It’s More Expensive to Do Nothing

It’s More Expensive to Do Nothing
The film, “It’s more expensive to do nothing” allows us a look at the overlooked realm of criminal integrity, the gyrating door institutionalization, the intricacies of remediation and the platforms that have been put in place to assist nonaggressive ex-offenders to thrive as independent associates of the society. The director of the documentary in conjunction with the Humane Exposures Films brings together a compelling range of voices that includes experts in the field of criminology, service providers and ex-cons. The participants help to come up with a detailed overview of how the system being applied is failing to motivate criminals and addicts so that to make them be in a position to change their behaviors towards a productive lifestyle. Therefore, this shows that the primary academic field presented in the film is the area of criminal justice since it touches on the various ways of handling offenders within the society and in prison.
The secondary academic disciplines covered in the film include politics, law enforcement, law, life training, addiction training, and childhood development. Similarly, the film exposes the nonaggressive lawbreakers who have twisted their lives in a better way after effecting remediation and other set literary programs. The fields are depicted through the interviews that Susan Lankford and Alan Swyer who is the director of the film carries out on different experts under the above mentioned secondary fields. Equally, the film examines the roots of criminality, vagrancy; infatuation, infantile distress, and desertion so as to enable it copiously survey the mounting catastrophe in the integrity structure.

The filmmakers guide the watchers over a succession of actions with established trajectory proceedings for altering the lives of both infantile and fully-grown reprobates. Bill 618 that was passed by the California Senate has been discussed in depth since it offers a multiagency return platform that is designed at accelerating a suave transfiguration from custodial back to the communal setting. Therefore, the film depicts that in a State with the maximum detainees reoffending frequency, remediation platforms that are accredited are on the brink of trailing backing.
I discovered that the methodology of the primary discipline is focused on the remediation of nonviolent offenders. The documentary depicts on how the acts of the nonviolent offenders may trigger miracles, and how cutbacks can turn out to be disastrous in a society that is made up of people with distinct traits. The film provides a proactive intervention that can be applied so as to reduce recidivism, save substantial public funds, and benefit not only the affected individual but the entire society.
The film presented some assumptions and biases on the stand it holds towards the treatment of prisoners. The position on helping prisoners rather than warehousing them is a little bit biased as many people may tend to carry out criminal activities so that they can be imprisoned for them gain the help provided to prisoners so that to enable them to live a prosperous life. The documentary shows that 40 percent of the detainees are not in a position to read at a fourth-grade level, have no training in any particular skills, and they portray substance abuse problems. Consequently, the film claims that remediation should be applied as a replacement to the system of inculcating punishment. Therefore, I defer with the view of the presenters of the movie since punishment is necessary so as to act as a disciplinary action for offenders in the society. Criminal activities may rise in the society due to the replacement of punishment that sometimes makes people fear of committing crimes. Henceforth, this shows that the view of the film is biased on its course to protect prisoners due to the affiliated consequences that may result from the act.
Similarly, the presenters held an assumption that keeping prisoners is costly to the general society. The film claims that preparing prisoners for a second chance saves money and reduces policing and court costs. On the same note, the presenters argue that ex-cons may contribute to the society through paying taxes and this makes the world a safer and better place as time progresses. I defer with the assumption since I feel like equipping prisoners with skills is more dangerous than leaving them to be illiterate and expose them to couple punishments. If criminals gain skills, they may turn into cyber crimes and make the world unsafe and unsettled for humans across the globe. On the same note, the criminals may learn skills that they may use to suppress the economic and political activities of a country. Therefore, I feel like habitual criminality should be dealt with in a similar methodology that is applied in addressing chronic illness.
The title of the film renders itself well to an interdisciplinary approach due to its general construction. The title helps those who came up with the documentary to touch on different disciplines so as to portray their ideas to those who shall watch the documentary. Apart from being meant to be centered on the discipline of criminal justice as its primary function, secondary subjects such as politics, law enforcement, law, life training, addiction training, and childhood development were dealt with in the film.