The idea of removing criminals from society and punishing them for their wrong-doings with confinement and hard labor became popular as the areas became more urban and crime also increased (Prison 1). A big problem with the way that prisons were run was that they focused on retribution instead of “fixing” criminal behavior. There were many forms of retribution. The first type is personal revenge: in small societies, the victims of the crime would punish the offender. There is also vengeance by state. In this case, the governments of larger societies would take over the process of vengeance. The bigger the society, the less the victim has to do with vengeance are more to do with justice. Most forms of punishment would involve public torture. The intentions of public torture were to prove the criminal guilty, to get revenge, and deter future crime. The unintended consequences often included sympathy and switching the blame from the person that was being held accountable for the crime. In the early nineteenth century,, there was a rise of penitentiary and debates on how prisons should be run. The two dichotomies of prison systems included the Auburn System, from Auburn, New York, which opened in 1819, and the Eastern Pennsylvania System, which opened in 1829. The Auburn System practiced respect for work and focused on discipline. The rules of the prison included remaining in silence throughout the …show more content…
Also, many deny the idea of rehabilitation. People believe that someone cannot change their bad behavior. An argument that is being constantly made is the idea of building more prisons. “In 2001, The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that only 6 percent of the $22 billion spent on state penitentiaries in 1996 was allocated for rehabilitation programs” (Prisons 2). “It costs state taxpayers an average of $23,000 every year an inmate stays in prison” (O’brien). Obviously, that is a ridiculous amount, and it should be put to good use. Prison control should be reconsidered and improved. Usually prisoners do little work, watch TV, has access to drugs with no incentive to reform, there is no opportunity for “fixing” inmates (O’Brien 1). There should be more inmate labor programs and prisoners should be able to keep all the money they earned. Only one-third of inmates work thirty hours or more weekly, and these are often jobs with no value. Participation in work programs could teach inmates the importance of work and will teach them valuable skills that will make the process of applying for the job easier. This will teach them responsibility and self-worth they probably did not have prior to entering prison. For example, inmates could work in junkyards and restore cars. Then, the owner of these cars can sell them and split the profit with the