For what reason do we punish criminal activity? Do we want to punish the wrong doer? Deter others from following in their path? Reform their antisocial tendencies?
According to what I have learned to date, the various goals/aims of punishment are:
retribution
deterrence specific to the individual who is being punished
general deterrence of others
rehabilitation
restraint
It is important to keep in mind that I am a first year law student and I have much to learn. Added to this is the fact that the law school I attend focuses on substantive law and its practical application, to the detriment of discussion of legal theory and the like. So I have not had a great deal of time to research this independently.
It seems as though taking the purposes of punishment in order from the most optimistic to the least, the first would be rehabilitation. In this instance, we hope to retrain or redirect the individual to a productive and socially acceptable behavior. This is a commonly stated goal when dealing with juveniles.
The next may be specific deterrence; likened to that of the puppy and the spray bottle of water which teaches him that it is not acceptable to chew on the table leg. Once I have been punished for stealing from my neighbor, the idea is that I may subsequently refrain from such undesirable behavior.
General deterrence is implied in almost any case where punishment is meted out and in particular is used when courts decide to 'make an example' of someone. The greater good of sending a message to the rest of the community is deemed worth giving the particular actor a heavier sentence than would otherwise be imposed.
Retribution is meant to make one pay for their wrongdoing, based originally in the concept of an eye for an eye.
Lastly, restraint is required for those deemed too evil or dangerous to be allowed freedom. They are considered unsalvageable in the main and for this group of people, the solution is removal from society to a place where their ability to inflict harm is at least lessened. My focus is not on this group of criminals, as I think there needs to be a place for sociopaths and the like, and I see no better solution, except perhaps Abigail's solution-shoot them. I'm not sure that is a bad idea, but first I'd like to know that there is no possibility of error, and secondly, I'd like to know how we keep from debasing ourselves in the process. On this matter, Peter has reminded me of what Bardolph said to King Henry the 5th before he became king-"Do not, when you are king, hang a thief." And Henry, in his response, told Bardolph that he the King would not do it, the thief would. The inference is that the sovereign, or in our case, the State, does not kill anybody, they kill themselves-they knew the rules and acted in spite of them. But let's save that for another time.
Also leaving aside for the time the group of individuals convicted of violent crimes, let's move to the rest of the criminals. While I do not want to just dismiss all of the former population, I would like to pick that thread up at a different time.
We as a society have a great and urgent need for reformation of the use of punishment with those who are convicted of crimes in general, and non-violent ones in particular. I mean in particular to criticize our overuse of prison/jail as a means of punishment (or should I say administrative processing?) What good does it do to lock up large populations of our society and treat them without respect, teach them how to survive by joining a gang and demonstrate our disdain for them? They learn that polite society has no use for them, that the only place they belong is with other criminals, and they learn the skills necessary for success in that world.
I don't pretend to know all there is to know about our prisons, and I have been fortunate in not being a victim of a crime more egregious than burglary. However, I do not think one is required to be a victim of murder to understand the harm that can come of it.
I do not mean to understate the deleterious effect of property and white collar crime. It can have devastating effect on the lives of its victims. However, once we get past our individual righteous indignation and look at the higher good for society as a whole, and to some degree, the greater benefit in improving the odds for at-risk sectors of the population, I think there is a clear problem with our current approach. This is most clearly highlighted in our handling of juveniles, and this is also the area where the most benefit can be gained from small changes.
While we do have restorative justice programs and a stated intent not to punish juveniles, I think we are kidding ourselves to say it is otherwise for most youthful offenders. You may know the phrase "there but for the grace of God go I", and whether you believe in God or not is not really of any import here-we all need grace and mercy, especially during our adolescent years. Volumes could be, and have been, written about the effect of poor or absent parenting, abuse, lack of structure and a myriad of other things that adversely affect developing minds and behaviors. However, we do not seem to find ways to use this knowledge for our own good. In the end, we all pay for our inertia. Society is poorer for not providing its youth with clear and positive direction, good role models, opportunities to find the thing that fires their imagination and reasons to do the right thing.
Beyond reaching majority, many of us still have much to learn. Some of us learn it the hard way. I remember visiting my family member in the state prison every Sunday for years, and while from one visit to the next, I saw no change, in the end, he came out of that experience a different person.I do not credit the prison system. I think a big part of the positive change was a result of his parents' unwillingness to let him go. They loved him and treated him as a person for whom better things were to come, he would learn and change from this experience, and it became a self fulfilling prophecy. My point is that it can be done. But I think it will be difficult to do a lot of reformation within a prison environment.
It is intrinsic in human nature that the prison-keeper has too much opportunity for abuse of power without consequence, and the prisoner little self respect or dignity. Both of these mean that a correct balance of power is nearly impossible to maintain when one is the keeper and one is the kept. In my opinion, learning to respect others' rights begins with respecting one's own. And that is a lesson rarely learned in prison. One only needs to look at the rate of recidivism to know that what we are doing now is not working. How long can we continue on this path? We imprison ourselves at a higher rate than any other country in the world. Surely there are other ways.
No comments:
Post a Comment