CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:16
Arguments:40
Total Votes:19
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 What is the main problem with the US Criminal Justice System? (13)

Debate Creator

Amarel(5669) pic



What is the main problem with the US Criminal Justice System?

I'm sure we can all think of a few things. But which problem would have the biggest positive impact if changed? Why?
Add New Argument

Sanctuary cities that won't turn over prisoners to ICE.*

Amarel(5669) Clarified
1 point

You really believe that illegal immigrants are the number one problem in our criminal justice system? I don’t.

There are cities that would not call themselves sanctuary cities and do not wish to be labeled as such. Nonetheless they will not hold people in custody for ICE unless ICE is readily available, and they often aren’t. There are two reasons cities do this. Some people are simply under investigation by ICE, and holding them would amount to false imprisonment for which the city would be responsible. The other reason is that it takes up resources that it otherwise wouldn’t if city jails followed their own internal policy.

1 point

What is the main problem with the US Criminal Justice System?

This is very general, however I think there is far too much emphasis on minor offenses. In my view, the Police & Criminal Justice system should be when serious threats to human safety occur (e.g. Murder, rape, Mugging, Breaking into a persons home, ect. ect.)--not Parking Tickets and most "petty offenses".

Amarel(5669) Clarified
2 points

I don’t believe parking, traffic, and other minor offenses are the biggest single problem. Nonetheless, let’s discuss it.

Do you believe parking and traffic enforcement is necessary? If so, how should it be done?

Are there other minor offenses that you would put in this category of offenses that should not be a law enforcement concern?

xMathFanx(1722) Clarified
1 point

@Amarel

I don’t believe parking, traffic, and other minor offenses are the biggest single problem.

The problem is the hyper-expansion of legitimate functions of the Criminal Justice "Wing" of society/Government into a means of Social Control/regulation of essentially normal behaviors that are relatively harmless. Also, it is used as a sort of "under-the-table" type taxing of the populace to generate further revenue for the Government (i.e. I find it to be fundamentally dishonest). Furthermore, these types of "petty offenses" hit the poor/lower-classes disproportionately hard. For instance, Parking Tickets to people who are living paycheck-to-paycheck is much more difficult to cope with then a person with a "solid" income or above.

1 point

Hello A,

I think you know what I’m going to say, but clearly, the drug war must come to an end. There’s many social reasons why it should be discontinued, as we’ve discussed, but the main reason is, prohibition just doesn’t work.

50 years of failure SHOULD tell us something.

There is, of course, the drug warrior mantra that we could win the war on drugs if only we cracked down harder, which is patently stupid.

If we did end it, we’d have so much prison space that we really could lock up really bad guys, for a really long time.

excon

Amarel(5669) Clarified
2 points

Roughly half of the approximately 200 thousand people in Fed prison are in for drug offenses. Of the nearly 1.36 million people in state prisons, only 16% have drug crimes as their worste offense.

I’m not posting stats in opposition to you position, just providing some clarity.

It seems states are far less concerned about drug offenses, and lock up far more people. This should be expected since most violent crimes and property crimes are not a federal issue. With this in mind, what would ending the war on drugs look like? Would it simply be fed decriminalization? Or would there be a fed requirement for all states to legalize? If legal, would it be regulated?

outlaw60(15368) Disputed Banned
1 point

Super STUPID must it be that all illegal drugs should be legal ? Your Obama didn't really believe in prisons so are you as stupid as the nigger was ?

mrcatsam(663) Clarified
1 point

Wow. That, ladies and gentlemen, is why I don't live in the US.............

What a redneck you are. The stereotypes are true.

I'm enjoying this. You can't respond because you're banned. Hehe, youre BANNED!!!! HAHAHAHAHA! That's how far being a cracker is going to get you in life. BANNED!

Amarel(5669) Clarified
1 point

What would ending the war on drugs look like? Would it simply be fed decriminalization? Or would there be a fed requirement for all states to legalize? If legal, would it be regulated?

1 point

Judges are the main problem with the Justice system. The punishment for crime is inconsistent and weak. As a result, legislators created mandatory minimums for drug crimes, which created another problem. They should drop these and have mandatory punishment for certain crimes against persons and property. This would make for a more objective system.

Ever see what happens when the victim is a friend or family member of the judge? Full punishment. But judges don’t empathize with unrelated victims, rather they pity the perpetrator. Judges have used their discretion to create a less efficient, less functional system. Some of their discretion needs to be removed.

1 point

The main problem (but not the only one) is that there is no clear definition of what we want it to accomplish.

- Deter people from breaking the law?

- Punish the guilty?

- Rehabilitate criminals & modify behavior?

- Protect society from criminal activity?

Deterrent The fines and prison time are generally too divorced from the criminal activity to act effectively as a deterrent for further criminal activity. Instead they function to discourage getting caught or having a bad lawyer. Our recidivism rate in the US is high, as is the rate of criminal activity, so the system clearly does not work to do this.

Punishment This requires that the system reliably gets the guilty people only, and reliably convicts the guilty by imposing uniform sentences and punishments. Both of these requirements are undermined by plea bargaining, a chaotically wide range of punishments due to mitigating and aggravating circumstances that impact sentencing, lack of truth in sentencing, etc. ad nauseum.

Rehabilitation The structure of our prison system effectively sabotages rehabilitative activities by failing to resemble outside society, thus making it worthless as a place to practice healthy behaviors, and train for readmission to society.

We put undisciplined and antisocial people into a socially hyper-aggressive, and highly controlled environment wherein any healthy social skills and self-direction capabilities quickly atrophy. This leaves ex-convicts even less capable of running their lives and participating productively in society than they were when convicted.

On top of this, the reintroduction into society is done haphazardly, often without adequate support, and commonly with only poor opportunities for useful employment.

This contributes greatly to recidivism rates.

Societal Protection The fact that violent criminals rarely serve full prison terms due to parole and probation truncates the time from which people are protected from the thieves and sociopaths in question.

Worse yet, we lock non-violent criminals in the same places as the violent ones. This often puts otherwise non-violent people in the position of having to learn to be violent in order to make it through their time.

On top of that, prisoners are allowed to lift weights, etc., enabling them to get stronger and more dangerous than when arrested.

+

Were our system designed to tackle ONE of these, it could be designed to be more effective at that particular task.

Instead, the dispersed scope of the purpose and methods of the system virtually ensure failure of all possible positive functions of the US criminal justice system.

1 point

@marcusmoon

The main problem (but not the only one) is that there is no clear definition of what we want it to accomplish.

- Deter people from breaking the law?

- Punish the guilty?

- Rehabilitate criminals & modify behavior?

- Protect society from criminal activity?

This is true and largely the product of there being fundamental Philosophical disagreements within the population on this front.

Marcus,

Are you familiar with Neurolaw? Based on your position regarding "free will" I came across elsewhere, it would seem you would not be in favor of this discipline/approach(?)

marcusmoon(576) Clarified
1 point

Are you familiar with Neurolaw?

I have never heard of it (by that name, at least.)

Amarel(5669) Clarified
1 point

The main problem (but not the only one) is that there is no clear definition of what we want it to accomplish.

This is true. Our sense of justice seems to lean heavily toward retribution. A sense I believe evolved because of the deterrence it produces. This is why deterrence and punishment have been central to the discussion for longer than rehabilitation, which is a more modern concern. Let’s consider your various critiques:

-Deterrent: The fines and prison time are generally too divorced from the criminal activity

True. Some of this could be helped, much of it can’t. But I don’t believe this is the main reason our criminal justice system fails to effectively deter criminal behavior. People are arrested repeatedly for the same crimes and are repeatedly released in little more than a signature bond and end up sentenced to probation only. Regardless of what’s on paper, criminals get a slap on the wrist unless it’s a drug crime with a mandatory minimum. You cover this under “Societal Protection”, and I completely agree, though I think this is the most glaring problem which could be addressed and, if it were, it would move a number of issues in the right direction.

-Punishment: This requires that the system reliably gets the guilty people only, and reliably convicts the guilty by imposing uniform sentences and punishments.

I agree that punishment needs to be more uniform. I don’t believe that false convictions are at all common.

Both of these requirements are undermined by plea bargaining, a chaotically wide range of punishments due to mitigating and aggravating circumstances that impact sentencing, lack of truth in sentencing, etc. ad nauseum.

Do you see a solution to this particular issue?

-Rehabilitation: The structure of our prison system effectively sabotages rehabilitative activities by failing to resemble outside society, thus making it worthless as a place to practice healthy behaviors, and train for readmission to society.

For the most part, I agree. This reflects the fact that rehabilitation is a fairly recent concern that is preceded by our current system. While some are rehabilitated, it is not common. One has to wonder how conducive to rehab most criminals are. If they generally are not, then it wouldn’t matter that the system is mostly punitive, and we could worry more about deterrence.

Were our system designed to tackle ONE of these, it could be designed to be more effective at that particular task.

Instead, the dispersed scope of the purpose and methods of the system virtually ensure failure of all possible positive functions of the US criminal justice system

I believe this is more bleak than the situation suggests. If many of these issues have a common contributor, that contributor can be effectively targeted. I believe the methods of our judges are the single greatest contributor to the greatest number of issues.

marcusmoon(576) Clarified
1 point

Amarel,

I believe this is more bleak than the situation suggests. If many of these issues have a common contributor, that contributor can be effectively targeted.

Perhaps I overstated a little, but that is largely because of how expensive incarceration is. For how much we pay for incarceration, I would think we would get better results.

I believe the methods of our judges are the single greatest contributor to the greatest number of issues.

Interesting.

Why the judges, as opposed to the prosecutors or juries?

For that matter, why not the investigation methods of the police?

Main problem?

The removal of impartial separation as the driving cost of taxation.

Why?

When the Justice system is directed to collect review by fine, levee, or lean. It removes a common defense that all people who pay a form of taxation by interrupting impartial judicial separation. This process was used to places a burden of proof on both side of justice.

Amarel(5669) Clarified
1 point

It’s not clear what issue you are presenting. Do you see the problem in fines, or in civil asset forfeiture?

1 point

I would have to agree that there is too much emphasis on minor crimes, such as marijuana use. I also do not agree with privatized jails. When judges can get money for sending people to jail (not legal but it is done) then there is a problem.

Amarel(5669) Clarified
1 point

For some clarification I will re-post here some stats about prisoners of drug crimes: Roughly half of the approximately 200 thousand people in Fed prison are in for drug offenses. Of the nearly 1.36 million people in state prisons, only 16% have drug crimes as their worste offense.

I’m inclined to agree that pot needs to be decriminalized and the whole approach to the drug issue needs to change. But drugs are clearly not the emphasis of the states.

Privatized nails are definitely a bad idea (They are truly only pseudo-private and reflect cronyism). The appropriate functions of government cannot be appropriately handled by the free market. Imagine if cops profited off arrests or legislation produced income for represtatives (both happen but neither are legal). The problem of private jails should have been seen miles away.

Mint_tea(4641) Clarified
1 point

I agree.

My main concern with pot is that people spend more time in jail for smoking a joint than a rapist does. coughBrockTurnercough. To me that is an injustice in itself.

I also agree about the fact that problems with private jails should have been seen, however money blinds the corruptible.

1 point

Fragmentation. You have 50 states with 50 sets of laws and 50 ways of doing things. You also have democracy politics which over two centuries lead to some crimes being uber-punished and others not, thus inconsistent. And you have different enforcement, prosecution, and punishment based on demographic groups, which also is fragmentation.

Amarel(5669) Clarified
1 point

I would take it a step further. The outcome of your crime will vary depending on what individual judge you get. I don’t believe our federalism would be problematic if the judges within our states were held to a more objective and uniform standard, at least within their state.

But yeah, inconsistency is not a sign of health.

1 point

Call me crazy but I think the criminals are the main problem.