I am going to ask you to think outside the box for a moment.
In 1963, there were 161 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants in the United States. In 2011, that figure rose to 386 per 100,000. So, in my lifetime, the per capita violent crime rate has more than doubled. The rate for rape and assault has nearly tripled. The murder rate is almost the same while the rate for robbery has doubled.
Needless to say, things have not improved in the last 50 years. In fact, the crime rate has steadily increased.
With all the new technology, we continue to spend more and get less return on our investment. Law enforcement relies on tax dollars to fund police protection, probation and parole, the courts, jailers and others in the quest to “control” the crime problem. Support industries such as uniform suppliers and outfitters for special equipment and firearms suppliers profit.
Attorneys defend the accused for a fee. Prisons grow larger to accommodate more convicts. Because the entire criminal justice system relies on the existence of crime the “Industry of Crime” continues to grow.
We have been programmed to believe crime is extremely difficult to curtail. Do you believe this? Crime control, to include prevention, prosecution, defense, adjudication and incarceration, is a business.
Crime exists, at least in part, because the industry surrounding it is a lucrative one. Our justice system is broken and the punishment almost never matches the crime. Why is that?
Some would place the blame on economic reasons. “We simply can’t afford to house all the criminals,” they say.
Others would place the blame on poverty and social issues or alcoholism and other addictions. I say there is no motivation or incentive for the multiple offenders to change their ways and certainly no example made of them. The convict usually has better health care and nutrition in jail than we do. The industry continues to thrive through recidivism.
But is there more to the story?
The economic paradox is that by “fixing” the crime problem, the industry surrounding crime would fail. Like General Motors, the industry is just too big and we won’t let it fail. Careers and livelihoods would be lost. Jail cells would sit empty. Taxes would go down. We allow lax sentencing for intolerable criminal acts and, in turn, perpetuate the downward spiral of crime suppression.
From an economic standpoint, tolerating a higher rate of crime to keep this industry alive is perverse, but we allow it as a society.
Socially, we suppress crime to an acceptable level, one the public can tolerate. We all need a sense of security, but at what price? We allow this lax mindset because some think it is inhumane to punish to the full extent of the law.
It is also easier to allow this nonsense to continue than to “fight city hall.” Sending a known criminal back into society with a slap on the wrist for his infractions is like putting a Band-Aid on a severed artery. The prevailing mentality is, “We can afford Band-Aids.”
Why not repair the severed artery once and for all? Why not punish to the extent that the crime is deterred? Is infliction of pain no longer an option?
I have worked with kids that have grown up under severe conditions. Not everyone has a great childhood. But when that child grows up and rapes or murders someone, there is nothing that can reverse the crime or bring back a loved one. The now adult criminal must suffer suitable consequences. And we all know that doesn’t happen in today’s society.
Why are we allowing this to continue? Why do we tolerate this nonsense? My intent is to provoke thought and expose truth. It is not to accuse any entity or subset of this industry of intentionally milking the system.
Most of you reading this never gave the idea much thought; you just want to be safe. The justice system, to include law enforcement, adjusts to the ever-changing socioeconomic challenges.
We now offer unrealistic rehabilitation options to criminals that don’t want rehabilitation. When rehabilitation won’t work, a harsher, more effective punishment is in order. The “rehabilitated” criminal reappears over and over again in the “revolving door” phenomenon.
We get caught up with human rights issues and hear the mantra about what kind of childhood they had. If they murdered someone because they had a bad childhood, game over. It’s too late. It’s a vicious cycle. Enforce penalties that match the crime.
We can build all the jails and prisons we want with our money, but if there is no true consequence for negative behavior, we will see more crime and more growth in the industry associated with it. It is our responsibility as citizens to bring about change. The government works for us, not the other way around.
Our country was founded on the premise that the purpose of government is to provide for its citizens those things they can not provide for themselves. Things like infrastructure and protection from outside invasion would qualify.
Many of us can protect ourselves from the majority of criminal attacks. Our forefathers provided us the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution for that reason. But today, we stand a higher risk of being incarcerated by defending our own home than by allowing the government to do it for us.
We allow our Constitutional rights to slowly disintegrate. We pay higher taxes and support a larger government on the local, state and federal level.
In 2011, transfer payments, such as Social Security, Medicare, disability and pensions, consumed 61 percent of expenses paid for employees and retirees from government jobs. This is an average but includes the justice system employees. So, in effect, only 39 cents on your tax dollar is left to actually fight crime.
How ridiculous is that? But this is what we have come to as a nation.
Don’t forget that “We the People” do have a voice, that we live in a Republic whereby elected officials represent our interests. It is your responsibility to have dialogue with those elected officials and hold them accountable.
This country belongs to you and me, not the bureaucrats at the local, state or national governmental levels.
Our Constitutional rights are under attack every day. It is our responsibility to protect those rights for future generations. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness come at a price and freedom is never free. Stop ignoring the issues that are sending this country down the drain.
Write or call your legislators, visit your local county commission or city council meeting and be a part of the solution.
John Nix is the owner of Matrix East, a former Kinston City Council candidate and part of the Nix v. Holder federal lawsuit. You can reach him at john@matrixeast.net.