Most Americans ignore the horrifying reality that is life in the state and federal prison systems. On those rare occasions when the issue is brought up, they justify their lack of concern by saying that those in prison are "criminals" who "deserve it." The horror of prison is actually celebrated, with disturbing regularity, on several popular cop dramas. Officers use the threat of prison rape and other crimes against prisoners to coerce cooperation out of reticent suspects.
At n+1, Christopher Glazek has a powerful piece swimming against the tide on this. The tone of the article is best captured by this sentence: "America’s prison system is a moral catastrophe." And while I can't do justice to the content (you should really read the whole thing), I did want to share this bit of information:
After asking around, and performing some calculations, the Justice Department came up with a new number: 216,000. That’s 216,000 victims, not instances. These victims are often assaulted multiple times over the course of the year. The Justice Department now seems to be saying that prison rape accounted for the majority of all rapes committed in the US in 2008, likely making the United States the first country in the history of the world to count more rapes for men than for women.Let that sink in for a moment. The 0.7% of the population that is behind bars—the 0.7% of the population most directly under the supervision and control of the state—suffers more than 50% of rapes in this country.
Like I said, there's no way I can summarize the piece. Read it. Read it now.
Of course, Glazek's policy proposals are all wrong. Prisons should not be abolished, and the death penalty should not be expanded. Convicted rapists should not be castrated. But even though Glazek is incredibly misguided on his proposed solutions, his identification of the problem is important and valuable.
Let me contrast the realistic picture of prisons in Glazek's piece with that presented by Robert Blecker, a professor at New York Law School:
For 25 years, doing research, I’ve spent thousands of hours inside maximum-security prisons in seven states. What I’ve seen has appalled me. Convicted murderers play softball, volleyball, and Ping-Pong. Vicious men who raped and murdered children watch soap operas on color TVs. Serial killers who tortured their victims to death munch on snacks that they “shopped” for at prison commissaries.Blecker advocates a morally depraved philosophy known as "retributivism," which he summarizes as follows: "We retributivists, ignoring future costs or benefits of punishment, seek justice based almost exclusively on a criminal’s culpability. We believe that society should intentionally inflict harsh punishment on criminals because they deserve it—and only to the extent that they deserve it."
But I want to set aside the "justification" behind Blecker's call for more punitive prison life, and focus instead on the way he misrepresents the reality of prison life. For instance, he says that conditions in maximum security prisons are "comparatively unpleasant." Yes, maximum security prisons are still pleasant, just less so than the lower security variety.
As an academic who studies criminal law, Blecker has accesses to the resources he needs to understand the moral depravity of America's prisons. Spending "thousands of hours inside maximum-security prisons in seven states" over "25 years" and still thinking that those prisons are pleasant places full of fun and games requires either a remarkable naiveté or a disgusting willingness to hide the truth in support of efforts to make things even worse.
Beyond the evil done by academics like Blecker, recognizing the reality of prison life in America brings up another important question. I've previously asked how prosecutors in states with the death penalty can justify their work. Now I want to know how any prosecutor can justify sending anyone to prison when doing so makes them more than 140 times as likely to be raped. It boggles the mind.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder