The Criminal Justice System’s Abandonment of Criminal Punishment
The Collapse of the Criminal Justice System: Tracing the Origins of Lawlessness
I have talked extensively about the collapse of the criminal justice system, but few people take the time to understand its roots. The truth is, you don’t have to look very far.
Our country is now governed by individuals who reject the idea of enforcing the law and punishing criminals. These people operate based on a set of particularly crazy beliefs, one of which is the notion that punishment doesn’t deter crime. This insane idea originated in our institutions of higher learning and has spread throughout society.
It all started with the claim that the death penalty doesn’t deter crime, a claim that has been proven false. However, this argument didn’t stop at the death penalty; it expanded to include all forms of harsh punishment. The prevailing argument today is that all punishment is pointless because criminals don’t consider the consequences of their actions.
This intellectual origin of the “soft-on-crime” approach to law enforcement is now prevalent in major cities across the country. The Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) adopted this approach without much attention. In 2016, the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the DOJ, published a document titled “Five Things About Deterrence,” which serves as the modern manifesto of the anti-incarceration movement in the United States.
The DOJ’s Manifesto on Deterrence
According to the DOJ’s document, the certainty of being caught is a more powerful deterrent than the punishment itself. Criminals are supposedly more concerned about getting caught by the police than the length of their prison sentences. However, this argument fails to address the fact that if punishments are not severe, being caught loses its fear factor.
This flawed reasoning is evident in cities where criminals are caught but not adequately punished, leading to a cycle of repeat offenses. It’s like saying that home invaders are deterred by guns, regardless of whether it’s a Glock or a super soaker. It simply doesn’t make sense.
WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show
The DOJ’s manifesto fails to provide further explanation for this point. It simply states that research shows the chance of being caught is a more effective deterrent than draconian punishment. However, buried in the fine print is a citation to an article by Daniel Nagin, a public policy professor at Carnegie Mellon University. Nagin’s research supposedly proves that criminals don’t care much about punishment, only about the prospect of being caught.
To investigate Nagin’s claims, I found a clip from years ago where he states the obvious: more police officers lead to less crime. However, his argument differs from the DOJ’s. Nagin suggests that increasing the severity of existing prison sentences won’t have a significant deterrent effect. These are two completely different arguments.
Nagin’s paper, cited by the DOJ, presents conflicting claims. On one hand, he argues that existing prison sentences are sufficient deterrents and don’t need to be longer. On the other hand, he states that imprisonment doesn’t have a specific deterrent effect compared to noncustodial sanctions. These contradictory claims are the basis for the DOJ’s argument against deterrence, which is truly bizarre.
The DOJ goes on to claim that sending convicted individuals to prison is not an effective way to deter crime. They argue that prisons are good for punishment and keeping criminals off the streets, but lengthy sentences may actually make inmates more dangerous and desensitized to future imprisonment.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP
However, if this claim were true, it would support longer punishments rather than shorter ones. Life sentences, for example, would remove individuals from society permanently. Strangely, the DOJ doesn’t mention this possibility. Instead, they conclude that criminals should be released earlier, despite acknowledging that prisons make them more dangerous.
The DOJ’s document continues along these lines, claiming that police deter crime by increasing the perception of being caught and punished. They also argue that increasing the severity of punishment has little effect on deterring crime and that there is no proof that the death penalty deters criminals.
These latter claims contradict our understanding of human behavior. Longer and harsher prison sentences do deter crime, as evidenced by thousands of years of human civilization. The DOJ’s reliance on random studies by questionable sociologists contradicts the collective experience of mankind.
Moreover, the DOJ fails to consider the goal of incapacitation, which removes violent criminals from society to prevent further harm. While they briefly touch on this goal, they suggest that sending criminals to prison for a long time might be pointless because they will naturally “age out” of criminal activity. This flawed thinking permeates the justice system from top to bottom.
Ultimately, it is impossible to conduct a fully accurate study of deterrence. We must rely on the history of human societies and our common sense understanding of human behavior. The conclusion is clear: if we want to reduce crime, we must punish criminals severely.
What evidence supports the claim that longer prison sentences serve as a deterrent?
Ent. This claim is not supported by any evidence and goes against common sense. Longer prison sentences serve as a deterrent because they remove criminals from society and prevent them from committing more crimes. The idea that harsh punishments make inmates more dangerous is simply absurd.
It’s important to note that the DOJ’s manifesto on deterrence does not provide any justification for their claims. It merely states that research supports their position, without providing any details or citing specific studies. This lack of transparency raises questions about the validity of their argument and their true motivations behind adopting this approach.
The Consequences of the “Soft-on-Crime” Approach
The adoption of the “soft-on-crime” approach by the DOJ and other institutions has had disastrous consequences for our society. Major cities across the country have seen a surge in crime rates as criminals become emboldened by the lack of consequences for their actions.
In cities like Chicago and New York, prosecutors have adopted policies that prioritize reducing prison populations over public safety. This has resulted in the release of dangerous individuals back onto the streets, who then go on to commit more crimes. Innocent citizens are paying the price for these misguided policies.
Furthermore, the lack of consequences for criminals has led to a breakdown in trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve. When criminals are not held accountable for their actions, it sends a message that lawlessness and disorder are acceptable. This undermines the efforts of law enforcement officers who are working tirelessly to keep our communities safe.
An Urgent Need for Change
The collapse of the criminal justice system is a serious problem that requires immediate attention. We need leaders who are committed to upholding the rule of law and ensuring that criminals face the consequences of their actions.
Reforming our criminal justice system starts with recognizing the flaws in the “soft-on-crime” approach and challenging the misguided beliefs that underpin it. We need evidence-based policies that prioritize public safety and hold criminals accountable for their actions.
Additionally, we must invest in our law enforcement agencies and provide them with the resources they need to effectively combat crime. This includes hiring more police officers, improving training and equipment, and supporting community policing initiatives.
To address the root causes of crime, we must also focus on providing education, job opportunities, and rehabilitation programs for individuals at risk of becoming involved in criminal activities. By addressing the underlying factors that contribute to criminal behavior, we can help break the cycle of crime and create safer communities.
Conclusion
The collapse of the criminal justice system cannot be ignored or downplayed. It is a problem that affects us all and requires immediate action. We must trace the origins of lawlessness and challenge the flawed beliefs that have led us to this point.
By implementing evidence-based policies, investing in our law enforcement agencies, and addressing the root causes of crime, we can begin to rebuild our criminal justice system and create a society where the rule of law is respected and criminals are held accountable.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...