Determinate and indeterminate which model holds the best long term promise for crime reduction and why?

Question

in the u.s.

Answer 1

Indeterminate sentencing is better and some determinate sentencing schemes have been held unconstitutional as legislative interference with the judiciary branch. Indeterminate is better is the facility has effective rehabilitation programs for inmates who qualify. I represent a prison that has many such programs. In-determinative is better is the inmate gets a regular review of his/her performance in prison. In-determinative is better if the Court hears Victim Impact statements and can analyze all aggravating and extenuating circumstances in sentencing. I guess my opinion is indeterminate is better IF a bunch of other safeguards and procedures are in place.

Answer 2

Indeterminate sentence is better because it gives the inmates the privilege to a lesser penalty and contribute to the reduction of crimes.

Answer 3

Unfortunately neither because there is no attempt at behavior modification in U.S. prisons.

If there were some sort of behavior modification treatment in prison, I think the indeterminate sentencing would be far more successful. using benchmarks and gradually increasing privilege within the prison system as an inmate progresses. Reduce or eliminate privilege if te inmate does not progress or regresses.

Answer 4

It's not clear that either form of sentencing has a long term promise of crime reduction. Recidivism rates have varied over the years, but there's no study that definitively shows that sentencing of one type or another results in any drop in crime.