Judgment and Punishment 8-4-2010

 I remain set on the twelve years of imprisonment coming my way. That is the law's punishment. I have passed my own judgment, with my punishment lasting until the day of my death. I offer this view of mine for the criminal justice and/or political science majors out there.

Why do I offer this? I feel the shame of my crime to my core. I thought that shame would be such that I could not live with it, that I could not back down on suicide. It did not work. And I am tired of writing about my motivation. More interesting are the people I see leaving the Bureau of Prisons, who exude the opposite of shame when they refer to their crime and/or time in prison. This failure of the federal prison system needs examining.

The pressure groups, the editorial writers, and, eventually, the politicians will be making loud noises about getting tougher on crime. They will misjudge the situation and be surprised at its ineffectiveness. The type of culture I am seeing approaches prison time as a matter of course and respects prison time in relation to the hardness of that time. In time, the politicians turn coal into diamonds. I suggest looking at how much shame the recidivist feels about their crime, rather relying only on gross numbers. Diamonds can be cracked, but not by the politician's hammer of “get tough on crime.”

I feel now and expect to feel forever the judgment of others. I do not say it is not merited; I only note its existence in my mind. Albert Camus wrote the following in The Fall:

Believe me, religions are on the wrong track the moment they moralize and fulminae commandments. God is not needed to create guilt or to punish. Our fellow men suffice, aided by ourselves. You were speaking of the Last Judgment. Allow me to laugh respectfully. I shall wait for it resolutely, for I have known what is worse, the judgment of men. For them, no extenuating circumstances; even the good intention is ascribed to crime. Have you at least heard of the spitting-cell, which a nation recently thoguht to prove itself the greatest on earth? .... Hence only his face is visible, and every passing jailer spits copiously on it. The prisoner, wedged into his cell, cannot wipe his face, thought he is allowed, it is true, to close his eyes. Well, that, mon cher, is a human innovation. They didn't need God for that little masterpiece.

I agree with that passage. Why does the lawmaker think harsher punishments will deter crime? 

Is it not likely they think the citizenry will not care for anything but more harshness? An eye for an eye has its simplicity; revenge seems so natural. We ignore the Golden Rule at our peril; we create a world of moral harshness. Camus' spitting-cell was created by people.

Christianity maintains the redemption of the sinner exists throughout a person's life. Americans seemingly have decided that reformation was impossible. I think I must believe in reformation. Not only for what I feel in my heart, but what I observe in others. Those who cannot turn loose of what brought them here need pity for their attachments. I do not miss what constituted my crimes. Moreover, if I am a Christian, I must believe in the powers of forgiveness and redemption.

I think we are too cheap, too lazy for reformation. We want cheap, quick solutions to our social problems so that we can get back to our televisions, our video games, texting our best friends of the day, or rest after work that barely keeps one alive. As I said all too often in another life: you get what you pay for.

We could blame the politicians. We could blame them for self-serving laws meant to make them look good, insure government jobs, but would the voters support any other kind of politician? If the politician could trust the people and if the people could trust the people trust the politicians..... I suppose some politician could have designed our current criminal justice system to fail and prove the general ineffectiveness of government. I do not think any politician wants to work that hard.

What would be your response to a politician telling you we need not more cops and prisons, but more teachers and schools for fighting crime?

What would be your response if a politician told you that the better educated and the more and better employed meant we require more job creation in high crime areas?

What would be your response if a politician proposed moving all criminals to an area in Wyoming, from whence they could never leave?

Chew it over. I am going off to find Pogo.

sch

[I typed this up after hearing Senator Lindsey Graham grill Attorney General Garland about increasing the punishment for fentanyl as a deterrent. Never a question about why there is a market for such a dangerous drug. Combined with the Camus quote and the past 13 years of experience with the criminal justice system, I got thinking the politicians and their supporters have a fetish for punishment. That is, it is not for the common good they want to increase penalties but to get themselves off on the idea of being the inflictors of punishment. All Senator Graham will do is increase the price of the drug, making it more profitable, and in our capitalistic system this is not a deterrent. I will give the Senator credit for knowledge, if not intelligence, that his ideas will not slow the trade in fentanyl and will increase the profits. Therefore, he knows deterrence does not work. If he knows deterrence does not work, then what motivates this politician? The thrill he can get at being the tough guy who inflicts pain on others. sch 3/5/23.]