|
Prop 47 is one of the ballot measures that California voters have the opportunity to vote for. This proposition will impact low income communities and communities of color that are disproportionately impacted by the criminal justice system. See the quotes below:
Explain how the passage or failure of the initiative will impact California voters. What are the elements California Proposition 47, the Reduced Penalties for Some Crimes Initiative, is on the November 4, 2014 ballot in California as an initiated state statute. The initiative, if it is approved by the state's voters, would reduce the classification of most "nonserious and nonviolent property and drug crimes" from a felony to a misdemeanor. Specifically, the initiative would:[1][2]
Supporters of the initiative refer to it as "The Safe Neighborhood and Schools Act". Requirements for BLOG POSTS
57 Comments
Karla O'Connor
10/22/2014 09:40:11 am
The passage would give the opportunities for people who were convicted for misdemeanors, and minor offenses to redeem themselves. They would get the chance to enter back to society, and especially if you were like Sajad Shakoor, to prove something for themselves, and educate others about the criminal justice system. I strongly believe in revising Prop 39, but only if these criminals are willing to learn from their past mistakes, and try to rehabilitate themselves. The Three Strikes Law is so unfair to people of color, their last misdemeanor should not be converted into a felony, and be sentenced 25 years to life, mainly if their criminal background were minor offenses. The Three Strikes Law should only be valid if their past felonies include: murder, rape, or molestation which are true crimes in my eyes. It should not be valid if it involved shoplifting or theft to a small degree, not saying that, these things are permissible but these offenses should not resemble to murder or rape in any way.
Dylan SanFilippo
10/23/2014 10:14:24 am
In your post, you said, “The passage would give the opportunities for people who were convicted for misdemeanors, and minor offenses to redeem themselves” (O’Connor). This is the first time I have heard this. I have heard that the law only states that felonies will become misdemeanors. The law does not say anything about erasing misdemeanors or “minor offenses.” Simply put: The law would only make it harder to get a felony. (Which is good in itself)
Karla O'Connor
10/23/2014 03:30:54 pm
What I meant is that the law will allow misdemeanors to not count as felonies, especially if their criminal background consisted of minor offenses, I didn't mean that it would erase these misdemeanors. And to redeem themselves, I mean the fact that these prisoners will get the chance to contest their last strike.
Judy Chen
10/26/2014 09:56:31 am
I strongly agree with your point about enforcing this proposition ONLY if the criminals let go for minor offenses are willing and do learn from their mistakes. Prop 47 could potentially have the unintended consequence of people committing even more minor crimes, because they realize that it will be charged as a misdemeanor, and their sentence will be lessened, even though this was not the original intention of the proposition. If Prop 47 does pass, I hope that criminals who are let off on misdemeanors really do try to rehabilitate and redeem themselves, instead of taking advantage of the new social justice system (which I don't think they will). Overall I believe that Prop 47 is an important step for American society to take, and give people of color a chance to start over without being sentenced to 25 years to life for a non-serious or non-violent crime.
Tiffany Le
10/22/2014 02:28:27 pm
Obviously, there is overcrowding in California’s prison population. California has more than 134,000 incarcerated persons. Some punishments that California has is unjust for the crime; take into consideration Sajad’s situation, and there are many more just like him. Nonviolent crimes putting people in jail for 25 years to life seems cruel and unusual, especially since there are people who have murdered and gotten away with a lesser punishment. If nonviolent crime offenders are placed into jails with high risk inmates, then that may create unsafe and unhealthy environment for everyone involved. Luckily, Prop 36 passed in 2012, and we need more laws like this one to pass. Our justice system needs more reform; currently, people of color are being targeted for drugs even though Wise has mentioned that white people are the majority of drug users. Clearly, there is a racial disparity.
Dylan SanFilippo
10/23/2014 10:07:15 am
I agree with you. California gives too strict punishments. Prop 47 will make the justice system more just. I think it is interesting how you say that laws like this will help eliminate racism in the political justice system. The racism will likely still be there. This law doesn't only help non-whites. The justice system will always be able to find ways to be unjust.
Tiffany Le
10/23/2014 01:23:48 pm
I do not believe that it will completely remove racism. I believe this will bring us a step toward ending injustice in the system; of course there will still be unjust rulings. One law won't change it all. There must be a progression.
Hakwoo Kim
10/23/2014 05:06:44 pm
I agree with you that the current criminal justice system is in many parts unjust, especially the three strike law. The consequences they get for such lessor serious crimes are too cruel or too much of a punishment.I also agree that the overcrowding of the prisons is a problem, and I heard that some of them are being released early because of this problem. I would rather have a law such as like this mandating the release of lesser serious criminals rather than random ones. Also, like you said, I like the idea of helping criminals stay away from crimes with different programs. It seems for me more realistic!
Tiffany Le
10/22/2014 02:34:35 pm
Without the human aspect of the justice system, without seeing the face behind the bars, people may only examine the statistics that the state publishes about the prison population. Even the law students who had met with Sajad and helped pass Prop 36 said that he was the one who was the catalyst to reform the Three Strikes Law. I believe that rehabilitation is important to help people who have made poor decisions, and jail isn’t the best place to do that!
Tiffany Le
10/22/2014 02:35:21 pm
This was supposed to be a reply to Karla O'Connor.
Karla O'Connor
10/23/2014 05:11:45 am
I totally agree with you, I strongly believe that the ones in power who write these laws only see statistics, and do not really see these criminals as human-beings. Because of this, there is this tough on crime stance towards communities of color, so much money is being spent on prisons, and I don't feel like locking up more Black or Latino youths is the resolution honestly. Instead of disproportionately discriminating against these teenagers who, first of all, might not get a good education, or have the resources to do so, because they live in areas of poverty. The government may not fund schools in these areas as much, therefore causing a disinterest for these kids to pursue their studies, and other factors that play out is the path to gang violence. Like Tiffany says, rehabilitation is strongly encouraged to see some result in society, and to keep criminals out of the street, and actually give them a chance to live a life of good.
Dylan SanFilippo
10/23/2014 05:33:43 am
The state of California has been given a federal order to have less people in the jails due to an over-expenditure indictment of the state of California as a whole. Prop 47 will put the state of California in more favor with the feds than it currently is, therefore easing away some of the tension between the federal and state governments. Not only is Prop 47 good for the government, but it is also good for the people. With the price of every little thing being inflated over the years, it only makes sense to raise the dollar amount of petty theft for what would be classified as a felony. Prop 47 would raise the felony charge for petty theft from $400 to $950. This is a reasonable response to the inflation of the dollar in years past. Prop 47 would also help drug addicts get help because the penalty for the possession of drugs in many cases would go down from a felony to a misdemeanor. This is good because 65% of the money saved because of this act would be re-distributed to mental health and drug abuse treatment, so the people who need help the most will have more access to it. Thanks to the retroactive clause in this proposition, the number of jailed inmates should drop almost immediately if the bill were to pass. According to the Lenore Anderson of Californians for Safety and Justice, there are approximately 10,000 inmates eligible for resentencing which would help the number of state jail population to drop phenomenally after serving their shorter terms.
Alexander Salah
10/23/2014 10:53:13 am
I like how you say the passage of prop 47 is not only good for the people but also good for the government. There is a reason that many citizens have not grown fond of the United States government and it’s due to policies such as the three strikes law and harsh unrealistic sentencing for minor crimes. I think if prop 47 gets passed it would show the people taking a stand for what they believe in and would allow the government to reassess the way they sentence people for crime.
Nelson Chuang
10/26/2014 11:39:52 am
Im wondering how making possession of drugs from a felony to a misdemeanor would help drug addicts. If someone was addicted to drugs, they would find ways to quench their desire regardless of the consequences. Making the consequence less severe would eliminate the barrier of second-guessing. Wouldnt making rehab mandatory solve the issue instead of a less severe sentence?
Gordon Wang
10/23/2014 08:52:53 am
Prop 47 passing would be a huge step forward in bringing fairness to our criminal justice system. Prop 47 turns what many people arguably consider non-serious and nonviolent crimes into misdemeanors. The effect on California for this proposition passing, would be an indication that as a society we are moving away from blindly incarcerating everyone via Three Strikes, to emphasizing rehabilitation of people who haven't committed serious crimes. Between Prop 47 and the amendments to the Three Strikes law, people convicted of minor offenses will no longer be subjected to the same punishments as other prisoners who have committed serious/violent offenses such as rape and murder. On top of leading to more fair sentences to inmates, Prop 47 also creates funding that will go towards education, corrections, and victims compensation. This means that less money will be going into merely keeping people locked up and will go back into the community to help keep people out of jail to begin with, pay reparations to those wrongly imprisoned and help to rehabilitate those incarcerated to break the cycle of repeat offenders. Clearly Prop 47 will not only lead fairer sentencing for inmates, it will also help to heal some social injustices drawn along racial lines. As a disproportionate amount of people currently incarcerated are people of color, Prop 47 will help many of these people who were unjustly imprisoned for huge lengths of time, under laws such as Three Strikes, to have a fairer sentence.
Alexander Salah
10/23/2014 10:57:26 am
I agree with you. The way our criminal justice system blindly incarcerates people for minor crimes is a major red flag in our system. We have to change the way our justice system works if we want to see real transformations taking place. It is only fair that we give people a chance to change and not just lock them up for a couple of careless mistakes. This happens too often and something must be done about it.
Arnulfo Gembe
10/26/2014 03:08:03 pm
I hope that people will not abuse the idea that they may be able to commit three misdemeanors and get away with a short sentence as in the past. I do hope that there is a statistic that comes out if Prop 47 is passed to compare what races commit the most misdemeanors. Not to point fingers at one race but rather to hopefully notice that all races commit the same amount of crimes so as to eliminate stereotypes that we have in society.
Caitlyn Nürnberg
10/23/2014 09:34:34 am
The passing of proposition 47 would affect California voters because not only will it keep people who do not deserve to be serving long sentences, which will help stop prisons from overcrowding, it will also stop California from pouring so much money into these prisons for low risk offenders. According to Lenore Anderson of Californians for Safety and Justice around 10,000 inmates are eligible for resentencing under this proposition which would lessen the overcrowding problem immensely. It would only affect those offenders with non violent or non-serious crimes, so people who have been charged with offenses such as murder or rape they are not eligible for the program. The people who have been charged with minor felonies that would now be classified as misdemeanors would have a chance to get there lives back, and change it for the better. In addition to helping these people, the money saved, an estimated $150 million to $250 million per year, would be going back into the communities by creating a safe neighborhood and schools fund. The failure to pass this initiative would lead to many people staying in prison for minor offenses, such as personal use of drugs and shop lifting, for the same amount of time as people who committed heinous crimes.
Dakota Bramer
10/26/2014 02:17:52 pm
I'm all for giving the people worthy of it, second chances. Also, just imagine what we could do with that extra budget space like improving neighborhoods and schools like you said. I don't think that personal drug use should be taken so lightly. I am in no way saying it is equal to murder or rape but depending on the drug, there should be varying levels of punishment.
Jason Do
10/26/2014 03:44:37 pm
I agree with you that there would be a lot of benefits obtained by passing Prop 47. To put it simply, imprisoning someone who stole a candy bar for life is a complete waste of resources. I doubt tax payers would want to know that their money is paying to feed a petty thief in prison when it could go into something much more productive like school funding. I understand that some people are considered just way too dangerous to be allowed freedom to wander the streets but I for one couldn't care less if my next door neighbor has a hobby of stealing packs of gum.
Alexander Salah
10/23/2014 10:47:09 am
Due to California prisons being overcrowded, its no surprise that there was a federal court order to reduce its population. California has had a continuous problem of overcrowded prisons for years and due to this there are many concerns among inmates and their families. “In 2011, the United States Supreme Court found that the overcrowding had gotten so bad — close to double the prisons’ designed capacity — that inmates’ health and safety were unconstitutionally compromised.”(NY times, p1) its no surprise that prison cells were over crowded causing problems with safety and health. If one inmate happens to be sick, there is a much better chance of others who are close to him getting sick as well. Prop 47 would be a huge factor in combating this issue not only for the state, but for the country as well. Minor crimes such as petty theft, writing bad checks, receiving stolen property, and many more, have been considered to be felonies, when in other countries they are considered at most, misdemeanors. Most European countries do not have a crowded jail system due to realistic sentencing. If we were to pass proposition 47, it would be a tremendous help towards helping our country improve its jail and criminal justice system, making sentencing reasonable. In many cases, people who have records are in the system for very minor crimes such as shoplifting and possession of cannabis. Even though racial profiling has a lot to do with the records people have, it is not the only factor. Our criminal justice system is very flawed due to greedy corporations and government agencies making money off of sending people to jail and prison. Our prison system is a business to many people and to stop the flow of inmates would essentially stop the flow of cash. To end this post, the passage of prop 47 will have a heavy impact on California voters for years to come because the failure of the system reflects the failure to act upon it. If we fail to act, then we fail to change.
Gordon Wang
10/26/2014 03:21:30 pm
It's really ridiculous at how overcrowded prisons have become. The statistic that you quoted, where prisons were at as much as double capacity, is truly a frightening look into the state of our criminal justice system. Facts like these show how both the law and the attitude of the people are more interested in locking people away and forgetting about them, then helping them reintegrate.
Brandon Morin
10/23/2014 10:57:36 am
Proposition 47 would do more good than harm for Californians. Im not sure if the voters themselves would reap the majority of the benefits of the passage of the proposition, however lives will change as a result. Reducing the severity of sentencing on the non violent charges will be beneficial to the individuals who are currently serving time and at the same time will move a large amount of tax dollars from prisons to schools, victims, and neighborhood programs. That in itself is a great improvement on communities and lives for Californians. However, I don't believe that altering the conditions of food stamps and welfare eligibility is a good idea. Knowing a lot of people that still participate in that lifestyle and from my own experience, there is a potential that as a result petty crime particularly counterfeiting/check fraud may increase. A lot of the mentioned crimes that are mentioned as being reduced are go to crimes for dope fiends that want to re-up. Food stamps get sold left and right for bags of dope and I think it's a good idea to keep the current policies in place. The rest of proposition 47 would be a great punch in the face to the administrators of so called justice and hopefully a spike in petty crime won't be the result. It's interesting to look at the history of the war on drugs and analyze the propositions that are being proposed. If this continues to progress the war on drugs may finally take a loss and maybe then this country may start looking into the real problems facing our society!
Arnulfo Gembe
10/26/2014 02:55:37 pm
I had not thought of that aspect of proposition 47, the possible increase in petty theft crimes or other misdemeanor crimes. I could see how people would find it okay to commit their first offense with the law especially since the state would just "slap their wrist." However like you stated I also hope that people don't take advantage of this new proposition if it is indeed passed.
shannon casey
10/26/2014 03:15:48 pm
I'm interested to see if there is a spike in petty crime, I think it is possible that if won't change in a perceptible way. If the attempt at deterrent of jail or prison was inneffective in decreasing the number of offenders. It would be great to see some the money not spent on incarceration could be used for employment skills or education for some of the folks being released. Having a clean and sober network built in to re-entry to increase opportunities for success.
Sharon Serper
10/23/2014 12:29:58 pm
Ultimately, the passage of prop 47 would be beneficial for the people of California. One major issue this initiative addresses is overcrowding in prisons. California spends thousands of dollars on prison costs, many of which are put towards people that are unnecessarily incarcerated. The state spends thousands more on each prisoner than it does on each student in public schools which is a huge issue and really should not even be the case. Prop 47 will help control the population in prisons, significantly assisting the state in managing its budget.
Tiffany Le
10/23/2014 01:27:52 pm
Hi Sharon! I completely agree that California spends too much money on the prison system and not enough on schools! It's unfair that students across the state will lack resources because money is poured into housing prisoners that shouldn't be locked up for 25 to life. As we've seen with Sajad (and there are plenty others), people want to turn their lives around, and second chances should be granted.
Nelson Chuang
10/26/2014 11:46:43 am
How come you do not want second chances for people people who commit rape, or murder? Im sure there are also many of those serving sentences with special circumstances. They could have been provoked while being in the wrong place at the wrong time for them to take those drastic measures. If we are allowing special circumstances for inmates without serious offenses, dont you think we should allow a re-sentencing of everyone?
Sharon Serper
10/26/2014 01:52:39 pm
Hey Nelson. I’m curious why you believe that people who have committed rape or murder deserve a second chance. Personally, I would not want these people wandering the streets. I do not believe that there are excuses for either of these crimes. Rape is in no way excusable and I cannot think of a situation in which a person was provoked and should be let off. If this person was provoked to rape someone, they are a threat to the public because there is no guarantee they will not be provoked again. To answer your question, no. I do not think all inmates should be re-sentenced. Some crimes are simply too drastic and inexcusable.
Dominic Allred
10/23/2014 01:19:52 pm
If proposition 47 passes (I hope it does) a couple of changes stand out to me in a broad scope to me. One is the reduction of a need for prisons, the prison industrial complex will weaken, and more tax money can be allocated towards different programs that will benefit more people. Also instead of housing people who commit minor nonviolent offenses and wasting money forcing those with minor offenses to become institutionalized, money can directed towards rehabilitation and preventative measures. One thing that stands out if proposition 47 passes is families will no longer be ripped apart, children will no longer have to grow up without one or both their parents for committing a minor offense and sometimes those offenses like theft of food are done out necessity and desperation. The fact that tax money could be redistributed to more important programs that prevent people from having to struggle on a daily basis and hang on by a thread to maintain their humanity is by far more important that rounding up people who commit minor offense like cattle and throwing them in pen.
Hakwoo Kim
10/23/2014 04:57:39 pm
I really agree with the points you made about how it's going to improve the quality of the families. The current criminal justice system really sets a lot of obstacles for the minority groups to succeed. I just like that you address that this proposition can resulting in helping them maintain their humanity. I also agree with you that it is more efficient to allocate money towards rehabilitation and prevention programs.
So Chun Kiu Ryan
10/23/2014 01:34:49 pm
Passage of California, Prop 47, the Reduced Penalties for Some Crimes initiative enhances fairness of judgment of sentence and reduces government and public spending.
Judy Chen
10/23/2014 01:35:33 pm
Most people who are incarcerated for non-serious or non-violent crimes are people of color, even though they make up a small percentage of people who are actually committing crimes of the same nature. Passing Prop 47 will be another step America decides to take towards social justice and equal opportunity. By categorizing these crimes as a misdemeanor instead of a felony, it gives people of color a better chance to have a clean criminal record, or at least to bounce back into their daily routine without being scathed too harshly by the criminal justice system. If Prop 47 isn’t passed, then people of color are going to continue to be the target for criminal incarceration for police officers and the criminal justice system in the United States as they were, but have severe penalties for their crimes, even if they are non-serious or non-violent. Prop 47 allows people of color, both men and women, to come back from their jail sentences sooner and continue to be on welfare and food stamps so that they can support themselves and their families on their already low income. Even though the crime was committed and the individual is guilty, there isn’t an equal incarceration rate or fair treatment between white criminals and criminals of color. For white criminals, some violent and serious crimes may even be passed off by the judge as a misdemeanor, whereas for criminals of color, the criminal justice system wouldn’t even think twice before sentencing them to jail/prison and locking them behind bars (mostly for the long run or even life). Passing Prop 47 would give the American criminalization system to perhaps clear out their already overcrowded prisons, and incarcerate those who actually deserve to sit behind bars for life, not just those who have committed minor offenses and arrested to be sentenced to jail as their last strike.
Dakota Bramer
10/23/2014 01:51:22 pm
It is really unfair when considering what some people get prison sentences for. The line between a non-violent/minor offense and a violent crime is too thin. It should not be so "technical" and by that I mean this: (ex.) "Well you technically did break this law, so technically we have to put you in jail." Whatever law that person may have broken could be something as minuscule as stealing a candy bar worth less than two bucks. It seems the justice system looks too much at the fine print saying "you broke the law, you pay the price" without really considering the magnitude of the offense. There is definitely a difference between assaulting someone and smoking pot right? Certain offenses should not be grouped in the same categories and punished the same way based on technicalities.
veronica romo
10/26/2014 03:23:03 pm
I completely agree. it seems that once in a position of power, authority figures seem to take on the strict roles before them too readily. As if anyone especially minorities, are already guilty until proven innocent instead of the other way around as the law states. at least this proposition provides somewhat of a fighting chance to those minor offenders less likely able to afford an attorney. If the saved funds are distributed as described our educational system should reap sum benefits, however I don't believe that the majority of profits should be distributed right back into the state's correctional system.
So Chun Kiu Ryan
10/26/2014 04:05:45 pm
Consequences of violation of law should be taken into account. The guest in our previous mentioned a guy who stole a battery got same length of sentence as a murderer and it was really shocking to me despite of the consequences of 2 crimes. We have been proud of our criminal justice system that it maintains social order. but at the same time, many people neglect the extreme unfairness of it, like the situation mentioned above and how people of colour are lot more likely to get into jail. I think everyone should be noted of the injustices of our criminal system. Therefore, more laws like Prop 47 will be changed and improve its situation.
Cody Caropepe
10/23/2014 02:08:00 pm
Prop 47 should totally be passed I think. The amount of people that are serving 25 to life sentences in prison is ridiculouse. We waste so much money keeping these people in prison for things that barely have any effect on anyone on our society. Just like Sajad said we he visited our class wensday, there were people in prison for life that stole batteries from a best buy. Could you imagine being a non violent person thrower in with people how have murder countless numbers of people, that would be terrifying. My uncle almost had this happen to him when he had his second run in with the police. The only thing that helped him get out of it was probably the fact that he was white. Isn't that sad. I think that if they actually out all the money that they would be saving from this prop towards schools then it would be totally beneficial. I think we need to do like Sajad suggested," put a face to these so called felons" this way people can have a little eye opening. I think once people realize how non violent these people actually are they will be more pushed towards passing this proposition.
Judy Chen
10/26/2014 09:50:11 am
I completely agree with how it's a waste of money for our government to keep so many prisons and jails overflowing with criminals who were charged on a minor offense. Not only does it waste money, but it also prevents those who have committed real felonies from being able to immediately be sent to jail and imprisoned for their crimes. Overcrowding prisons with individuals who have committed misdemeanors prevents those who deserve a heavier sentence from getting the punishment they deserve. Especially since a majority of people incarcerated for minor crimes are people of color (due to unjust racial profiling by our criminal justice system), they are getting put away for non-violent or non-serious crimes, while several white people are getting lesser punishments simply of their race, or the fact that there isn't enough room for them to be imprisoned.
Dominic Allred
10/26/2014 11:17:45 am
Its good that you quoted Mr. Shakoor, the idea of showing an inmates humanity especially those who have committed non-violent crimes is important. It would be interesting to see politicians, judges, prosecutors, etc. to look at the people they affect and see their reality and their humanity. As you stated directing money towards schools instead of prisons is what we need to do.
Dakota Bramer
10/26/2014 02:04:04 pm
Yeah, there are tons of other things we could with the huge amounts of money we are using to imprison people who really do not even deserve to be in prison. Putting faces to the felons is a big point too, because it brings the "human" part into discussion. After all, these "felons" are people with emotions and lives.
Arnulfo Gembe
10/23/2014 02:35:11 pm
Proposition 47 to some voters might seem like the proposition allows dangerous inmates back into society when in fact this is far from the truth. Voters need only to briefly read the main points of proposition 47 to realize that inmates with a history of “convictions for murder, rape, certain sex offences or certain gun related crimes” would not be eligible for proposition 47. Voters would also be able to greatly reduce prison population in California. Voters should be delighted that “about 10,000 inmates would be eligible for resentencing” which means that inmates would be able to serve shorter sentences which in turn means that inmates would be able to reunite with family members. However if a voter is not too concerned with this aspect then a voter should at least know that prisons would not receive such a large portion of California’s tax allocation. Taxes instead could then go to either infrastructure or education if California wishes to allocate the taxes to those departments. Also voters should take into consideration the severity of the crime committed, if for example inmate X has committed petty theft three times the third time the crime becomes a felony and serves the same sentencing as inmate Y who may have murdered someone and receives the same sentencing as a felony. Proposition 47 would take the severity into account and reduce a felony to a misdemeanor which would make it easier for inmates to readjust to society as opposed to have a felony charge on their record. The latter most applies to when an individual wants to apply for a job, the individual has a better chance of landing a job with a misdemeanor rather than a felony charge on their record. Voters should not be afraid of allowing murderers or rapist being reintegrated into society rather giving an individual a second chance to adjust to society.
Gordon Wang
10/26/2014 03:32:24 pm
I think it's an important point that you noted that prisons receive a very large portion of tax dollars. I remember several years back when people were making a huge deal about how more tax dollars were being spent per prisoner than per student (almost double if I remember correctly). The fact that such a large portion of the state's budget goes towards keeping many people incarcerated for minor offenses is ridiculous, instead we should be seeking to rehabilitate people and lower prison expenses by lowering the number of inmates.
Hakwoo Kim
10/23/2014 04:52:32 pm
The current criminal system has been racially biased and inefficient in preventing crimes. Racial profiling and the war on drugs have served as one of the forms of institutionalized racism, as it puts certain racial groups, that are more likely to commit crimes due to their harsh conditions, into a situation in which they are stuck in a vicious circle; harsh conditions lead to their more likeliness of committing crimes, which acted with racial profiling and the war on drugs incarcerates them, which again enhances their harsh conditions such as single mom situations. The law enforcement has been stricter on stigmatized racial groups, yet not much has been done to improve their environments and prevention of such crimes. However, Proposition 47 can initiate positive changes to challenge racialized criminal justice system and better the environments for people.
Nicole Cheng
10/23/2014 05:01:28 pm
If Prop 47 is not amended, the status quo will not change-- meaning prison populations will continue to grow beyond carrying capacity, state funds will be poured into incarceration, and prison sentences will inappropriately reflect crimes. The most appealing part of this proposition (other than the fact that it will disallow petty crimes like the aforementioned to be given 25+ years for life, a rather sad notion) is in the funds spent in rehabilitation. Everybody gets stuck in life, some people in less “prettier” places than others. But everybody needs help. Not having adequate rehabilitation services would be the equivalent of not helping an individual wrestling with multiple personality disorder, or depression--- or any internal problem. There is a problem that can be helped, but is left to resolve itself. This is especially undesirable when it can sometimes result in actions (as a by-product of unfortunate circumstances) that work negatively on the community (like theft, or petty crime, and more serious ones). The passage of 47 will also force the community to reevaluate it’s stigma on prisoners, and the people who make up that population (which is virulent with racism). It will also give people more opportunities; being labeled a felon closes many doors (disallowing individuals from voting, job opportunities-- preventing those who get out from reintegrating into the community, which often leads to repeats in old patterns), and redefine what it means to give people “second chances” -- or third chances!
Veronica Romo
10/26/2014 03:30:59 pm
I agree that this proposition truly is the beginning to changing the status quo little by little by integrating less minorities into the prison system especially for minor offenses. by doing so the stigma placed on the stereotypical prisoner should definitely be altered. it seems that most minor or non-violent crimes are usually targeting those less likely to fight the crimes, for example the poor, foreign, or minority. its great to finally see the allowance of the opportunity for more rehabilitation rather than incarceration.
Niloufar Pirkhezri
11/10/2014 10:07:06 am
I like your points Nicole. I believe that by proposition 47 passing, it will change that status quo and actually allow for prisoners to get our of jail for misdemenours, and give them the opportunity to flourish in life without having restrictions. It will break "the norm" and will allow us to spend our tax dollars on something more proactive like our public schooling system.
Nelson Chuang
10/24/2014 01:34:24 pm
Although Proposition 47 is on the right path to providing a second chance for citizens in the justice system, the initiative provides too many scapegoats for criminals to “get off the hook.” For instance, misdemeanor sentencing for shoplifting that does not exceed $950 is ridiculous. Many of today’s laptops, phones, and luxury merchandises are easily purchasable with premiums under the $950 limit. I can understand if someone is stealing medicine or food for their basic wellbeing, but if they are stealing for the basic reason of wanting, not needing, it should stay a felony.
Caitlyn Nurnberg
10/26/2014 03:19:59 pm
Hi Nelson,
Jason Do
10/26/2014 03:37:22 pm
Though it is true that the information we've been given about prop 47 is quite vague, I think that may just be because we are only writing a blog post about it and not anything requiring us to red the fine print in the bill. I would assume that the actual bill will have clear provisions on which drugs will be considered misdemeanor offenses and which won't be. Also in agreement with the other comment, while theft is definitely not socially acceptable, I do't believe it has enough weight on it to be considered a felony, especially at a cap of $950. Sure having a laptop stolen would ruin someone's week, but file a police report and you may end up getting it back. However, filing a police report on a murder won't bring a person back to life. Reporting an assault won't erase the physical injuries sustained. I believe felonies should be treated as the worst of all crimes and petty thievery is definitely not the worst thing that can happen to you.
Niloufar Pikrhezri
11/10/2014 10:03:24 am
I agree with Caitlyn's comment. After working in retail I have experienced a lot of shoplifting for silly things such as $14 socks. I have seen customers get a misdemeanor charge and a $900 fee for stealing a 20 dollar shirt. Although I do think stealing is wrong, but sitting in jail for life just for stealing something so small is ridiculous.
jennifer melgarejo
10/24/2014 03:09:34 pm
The passage of this initiative is not just relegated to benefit those who are affected by an incarcerated relative, friend or acquaintance, rather it has the potential to affect the wellbeing of communities.
Jason Do
10/24/2014 04:20:06 pm
Prop 47 has a lot of things I believe should definitely be put into practice. Getting 25 to life for something as minor as stealing batteries just doesn't make sense in any universe. Prisons are already becoming overcrowded as it is, and throwing the life sentence around really undermines the severity of the punishment. I believe that a life sentence should be reserved for the worst of the worst: the people who have committed the most heinous of felonies like murder and assault. Handing such a severe punishment to just anyone will not only hurt people's trust in the justice system, but will also flood the prisons with immovable inmates, leading to rising prison costs and less funding elsewhere. Passing Prop 47 will hopefully cut down on the prison population thereby reducing the amount of tax dollars going into prisons and allowing them to be spent elsewhere, like public schooling. This will in turn, educate the young so they can learn to become good members of society, preventing future criminals from being produced.
Dominic Allred
10/26/2014 11:09:46 am
Your last two statements are vital to why proposition 47 should pass. Its essential to direct tax revenue towards programs of rehabilitation and towards programs of prevention like schools. Could you imagine how great the public school system would be if a large portion of tax revenue was allocated to schools? Great blog post overall.
Sharon Serper
10/26/2014 02:14:25 pm
I agree completely! If there are actions we could potentially be taking to improve our state’s public schooling system, why are we not already taking those actions!? Like Jason said, educating our youth will help ensure (at least to some degree) that future generations will learn to be upstanding members of our society.
So Chun Kiu Ryan
10/26/2014 03:53:22 pm
I agree with you with the fact that life sentence should be reserved for people who committed felonies. Stealing a battery is definitely not a sufficient reason to give anyone a life sentence. On top of wasting taxes, getting life sentence just because of misdemeanor can kill someone's life. How absurd it is if these people can no longer have their life, freedom, family just because of a battery? I believe this is certainly not what Americans want in our society. Prop 47 should be passed to avoid these cases repeat in the future.
Niloufar Pirkhezri
11/10/2014 09:58:53 am
Proposition 47 is the perfect chance for people who get out of jail to get a second chance. Prisons in California are over populated with people with misdemenour crimes sitting next to people doing time for murder. It gives them an oppurtunity at getting out of jail, getting a job and actually affording to live. We are spending millions of dollars on these over populated prisons from tax payers that could be put into a more productive use, such as public schooling. Granted, prop 47 would be used for those who have realized their mistakes and want a second chance. After having Sajad talk in our class, he had told us that he was sitting in jail next to one guy who had stolen bread, and another who had committed countless murders. Does that sound like justice? How can someone with a misdemeanor crime and another with a felony both be in prison for life? Thats why proposition 47 will re-sentence people with misdemeanor crimes and give them a chance of getting out of prison and learning from their mistakes. Since the proposition will impact low income communities, can direct our tax money to public schooling, and significantly change people lives then who wouldn't be for that?
Bojana Cvijic
12/1/2014 02:41:59 pm
Prop 47 is good because it reduces sentencing for non-violent and non-serious crimes to a misdemeanor instead of a felony. California has a high and overcrowded population of people in prison and this would help reduce the rate of people getting thrown in jail for as something as little as stealing chips from a convenient store. The fact that people could get 25 to life for just stealing a bag of chips seems absolutely ludicrous, it's important that prop 47 was enacted that way sentencing is not as harsh as it has been for a really long time. Not only does prop 47 reduce prison sentencing for people who commit non-violent/non-serious crimes and gives a chance for 10,000 people to be resentenced, it also aims to create a safer community for people to live in. With prop 47 (also known as the The Safe Neighborhood and Schools Act) aims to put education over incarceration, by helping out underfunded schools, this hopefully could aim to disconnect the "school to prison" pipeline. By funding schools instead of overfunding prison systems in this country, this could bring a safer environment to communities and lessen crimes in return diminishing prison populations. Education is one of the most powerful tools and could completely turn around the way a society or community works. Leave a Reply. |
Poli 15
This blog is for Poli 15 students. Archives
November 2014
Categories |
RSS Feed