The film talks about jail and prison and how many people see it almost as a part of life,

but even

though it’s not directly stated, the amount of inmates that were other than white greatly

outnumbered those who were. I feel like the point of prison is not to be correctional, but to

protect society from those who are unfit to live among us. The expectations to not do drugs, or

not skip school, or to be an “acceptable member of society” are there as a guideline for us to

follow. I believe that the way we act is largely environmental, and we are thus framed by it. It

makes them incorporate the social messages that no one cares about them into their view of

life. The film challenges incarceration by showing that it doesn't always work as a deterrent, and

that many end up back in the incarceration system. It normalizes jail and prison for the black

children, as well as the adults inside of the community. It desensitizes prison for the black and

latino community, in an odd way, and many are not afraid to admit it. A report out from The

Sentencing Project, a Washington, D.C.-based research and advocacy center, found that Black

Americans are incarcerated at nearly 5 times the rate of white Americans, whereas Latino

Americans are imprisoned 1.3 times the rate of white Americans.

Prison State shows incarceration as a form of retributive justice by showing that it is, in most

cases, an attempt to re-educate, rather than just incarcerate. I guess that you could say prison

is somewhat egalitarian in the fact that it doesn’t matter if you are rich or poor, you are

supposed to be incarcerated the same. It might be trying to send the message that there is no

special treatment for criminals. Proportional equivalency is shown by the sentences that must

be carried out. We all know this. Your sentence is in correlation with the crime committed itself.

It wouldn’t be fair to give a life sentence for truancy.

I think that a natural law proponent might argue that the costs of incarceration should be

minimized, as it is an affront to a person's human dignity to be incarcerated and that it goes

against the natural law principle of protecting life, liberty, and property. With deontology, I

feel like they would argue that the costs of incarceration should be minimized, as it goes against

the deontological principle of respecting an individual's autonomy and treating them with dignity.

They would say that incarcerating someone should only be used as a last resort, in cases where

the person poses an immediate and clear danger to the public. A deontologist might also

argue that incarceration should not be used as a form of punishment, as it violates a

person's autonomy and denies them their right to be treated with dignity. Instead of

spending money on incarceration, deontologists believe that resources should be used for

prevention and rehabilitation.