Should Non-Violent Offenders Do Jail Time

750 Words3 Pages
There is nothing like a good argument about justifiable imprisonment while mingling around the office water cooler. The benefits of being incarcerated must outweigh the cost of being locked up in order to justify it as a punishment. When individuals are imprisoned and confined to jail, resources are therefore being used. Kevin Carr, the author of “Criminals Convicted of Non-Violent Crimes” article, scratches the surface with some of the underlying issues. He expresses his concerns and shares his viewpoint with the readers about our unjust judicial system for these offenders. Should criminals convicted of non-violet crimes face jail terms? Through out his commentary, Kevin mentions a few good argumentative points. For example, he strongly feels that no matter how heinous the crime may be, the senseless act such as “theft” is still a violation of the law. For example, he feels people who break the law should be punished accordingly and not necessarily be locked-up and behind bars. Another point presented by the author is how United States citizens have to rectify and acquit oneself in order to be punished and imprisoned for their wrongdoings. Kevin Carr feels that people should not be restrained and confined behind steel bars. Despite the previous arguments, another reason Kevin strongly feels that “criminals convicted of non-violet crimes” should not face jail terms is because it can leave a psychological affect on people who are not a threat or danger to others. In other words, offenders that find themselves incarcerated for a small case such as being a thief, a beggar, or being a violator for parking infractions should not be labeled and put in the same classification as people who are convicted of repulsive, despicable, and inhuman types of criminal violence. The demeanor of the once calm and harmful individual can change just from their experience
Open Document