Criminal justice system has been defined as way in which the society tries to ensure social control. Usually there are certain behaviors which are regarded as having the potential to cause some chaos or danger within the society (Siegel 7). In order to prevent these situations there are certain formal procedures that have been put in place to either prevent people from committing those bad behaviors- offense or to deal with those who have already committed the offence. Usually the offenders are taken through a series of decision making after which a decision is made on their punishment or are discharged. But then something seems to be wrong with the formal criminal justice process in the US; the cost of law enforcement, correctional agencies and court agencies seem to be going higher and higher. Why so many US citizens are finding themselves into prisons? Why so many of the sworn police being employed in US? The explanation of this situation can only be understood using the same criminal justice system; it is apparent that the punishment being given for offender is obviously so severe for the crimes committed.
The overall crime rates in US were never higher as compared to the crime rates of other western countries during the 1990s. This is no longer the case in the contemporary US judicial system when compared to those of Germany, Finland and other western states. Prisoners have become so many as compared to prisoners in other states. This could make just about any person wonder if it is the US citizens that have become so offensive or there are other factors behind this awkward explosion (Tonry 27). Does any person wish to spend their lives in prison?
No person want to spend the rest of their lives in prison, no person would love to lose their freedom even for a day and therefore I believe that the US citizens are not very foolish as to consciously commit crimes so that they go to prison. People need their freedom, people have family and friends to tend to, people have jobs and academic work to tackle so prison can never be an alternative for any sane person. ‘American imprisonment rates did not rise because crime rose. They rose because American Politicians wanted them to rise (Tonry 33).
There are certain amendments that have been done with the general criminal justice systems in the US that is leading to high inmates rates. The policies were made consciously perhaps with good intention but then the good intention just seems to be leading the country into much more trouble. But then why is it that politicians in the US enact policies on criminal justice relying only on the ‘seriousness’ of the offense, the offenders prior records on crime, the mandatory minimum sentence, truth in the sentencing policies and three- strikes-and you are –out laws? Do politicians have some good will for the society or is it that they make amendments on these policies only based on the benefit that they can selfishly gain? According to Tonry the amendments of criminal justice policies is never due to public demands. It is also apparent that this penalties are never increased so as for politicians to use crime and punishment as wedge issue design. The truth behind these drastic changes in the policies and penalties for offenders by the US politicians is mainly due to their pursuit towards consolidating votes to win the elections. Tonry after analyzing the different probable reasons for politicians’ indulgence in criminal justice policy concluded that ‘they lack a pattern of intelligible pictures’ (Tonry 51).
Mostly the excuse given for the changes in control policies is that the crime control policies in America which was adopted in the past half century are as a result of the disagreement between the liberals and the conservatives; or sometimes between those concerned with safety and advocates of due processes still either between those who were concerned with the victims and those concerned with the offenders. This notion is obviously faulty and is only used as an excuse to form harsh policies for the American citizens. In most cases changes on the policies off a country reflects the social cultural perception and beliefs of the citizens of that country usually beliefs that justify them (Tonry 69). This is to say that the American crime control policies are a reflection of the American ‘sensibilities’ on time and place. Tonry argues, “bound methods of thinking such as express values and ideas which are widely shared but little questioned” (Tonry 70). Using the death penalty Tonry shows how evolution in sensibilities (opinions on the appropriate or inappropriate methods of execution) influences change in the penal policies (preference of death by legal injection rather than by execution or hanging’
Could it therefore be true that the changes in American sensibilities are what has led to the changes on the policies for crime and justice? Certainly not, it is not logical to say that the Americans sensibilities regarding crimes and punishments is increasingly leading to harsher punishments that makes them to be held in prisons longer and with less serious offences. Americans are most likely suffering from moral panics following several injustices that they have experienced just once or twice. The problem is that these decisions to increase the punishment of the offenders are never made soberly but out of the panic caused by a single incidence of moral injustice. Tonry conquers nothing that “anger, emotion, and urgency that moral panics generate can be harnessed to various ends” (Tonry 96). The result of this moral panic is that the penalties in the American justice system are so severe compared to those of other countries and consequently more people are living as inmates.
Sensibility of people living within a state varies considerably with time, the moral panics that the Americans have and use in shaping their policies are usually very temporal. During the time of crime say increased sexual offences or drug trafficking people are always moved by the effects of the crime. They do not think straight and may accept anything they are told that can stop the diverse effect. As time goes by though and the effects of crime are no longer felt so intensely they may start regretting their actions. The problem is that this happens when the policies have been enacted; more people are in prisons, people that would otherwise be building the nation. As Tonry puts it they are ‘issues and ways of thinking that are common in particular time and conspicuously absent in others’ (Tonry 90).
The effects of this impromptu decisions are so many; the per capita expenditure for criminal justice functions in US is now more than $720 each year for every American (Siegel, pg 8); the penalties given are so traumatic such that by the time the inmate is released they feel so lost in the society; the inmates are separated from their families for so much time and many other negative impacts that actually do not necessarily lead to positive behavior change.
With all the negative effects of these severe penalties is it wise to say that the American justice system is ruined by fate? Things may be seemingly bad enough but there is always a solution to every identified problem. There is a need for the contemporary American sentencing laws to be subjected to ethical introspection. Judges and prosecutors tasked with the function of making decisions on the punishment for offenders should be protected from the partisan political pressure hence be made career civil servants. There is also a need for the sentencing policies and practices to be revised. When this is done the judges and prosecutor will be able to make policies without lots of pressure from the politicians who are out to gain popularity. The already existing policies that are so severe needs to be amended and the punishments be reduced. Behavior theorists have demonstrated that punishment is never the best way that can lead to behavior change. Worse still if the punishment is so severe the result is that people will develop some resistance to cope. If the inmate citizens of America learn to cope with the punishment then even after release from prison they will be more likely to continue engaging in crime. What else can a person do after twenty or so years in prison and without family, work, school or even hope?
All the criminal justice measures should be subjected to ‘disparity audits.to establish whether and to what extent they exacerbate or ameliorate disparities in outcomes affecting women and members of the minority groups’ (Tonry 225). This is what will reduce the inmate explosion in the American prisons. It will also save the country from the expenses that are placed on the government to cater for inmates as it is obvious that the reason US has so many inmates is basically due to the severe policies on criminal justice practices.
In conclusion, it comes out that a lot still needs to be done to make criminal justice system remain within its scope. This is especially true considering the discrepancies and atrocities that have been, from time to time, associated with the system. This is much illustrated by the fact that something seems to be wrong with the formal criminal justice process in the US; the cost of law enforcement, correctional agencies and court agencies seem to be going higher and higher. There are also cases of rise in inmate population within the American prisons. Tonry comes up with array of solution that should be used by the system to cure the situation. Fighting discriminatory practices in the system is a major solution that will save from the disparities witnessed in the prisons. Further, the perpetrators of the law should also be protected from political manipulations. This will surely protect the system from the intervention of the selfish politicians.
Work Cited
Tonry, Michael H. Thinking About Crime: Sense and Sensibility in American Penal Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.
Siegel, Larry J, and John L. Worrall. Essentials of Criminal Justice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, 2013
