Introduction
In the recent years there has been a high growth in the number of people who are getting incarcerated. This has led to a lot of debate on the legitimacy of the penal system. Is it really working to reduce or deter criminal behaviour? Is there anything in the punishment system that needs to be changes? The penal system should be revisited in order to address the high incarceration rates in the country.
The Legitimacy for Penal Punishment
There are theories that have contributed to the penal system. The choice theory in criminology has contributed over the years to justifying and specifying penal punishment. Each man has choices and he freely chooses his course of action. Therefore emotions such as greed, revenge and lust can be controlled by the individual and he can choose not to express such emotions or act on them. A person’s choices can be influenced by the fear of punishment. He will choose to act better so that he does not suffer yet the benefits are low.
The penal system is supported by the deterrence theory which was advanced by Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. The deterrence theory puts forward that the penal punishment prevents the criminal from repeating the crime and others from engaging in a life of crime (Beccaria, 1764). If the costs of punishment are higher than the benefits then the criminal will be deterred from committing the crime. A criminal is a logical and rational person who desires his freedom. He is an intelligent person who thinks and plans his crime.
For the deterrence theory to apply, the criminal should know that if he commits a crime, it is certain that he will be caught by the arm of the law. The punishment for the crime should also be quick. With the growth of the prisoners, it has been suggested that the focus on the severity of the crime does not deter potential criminals in any way. The certainty of being caught acts as a better deterrence.
The deterrence theory assumes that the individuals are intelligent and well-informed of the incarceration terms. The individual will therefore tend to maximize his pleasure and minimize his pain. The criminal justice seeks to increase the length of incarceration in order to discourage the criminal from committing more crimes. Longer sentencing causes the individual not to commit another crime when he thinks of the lost earnings and the other benefits that come with their freedom. The lack of approval by others is one of the best ways to deter crime. When people think of the social circles they will lose they will be more likely to commit less crime than face longer imprisonment. Longer lengths of sentences wears down the
criminal’s drive to commit crime.
However the high growth rates in the prisons has caused scholars and other experts to debate on the legitimacy of the penal system. There are several factors that have contributed to the growth of inmates in the United States. First of all there has been a change in the sentencing policy in the country. Prison sentences have been lengthened for certain crimes with the aim of preventing recidivism in the prisoners once they are out of prison. Those crimes in the past where the convicted felons would receive probation and other kinds of punishment, the prisoners are now being given prison sentencing.
Secondly, there have been a lot of racial discriminations in the criminal justice system. Statistics show that the incarceration rates of the African Americans and Hispanics is six times higher than the rates for the Caucasians. It also shows that eight percent of the African Americans who are eligible for employment are in prison.
A quarter of the African American men who are between 22 and 40 years of age have been incarcerated at one point in their life. It has been argued that the minorities are given harsher sentences that the Caucasians for similar crimes. The high incarceration rates in the minority races can be explained by the differences in the socioeconomic conditions between them and the Caucasians. In the ghettos and other low income neighborhood, the proportion of the minority races is higher than the Whites. The minority races resort to crime in order to get what they need for their daily life. Crime was caused by their materialist needs due to what they lacked. If poverty was reduced in the ghettos the rate of crime would go down (Blau and Blau, 125).
There are certain risk factors that increase the probability of deviant behavior which are prevalent in low socioeconomic classes. These are lack of family resources, the presence of gangs in the locale area and lack of mainstream attachment in the context of lack of fathers or positive male role models (McNulty and Bellair, 734). There has also been a high rate of recidivism. When prisoners are released, they have a hard time adjusting or re-entering into the society. There is a stigma attached to the people who have been incarcerated. Employers are reluctant about employing them. They also lose most of their social circles by the time they leave the prisons. They only have their family. These factors cause the individuals to despair and resort to a life of crime in order to make money and fit it into a certain group. There is a high probability that someone who has been released out of prison will commit another crime in the near future and be incarcerated.
The number of women in the prisons has also increased. This has been caused by their rising involvement in drug related crimes. These crimes carry severe and long sentences.
The application of the theory of deterrence and choice has therefore not worked to reduce the incarceration rates. The assumption that a person is rational and stable is not perfect. Secondly, not all people are aware of the laws and penalties of the crimes. At times there is a knowledge gap in the potential criminal’s mind. The aspect of deterrence may not be true since people tend not to really consider implications of the decisions today on their future. A good example is that people smoke, take alcohol and do not wash their hands despite their knowledge of the dangers of their actions on their health.
The theory does not also consider the individuals who are impulsive and shortsighted. Research has shown that half of the criminals were under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of the offense creating holes into the argument that an individual is behaving rationally and will choose not to be arrested. People tend to underestimate the incarceration terms for the crime they have committed. Furthermore the public would not be aware of new laws changing the imprisonment terms for a certain crime.
Conclusion
In light of the above discussions, the State should not rush to give criminals longer or severe sentences. Instead the State should work on having sound crime detection mechanisms such that an individual has the certainty that if he commits a crime he will be apprehended and punished. It is the certainty of the punishment and not the severity of the punishment that causes an individual to deter from committing a criminal activity (Wright, 2010).
References
Beccaria, C. (1764) On Crimes and Punishments, Chapter 12: Of the intent of
punishment. Retrieved from: http://www.constitution.org/cb/crim_pun12.txt
Blau J. & Blau, P. (1982). The costs of inequality: metropolitan structure and violent crime. American Sociological Review, 47, 114-129. Retrieved from: http://www.soc.umn.edu/~uggen/Blau_ASR_82.pdf
McNulty, T. & Bellair, P. (2003). Explaining racial and ethnic differences in serious adolescent violent behavior. Criminology, 41,709-748. Retrieved from: http://cooley.libarts.wsu.edu/schwartj/pdf/mcnulty.pdf
Wright, V. (2010) Deterrence in Criminal Justice: Evaluating Certainty vs. Severity of
Punishment. Retrieved from: http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/Deterrence%20Briefing%20.pdf
