Quote:
Originally Posted by madcorgi
I agree that this is an age old problem, but I disagree that we are using kid gloves on criminals. We have moved away from more barbaric methods used in the past (public hangings, floggings, stocks, etc) because (a) they don't work; and (b) they are morally unacceptable in a civilized society. I think we will eventually move away from capital punishment for the same reason--the deterrent effect is minimal, and the costs associated with a state-sponsored system of human extermination are extremely high. As I said earlier, people tend not to consider consequences of their actions when they act out of anger or fear, which is how most violent crimes occur.
But the notion that we use kid gloves on criminals is, I think, incorrect. The criminal justice system is a bear trap--once in, it is almost impossible to get out--and it's a horrible place to be. Too many enter at an early age, get branded as career criminals, and come to consider themselves as such. Small crimes become bigger crimes, and the downward spiral continues, not because we make "the life" too attractive, but because our system pretty much guarantees failure.
Other countries see to have figured this out better than we have. What can we learn from them?
|
I'll defer to your experience in the criminal justice world, having actually worked within it while I have never been more than a spectator. And, as I outlined above regarding my observations with this young man, I could not agree more about the "bear trap" analogy.
That said, I've attempted to present a bit different perspective as a part of my argument. That of the citizen who would like "the system" to protect me from these guys. Most of the focus seems to be on them, their "rights", their "rehabilitation", exploring the root causes of their behavior, etc. That is all well and good, and I support those efforts. We must also keep in mind, however, the rights of the citizenry to be protected.
Severity of punishment is no deterrent to these guys. Agreed. At some point however, we have to understand that deterrence is only a part of the equation. Our sentencing is far, far too light on very serious crime and the perpetrators live very much in a "catch and release" system. Plea bargaining often reduces the punishment for some pretty serious stuff down to a slap on the wrist. In the end, the citizenry suffers. To be honest, I am far more interested in reforms that address public safety over felons' rights. Right now, our system is failing spectacularly in that regard.
When a violent felon achieves what I believe to be the criteria necessary for execution, I am no longer interested in any sort of a deterrent affect that may have on the rest of the criminal world, because I know it won't have one. Mine is a purely pragmatic position - if he is never going to get out, I see no reason to feed and house him anymore. It sure would free up a lot of space, and budget, to simply exterminate those who have attained the status of a "lifer".