ple. There is, ofcourse, a reason that the concept of restitution appeals toAmerica's sense of justice. Restitution also provides analternative to imprisonment for nonviolent criminals,reducing the need for taxpayers to continue buildingprisons. (54)Working with the purpose of paying back someone that has been wrongedallows a criminal to understand and deal with the real consequences of hisactions. Restitution would be far less expensive than the current system. Experience shows that the cost per prisoner can be as low as ten percentofthat of incarceration, depending on the degree of supervision necessary. Removing nonviolent offenders from prison would also relieveovercrowding, eliminating the necessity of appropriating billions morepublic dollars for prison construction.Restitution would deter crime with the same effectiveness as prison. Prisons themselves have not done much of a job when it comes todeterrence. Nations with the highest incarceration rates often have thehighest crime rates. But studies of model restitution programsdemonstratethat they greatly reduce the incidence of further crime, since theyrestore asense of individual responsibility, making the offender more likely to beable to adjust to society. Reducing recidivism is the most direct way toreduce crime.Criminal justice authorities also tell us that it is not so much thetype of punishment that deters crime, but rather the certainty ofpunishment. With respect to deterrence, virtually any sanction, imposedswiftly and surely, has a deterrent effect. An effectively runrestitutionprogram will deter crime. It is believed that in many cases, aggressiverestitution programs would be a greater deterrent than the threat ofprison. To quote author David Simon, I remember talking in prison with a hardened convict whohad spent nineteen of his thirty-eight years locked up. Hewas in for a heavy narcotics offense that drew a mandatorylife sentence. " How in the world could...
