I have been pondering a lot lately about the current state of criminal law in this country and others. I have been especially thinking about various crimes and their related punishments such as the death penalty, minimum security prisons, white-collar criminals and child murderers.
From all of this I have come to no easy solutions or conclusions as to how to handle or resolve this problem. Unfortunately, there is obviously a reasonable subsection of society which is inherently corrupt and anti-social. A good portion of which is solely determined to get into a position of power so they can acheive whatever petty personal gains they can get in this life. A prime example of this is a subsection of the politically active conservatives in the states which actively lie to their populous, and then line their pockets with tax payers money and order other people to do what they (the cons) want. So, from this, no matter what judicial system comes into power, no matter how many checks and balances may exist, there is always a considerable amount of room for abuse.
Yet, at the same time there are even worse sociopathic offenders in our society who are not being handled in a way that would resolve the problem. A prime example of this is child molesters like the repeat offender priest in France recently, or many other examples where they were caught, punished, and released back into society to offend again. How does society prevent reoffences, without punishing those who have truly recovered from their disease? How does society punish offenders, without accidentally punishing those who are innocent? Currently, some countries rely on a jury based system (which is easily provably biased), others rely on a judicial system, with a judge that, supposedly, determines the punishment based on tradition, law, and conscience. Again, three things which are purely subjective, and even more easily biased if there is hanky-panky occuring in the back rooms of the judiciary.
One idea is the American mentality of shoot them all and let God sort it out. However, if anyone is a religious person, or has any true respect for the sanctity of life, this is not a valid choice. Shooting an innocent man is tantamount to murder, no matter what your reasons behind it are.
Another idea is the libertarian ideal of letting most of the criminals free, unless it is provable beyond any shadow of a doubt that they are dangerous and committed the crime. Obviously, this also is not an option since many dangerous sociopaths will be let free. Again, while shooting an innocent man is tantamount to murder, perhaps it could also be said that standing there while an innocent man is shot when you could stop it is also as bad.
So, we try to resolve this by creating laws and police forces. In Canada, this works reasonably well since the RCMP is well respected, and has a police force that has not had many major cases of corruption in years. However, giving the power to lock someone up or even harm them in any way naturally provides a beacon for the corrupt individuals in society who are looking for a legitimate way to enact their sociopathy. Thus, as most of my friends will agree there are two types of cops, those who joined the force to improve society, and those who joined for the power kick. Again, natural mankind corruption sinking in to destroy what little civilized society we do have. The only easy solution for this is some form of check and balance, but even then a well organized minority can easily overpower a majority in any political atmosphere.
But even with such, when we are creating laws that are not based on tradition, who determines them? Well, obviously the government does. Again, another place ripe with corruption. With the conservatives actively trying to remove any civil rights that people have in exchange for their religiously ordained narrow view on rights and society. Removing a persons right to privacy in their own home, while also working to enact "property rights" as a fundamental right for society. (for proof of this go to http://howdtheyvote.ca/ and look at the bills enacted by the Cons during the last session of parliament)
At the same time, the issue of child molesters, and corporate criminals is obviously not being handled in any way that is decreasing crime and stopping these horrific atrocities from occuring. Historically it has been proven that adding more laws will not resolve this issue, but at the same time how else can you stop it? This is a problem I am still grappling with, and I always end up with a dead end as soon as I consider the possibility of accidentally ending an innocent’s life, or allowing those who are corrupt in government to make more power decisions.
The only solution I have come up with so far resolves the issue of arresting an innocent man, and having a law which is unjust on the books. I call it the Slow House, Fast Court law. The basic rule is that the house of representatives, or whatever legislative body exists in your country should be as slow as possible to enact new laws, with as many points as possible to prevent bad laws from coming to power, followed by a traditional senate body which has longer terms and is non-elected but appointed by the previous legislature to buffer sudden short-term fads in public opinion. Perhaps even have a minimum debate time for any one bill or law. While the judiciary body, or some other body which represents the traditional interests of the population (ie. non-elected, and rotated on a decade style basis, perhaps even determined on a multi-partisan basis) is able to not create new laws, but rather remove any laws (specific bills) which exist that prevent or hinder someone’s rights.
In Canada, we almost have this, however the legislature can still push through laws rather quickly. In this system, the check and balance works nicely to keep bad laws from the books since they can be removed far quicker than they can be written. Unfortunately, while this almost handles corruption at the government level, it can still be easily destroyed, as seen in the american system where the senate was shifted to an election basis (originally it was not elected), and now even the judiciary is shifting on a non-traditional basis, just due to the fluke of timing and the polarization of the current populous.
Yet, this does nothing at all about the more basic problem that plagues me when I ponder criminal law. While I disdain laws that I consider immoral and unjust, there are laws that are definitely on the books for a reason, and have been there for time immemorial (even before the ten commandments, but rather since the beginning of human society itself. The ten commandments themself are actually only a very minor part of what modern law systems handle, and some of them are even completely invalid in a secular society, but that’s a different discussion.) For example, child molestation, and murder. So, how do we remove these dangerous people from society without risking to lose innocents.
One idea is the death penalty. Simple and straightforward. unfortunately however, it is too easy to accidentally kill an innocent man, and eight years later look at the books and go, ‘oops, I guess he didn’t do it.’
Another idea is life sentences for those convicted, with regular parole review meetings on a 5 year or so basis. The parole reviews would not be to release the prisoners, but rather to re-examine the facts of the case and make sure that the initial jury/judge did not make a rash decision, and sentence someone who was not guilty. The only problem with this is that it costs money to the general populous (< 1 cent per person/per year), and it must be enforced that no matter what if you commit certain crimes, you will _never_ be released into the public again. This, though, is not a preventative in stopping new people from committing the crime, but rather keeping known offenders off the streets. The review every 5 years should be able to get innocents out, but even then a few would naturally slip through the cracks of the system. The idea is, if you screw up that badly, you are done with. You do not deserve to be part of society any more. Perhaps, the prison system could set up minor economies and allow these people to work within the prison and pay their own way. Basically, segregate them from society in general, but still keep them productive. Turn prison into the part of the country that is a police state, but if the people are non-violent, they are free to work amongst themselves.
Another idea, which is being tested in many states, is the "walking around with a sandwich board saying that you are a known sexual offender." I think this is silly, and destroys more families and lives than anything. For molestee families, this is sickening to them that the person is free. While for molesters, they will never be able to function in any meaningful way due to the pariah effect of the sandwich board (which is what was intended). Making social pariahs does not help society, and usually leads to more crimes or suicides. Both of which are bad.
Anyways, I have gone on long enough with my reflections this morning. I hope someone will be able to take something useful from this.
Have fun,
…..1337hax0r…..