Submitted By B-Rad20603
Words: 750
Pages: 3

As compassionate people we often feel emotionally driven to seek justice for those who have been victimized, but as chivalrous as the gesture may appear those emotions have the potential to cloud our judgment when seeking retribution. This brings us to the topic at hand regarding a newly proposed bill that would double the maximum prison term for anyone convicted for armed robbery. The purpose of this paper is to present the perspective of an opposing party, expose the irrational mindset of those willing to revamp current legislation, and present alternatives methods that accomplish the goals of the newly proposed legislation, but avoids extended imprisonment for offenders.
According to Uniform Crime Reports. (2012), “there were an estimated 354,520 robberies. The estimated number of robberies decreased 0.1 percent from the 2011 estimate and 20.1 percent from the 2008 estimate.” (para. 2) Although the national rate of armed robberies may seem excessively high at first glance, comparisons of those rates years prior indicate a decline in offenses that suggests promise in current legislation. However, despite favorable results of preexisting legislation a revamped proposal suggesting an extension to prison terms is on the table for considered. The shared mindsets among those in favor of the bill argue that offenders have the potential to continue to engage in criminal activities upon their release from the justice system. Supporters of the bill believe that by simply extending a offenders stay behind bars would resolve the issue of a habitual offense therefore safeguarding homes and business from armed robberies. However, this new proposal appears to be one based on fear, the fear of a potential reoccurrence. The following information will be an effort to rebuttal these allegations
The unforeseen dilemmas supporters of the bill fail to address with extending incarceration is the increased strain on state budgets and how it impedes the offenders ability to rehabilitate and reintegrate as a productive member of society. In these troubling economic times funding for establishing, and maintaining facilities is hard to come by which means doing more with less. This forces prisons to utilize whatever means readily available to get the job done. For example the Sheriff of Maricopa County Jail in Phoenix, Arizona, Joe Arapaio established a tent city that resembles a make shift concentration camp. The conditions in the tent city are deplorable, and raise safety concerns regarding inmate exposure to the extreme summer heat. According to Professor Craig Haney, “when prison environments become unduly painful, they also become harmful, and prisoners carry the effects or consequences of that harm back into the free world once they have been released.” (Haney, 2006) Meaning that prison systems with increased populations risk the chance of losing its stability, and the lack of stability can translate to the behaviors of offenders upon their release from the criminal justice system. Now this is where supporters of the bill say “I told you so!” but they fail to recognize that their desire to extend imprisonment in conjunction with