Word on the street: Should non-violent criminals be under house arrest instead of jail?

Published 12:00 am Tuesday, July 3, 2007

With the Lawrence County Sheriff’s Department having to send prisoners to other counties because of overcrowding,

Sheriff Tim Sexton has said

on June 4, there were 69 inmates housed at the jail in Ironton, another 10 in Scioto County, seven more in Morrow County and another six inmates housed in Washington County. He said he would like to see judges order non-violent offenders to home confinement and 19 Lawrence County inmates might be eligible for it. Those eligible would be those incarcerated for such crimes as forgery, failure to appear in court and drunken driving. Home confinement would cost tax payers less than sending them to other counties and save the department money.

Email newsletter signup

We asked people on the streets of Ironton what they thought about confining non-violent offenders to their homes to serve out their sentences.

“I can see it for non-violent offenders. It probably would save us a lot on costs.”

- Jack Pemberton, Ironton

“I would see no problem with house arrest. If they can let Paris Hilton out after three days for driving while intoxicated, I see no problem with it.”

- Richard Boll, Ironton

“It’s better for them to be under house arrest as long they can work and pay off their fines.”

- Joe Bass, Ironton

“The overcrowding is pretty bad so they should probably do something about people who commit lesser crimes like drunk driving.”

- Judy Davis, Ironton

“As long as they keep a close watch on them, I think putting them on home confinement is ok.”

- Johnny Hackworth, Ironton