The House I Live In Analysis

779 Words4 Pages
In the film “the House I Live In”, is most broad and obvious clam is in the issues with the laws that separate, not the different races in the country but actually separating the economically differences. In the film many people are interviewed and beautifully showing us how Jarecki’s view on these issues as well as showing very little amounts of bias. In the film “The House I Live In”, many people that you would consider heroes are interviewed such as Vice President Joe Biden, Bob Dole, Charles Rangel and President Barack Obama. They then interview other people such as prison security and even prison inmates in an attempt to humanize the two very different sides in the film. The sides of whether or not our country is really divided but not only racial status but also economic status as well. I agree that there is a large problem with this economical divide and something should be done to shrink the divide we experience in the film. He states that the rock version of cocaine compared to the powdered version is much more severely punished by sentencing laws at a ratio of 18:1. At first it is thought that perhaps this is because the rock form is actually much more dangerous but when they dug a bit it was shown that the two forms actually have the same amount of chemicals…show more content…
Jarecki believe that because private prisons make a profit from having more inmates it stand to reason that a prison would do whatever must be done to ensure that their beds are filled and if this means promoting the war on drugs so that more people would be in these prisons than it’s something that must be done. They interview several prison inmates and many of them do agree that they were harshly convicted just to serve the purpose of filling these beds. Is this wrong? In the film and in Jarecki’s opinion this is really
Open Document