Should
public opinion counts when it comes to making policies?
One of the things that I would like to comment on is
a question that is asked in Criminal
Justice Ethics: Theory and Practice; and the question is, “should public
opinion be the determinant of sentencing and correctional policies” (Banks, 2013,
p. 192). My response to this question is that I do not believe that it would
ethical for criminal justice policies to be formulated solely on the basis of
what is perceived to be public opinion because, as Banks (2013) points out,
public opinion on crime control and punishment often fluctuates in response to
certain events, such as urban turmoil and when the crime rates escalates. In
addition, the media also plays a big part as far as how and what the public
thinks about crime; as some commentators put it, public opinion can be easily manipulated
by the media.
However, does this mean
that the policy makers should have total control when it comes to making crime
control and criminal justice policies? No, I am not saying that either, because
I do believe that it would also be unethical for policies on criminal justice
issues to be made without the public’s view on these issues being taken into
consideration. However, the point that I am trying to make here is that I
believe when criminal justice policies are made without the input and consideration
of public opinion, we would end up with some policies that will have a
disproportionate impact on minorities. For example, research shows that the
legislation enacted in 1986 to shape the war on drugs by prescribing minimum
penalties for drug trafficking based on the amount of drugs involved and making
distinction between possession of cocaine and possession of crack cocaine was
aimed more at African Americans (Banks, 2013, p. 190). To show how bias this
policy was against blacks, as Banks (2013) also points out, a minimum of 25 years
imprisonment was given for possession of 5 or more grams of crack cocaine,
which is the form of drug that was normally used and sold by blacks; however,
the minimum sentence that was given for possession of the powder cocaine, the
kind that is normally used and sold by whites, was only 5 years and the amount
had to exceed or equal to 500 grams. Anyone in their right frame of mind can
see something is wrong with this policy. However, as a result of this
legislation, as (Banks 2013) further explains, three of four people that were
doing time for drug offense were African Americans. This is just one example of
the many laws and policies that have these ethical issues.
Now that you have gotten
an idea how some criminal justice policies can impact the lives of some people,
wouldn’t you agree that public opinion should have some kind of a role in the
policy making? Well, even though I believe that the wishes of the public should
be taken into consideration when these policies are being made, some experts disagree;
according to Banks (2013), they believe that in most areas of crime control
that there is a widespread lack of knowledge of the public.
Reference
Banks, C. (2013). Criminal Justice Ethics:
Theory and Practice (3d ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhile taking to my wife she made me realize that the public does have the power to enact some of the laws in the state. Last year when we went to the polls to vote in the presidential election there was also a vote on the issue of imminent domain. The funny thing was it was so detailed in its wording a friend of ours had to explain it to us so we could vote correctly on the legisation. In most cases public policy is the same way that is why there are judges and lawyers to interpret the law.
ReplyDeletecorrected comment.
Hello Evans Bryon,
ReplyDeleteI do agree with your opinion in theory, however, as you stated, the public can be extremely uninformed or misguided on correctional policy making pertaining to sentencing. The public relies on what they see reported and debated on the television, internet and radio to develop their views on crime rates and criminal activities; but their opinion on how it should be delivered is often based on their individual and personal experiences, fears, emotions and biases. We all have them. If a White woman was raped by a Black man, she may view all Black males as a potential rapist based on that experience. The same would be reasonable for the parents of a child who was molested; they would be motivated by fear and emotions to have the offender locked away for life. If someone murdered your family member, you would not care what about race. You would want him to get the maximum sentence possible; the death penalty may not be severe enough based on your emotional reaction to this crime. That is why we have to have something more effective that public opinion determine sentencing policies. We have all been touched by crime in one way or another. We have to elect officials and politicians who are in sensitive to the public’s demand for justice, but have the integrity to sentence without prejudice.
The disparity in sentencing for possession of powder cocaine and crack cocaine was an excellent example of how policies can go terribly awry if not monitored. Even after the court system realized that these laws were weighted against minorities, they have remained on the books. Judges have been given some discretion in sentencing for these cases, however, the fact that this is still an issue reflects negatively on the criminal justice system. Minorities are receiving longer sentences for fewer drugs than White offenders based on the form of cocaine they buy, sell or use. This is one of the worst travesties of justice within the criminal justice system. Whenever the criminal justice system criticized for being blatantly racist, politicians and court officials point to studies and research that report that deny the allegations. The proof is in our jails and prisons.
I have no problem with minimum or maximum sentences for crime, if it is dished out equitably to all. I believe all criminal acts should be punished. If the public could believe that politicians, law makers, and law enforcers would do the right thing, they would less suspicious of their motives. If someone commits a crime, their ethnicity should not be a consideration during sentencing. As long as it is perceived that minorities are still on the unethical end of the balance of justice, the public must remain vigilant and informed on how the policies on sentencing are being legislated and applied.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe propaganda that came about because of the war on drugs had an enormous effect on the laws that were pushed through. As uneven as that legislation is; moral panic, federal funding and political gain was the motivation that overwhelmed our prison systems.
ReplyDeleteThis immoral way of law making had little to do with research or impact on society. It was a knee jerk reaction that had unfair consequences we are still paying for today. Some states have begun to correct this lop sided legislation, but it has a long way to go. Research and scientific study should be used in the law making process and not panic.
Evans: This is a very well-written, thorough blog. You have supported your opinions well. Professor Taylor
ReplyDelete