3 ms·
Then why not better train, screen, and pay the parole officers? These people seem to be a key part of the system which would be overseeing people who have a hig
by dm2 13y ago
Then why not better train, screen, and pay the parole officers? These people seem to be a key part of the system which would be overseeing people who have a high chance to commit a crime. The parole officers should definitely try to fairly assess the parolee's life circumstances and try to best assist them in finding a job and crime-free life in normal society.
I've heard stories of parole officers being hard on parolees but the parolees were also thankful because it forced them to turn their lives around.
40% seems very high but the people who sentence and lock-up parolees who violate their parole are likely much better equipped and trained to judge the parolees.
Just my 2 cents.
- cema 13y agoThen why not better train, screen, and pay the parole officers? Think about the candidate pool. Who would be willing to go and take that kind of job? I would expect a certain bias towards what the parent posting has described. Independent observation and openness, in my opinion, would be much more effective.
- guelo 13y agoWhat gave you the impression that it's a problem of training and pay? Parole officers are doing their jobs as they are trained. The system, run by "tough on crime" politicians, prosecutors and cops, is geared towards having as little sympathy as possible.
- nanidin 13y agoIt depends on how you define better: In the context of the owners of a for-profit prison system, better training would result in more parole violations.