Prison Makes Less Sense for the Young and Old

Re “Cost Should Be a Factor in Prison Sentences,” Commentary, May 19: Deputy public defender R. Konrad Moore makes an excellent point when he says that jail time is not a cost-effective way of handling relatively minor offenses. It becomes even less effective when you consider that many young people who could go either way may be influenced toward a life of crime by the inmates they meet in state prison. We need to look at consequences that combine deterrence and the possibility of rehabilitation.

Possible solutions include house arrest, boot camps, hours of community service and others that, at least for minor offenses committed by young people, would be less costly and possibly a more effective deterrent for future crimes. Judges need to be free to impose those alternate sentences. “Locking ‘em up” may satisfy some of our frustrations but may not be effective.

Larry Wiener

Alhambra

*

At $31,000 a year, is it worth it to lock up a drug abuser? The answer is certainly a resounding “no!” It is interesting to note that as the prison population ages, along with the graying of the general population, costs for these “senior” inmates, classified as those over 50 years of age (due to their harder life) in the penal system, dramatically rise. The average cost to house such seniors approaches three times that of the average inmate.

If any of these aged inmates require dialysis, heart surgery, etc., as wards of the state (that’s us), we are required by law to supply it. It is actually more secure for a senior with a serious infirmity and without money to be in prison than to be on “the outside.” Does this make any sense at all?

Tom Pontac

Seal Beach