Justice Reinvestment to Reducing Crime and Re-Offending - Example

COMPARE AND CONTRAST JUSTICE REINVESTMENT WITH OTHER APPROACHES TO REDUCING CRIME AND RE-OFFENDING Name Course Task Date Introduction Societies existing in the 21st century face a lot of challenges ranging from economical, political to social. The most challenging issue is how to effectively deal with law breakers and offenders. The existing penalty for any law breaker is imprisonment for a certain time bound, and in extreme cases, some may be sentenced to a death penalty. The management of prisons vary in different countries meaning that there are variations in their activities, philosophies, physical conditions and regimes. Their prisons differ also in characterization and classification ranging from rehabilitation centres to maximum security centres. The other difference is founded on the government ways of running and financing the prisons. The population of almost all the prisons in the world represent those individuals who originate from the lowest strata of the society. The population represent every poor stratum within the country, but the proportion of each society may be different. The areas where the prisoners reside are characterized with poor sanitations, health problems, lack of basic needs and poor financially backgrounds. There presence in the prisons is based on the fact that, the nature of their wanting conditions they are more likely to be involved in the criminal acts. This is because the only way they can make their ends meet is through crime. The law enforcers are fully operational in such areas. Therefore, it is of significance to set up centres which are a replacement of the existing systems of prisons so as to have a keen look at the problems affecting these areas. The prison option can only be sought for those offenders who are dangerous, serious and persistent. The paper sets out to examine the existing comparison and distinction between justice reinvestment and the other approaches of reducing crime and re-offending. Justice Reinvestment Justice reinvestment is a term which originated from the United States, and the concept stands for a system whereby the money that are used for the imprisonment of the offenders are effectively and efficiently utilized in the improvement of such areas where crime prevalence is at an alarming rate. The goal is achieved through the establishment of initiatives that are community based and are focused towards the eradication of such behaviours, which lure the, community members to crime. The new system of ensuring that justice prevails, and ensure that the local government exercise control over how the money are used to crop a society where people can exist freely without any fear or favour. The concept is founded on two major elements. First, the concept of justice reinvestment sets out to come up with standards, and policies focused at promoting individual case prospects and to extension address the specific case. Second, the concept entails a strategic approach designed in a way that offending and re-offending are minimized through the collection and evaluation of data. The move will ensure that informed decisions are made concerning ways that the funds can be used appropriately towards the reduction of crimes. The components of justice reinvestment strategy strengthen the applicability of the system through there capability of providing the necessary solutions to the main aspects that contribute to the prevalence of the problems. The system tackles the problems and challenges which make it unavoidable for the society members to engage in crime and a time redo the crime more than once (Goldson, 2006). The committee’s report in the ministry of justice categorically stated that the focal point should be towards reduction of offenders. However, those individuals who are continually committing crime should be retained in prisons. This is because there involvement in crime can not be ousted by any other intervention measure. The committee believe that reducing re-offending is a way to build a society which all inclusive and safe. The same view is maintained by the government, with them looking at the strategy as a way of building a safer society. The move makes the prison a place for that serious and persistent law breaker (Marsh, 2004, p. 99). Community Policing There are, however, different kinds of community policing, which are used, in problem solving in a community which will lead to justice. Due to this approach, the police are not the only people who are supposed to be guarding people as the community has become actively involved in making sure that people live in a more safe and cohesive community. However, we find that community policing has some implications. These implications are: It is quite hard for the community members to adhere to the rules which ought to be followed in order for people to live harmoniously hence it would be very hard for the community to prevent crimes. In order for a community police officer to find solutions to the root cause of the problems, the officer should get support from the police organisation. In order for creation of a safer society, the community as a whole should be thought about the rule of law. In this case, we find that for peace to prevail within the community, members of a community are required to get well and familiar with the police officers who are guarding a community. We find that, when the police officers would have gained this information about an individual in a community, the police officer would find it very easy to know and find people who are always involved in bending the rule of law. In doing so, the police officers will find kit easier to meet the needs of the community members and what they are expected of them. Situational Crime Prevention Strategy Situational crime prevention strategy is the most important strategy used when preventing crime. Under this strategy, incidences of crime are reduced tremendously which then leads to escalating risks of committing the felony. Through this, offenders tend to compose logical choices to execute a crime and the outcome of committing that crime because under this founded ideologies were used. So, under this strategy we find that crimes, which can be, committed by offenders can be reduced. This was achieved through review of the crime patterns of criminals in a neighbourhood and their unlawful dealings in a social framework (Siegel, 2008, p.67). This feature has received tremendous support as a prevention tool of crime. In this case, the interest of a criminal was brought into the account of a community. For the community to assist the police officers in reducing and avoiding crime, much interest was taken into account in areas where the criminals were targeting. Under the strategy which started in the United Kingdom about the situational crime prevention strategy, from the researchers from the Home Office, decided that this strategy had a little impact on justifying the crime and their conventional justice systems (McNeill, 2007, p.63). However, institution management and the behaviour of an individual involved in a crime revealed that the behaviour of these individuals in correctional facility motivated the development of this situational crime prevention strategy. This was brought out through a research carried out in the 1960’s and 1970’s. Situational crime prevention strategy was also boosted by geographical events, which were being, researched at that time. This is events are like where joins or clubs were situated which would help in the description of crimes. Similarities For crimes to be reduced or to prevent crimes from happening again in neighbour hoods, comparison of the above crime prevention strategies discussed above should be given much attention. The vital thing in crime prevention and reduction of crime rates is that although the mentioned measures take different logistics, their must be crime prevention in a community. This is evident in the report of social justice, which maintains that the concept of justice reinvestment does not only focus in the reformation of the justice system, but it also strives towards ensuring the populace does not get into the custody centres. The government move towards investing on strategies that are aimed at reducing crime and stigmatization has to be maintained and strengthened. The strategies if properly implemented are believed to have transformational effects on the justice system as well as in the behaviour of community members. With the transformation and government support, different communities will register reduced incidences of crimes. The prevailing evidences maintain the same believe in relation to the effects of implementation of strategies that are focused towards crime prevention. On the other hand, Community policing mainly focus on ensuring that the incidences of crime are reduced. The strategy which community policing embrace is more direct in its fight against crime relative to other strategies. Community policing comprise of a close interaction between the police and the members of the society. With the existing relation, there is a quick identification of crimes, the problems that lead to crime and the possible counter measures to those crimes and problems. In addition, the other similarity is grounded on the effectiveness of the approaches. All the strategies are effective in ensuring that crimes are eliminated, and there future occurrence curtailed. One of the approaches of responding to law breakers is through the provision of better housing, giving the something to do inform of employment, providing them with appropriate social and medical services and guiding them on the options that will get them out of drugs. For, such objectives, to be attained a strong collaboration between different stakeholders especially those involved in the various initiatives of crime reduction should be established. It goes directly with the advocacy of the idea that not all the law breakers should be put in custody. In practise, it is evident that a good number of law breakers are released from custody after trial. Therefore, the law breakers should be incorporated in the existing programmes which are effective towards the reduction of crime. The different approaches to crime especially justice reinvestment and situational crime prevention system make use of information collected to address the possibility of crimes. On the other hand, community policing gather information which will help in crime identification and in the design of counter measures that will assist in crime alleviation. For the proper implementation, of the strategies, a substantial understanding of the underlying theories is of the essence. The aspect of information gathering is necessary for all the above mentioned strategies (Clear, 2011, p.43). Differences The main difference that is exhibited by the various approaches of crime prevention is founded on the process of designing and developing such approaches. The different strategies have their precise objectives resulting to their existence. The design of a justice reinvestment system is founded on three main factors. One is the absence of a universal approach towards the achievement of the judicial system objectives by different bureaus in relation to the money that is directed towards the management of the system. A substantial crisis is clouding the justice system and, therefore, the public expenditure is subjected to immense pressure from all perspectives (McDougall, 2006, p.32). The committee on justice affairs maintained that rehabilitation programmes can be practised both in bars and within the public scenes. This involves a number of aspects, some of which are; the offenders are moulded perfectly and again, their acquire skills and improved self esteem from the programmes (Koech, 2007, 102). However, it is clever to take an economic approach which focus on getting off the bars law makers and changing their criminal behaviours. This can be achieved through investing heavily on rehabilitation programmes. About 800 prisoners are held in 39 rehabilitation centres while 1000 prisoners are being held at about 39 rehabilitation centres. This research is found in Prison Reform Trust of 2010. According to this research we find that it easy to run a prison accommodating 624 prisoners. This is not the same as compared to a prison over 800 inmates, which is cited, in this research (Fabelo, 2007, p.98). Also, a research, which was carried, out in18th June 2010 found out that England and Wales hold the biggest population of about 85,085 with an imprisonment rate of about 154 prisoners per a range of about 100,000 prisoners. Wales and England has the highest percentage rate of the prison population of about 66% or 32,500 which was between 1999 and 2009. Schooling of offenders has seen the government heavily investing on the inmates for a very long period which has multiplied thrice from 57 million pounds in 2001 to 2002, to 175 million pounds commencing 2009 to 2010. The annual financial, budget basis on treatment of inmates has risen since 2009 to 2010 by about 15 times to what it was back then in 1997. This funding has mainly gone to drugs. With this percentage, prison population has taken or spent about 122 million pounds, as it was in 2009 to 2010. Construction and maintenance cost about 170,000 pounds while a prisoner takes about 45,000 pounds per annum (Hardie, 2002, p.61). About 4200 pounds are accredited to programmes to each offender which include 2-year training about a community, 80 hours of not paid work, and being in contact with a probation officer. This is according to the National Audit Committee. It was found that use of punishment in prisons when punishing offenders and re-offenders is ineffective compared to when punishing serious offenders according to the National Audit. Prison is, therefore, found out to be very expensive when used to administer justice as the committee states. The number of prisoners has increasingly doubled since 1992. However, the number of prisoners serving short sentences has, however, increased compared to criminals who are violent crimes and household crimes. Both of these crimes have dropped by 46 percent. Petty criminals are considerably prisoners who have the highest number in prisoners, as compared to the hardcore criminals who are found to be very few in prison centres (Beith, 2010, p.78). Due to this, reduction of crime and increase in safety, in a community, will save a lot of funds which go to correctional facilities. This amount of money will then be reinvested somewhere else like on ways which can be used on reduction of crime in a community. According to the increase in the population in prisons in the precedent two decades, has seen the government spending a lot of funds on the correctional facilities so that it can accommodate the prisoners. This is quite expensive, unsuccessful and unsustainable approach. Situational crime prevention strategy partly assumes the same role of navigating the offenders off prison by addressing the root cause of a problem at confined level, which is used, by justice reinvestment. The only problem is that situational crime prevention strategy is run by the central which is not the same as the one which is run locally. Funds, which are spent, on correctional facilities are not of more importance hence should be given to other development areas which at long run will reduce crimes. Decongestion of prisons is, therefore, a major factor in getting of these funds according to the development of justice reinvestment committee. Thus, justice reinvestment can be viewed as a measure of economically applying funds in effective strategies hence reducing unnecessary expenses. Management of funds is not important as with alleviation of crime which should be a major factor as situational crime prevention strategy. The issue money will not come into perspective as with this approach, as their main aim is to reforming an individual with criminal tendencies through contributing rational choice on the potential crime. The rational choice theory is based on the assumption that the criminal acts done by individuals are intentional (Cheks, 2010, p.87). The behaviour is geared toward the attainment of certain needs, which include; status, money, sex, excitement among others. For the satisfaction, of this needs timely and constraint rational choices has to be made and executed. The decisions reached at are not hinged to an individual past experience, but it is forced by the prevailing circumstances. In addition, the theory goes against the principle that crime is as a result of the existing stratum in the society. This, in turn, leads to search for those problems that contribute to the acts of crime. On the other hand, justice reinvestment considers an individual background and the society processes. This implies that the crime incidences are rooted in the existing stratum in the society. Community policing on one hand, focuses on the interaction that exist between the community members and the police officers in the establishment and eradication of criminal acts and those behaviours that lead to repetition of crime. On the other hand, justice reinvestment is focused on transformation of an individual and the justice system through reforms. The two are in total contrast with justice reinvestment strive for a society with less or absolutely no crime, whereas community policing is deemed to be focused on increasing the number of prisons in a society hence high number of individuals with a criminal record. Conclusion An indigenous strategy to prevention of crime and prevalence of peace in the society is through a clear, and substantial understanding of the challenges and problems that a certain community encounter in its day to day processes. The main factor to be incorporated is the prevailing resources that can be utilized to address the menace in the society. The resources are used in the development of programmes that are aimed at addressing the existing challenges. Normally, the prevailing conditions and situation varies in magnitude and effect, therefore, the strategies ought to be designed in such a way that they fully go hand in hand with the counter measures necessary for addressing the criminal circumstances prevalent. For, the right approach to be implemented a full assessment should be done. In reference to the measures of crime prevention, justice reinvestment is more preferred relative to other criminal prevention measures. This is due to the truth that justice reinvestment pursues a community based approach towards the alleviation of criminal acts, for this reason a more direct approach relative to other measures, which use, indirect approaches. Justice reinvestment is more advantaged in relation to other measures since it strive to minimize the expenditure of the government in building prisons. The approach also facilitates the transfer of money to intervention programmes that are effective in dealing with criminal acts. For this reason, justice reinvestment approach remains as the best option for both the government and the offenders. References Beith, A 2010, Cutting Crime: Report, Together with Formal Minutes, London, The Stationery Office. Beith, A 2010, Crime reduction, London, The Stationery Office. Cheks, S 2010, Reducing Re-offending Through Skills and Employment, New York, Cengage Learning. Clear, T 2011, Community Justice, New York, Taylor & Francis. Fabelo, A 2007, Justice reinvestment: a framework to improve effectiveness of justice policies, Council of State Governments. Goldson, B 2006, Youth, crime and justice: critical issues, New York, Pine Forge Press. Hardie, H 2002, Partners Against Crime, Institute for Public Policy Research. Koech, A 2007, Justice reinvestment: a new approach to crime and justice, International Centre for Prison Studies. Marsh, I 2004, Criminal justice: an introduction to philosophies, theories and practice, Sydney, Routledge. McDougall, C 2006, Reducing crime: the effectiveness of criminal justice interventions, London, John Wiley and Sons. McNeill, F 2007, Reducing reoffending: social work and community justice, Michigan, University of Michigan. Siegel, LJ 2008, Criminology, New York, Cengage Learning. Read More