author provides five possible explanations W r i t i n g

Which of the many hypotheses advanced to explain the rise in the incarceration rate seems most plausible to you? What other reasons might be added?

Peer Responses:

Post 1 LizbethThe war on drugs seems to be the most advanced hypothesis and able to better explain the rise in the incarceration rate all while being plausible. I believe the war on drugs is the most plausible because it is the most practicable. It has been around for the longest in terms of being at war with the situation. The war on drugs is one that people do not take seriously as they should. Especially now in our time when people disregard the fact that drugs are dangerous and not okay by any means. But of course with everyone going against the law people now want drugs to be legalized.This should go without saying but, if drugs are illegal then it must be because they are more harmful than good. If something does more bad than good then there is no sense in taking the risk in the first place. It would be shameful to “fix” one thing and potentially “break” another, on other words curing a disease but dying from a drug related symptom. Which brings me to the jail portion of all of this. The rise in incarceration doesn’t always have to do with hard crimes but the little ones that then pile up to be an even bigger charge. Possession charges are not taken seriously until you have a couple of them. Leading to jail time because the offender failed to see the warning signs. More people are in jail because of possession than most other crimes because of the fact that the policy varies from state to state. I think having everyone on the same page would do some good because it makes no sense to allow some to do drugs but arrest others for it.Post 2 GisellAccording to the textbook, it is argued that there is not much of a connection between crime and incarceration rate. The author provides five possible explanations on this issue. (1) more arrests lead to higher incarceration chances. (2) sentences have become tougher on defendants. (3) constructing more correctional facilities. (4) war on drugs. (5) influence of politics on a state and local level. It is important to note that each issue is not to be analyzed individually because it can cause certain factors to be ignored when we analyze incarceration rates. In this case, based on the question, I would say that both (4) the war on drugs and (5) the influence of politics within a state and local level have a lot to do with these rates increasing.First, drugs have been a never-ending battle, especially for the U.S., lawmakers and the justice system seek to pin down, incarcerate, and retain individuals who are found in possession of drugs to attempt an deter their needs and potentially rehabilitate them. However, this is where I think politics have a lot to do with incarceration rates. As I stated before lawmakers want to create new forms of possibly deterring behaviors, so by being able to incarcerate drug offenders, the justice system is able to try and provide services to help them overcome their drug addictions. So, all in all, the system only finds a response to the issue through incarceration. Moreover, the textbook claims about 91% of the individuals incarcerated were in upstate counties, which means that the increase of prison population helps create jobs and helps the economy of the state or city. Nonetheless, politics influences incarceration rates through the policies liberals and conservatives create for their state and local communities. Crime is not necessarily the one to blame for high rates, instead the political parties these areas attempt to follow greatly affects the future of individuals who have a run-in with law enforcement.