Should non-violent prisoners be released from jail in order to reduce overcrowding?

Yes, but rehabilitation and community programs should be given to create a seamless transition for prisoners into the every day life.

Yes, but ensure appropriate parole time, and provide social/financial programs to support their re-integration into society.

This question is too vague. It would very much depend on what the crime actually was. And should be judged on an individual basis

ABOLISH PRISON! IT’S NOT NEEDED! it should be like living a normal life, just without a huge amount of people around you all the time

If they have served 3/4 of their sentence and prove they are safe to the community and can be rehabilitated in a safe way, then they must serve parole and do community service for the rest of their sentence

It depends on what they're in for, if they were simply evading taxes then sure. But if they were a registered sex offender, keep them in there.

its dependant if they a proven that they aren't bad people and have been doing good in jail and haven't had anyproblems

Yes, but only if they've served a reasonable amount time for their crime + if the crime was not super serious.

If they had done a more harmless crime, than they should be released from jail. If they had committed a crime that put another person in danger, than they should not.

Yes, but only if they complete proper psychological evaluation and are proven to not be a danger to society.

Yes, but must attend community service, or attend class for skill building, and must wear a monitor at all times

No, we should institute corporal punishment and/or work camps for offenders.

Yes. And help them transition to life outside of prison with rehabilitation programs and volunteer work

They should be released, but who and how depends on the crime.

It truly depends on the crime, non-violent crimes can range in nature and one uniform answer wouldn’t be suitable for all. Anyone being released from prison to remedy overcrowding should be placed in appropriate programs and participating either in daily supervised community service initiatives or enrolment in the military. An applicable form of probation should exist in both scenarios and strict consequence must be in place for violations. However there needs to be a refresh and suitability audit of current probation officers, as many are corrupt and unsuited in their profession.

Depends on the crime and if they've proven to be good

Yes, under moderation and proper supervision

Yes, but only to rehabilitation/skill building centres

I think we non violent prisoner should be sent for a hearing and then determine whether they can be released or what the best course of action would be

No, we should build more prisons, and make the prisoners work. They are rotting away put the animal to use. They will have to give back to society for what they took.

Yes, but there should rehabilitation programs and a probation period where they are required to check in.

No, but we should increase funding to rehabilitation programs, social programs, education and skill building services to prevent non-violent crimes from occurring and continue to provide them to non-violent offenders to rehabilitate them.

I think they must do community service to prove they can be released early and under supervision of an officer

No, unless they have served their sentence and are commited to a crime-free remainder to their lives.

Yes, depending firstly on the offence like murder, attempted murder, rape, And paedophilia shouldn’t be released

Offer education and skill building programs, and rehabilitation services depending on the nature of the crime

Depends on the type of crime. White collar crime should not be forgiven, only crimes done for survival, out of desperation, or under duress should recieve leniency

Yes, and they should have to perform community service daily in the community most affected by their crimes to see their effect on people. (Assuming they are capable of empathy and remorse)

They should have to be on officer parol or be placed under a community service activity, for a few months.

depending on the crime if it is a life sentence for murder then no if it is a asult that was not sextual but a fight on t he street then yes

yes, if the crime is not as serious as long as they are put under house arrest for a fair amount of time, if the crime is still pretty serious then move them to a less crouded prison

Maybe instead of a full release create a community program for them to work towards reducing their sentence and time.

yes, but place them under house arrest using an e-bracelet and increase funding to offer education and skill building services for prisoners

Either, transfer them to a more under crowded prison or once again, look at the crime they commited and the time they've already served. I feel for some crimes people serve too much time and then for more serious crimes they don't face enough.

Yes, but not for any non violent crime. Definitely should get out for unpaid tickets/fine and should only have to do some community service. Also for peddy crimes should have to do more community services. First time offenses for non violent crimes community service though. But not for repeat offenders automatically could but should be better evaluated and potentially need more community services. There should be more community resources to help people in the first place though to prevent these crimes from happening.

no, they should make more prisons. one for the non violent crimes and one for the more dangerous violent criminals.

Yes, after performing community service, house arrest, and/or after psychological evaluation or rehab

Rather than violence the criteria should be the impact of their crimes on society and how likely they would be to recommit those crimes. For example, a proficient hacker who has been committing numerous cybercrimes is not violent, but is dangerous.

This isn’t a yes/no question. What is the crime, how did it impact others, how substantial was it, and so on. Facile thinking on serious matters shouldn’t be an approach here.

Non violent offenders should have to be placed under house arrest and pay for all the costs related to their monitoring.

Depends on the crime, even if it's non-violent, that's very vague.
I feel they should be released from jail and definitely perform community service on a regular basis for a time. However if after, they continue committing non-violent/violent crimes, then their sentence should be extended, and they must serve it in it's full length before being let out.

Depends on whether or not they are at high-risk of reoffending. If yes, they are at high risk of re-offending then absolutely not. More prisons should be built or more skill building services should be offered within prisons.

I think it depends on whether the person is a high risk offender. Child molester aren't always violent but they are very dangerous, many are released only to reoffend. If they are going to be released I think they should have education/skill building, house arrest and commitment to performing community service with surveillance.

Increase Education and Skill building services for prisoners and once they complete a program then they get let out and put on house arrest or supervision with an ankle monitor until time is finished being served

yes if they have been deemed psychologically stable and have undergone skill building and other sort of training beforehand.

Entirely depends on the "non-violent" crime committed. Sexual predation without violence... stay in prison. Property crime (theft, burglary, vandalism).. stay in prison

Yes, but they must go through a series of psychological tests before being released, as well as completing community service

Only the ones which did nothing and were arrested based on their skin colour (racial profiling) and were unjustly put in jail shall be allowed out. Police officers guilty of such crimes will lose their jobs, be charged and placed in jail by lawful creed of the knight order.

Yes, but look into building non-violent jails or similar programs to prevent the non-violent criminals from being influenced by the violent ones.

Yes, and we should increse funding to offer education and skill building services for prisoners to aid in rehabilitation.

I believe they should ensure that they can be checked daily and that once released back to society, they can work and still be human within society to ensure they don't feel left out.

Put them either under house arrest and offer more effective rehabilitation, skill building and education for them in hopes to not reoffending

Yes, but they must complete community services, and seek education or skill building services after being released.

Yes, but only if the non-violent prisoners have actually changed their ways, and won't cause trouble anymore.

Yes, but have more community based services to support them, and should increase funding to offer education and skill building services for prisoners. Change our model to ones in other countries that show successful rehabilitation

Dependent on behaviour in prison, and the crime committed. Also dependent on rehabilitation plans.

No, we cannot know how a person will behave in different circumstances, most importantly, they are prisoners. They may not be violent in jail because of the security but once they got out, they might think of the unthinkable.

People who have behaved well in prison could be released earlier

Reform the system for rehabilitation rather than punishment.

Yes, and we should increase funding to offer education and skill building services for prisoners. Additionally, extreme repeat offenders of violent crimes, or additionally single instances of terrorism or public shootings/bombings, should face the death sentence, with a side-benefit of reducing overcrowding.

No, but we need more and easier access to rehabilitation for offenders when they are released

yes but go through a evaluation before being released

A combination of two options listed. Yes, but they must undertake either community services, education, and or skill building services.

Yes, provided they are SUPPORTED in giving back and connecting to their community.

Yes, but they must do community service for 1-2 years everyday, or be under house arrest with a electronic braclet.

Of their crime was victimless yes

Yes because prisons shoukd be abolished

Non-violent offenses can certainly be a range of multiple different things, so I would say to tread with caution. We should definitely be putting those with mental health/psychological issues in places where they can get help, as well as those with addiction issues as well, as if we don't they just learn from other people in prisons and jail how to become a better criminal.

Yes, and there should be more funding towards offering education and skill building services for anyone convicted of a crime, whether they are imprisoned or not.

Yes, and increase funding to offer education and skill building services for anyone convicted of a crime.

Depends on what "non-violent" is.

I think that if someone is a non violent criminal, depending on what they have done, they should either be transferred to a different more respectful prison or should do lots of volunteer work.

No, a prisoner might appear non-violent and then go out and commit a crime again.

Yes after going through a rehabilitation program to learn their mistakes.

yes, but with supervision and mandatory pop ins by parole officer

there should be more focus on rehabilitating criminals instead of locking them in jail, this will allow people to reintigrate into society and prevent the issue of overcrowding

Yes but it depends on the kind and severity of their crime

They should be sentenced using Restorative Justice to best benefit the community and prevent recidivism

Non-violent prisoners can mean a whole lot of different criminal offences, many of which aren't fit to be in the community for public safety reasons alone. I would say it's much better to direct them to where they need the most help, be that a mental hospital/ward, addiction center or therapy, but at the same time, prison still needs to be an option as some may not respond well to the help/efforts at rehabilitation.

Is there even significant overcrowding in our prisons?

For non-violent criminals, we will put them in rehabilitation centres.

Depends on what "non-violent offences" mean, as it is a very broad category that encompasses all kinds of offences. If they're a drug addict, they shouldn't be in jail and should be getting treatment.

Yes, but sexual offenders should remain in prison

I think some reevaluating needs to be done, release the wrongly convicted people to reduce overpopulation in the prisons

depends what the prisoner was in jail for not all non-violent crimes cause suffering to others.

Non-violent in prison and out of prison are two different scenarios. It depends on what they were incarcerated for.

No, we should bring back the death penalty.

Jail shouldn’t exist

Yes, so long as they have completed rehabilitation and are fit to re-integrate into society.

Yes, but put them under house arrest with an electronic bracelet, increase time on probation, and make community service mandatory for 2 years.

we should abolish jails.

yes, but they most prove they are functioning members of society

This ultimately depends on the nature of the non-violent crime. I might have differing answers if presented with different cases

We should address why there is an issue with overcrowded prisons in the first place: a biased and punishment-focused justice system that views prison time as the logical response to most legal transgressions.

they should be moved to a more tame prison

Yes, only after a strict psychological evaluation

depends on the severity of their crime and whether they’re a threat to society

Yes, but on certain conditions of rehabilitation and the type of crime must be taken into account

Yes, but they must perform community service daily and have an ankle monitor to make sure they stay home.