Private property is the property owned by a person or a group of persons who have the right to own any material or non-material objects in accordance with the law. However, the list of things one may own is not endless. For example, a private person or corporations are not allowed to own prisons.

The right to penalize criminals within the borders of the state is an inalienable part of the sovereignty of every state. When sharing this right with private persons or companies, the state will reduce its spending but lose a significant part of its powers. For this reason, one may say that private prisons do not correspond to the modern concept of the state power and sovereignty.

The other aspect is the practical one. The realization of the right of the private entities to own prisons may cause favorable conditions for various kinds of trespass. The main goal of every private company is bringing profits to its owners or shareholders. In the case of private prisons, it may take a form of the provision of additional services to prisoners for money. Those prisoners who have enough cash to pay to the manager of the company operating the prison would be able to turn their punishment into rest. For example, famous drug lord Pablo Escobar had been serving his sentence in the prison built by him, so he had a wide range of services available there. He was able to hold meetings with the other members of the cartel and even to leave the prison to rest in the local club or restaurant. Therefore, private prisons may be inefficient in terms of the isolation of prisoners from the society and social benefits.

The other argument against privatization is the complexity of the procedure of developing standards and requirements for such institutions. As the main task of every business is generating profits, this attitude in private prisons may result either in the deterioration of detention conditions or the safety and security worsening. To avoid this, a vast number of regulations should be invented and the monitoring and control systems should be introduced.

One the other hand, there are few reasons to allow private persons and institutions to own jails. The first reason is the reduction of costs the state should spend on every prisoner. The government will be able to choose among all the prisons the best alternatives to allocate criminals. Private companies are more efficient than the government offices in the sphere of economy. The other argument is the states budget revenue growth, as the private corporations and their employees will pay more taxes. At the same time, the wages of the prisons employees may grow as the private firms will cause additional demand for the workers.

The idea to introduce private prisons has both weak and strong points. However, the total possible negative effects seem to be greater than the benefits of its realization. Private prisons may destroy the whole penal system and lead to a situation when criminals will not fear to get into jail. The other outcome may be the significant deterioration of detention conditions that is why the prisoners will face the violation of their rights. The growth of the financial effectiveness of the penal system and the increase in wages of the workers are the desired consequences. However, the arguments against privatization of prison are more compelling.

Privatization of prisons is a controversial topic, but the comparison of the possible pros and cons shows that the penal system should be governed exclusively by the state.