Behind A Nation’S Iron Doors

Posted on Thursday, April 01 at 15:02 by harrisp
In this election year, like clockwork, each candidate at virtually every level will promise to be ‘tough on crime’ while accusing his/her opponent of being soft. The result is that over the years all these promises of toughness in all those election campaigns have made the United States the most heavily incarcerated nation on the planet. The rates of incarceration in the U.S. have doubled since the late 1980’s and now sit at astronomical levels. The U.S. has five times more prisoners per capita than Canada and seven times more than the whole of Western Europe. With approximately 5% of the world’s population, it has about 25% of the world’s prisoners. Statistics show that almost 90% of those American prisoners have been jailed for non-violent offenses, often for misdemeanors arising out of the so-called ‘War on Drugs’. But it is a bizarre administration of justice that incarcerates large numbers of perpetrators of victimless crimes while leaving free murderers; that jails petty crooks while leaving corporate criminals free to strike again; the punishes blue-collar criminals harshly while treating white-collar criminals with kid-gloves. As an examples: Martha Stewart faces up to 20 years in prison because she told a fib while Enron’s Ken Lay faces a life of luxury because his buddy lives on Pennsylvania Avenue; O.J. Simpson went free while a mentally-challenged man in Texas who had no concept of his actions was executed; four executives of Hoffman-LaRoche were jailed in 2000 for up to four months for what the Justice Department called the largest criminal anti-trust conspiracy in history while a Texas man was jailed for sixteen years for stealing a Snickers bar. And the United States remains one of the few nations to continue the barbaric practice of state sanctioned murder. What makes all this even worse is the research that reveals a significant number of people behind bars in the U.S. may be innocent. In Illinois, to name but one example, during the last two decades of the twentieth century more convicted prisoners on death row were found innocent than were executed. And a group in the United States known as the Innocence Project has achieved marked success in overturning scores of convictions with the use of DNA testing. Naturally, all these apparent errors in trial law call into question the efficacy of the court system. Still, in the United States, it is important to be tough on crime; any candidate who is not will be suammarily dismissed as weak by opponents and will usually lose. As a separate but related issue, it isn’t enough that the United States locks up its citizens in record numbers, it puts them in deplorable conditions. The prisons are overcrowded, run down, and prisoners are often kept in conditions that violate any decent standards of humanity. In the case of hardened mass murderers, at least the bad excuse could be made that they deserve no better. But even the poor kid who got caught with a joint finds himself in these same conditions and if he wasn’t on the road to perdition when he walked into prison, with his feet shackled, he surely will be when he walks out. Being convicted of a crime in the United States often means you are stripped of your civil rights forever. Indeed, one of the accusations that arose out of the 2000 Florida voting debacle was the story of large numbers of convicted felons who are not eligible to vote. It seems the voting lists may not have been accurate, but the real point is that paying one’s debt to society apparently never ends in some parts of the U.S. Even though these people had served their time, they are forever forbidden from enjoying that most basic right in a democratic country, voting. Various scholars in the U.S., attorneys, prisoners, and freelance reporters have spoken or written of the horrendous condition of American jails and the vast numbers of people incarcerated for minor offenses for excessive periods of time. But it is not an issue that has excited the American people except insofar as they like to hear their political candidates preach about hiring more police, locking up more bad guys, and building more prisons. Since many American prisons are now run by private industry, you know someone is making a buck and is actively encouraging a need for even more prisoners. The story of this nation of prisons and prisoners (i.e., the Land of the Free) gets almost no ink or airtime. And for a very simple reason: the overwhelming number of prisoners come from the bottom quarter or so of the population in economic terms. It isn’t merely that the poor commit more crimes, but the justice system is stacked against them because the so-called ‘blue collar crimes usually generate harsher sentences than ‘white collar’ crimes. The part of the population that ends up at some time in jail, is less likely to vote in the future (even assuming they live in a state that doesn’t strip away that right), is a less affluent demographic than the majority, and is disproportionately non-white. In fact, some 50% of prisoners in U.S. jails are black; between them and the poor, their plight isn’t even on the national radar. Imagine if the situation was reversed: what if the bulk of prisoners were affluent, well-educated, and white. It’s a safe bet there would be a lot less of them in prison and for those who did end up there, the conditions would certainly be much better. Unfortunately, though, it’s election time again so the old shibboleths about locking up the bastards and throwing away the keys are about to fill the nation’s consciousness once again. And dutifully, they will listen to that siren song again and squeeze a few more souls into those prisons, hire a few more cops, and once again line the pockets of Houses of Detention Inc.

Contributed By


Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Fri Apr 02, 2004 12:16 am
    Seems to me, that the bulk of prisoners should be 'affluent, well educated and white'. They just have better lawyers.<p> Or in Canadian prisons, Liberals Cabinet ministers and Crown Corporation Execs.<p> The '3 strikes' rule in the US has to be about the dumbest thing I've ever heard (and I listen to question period). Steal a candy bar 3 times, and it's life in the slammer? Barbaric.<p> <p>---<br>"History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme" Mark Twain <br />
    "The greatest price of not participating in politics is being governed by your inferiors." Plato

  2. Fri Apr 02, 2004 3:52 am
    Smoke 3 joints and it's life. Can't have dangerous criminals like that roaming the stre... sitting on their couches eating bags of potato chips.

    ---
    Kory Yamashita

    "What lies behind us and what lies ahead of us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us." - Oliver Wendell Holmes

  3. Fri Apr 02, 2004 4:11 am
    The United States of America. Where any coke snorting draft dodger can become President. :)<p><p>---<br>"History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme" Mark Twain <br />
    "The greatest price of not participating in politics is being governed by your inferiors." Plato

  4. Fri Apr 02, 2004 5:31 am
    Doc, come on... not just ANY coke-snorting draft-dodger can be President. On top of those hefty qualifications, a President must also be longtime family friends of, and do business with, Suddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden. And he must be a man (no women, of course) who can honestly say he has presided over more deaths than any other Governor in American history.

    Blah.

    -KY

    ---
    Kory Yamashita

    "What lies behind us and what lies ahead of us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us." - Oliver Wendell Holmes

  5. Fri Apr 02, 2004 10:48 pm
    Canada holds the worlds record for longest wrongful conviction in world history. http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/05/15/phillion_030515 Not a rare fluke either, happens all the time in Canada. http://www.cbc.ca/news/indepth/facts/wrong_convicted.html Amazing huh?

  6. Sat Apr 03, 2004 6:48 am
    Here is a list of innocence projects and news about wrongful convictions.<br><br> <a href="http://www.innocencelaw.com">InnocenceLaw.com</a>

  7. Sat Apr 03, 2004 11:25 pm
    Any idiot can rant and rave about something he doesn't like, and little intelligence is required to find some examples of inequity in a system as vast as the US court system. It also isn't difficult to cite some statistics (without a source) and leave it to the reader to assume (with no evidence) that these figures have some statistically significant correlation to what you're discussing. Mr. Paul Harris demonstrates only that he's intolerant, and therefore probably unable to offer an objective, informed critique. I personally feel that the US justice system is in dire need of repair, but pieces like this serve only to inflame and distract.
    Ripping something apart is easy - try showing your work if you want credit for finding a problem, and try suggesting positive changes if you want to demonstrate your ability to make things better.

  8. Sun Apr 04, 2004 3:30 am
    Two points, Paul Harris is an excellent writer and he isn't afraid to put his name behind his written word. Since when is it mandatory to write an article following someone else's criteria? If someone else wants to write an article with stats and info on a point of view and sign their name to it, I'm sure vive would print that point of view.

    Second point about the stats regarding wrongful conviction in Canada, this is not good, but at least we don't put them to death and then find out we were wrong, as some countries do. Not saying that spending a good portion of your life in jail for being innocent is good, but at least you have your life and are usually compensated which is something. The problem I see is we have innocent people in jail and criminals on the street and according to the sponsorship info, even in our government!

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  9. Sun Apr 04, 2004 5:01 pm
    That was a interesting article. I usually don't read Paul's articles cause their too long and I spend enough time reading books, so I don't have time to read a chapter size article ;-)

    This time I used this new program which is only a 14 day trial, which all I have to do is copy a text and it will read the entire text to me, and I can still do other things. I think I may even purchase a program like this later on.

    Regarding this article. I think that Paul Harris is touching on some serious issues, regardless of Anon's opinion. As far as I know there isn't any laws against articles touching on issues, and having the author voice some of their own opinion.

    Kevin



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news