Lately, and between reading entries on the Rotten Library, I have turned my attention to the criminal justice system.
I am certainly no criminologist; regrettably I haven't had the time to get a degree from the University of Phoenix, but in my amateur opinion, this system requires a significant overhaul. Its standards are far too draconian, where it does not serve the public interest, and far too lenient, where harshness should be warranted.
First a disclaimer of sorts: this discussion is meant to be suggestive and not exhaustive. If it inspires someone to consider writing a more fully formed argument in favor of any of the tenets I put forth here, then I will consider my job done. Further, the harsher measures I suggest are meant only for a context where one can trust the legal system implicitly and, as Samantha Black Crow told us, "no one but a moron would ever trust the legal system."
The first of the two variations of failure in our current system of enforced morality is the brutality with which it disposes of what amount, ultimately, to petty crimes. Various "three-strikes laws"illustrate the problems herein and give rise to some rather absurd examples.
In California, there are mandatory sentences if convicted of an offense three times. Shoplifting falls under this category, and there is at least one instance there where, as a result, someone who shoplifted a set of golf clubs was handed 25 years. Additionally, under the three-strikes systems, numerous strikes can be awarded for the same incidence of deviation, resulting in one crime that would ordinarily be handled reasonably, instead resulting in concurrent sentences that can total 50 years or more.
This leads to an overcrowded prison system that loses whatever hope it once had of being rehabilitative. Before I am accused of weeping for the damned, however, let me take a more pragmatic approach. Though I am unsure of the exact figure, the annual cost of sustaining an inmate in Florida must run the taxpayers somewhere in the area of tens of thousands of dollars.
In Virginia, the cost per prisoner was a startling $24,332 for 2008. At prices like this, can we afford draconian standards?
Then again, we come to the other horn of the dilemma. Many times, the legal system deals far too leniently with crimes that deserve something more serious. An example would be child molestation, where sentences as light as five years are not completely unheard of.
My suggestion here is a bit harsher. In an ideal society, wherein lighter crimes go lightly punished, I would suggest a penalty of execution for first-degree (that is, premeditated) murderers, rapists and child molesters, assuming their guilt could be positively established and there were no mitigating mental circumstances, to borrow from the language of legalese. These crimes are certainly unforgivable and also have high recidivism rates.
Think of it not as revenge, but rather as a step to protect society. The death penalty was ruled out 5-4 by the Supreme Court in cases of child molestation as recently as 2008, though, so my ideal society will have to wait until the court reconsiders.
The flaws in our American justice system are plenty, and I have here given only a sampling.
The ill-using of those convicted of relatively minor offenses, and the charity shown to those with a predilection for the worst types of offenses are indicative of a backward national psyche. A determined reappraisal is warranted.
Eric Chianese is an English senior. His column appears weekly.
