Locking up non-violent criminals for lengthy prison terms fails to improve public safety, a public-interest research report concludes.
“There is little or no evidence that keeping them [offenders] locked up longer prevents additional crime,” according to The Pew Center on the States.
Between 1972 and 2011, the United States enacted numerous laws intended to take criminals off the streets through long-term incarceration. Advocates for that strategy say it would enhance public safety.
During this same period, the U.S. Congress influenced state sentencing policies by tying public safety funding to the Truth-in-Sentencing laws. States could only receive federal grants if prisoners served 80-85 percent of their terms. One result, during the last two decades, was the prison population in the United States rose 700 percent.
The “lock ‘em up and throw away the key” approach has reached its tipping point and policy-makers can help by adjusting the amount of time offenders serve behind bars, according to the report titled, Time Served – The High Cost, Low Return of Long Prison Terms.
The report quotes California Senate President, Pro tempore, Darrell Steinberg as saying, “We need to do a better job of distinguishing between violent offenders who should be in state prison for a long time to protect the public, and those who can serve their sentences in ways that are frankly less expensive to the taxpayer and consistent with public safety.”
Nearly 90 percent of likely voters in a 2012 poll support shortening prison terms by up to a year for low-risk, non-violent offenders if they have behaved well in prison or completed programming, according the report. The poll also showed support for using prison savings for alternatives to incarceration.
To read the study, TIME SERVED, The High Cost, Low Return of Longer Prison Terms, go to www.pewstates.org
