The get-tough policies focus on punishment as the sole and primary response to crime. It is worth noting that the model countries emphasize the use of get-tough policy in dealing with crime. The model countries include Germany, France, China, Japan, England, and Saudi Arabia (Dammer and Jay 67). These programs include truth-in-sentencing, zero tolerance, mandatory sentencing, three strokes and other harsher penalties. The model countries have experienced a decrease in the crime rate since the implementation of get-tough policies. The effects of get-tough policies are alarming in most model countries. In fact, most of the organized crimes have declined in most countries. The decline of crime is streamlined towards get-tough policies (McCarthy et al. 327). In the model countries, get-tough policies have increased community surveillance, arrest, as well as the resurgence of capital punishment. Also, get-tough policies is believed to deter individuals from committing a crime. Despite the fact that our model countries have chosen to get tough policies dangerous crimes have not been eliminated. Recently, there are many reports on terrorism-related activities. Get-tough policies seem not to deter terrorists in the world. The current events in the world demonstrate that get-tough policies are not a solution to terrorism.
In the United States, get-tough policies can be traced to 1970s. This indicates that the U.S has implemented the policies for many decades. Compared to the model countries, get tough policies seem to be less effective in the United States. Terrorism is a crime that is dynamic and complex. The local, federal and state government have implemented the get-tough policies. The achievement of these policies depends on the criminal justice system. The criminal justice system has to comprehend the dynamic nature of terrorism and be in a position to reform the get-tough policies (Whitman 34). In the United States, the get-tough policies have not assisted in eradicating terrorist attacks. Recently, Orlando became a victim of terrorist attacks. The failure of get-tough policy is attributed to the failure of law enforcement to be dynamics in investigating the crime. Terrorist attacks keep changing; hence, the law enforcement agencies should be dynamic. There are several loopholes in the get-tough policies that allow terrorism to execute their activities. Terrorism uses the internet to radicalize, yet the criminal justice system has failed to monitor individuals, especially those on the terrorist watch list. In the general perspective, get-tough policies are not the ultimate solution to terrorism. The criminal justice system should adopt new policies and be flexible in operations.
Works Cited
McCarthy, Bernard., Braswell, Michael, and McCarthy, Belinda. Justice, Crime, and Ethics. London: Elsevier, 2015
Whitman, James Q. Harsh Justice: Criminal Punishment and the Widening Divide between America and Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. Print.
Dammer, Harry R, and Jay S. Albanese. Comparative Criminal Justice Systems. , 2014. Print.
