NCJ Number
54757
Journal
Crime and Delinquency Volume: 21 Issue: 4 Dated: SPECIAL ISSUE (OCTOBER 1975) Pages: 356-359
Date Published
1975
Length
4 pages
Annotation
NONINCARCERATION FOR ALL NONVIOLENT OFFENDERS IS CALLED AN UNWISE POLICY BECAUSE LESS PUNITIVE SENTENCES, SUCH AS FINES AND PROBATION, RETAIN THEIR EFFECTIVENESS DUE TO THE THREAT OF IMPRISONMENT. OTHER CRITIQUES ARE MADE.
Abstract
THIS IS A REBUTTAL TO A STATEMENT BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON CRIME AND DELINQUENCY CALLING FOR ABOLITION OF PENAL SANCTIONS FOR ALL NONVIOLENT OFFENDERS. IT OFFERS FIVE REASONS FOR NOT ADOPTING SUCH A POLICY. THE POLICY IS CALLED DEFEATIST; IT ASSUMES THAT CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS MUST BE INEFFECTUAL AND DESTRUCTIVE. PRISON REFORM, NOT ABOLITION OF IMPRISONMENT, IS CALLED THE ANSWER. THE MAIN THRUST OF THE ARGUMENT, HOWEVER, IS THAT A POLICY OF NO IMPRISONMENT WOULD MAKE THE LESS PUNITIVE DISPOSITIONS INEFFECTUAL. IT IS HELD THAT OFFENDERS PAY FINES OR PERFORM COMMUNITY SERVICE OBLIGATIONS BECAUSE OF THE THREAT OF PRISON. SUCH A POLICY MIGHT ALSO LEAD TO GREATER SENTENCING DISPARITY AS JUDGES ATTEMPT TO DEAL WITH PECULIAR CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING A PARTICULAR OFFENSE CLASSIFIED AS 'NONDANGEROUS.' THE PROBLEM OF DEFINITION IS ALSO ADDRESSED. CORRUPT PUBLIC OFFICIALS, SELLERS OF DANGEROUS DRUGS, THIEVES, EMBEZZLERS, AND RECEIVERS OF STOLEN PROPERTY ARE CITED AS EXAMPLES OF 'NONDANGEROUS OFFENDERS' WHO ARE, IN FACT, EXTREMELY DESTRUCTIVE TO SOCIETY. IT IS ARGUED THAT SUCH A POLICY FOCUSES ON THE NEEDS OF OFFENDERS TO THE EXCLUSION OF THE NEEDS OF SOCIETY. (GLR)