A Reaction to The Politics of Injustice: Book Derides Harsh Penal Measures

The criminal justice system now in place in the United States has been in a state of constant evolution over the past few hundred years. After all this time, there has yet to be a general consensus on what the ideal system is. Recently, crime and punishment have become major issues in electoral politics with consensus pointing toward the harshly punitive side. Katherine Beckett and Theodore Sasson, in their book The Politics of Injustice, reason, "The punitive turn in crime policy is not primarily the result of a worsening crime problem or an increasingly fearful and vengeful public. Rather, above all else, growing punitiveness reflects efforts by national politicians to shift public policy on a variety of social problems - including crime, addiction, and poverty - toward harsher, more repressive solutions" (Beckett xii). Politicians are using the politics of panic to support ill advised and harsh penal measures when other methods will more effectively address the problem.

Take capital punishment as an example of this. In America, thirty-eight states and the federal government have the death penalty (Adler 584). The main cause of crime, according to many politicians in America, is the mercy of the criminal justice system. It has been shown, by many other democratic nations such as Great Britain and Canada, that easier sentencing has more positive results. In fact, the United States is the only remaining Western democracy that has held on to capital punishment. We have clung to this antiquated form of punishment for so long because politicians are afraid to appear "soft on crime" in today's society.

People get their information from the mass media, and the way the media showcases current events has led people to believe that we are in dire times. Newspapers focus on topics they believe the public will find interesting, in order to receive higher ratings. If, on any particular day in Boston, twelve men were accused of public drunkenness, six of gambling, and one of aggravated assault and battery, it is clear which event would be the headline: the uncommon criminal events are the most sensational. When the public is flooded with images of murder scenes and crying parents, they become susceptible to the flawed policy many politicians have towards crime prevention. The politicians want to be re-elected, and they will do everything in their power to gain public favor, be it a plausible solution to the problem or not. As Beckett and Sasson so eloquently put it, the "…media generated 'crime waves' have pressured politicians to adopt ill-considered anticrime measures" (Beckett 99). The fact of the matter is that crime rates have dropped. During the mid-nineties New York City had one of the sharpest drops in violent crimes in the country (Becket 190).

"Politicians who believe the public will only respond to 'get tough' appeals are underestimating the complexity of popular thinking on crime" (Beckett 143). By nature, Americans regard crime as a consequence of environmental factors, including family and community breakdown, and support a range of crime prevention initiatives. Most Americans also "support rehabilitation efforts for offenders already serving time behind bars" (Beckett 143). Conservatives purport that crime does not come from blocked opportunities, but from the clemency in the judicial system and the penal system. The conservative's idea, being an obvious blunder, should have been addressed long ago - but it has not, due to "the fact that the liberal politicians largely accepted this reframing of crime" (Beckett 74). People are afraid to go against the norm.

The book discussed a number of solutions to the many problems with our country. Alternative sentencing, including house arrest, electronic monitoring and supervision, are a cheap substitute to traditional forms of punishment. Rehabilitation as opposed to incarceration is an excellent idea. In addition to these, community police forces are an excellent way to increase communication between the citizens and the police officers. While I agreed with some proposed solutions, the "harm reduction" solution, which "differentiates between drug use and drug abuse" is quite possibly the most deplorable solution to the drug problem I have read. The recommendation that marijuana be legalized is shocking. The goal of drug policy - according to Beckett and Sasson - should be to minimize harm, which is completely true; however to totally minimize harm, and to teach repeat drug offenders a lesson, they must be punished. When discussing illegal substances, drug use and drug abuse are the same things: a user of an illegal substance is abusing the law.

The alternatives to current methods of crime prevention are great, but they will never be enacted to their fullest potential unless something in our government changes. This was only addressed in the final conclusion of the book, and I believe it is a crucial part that was sorely understated. Well-informed citizens of our nation need to voice their opinions to their representatives and senators, and need to publish more books like this one. We as Americans need to change our mindset, along with that of our leaders, and begin to realize that harsh penal measures are not the answer.