Creative Commons, "American Flag," Courtesy of Pexels
Unfairness Within Demographics
Incarceration in the United States has had a dramatic increase since 1971, when President Nixon declared the War on Drugs, calling drug abusers public enemy number one [1]. This can be seen when looking at the unfairness of different races and different socioeconomic statuses that are incarcerated in the United States. Laws have been created to target certain crimes that may be associated with specific races. These laws pertain to certain drugs have led to more prison time due to their association of more common use by a specific racial group. It is also common in the United States that impoverished areas, and the people within them, are targeted by law enforcement officials more often than wealthy, middle to higher class neighborhoods [2]. Click here for more information.
Treatment of Prisoners
Inside the walls of a United States prison, prisoners are treated inhumanely and dehumanized for much of the time, being placed in solitary confinement for days on end [3] and being searched in violent ways [4]. The harsh conditions that prisoners are forced to face greatly impact them mentally and physically, ultimately causing more harm to these people and their futures rather than focusing on rehabilitating them to become productive members of society upon their release [5]. Those who are incarcerated, no matter the amount of time, serve a lifelong sentence because of the stigma society places on them, in which they are stripped from their most basic rights, including voting, public housing, and in many cases, job opportunities [2].
Click here for more information.
Click here for more information.
Infrastructure
A huge problem that United States prisons face is immense overcrowding and unsanitary living conditions. The United States has experienced a skyrocket in incarceration in the past 40 years, increasing by 500 percent, leading to much harsher conditions than originally intended. This overcrowding has led to a demand for more prison infrastructures to be built to help separate, control and house the different types of offenders. Unique to the United States prison system, there are 5 security levels that one can endure: Juvenile, minimum security, medium security, High security, and supermax security. At each of the different security level prisons, the standards of treatment (way cops treat prisoners) and ways of living (amount of time they are allowed to spend outside, items they are allowed to have in their cells, ) differ greatly. (isolation vs normal prison cell)
Click here for more information.
Click here for more information.
Sources
1. history.com editors. “War on Drugs.” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 31 May 2017, www.history.com/topics/crime/the-war-on-drugs.
2. Alexander, M. (2012). The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness (Revised Paperback ed.). New York, NY: The New Press.
3. Breslow, Jason M. “What Does Solitary Confinement Do To Your Mind?” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, 22 Apr. 2014, www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/what-does-solitary-confinement-do-to-your-mind/.
4. George, Erin, et al. A Woman Doing Life: Notes from a Prison for Women. Oxford University Press, 2015.
5. Wilhelm, Daniel, and Nicholas Turner. “Is the Budget Crisis Changing the Way We Look at Sentencing and Incarceration?” Jstor, Digital Library, Oct. 2002, www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/fsr.2002.15.1.41?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents.
2. Alexander, M. (2012). The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness (Revised Paperback ed.). New York, NY: The New Press.
3. Breslow, Jason M. “What Does Solitary Confinement Do To Your Mind?” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, 22 Apr. 2014, www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/what-does-solitary-confinement-do-to-your-mind/.
4. George, Erin, et al. A Woman Doing Life: Notes from a Prison for Women. Oxford University Press, 2015.
5. Wilhelm, Daniel, and Nicholas Turner. “Is the Budget Crisis Changing the Way We Look at Sentencing and Incarceration?” Jstor, Digital Library, Oct. 2002, www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/fsr.2002.15.1.41?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents.