Two types of home incarceration, Community and Electronic Monitoring, work by placing would-be prisoners in their homes with restrictions such as where and when the can leave. The system has been proven to work efficiently and with low costs. Community monitoring works with community volunteers who watch an individual, and they conduct periodic checks with an individual. Anytime the individual breaks his limitations he is reported to probation officers by the volunteer. Electronic mon

The next problem is how to decide who receives home incarceration. How do the courts constantly hand down this punishment? Can the punishment be the same across the nation to make it fair to every individual? It is not realistic to say they can be completely fair when it comes to handing down sentencing to an individual. Punishment in America will never be consistent; terms of punishment are solely up to the judge's decision. The only way to help the judge is to set base criteria for the punishment. Using a screening process of the seriousness of an offense, the previous record, and the environment of the individuals home will help the process. The judge can use the criteria to make his decision. If the individual has no prior record, committed a crime that was not serious, and has a secure household environment, then that individual would be a prime candidate for this type of punishment. A simple lack of judgment should not put a person in a rough criminal environment where they do not belong. If a person were arrested for stealing beer, would it really be necessary to put him in a cell with murderers?

Home incarceration can help solve overcrowding and many other problems that are present in criminal justice. It can cut costs dramatically by taking away the responsibility of the state paying for prisoners' living situations. Along with not paying for living situations, the state does not have to pay as many people to watch over the individual. The program utilizes other programs if needed, and can even create positive effects for those programs. The courts have given a lot of positive feedback about house arrest. It is a definite way to help fight overcrowding in our prison systems. The simple truth is that it can not harm the system, because it does not have great costs and long-term investments are not need to run the program. Home incarceration keeps the prisons open by taking the less harmful criminals out of a dangerous, chaotic environment where they really do not belong in. House arrest effectively helps the prison system's efficiency. Anderson found, "Even the doubters therefore agree that by diverting some offenders and delaying others' entrance to prison, house arrest succeeds as a way to help manage the prison population" (p.49). The opening of cells in the prisons would help keep more serious offenders in prison longer; which would make the general public feel safer and it would make our prison systems more effective. It would be ridiculous not to consider home incarceration as an alternative to prisons. It is not risk free, but there is not any other option that would be. The risks involved with this system are incredibly low and do not have

Some common words found in the essay are:
Albuquerque Mexico, Punishment America, Baumer Mendelsohn, Scott Hirshi, Arrest Home, Electronic Monitoring, Huff Lilly, home incarceration, house arrest, electronic monitoring, criminal justice, community monitoring, home detention, prevent overcrowding, success rates, justice department, prison system, criminal justice department, Scott Hirschi, program home incarceration, help prevent overcrowding, prevent overcrowding prisons, community monitoring individual,
Approximate Word count = 1821
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page double spaced)