Opposite Meaning
After reading the material
throughout my criminal justice education and conducting personal research I
have concluded that the system is a complete farce. You may be asking yourself "why would a
person be studying a subject if they think it is so ridiculous?" Well, do not be overwhelmed because I am
about to answer your question, hopefully.
General Theme
The first ideas that I think most
people consider when the criminal justice system is the topic of conversation
can be exhibited with three words; which are: justice, equality, and fairness. However, when you peer into the realm of the
system you will see that these characteristics are not expounded. We have a system that is very racist
(especially against African Americans), prejudice against the indigent, victim
based, and backwards (meaning that we as a society seek out the punishment and
incapacitation of so-called violent petty crimes and the people who commit
them -- criminals). Furthermore, the
insignia that the criminal justice system uses to symbolize its practices can
be looked upon as a facetious slap to the American public’s face. Let's break this down, the insignia has a
blind-folded woman who allegedly represents the idea that justice will be
administered without any bias toward the alleged innocent person. Complex studies or past statistics are not necessary to claim this idea as a buffoonery, all that is necessary is a
few hours in a local police department, courtroom, or jail/prison. By doing this the demonstrable evidence will
presents itself, if you (yes, you) decide to partake in such an activity you
will quickly notice that the majority of people arrested, brought to court, and
detained in a jail or prison are mostly racial minorities (also known by Caucasians as
the "brown people") and poor people. This course
of insidious discrimination is the exact opposite of justice with a
blind-fold, it is more like the woman in the toga is lifting the veil so she
can expel her racism and negative prejudices.
Now, the next two components are my favorite parts of the criminal justice system’s symbol, the scale and the sword that the woman is holding. First, I think I am obligated to mention that the scale (obviously the idea behind the image, not an actual scale) is outrageous and should be broken over an offender’s head so that he or she does not have to endure such an absurd display of “justice.” Secondly, I will discuss why this should occur. With the assumption of guilt before innocence (yes, the wording is intentional) defendants rarely have an opportunity to uphold their innocence, and since the racism and prejudices occur the hiring or representation of an attorney is not necessary. Why would an attorney even attempt to zealously represent their client if their income, race, or ethnicity has already determined the outcome, and why would an “offender” engage in such a ridiculous relationship? There is no reason to do such, except for the defending of their innocence, again, which has mostly been predetermined. Hence, the representation of the scale (evidence) that should have a fair and impartial proclivity does not even come close to its representation. The act of discovery or any other tangible evidence takes on the role of adding to guilt more than innocence (obviously from the defense side of the courtroom). Moreover, the sword is a symbolization of administering a swift sentence, a bit too swift in my opinion. The use of zero tolerance, deterrence, or stiff sentences is useless. A simple and rational explanation for why they are useless can be conjured up by observing the docket of each jurist or court. If these policies worked then the docket would not have such an assembly line process and have offender-after-offender walking in for the same or similar crimes; simply put, it is a bunch of hogwash, the reason there are such punishments is because of liability concerns. Lastly, I am not suggesting that we toss petty crimes to the wayside, however, using the policies that are set in place currently have no just cause and posit the notion that rehabilitation is not our criminal justice system’s main concern. Also, I do understand that recidivism is a way of life for some people, so please do not argue that here.
To answer the question about why would I be studying this subject has two reasons. One, I want to educate the public (yes, without any bias of course), and two, I am a realist and comprehend the fallacies that are involved in the criminal justice system, which in turn sparks a motivation to do something about it, it is called activism!
Now, the next two components are my favorite parts of the criminal justice system’s symbol, the scale and the sword that the woman is holding. First, I think I am obligated to mention that the scale (obviously the idea behind the image, not an actual scale) is outrageous and should be broken over an offender’s head so that he or she does not have to endure such an absurd display of “justice.” Secondly, I will discuss why this should occur. With the assumption of guilt before innocence (yes, the wording is intentional) defendants rarely have an opportunity to uphold their innocence, and since the racism and prejudices occur the hiring or representation of an attorney is not necessary. Why would an attorney even attempt to zealously represent their client if their income, race, or ethnicity has already determined the outcome, and why would an “offender” engage in such a ridiculous relationship? There is no reason to do such, except for the defending of their innocence, again, which has mostly been predetermined. Hence, the representation of the scale (evidence) that should have a fair and impartial proclivity does not even come close to its representation. The act of discovery or any other tangible evidence takes on the role of adding to guilt more than innocence (obviously from the defense side of the courtroom). Moreover, the sword is a symbolization of administering a swift sentence, a bit too swift in my opinion. The use of zero tolerance, deterrence, or stiff sentences is useless. A simple and rational explanation for why they are useless can be conjured up by observing the docket of each jurist or court. If these policies worked then the docket would not have such an assembly line process and have offender-after-offender walking in for the same or similar crimes; simply put, it is a bunch of hogwash, the reason there are such punishments is because of liability concerns. Lastly, I am not suggesting that we toss petty crimes to the wayside, however, using the policies that are set in place currently have no just cause and posit the notion that rehabilitation is not our criminal justice system’s main concern. Also, I do understand that recidivism is a way of life for some people, so please do not argue that here.
To answer the question about why would I be studying this subject has two reasons. One, I want to educate the public (yes, without any bias of course), and two, I am a realist and comprehend the fallacies that are involved in the criminal justice system, which in turn sparks a motivation to do something about it, it is called activism!
Our "system" is not a binary system run by machines. It's a web of connections of people. People are not perfect and prone to subjectivity. If it was “stacked” against any particular racial or cultural group in our society then no one in that racial or cultural group would have a chance. But all you have to do is point your fingers towards 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. and find proof that your hypothesis is flawed (Colin Powel, Condoleezza Rice, et al). At one point in our history it was “stacked” against Native Americans in one corner, against the Irish in another, and against the Chinese in yet another. Pick a group, culture or color; no one is immune.
ReplyDeleteI personally do not want “activist” in the classroom. I am an advocate for equality and blind justice. Advocates are not “blind” to the realisms of a situation but take the best of it and try to use it to improve the worst of it. An “activist” is an anarchist with eloquent language and a Starbucks in one hand who thinks undermining, revolution, and utter destruction is the only answer to the problem. If there is a “fantasy” of a criminal justice system opposite of a democratic society as ours favored by “activist” is a socialist/communist system were the pipe-dreams of social equality harbors.
Given the histories of those fantasies in applications in the Soviet Union, The National Socialist Party (NAZI), and other so called “equal justice systems” I prefer our un-perfect system each and every day. If you find a better system somewhere else... move there and exercise your free speech as they define it. Ours is not “perfect” (if there’s such thing) but it’s better than the next or second best. As a (brown) minority who stood in line for government cheese as a child. I will be right here teaching theory and realism and getting our students to be part of an unbiased system so that they can fertilize the seeds of blind justice.
“Being democratic is not enough, to a majority cannot turn what is wrong into right. In order to be considered truly free, countries must also have a deep love of liberty and an abiding respect for the rule of law.”
― Margaret Thatcher
Ed,
ReplyDeleteI disagree with your comments. Regardless, I respect and appreciate your thoughts, thank you. Now to the reason why I do not concur with your post, and how my “hypothesis” has more merit. The first reason is that you do not use any current or relevant facts that demonstrate your notion. Suggesting that because there are African-American politicians or that there have been other prejudices against other groups of people has nothing do with the racism and prejudices that I describe in my blog (which is the contradiction of justice in the United States currently). If you simply look at any statistics from the D.O.J., or B.J.S., and even local municipalities you will notice that the demographic of people being arrested, brought to court, and sentenced are mostly minorities, racial and socioeconomic minorities. Additionally, you suggest that I am an anarchist that approves of destruction or other callous activities (Also, I am currently on social services my friend, I am indigent). Furthermore, you suggest I posit the idea that there is an ideal justice theory, not the case at all. What I am suggesting is that since the United States is a predominately "WHITE" nation then why are there not more white people entering the criminal justice system, as well as wealthy, or middle-class people? Is the 14% of African-Americans or low number of other minorities really responsible for the majority of crime in this country? Basically, you should use evidence to support your claims and not rant on about subjects that are not correlated to the subject matter. The criminal justice system is quite the opposite of its propaganda, do some research and you will find this out. Again, thank you for the post; I hope to read more of your comments.