe someone they don't like or who offends them (your words).
If you go by the increasintly prevalent definiton of "anybody who does something I don't like, or who by word, thought, deed, or very existence, offends me", then we're on completely different pages..... Most of the people I know would call such a person irritating, maybe vile or offensive. But they would probably not call them a criminal. In my "sheltered environment" the hating itself is not the crime. What people do when they act upon the hate makes them a "criminal".
Speaking hypothetically, what if 'group hugs' were proven to reduce recidivism by 75% across the board.
Would you then support such an alternative therapy as an alternative to prison?
Now, exactly how would you suggest crime prevention? Group hugs?
NYC is currently experiencing a huge drop in crime. Basically 1950s levels. The reason? A booming economy.
I'd be interested in reading some studies on the relationship between criminality and economic opportunity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.