Hi,
I think there's a lot of factors here. A big one is redefining crime. As long as actions which do no harm to others are considered crimes, we will have many criminals. Make things such as gambling, prostitution, drug use, and so forth legal (probably controlled, for the safety both of the purveyor and the buyer) and you get a great reduction in crime. Not only because the people who are 'guilty' of only these crimes are no longer criminals, but because the economic conditions the laws against those activities bring about would no longer apply.
Then there is social 'justice'. Entirely too many see any form of social programs as creeping communism and a free handout. The high cost of crime is at least in part caused by the poverty and attitudes of the deprived segments of society. That cost is not just in supporting those individuals while incarcerated. It is also the differential cost for police departments and a judicial system from what a law abiding society would need. It is the loss of the productive input of the minds of those who turn to crime because that is their only possibility. It is the loss to society because of the fear of that crime. When all these costs are totaled, it may well be that tax supported social programs to improve the living conditions, education, and prospects for low income people is cheaper in the long run than paying for the results of poverty. "It's going to cost you, but it's the right thing to do" is a hard sell, but "You'll do good and save money" should appeal to nearly all.
Finally, for now, there's evil. Most criminals are so because of circumstances, stupidity, or both. It might be possible to turn these people around, or at least get them to want to do so. But then there are the psychopaths and sociopaths and others who are mentally broken. Curing them by incarcerating them makes as much sense as trying to cure a fever by whipping the patient. We need some way to identify these individuals. We need some way to determine if there is a way to fix each individually, and if not, we need some permanent solution for them -- incarceration or death, but that's another topic. We need laws and methods to insure these people do what has to be done if they are released (e.g., taking their meds on a regular schedule if that is what's needed to keep them sane).
In many ways, we're trying to solve twenty-first century problems with eighteenth century tools. And then we express surprise at our failures.
--Pete
(09-02-2010, 05:26 PM)Jester Wrote: If you want to "fix" crime, you have to go after the criminals.
I think there's a lot of factors here. A big one is redefining crime. As long as actions which do no harm to others are considered crimes, we will have many criminals. Make things such as gambling, prostitution, drug use, and so forth legal (probably controlled, for the safety both of the purveyor and the buyer) and you get a great reduction in crime. Not only because the people who are 'guilty' of only these crimes are no longer criminals, but because the economic conditions the laws against those activities bring about would no longer apply.
Then there is social 'justice'. Entirely too many see any form of social programs as creeping communism and a free handout. The high cost of crime is at least in part caused by the poverty and attitudes of the deprived segments of society. That cost is not just in supporting those individuals while incarcerated. It is also the differential cost for police departments and a judicial system from what a law abiding society would need. It is the loss of the productive input of the minds of those who turn to crime because that is their only possibility. It is the loss to society because of the fear of that crime. When all these costs are totaled, it may well be that tax supported social programs to improve the living conditions, education, and prospects for low income people is cheaper in the long run than paying for the results of poverty. "It's going to cost you, but it's the right thing to do" is a hard sell, but "You'll do good and save money" should appeal to nearly all.
Finally, for now, there's evil. Most criminals are so because of circumstances, stupidity, or both. It might be possible to turn these people around, or at least get them to want to do so. But then there are the psychopaths and sociopaths and others who are mentally broken. Curing them by incarcerating them makes as much sense as trying to cure a fever by whipping the patient. We need some way to identify these individuals. We need some way to determine if there is a way to fix each individually, and if not, we need some permanent solution for them -- incarceration or death, but that's another topic. We need laws and methods to insure these people do what has to be done if they are released (e.g., taking their meds on a regular schedule if that is what's needed to keep them sane).
In many ways, we're trying to solve twenty-first century problems with eighteenth century tools. And then we express surprise at our failures.
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?