Do you approveof US ‘zero tolerance’ policing, vast prison populations, and the effect of these on; a) Crime b) Individual freedom ?
I ask because here in Australia we are looking very hard at these things as a solution to our crime situation, which is a ‘time-slipped’ version of the US circa 1986.
I was not aware that the US had a Zero Tolerance Policing. They are doing Zero Tolerance in Schools…
Is letting a murder out of prison in 5 years on good behavior Zero tolerance? My impression of Zero Tolerance would be death sentances to murderers. (All, not just a few)
I can’t talk on Zero Tolerance for society as a whole, but I can in schools…
Being a high school student at the moment, I do not feel it is the way to go. Kids with relativly minor offenses and no past record can be expelled, according to the letter of the law.
This is not a way to run a school, nor a way to run a society. Some people do not deserve a 2nd chance (ex. Tim McVeigh), but the vast majority of people do. I am perhaps a little naive, believe that humans are inherently good, but I feel anyone can make amends when given the chance.
As for it’s effect on crime, I do not think it would help significantly. It seems like to me this policy has not helped in schools, and schools are in many ways a smaller version of society.
And for its effect on individual freedom… not bad if someone follows the law all the time, but few people do. So it would diminish a person’s freedom.
Even if we restrict our discussion of Zero Tolerance policies to the schoolgrounds, what kind of thing is the OP referring to a Zero Tolerance policy on?[ul][li]Drugs?[/li][li]Violence?[/li][li]Posession of implements that could be used as lethal weapons?[/li]Marcel Marceau?[/ul]I could kinda understand a Zero Tolerance policy on Marcel Marceau, I suppose. I mean, that guy is scary.
Maybe a link to an example would be helpful.
Here’s one, currently under debate in MPSIMS: Canadian boy runs riot with chicken finger.
I have zero tolerence for zero tolerence policies.
(Yeah, it’s obvious, but somebody had to say it.)
Well, considering that we have the highest crime rate in the industrialized world, I kind of have to agree with ACLU boy.
I don’t know if the USA has “the highest crime rate in the inductrialised world”. I do know that it has a dramatically lower crime rate that it had in the mid 80’s AND that it has an increase in its prison population roughly in line with that drop in crime.
Quoted from another thread;
Drug related homicides 1986= 19,257 1999= 12,658
Incarceration rates for violent crimes 1986= 258,600 1998= 545,200
If you look at the percentage changes at both ends of the equation you will notice a remarkably solid correlation.
The above figures are from the US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, similar correlations can be found for almost all categories of crime. The USA now has the highest per-capita incarceration rate in the developed world. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/welcome.html
I cannot provide a specific cite, but I believe NYC is an overall example of a city that has slashed is crime rate, particularly drug related crime, by a draconian zero-tolerance policing policy. Example would be ‘stop-and-search’ with only very slight cause, or automatic indictment for any drug offence no matter what the substance, or how small the quantity.
Here in Australia the Federal Government is impressed by the US drop in crime rate and is advocating similar policies here. The opposition party is opposing on the basis that individual freedoms will inevitably be infringed and that minorities will become more victimised than they currently are.
I have no solid opinion on the issue and started this thread the help me develop one.
Unfortunately, you will have to be specific. The US in general does not have “zero tolerance” policing. There are some aspects of our society that we call “zero tolerance”. In general, I warn you that my answer is in the negative.
We have a “zero tolerance” policy towards several things in some of our state school systems, including anything that could possibly be conceived of as a weapon, any mention of violence, or anything that could possibly be taken as a drug. In general, this has had truly absurd consequences; kids suspended for sharing candy (lemon drops), for having a kitchen knife in the back seat of their car (having moved the previous day), for pointing their finger in the playground and saying “bang, bang”, for writing stories as part of their class assignments. Don’t do it. Really.
We have various “mandatory sentencing” guidelines that take away discretion from judges. These were in reaction to judges who give truly absurdly light sentences to career criminals: three to five years for murders. The result is that people who are convicted for what are only technically “felonies” are going to prison for life under the “three strikes and you’re out” laws. We have gone from absurdity in one direction to absurdity in another, and if the guideline is that it is better for the guilty to go free than the innocent to be punished, it is a change for the worse, the much worse. The US is experiencing what has been called “felony creep”; more and more laws are being classified as felonies, and it makes mandatory sentencing guidelines such as the three strike rule that much more unfair.
Civil forfeiture. Don’t do it. This is where property is seized on probable cause, without arrest or trial, and the burden of proof is on the property owner to prove that it has not been involved in a crime. It is by far the worst erosion of civil rights in the US in our history, and it has been upheld by the Supreme Court (to our everlasting shame). If anything like this comes up in your legislature, kill it any way you can. Pay no attention to arguments like it is protecting children, or they will only use it to go after the drug kingpins. It is a lie. It will be used on the ordinary citizen because those are the ones who can’t afford the lawyers. It is a hideous policy; it sets up incentives that encourage local police to do their worst to the guy on the street to increase their budget. Avoid this any way you can. Really.
Mandatory sentencing for guns used in a crime. This is, perhaps, the most understandable of the “zero tolerance” laws, but it still winds up being absurd in some cases. Someone who kills a man with a knife gets three years; a man with a gun in his car when he snatches a purse gets five to ten because he had a gun in his posession, and there is “zero tolerance”.
In general, “zero tolerance” is a substitute for thinking and the application of reasonable discretion. Thinking and discretion are hard, but it is worth while setting things up to encourage them, and to review the system to punish the people who cannot think and apply discretion in their jobs. Don’t go for the easy fix.
Thanks for the elaboration.
The issue of mandatory sentencing is at the very heart of the debate over here. One camp says that mandatory sentencing primarily affects minority offenders and is therfore racist.The logic is that offences that carry mandatory minimums are typically carried out by young disadvantaged offenders, while crimes such as fraud and electronic theft carried out by middle class offenders are left to the discretion of the Judge.
Another issue you raised was inequality in sentencing - essentially the argument FOR mandatory sentencing. In this country I can receive a life sentence for murder and with good behaviour and a following wind be out in 12 years. There is a strong movement for “truth in sentencing” instead of mandatory sentencing.
One thing bothers me though. The cite I gave proves that the prison poulation in the USA has almost doubled since the mid 80’s Is this because the typical offender is staying in longer? or are more people going in for shorter terms ?
If I helped, it was my pleasure.
A little bit of both — more people are going in for longer sentences. The boom in prison populations is the result of longer sentences and the drug war — a larger and larger percentage of our prison population are being imprisoned for drug related offences (this is on the FBI site, but I don’t have the time to look it up now, so requests for citations will be politely referred there.)