Discussion about this post

User's avatar
E.W.R's avatar

. There is no question jails and prisons are horrible places. But for all the corruption, the near impossibility of recruiting and employing people who are collectively able to humanely but firmly manage a world of and largely by and for the most ruthless violent criminals, we can’t forget that the latter are why prisons and jails are so dangerous. Does violent crime continue inside these institutions? Of course it does and much of it is truly horrific and undeserved. Does imprisonment harden criminality rather than help rehabilitate it? Too often, yes. But the last few years have made it obvious why in spite of all of this we must continue to incarcerate large numbers of violent criminals: because it is far worse to allow them loose on the streets to prey on completely innocent, defenseless people. It’s far worse to allow them to sow and enforce a culture of violent disorder that affects entire neighborhoods and increasingly entire cities. It’s far worse to subject police officers to direct extreme criminal violence (which has been increasing). It’s far worse to make it impossible for small business owners to safely operate and for chain stores to maintain locations in high-crime areas (which means convenient employment for locals and access to essential food and medicine for the most vulnerable residents). None of this is hypothetical fear-mongering. We’re living this new, harsher reality and it’s going to take a long time to get back to where we were a few years ago. If it were possible to safely implement a range of more humane, rehabilitative practices with some proven success in other countries, within our prisons, I’m not opposed to that. But the priority must always be keeping the general public safe and society free to operate with the basic security and social trust necessary not to descend into chaos or warlordism (as almost immediately happened in the so-called autonomous zone within Seattle, and which happens on a more informal basis on every block where gangs rule rather than citizens).

I know how it feels to see my own father arrested and taken away in a police cruiser. I know as painful as it is, it’s sometimes necessary. Violent crime tears families and communities apart first and on a more fundamental level than imprisonment does. A vast majority of prisoners will be released at some point. I’m not opposed to giving prisoners something positive to work towards and earn as a means to better themselves and eventually have a better chance of reintegrating into society as productive citizens. But there’s been far too much naïveté and wishful thinking, if not blind virtual signaling: just let out people who have committed multiple violent crimes, pat yourself on the back, and hope for the best. Heinous crimes require a measure of justice for the victims. We must try to deter violent criminality. Certainty and celerity in consequences seem to improve deterrence. We should do our best to rehabilitate criminals who show a sustained willingness to work towards a different path. But incapacitation is the key. Too many have deluded themselves into believing our criminal justice system had just somehow vacuumed up vast numbers of people on a racist whim, people who were themselves actually victimized for being the wrong color or for being poor. We’ve accepted the feel-good notion that there can’t possibly be so many persistently, violently antisocial people in our society who have chosen criminality because it gets them things they want, quickly and in large amounts, without having to delay gratification or stoop to following rules. The harder reality is that, whatever range of causes might explain the existence of so many dangerous criminals, they do exist. They aren’t just the invention of a repressive state bent on preserving elite perquisites and frightening the rest of us into compliance. If anything, much of the elite has arguably seized on decriminalization as a means of not only signaling superior virtue while remaining personally buffered, but of driving independent-minded working class people out of cities and frightening them into compliance by the twin threats of violent crime and reputational destruction - being called racist for noticing or daring to be personally impacted by violent crime. A lot of factors might cause violent criminality, but in too many cases, once a violent criminal is active, it’s very difficult to create an environment and incentives to change what’s become a hardened personality driven by certain impulses and assumptions. In many cases, changing that engrained mentality is a long-term proposition at best. The last thing we should be doing is apologizing to violent criminals, classing them as victims, and unleashing them to continue to harm more people with virtually no serious incentives for them to stop.

Expand full comment
E.W.R's avatar

On a separate note, anyone else notice that all of the articles coming out of left of center and progressive sources, purporting to focus on crime, actually only seem to have one or both of these foci:

1) Why talk of increasing violent crime is a lie and merely the fevered imaginings of deplorables/racist GOP talking points.

2) Here’s how Democrats should respond to this made-up, non-problem with the following messaging strategy.

Expand full comment
38 more comments...

No posts