Few aspects of our society need more correction than the corrections system.
For anyone unfamiliar with how I spend some of my recreational time, I do volunteer work in prisons with those suffering from mental illness. After a decade of such involvement I flatter myself that I have a better understanding of what goes on therein than John Q. Public or Joe the Plumber.
For anyone who jumps to the conclusion that I am a typical bleeding heart, let me say that I am atypical. I am a former commissioner of police. An astute visitor who has suffered through even just a few of my posts might have guessed that I am no more content with what obtains in the correctional system than I am in any other area.
We are apparently a nation of outlaws. One of every four prisoners in the world are in American prisons. We have the longest average sentences in the world. We have the highest recidivism rate in the world. Someone needs to slap our hands.
Our correctional system has no idea of what its role is or should be. Why? Because we have no idea what we want it to do. More precisely, we have too many ideas. Confusion.
Do we want it to keep them locked up so as to protect us? How about revenge? Perhaps we want the prisoners to be punished. Could it be rehabilitation? Actually, we change our minds. We want one combination now, another later. There is no consensus. If we were to ever reach a consensus it would change before we realized that we had reached one. There can be no reform unless and until we decide what we want.
Follow me now. This may not seem to make sense. One suicidal prisoner I was dealing with was given two weeks of solitary. He had to wait a couple of weeks for an opening. The prison put two people in every solitary cell. See what I meant? Can you say overcrowding?
One of the biggest problems is that politicians never lose votes by being seen as tough on crime. If they feel a need to shore up their support, they concoct a new way of toughening the laws. They have focused primarily on two areas.
The first is the issue of mandatory sentences. To me this a violation of the intent of the Constitution. It is a case of the legislative branch overstepping their authority. They are impinging on the prerogatives of the judicial branch. They are taking away the right of judges to judge.
The entire thrust of our legal system is based on our being treated as individuals. The circumstances in different commissions of a crime can be different. The motives and other factors of different individuals can be different. Over the centuries of the development of English Common Law, and our continued efforts to refine those traditions in this country, we relied on judges to look at the crime, the circumstances and individual involved to decide the appropriate punishment.
By putting mandatory sentences on the books, the legislatures are usurping the very job of the judge. They are denying your individuality and mine. They are corrupting 800 years of progress in assuring fair and equitable treatment of the citizenry. And they do this merely for votes.
The above ties in neatly with the draconian laws legislatures have enacted directed at whatever offends them or one of their constituents.
New York State has been considering lately ridding itself of some of what are known as the Rockefeller Laws. These are laws enacted in 1973, during Nelson Rockefeller’s time as governor. They focused on the use and abuse of drugs.
The law imposed a mandatory sentence of 15 years to life for selling two ounces or possessing 4 ounces. Ounces of what? Well, it could be heroin or cocaine or opium or morphine or even marijuana. That matches the penalty for 2nd-degree murder. That seems a bit much, but maybe that’s just me.
Has the State of New York acquired a sense of equity or empathy? No, not really. They are looking for ways of reducing the prison population. Apparently they have decided that saving money trumps the safety of their citizens, revenge, et al. Cracking down on drugs combined with harsh mandatory minimum sentences worked to violate the sanctity of the Commandment to Reduce Taxes. They don’t seem to appreciate that this action is a tacit acknowledgment of the error and excessive taxation of the past 36 years.
So, they want to reduce expenditures. Reversing the Rockefeller Laws is one way of doing that, at least it appears to do so. Another way to reduce costs is to reduce the already inadequate funds for helping those released to adjust to life on the outside.
The problem is that targeting these two areas for budget reductions is insane. Or, maybe the real problem is that legislators think this makes sense.
The economy is worse than simply bad. It is a basket case. Just at this time they intend to shove hundreds of thousands of people unwanted by employers into the job market. They want to top this off with reduced resources to prepare them for gainful employment. Aren’t you glad they are saving your tax dollars?
Just a side note: many jurisdictions are making budget cuts that include reductions in law enforcement personnel.
Do you think it’s possible that there may be unintended, however obvious, consequences? Would you like to try to tally up the increased costs of such stupidity? Rest assured, there will be costs, both financial and social. Welcome to Alice’s world in Through The Looking Glass.
{ 1 comment }
it really seems texas only wants to have their prison system to make them $$$$. find any way to throw them in and forget about them. it’s a very nasty thing.
Comments on this entry are closed.