The standard philosophical structure behind much of the legal system is based on the concept that the overwhelming bulk of humanity responds to logic and that punishment can be quantified in proportion to the seriousness of a violation of the legal system. In this point of view a small violation requires a small punishment and a larger crime demands more forceful punishment, mostly in terms of how long a perpetrator is incarcerated. There is, of course, a certain flexibility at the behest of the presiding judge, to vary the prison time in relationship to the mental condition of the criminal but this is basically a minimal capability. The theory is that a sufficient time in prison will have the proper psychological effect to modify behavior and return the individual to proper social behavior.
A recent estimate that 60% of released prisoners subsequently commit crimes and are returned to prison indicates that this traditional method of deterring crime is, at minimum, highly inefficient. In addition, the rapid growth of prisoners under the current system requires a tremendous increase of prison facilities which are economically unproductive and a real detriment to the economy.
There are two basic ways of dealing with criminal behavior. The first is punishment as detailed above. The second is a pragmatic analysis of the causes of each crime in the relationship of the criminal to society and to remove those motivations which result in crime. A recent suggestion of mine that extreme sex criminals have the glands removed that generate the sexual impulses may be a simplistic solution to a rather complicated criminal situation but it is an attempt to, not punish the criminal, but to endow the situation with no further motivation for repetition. Considered as a punishment, it may be extreme but considered as a medical treatment for an aberrant behavior, it is merely an attempt to rationally solve the problem.
Surgery and execution are extreme solutions to difficult problems but considered as a more sensible way to solve problems of criminality outside of the mindless system of standard times served in prison which have proved generally ineffective if not totally useless might be more rational. And of course, rational thought on the problem by experienced experts who understand the tremendous variety of problems in the system and the individuals involved could result in more humane and less extreme solutions which could result in a better and more economic system for dealing with criminal behavior less oriented towards revenge and more towards restoring individuals to productive lives.
I agree
No opinion
I disagree
Add your comment
Agree. I have always looked at jails as a place to put people that we as a society fear having free (the violent, sociopathic element). All other offenders I see as getting free room and board (and very expensive at that). Jails also are a good way for criminals to train to be better criminals, whether it is better connections for selling crack or meth, or better partners for stealing cars. And what about white collar crime? --My tax dollars have to feed and house these people, too? Who is the one "serving the sentence" when we send someone to jail who should compensate society in other ways? --my tax dollars are at stake every time a judge sends someone to a free-room-and-board situation. Someone has to pay, and it is always joe or jane taxpayer.
A serious crime prevention scheme would address both the genetic and environmental causes. The genetic part would result in charges of racism, and the environmental part would result in charges of "giving away my money" by conservatives.
You're screwed either way. Result = continue as we are.