California Sentencing Commission Critical Thinking Sample

The judges should base the sentences on the different individuals on different factors. First, the nature of crimes determines the type of fines to levy on the individual, which is whether impose fines, community services or jail. Therefore, it is necessary to revise the jailing terms in states in the U.S especially California. Research has shown that overcrowding in California jails is prevalent due to the punishments proposed on the criminals (Dansky et al, 2006). For this reason, the lawmakers are obligated to formulate laws and regulations that reduce the congestion in the prisons. For instance, the judges could come up with alternative punishments rather than the jail terms.
Thesis statement: an analysis of the current situation in the Californian cells depicts the true image of the California poor sentencing style.
However, the challenges faced by many prisons in California are attributed the constitutional failure to give the provisions that direct the judges on the forms of punishments to pass on the criminals. Therefore, there was the need to enact an Act that specified the kind of the crimes with the respective punishments. The number of the prisons was few as compared to the number of inmates. The way the judges would pass imprisonment judgments without releasing the older ones contributed to the congestion. More funds allocation by the government is essential to the construction of more cells that would accommodate the prisoners.
The punishments were meant to reform the criminals, but this was not the case because, the inmate developed resistance due to the state of the cells. The only way for the release of the inmates from the prisons was through the pardoning from the governors. The governors were humans who are prone to errors, and emotions could drive them when granting the pardon (Page, 2011). As a result, the hardcore criminals also had a chance for integration in the community and the ones who committed the fewer serious crimes left in the jails.
Conversely, the judges could adopt the use of probation when imposing fines on the criminals. In probation, one is monitored by the police and is restricted from visiting certain areas. It was a better way of reforming the criminals because it was hard for them to commit the crimes when under scrutiny. The law had provided several loopholes in the justice system. The differences between the lawmakers and the governors made the punishment prescription difficult ((Dansky et al, 2006). In most cases, the governors were sympathetic with the criminals, and this led them to agitate for their release. On the other hand, the judges perceived the punishment as a corrective measure to deter and reform the criminals.
The individuals who feel that the punishment laws need reforms shy away from the public. As a result, the fear to come out in the open and propose the recommendations to the relevant authorities led to the persistence of overcrowding in the prisons. The leaders have the perception that the criminals deserve to be put away from the public due to their regard as harmful and dangerous people (Page, 2011). Therefore, if one becomes a threat to the general public, the best option is to put them away from the community.
In conclusion, the legislators should reform the California sentencing commissions to curb the menace of overcrowding. If achieved, the spread of the communicable diseases also reduces and the economic growth rate increases because of the increased productivity of the healthy individuals. The government should revise other ways of punishment and educating the lawmakers is necessary because it helps them understand the types of crimes that deserve imprisonment. Therefore, all the parties involved with the laws need to deliberate to address the overcrowding challenge in the California prisons.

References

Page, J. (2011). The toughest beat: Politics, punishment, and the Prison Officers' Union in
California. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dansky, K., Dansky, K., Commission on California State Government Organization and
Economy., & Stanford Criminal Justice Center. (2006). Contemporary sentencing reform in California: A report to the Little Hoover Commission. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford Law School, Stanford Criminal Justice Center.