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

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

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

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

No, this is a symptom of a larger social problem and needs more social programs to reduce the crimes from being committed in the first place.

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.

Yes, for those sentence are minor. Not those who murdered or human trafficking, etc

Alternatives to peneal punishment such as rehabilitation for drug addiction and preventative action

Depends on their crime. And should be on parole. If the crime is benign then maybe house arrest.

Released from jail only if they serve their time with house arrest or community service.

Yes, but have them monitored

Yes, but it depends on what kind of crime they committed.

Depends on what you mean by non-violent, but also depends on what's best for the rehabilitation of the individual, as well as the communities that they live in. Sometimes, community-based sentences are better.

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

Provided that the non-violent crime still didn’t harm someone

I think this really depends on the crime, for simple theft then I would agree but I think if it's anything bigger then no. I think if prisoners are released then they should have regular check ups from a parole officer.

Yes, but only if they are monitered monthly for the first ten years after their release

Depends on what their sentenced for

Yes as long as they are able to function as members without falling down the same road and if they are not sexual predators by any means

Yes this would decrease the rate of crime

only if their crime was not violent

this is unfortunately not a "yes" or "no" question. it should be evaluated on an individual basis. funding education and skill building should happen regardless.

it depends on the seriousness of the crime committed

Depends on what "non-violent" is classified as. If it's a crime that didn't really do a whole lot of damage, maybe that's a community service but I'm skeptical to label all "non-violent" offenses as safe to be released to the community, because that sounds like a recipe for disaster.

We should be following the same protocols norway does with their prisoners, that way there isn't such a high volume of people going back in.

No, Death penalty.

It depends on the crime committed and what their sentences are.

Yes, after a certain time period has passed

only if there crime was under a two year sentence

Yes but after they’ve given time and after they’re kept on house arrest for a year or two after

Yes, but have harsher punishment upon a repeat offense.

really it depends on what they did, if they only killed children and no one else than no (Example only)

Yes, but after house arrest, community service, strict psychological evaluation, rehab, completing their sentence or after their parole/probation

Yes if they have exhibited good behaviour.

The death penalty would solve this issue

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.