2009.01.05
Discuss Monday's editorials
The criminal justice system needs help
Sen. Jim Webb demonstrates political courage in his push to reform a system that 'tough-on-crime' politicians have made expensive and ineffective.
Sen. Jim Webb is not a typical politician, and he wants to bring an atypical approach to criminal justice reform in America. The typical political fashion of treating crime and punishment has created an America that imprisons a larger percentage of its population than any other nation. It has created a justice system that is erratic, arbitrary and, well, unjust.
Read more.
Protecting the New River
Land on the banks of the New River once marked for a prison is now protected from development.
Grayson County's prison saga has concluded with a happy ending. Grayson County residents were in conflict when the prison was first proposed. Many residents wanted the jobs and other economic activity the prison would create. But many others thought the prison at the proposed location would do the county more harm than good. The land was along the New River, surrounded by property protected from development by conservation easements.
Read more.
RSS feed 
How can a bill like that be justified when the state contributes a paltry 20 to 30% of the operating budget? If the Homorable Delegate from Front Royal pony up more funding then he can justify the numbers he proposes. Also, UVa has reached its lofty stature due to the diverse background of its student body among many other assets.
Comment by Joe B UVa Alum — January 5, 2009 @ 9:33 am
Webb appears misguided. We see study after study linking illegal drugs to destructive and often psychotic behavior. As an example, the psychotic individual may go on killing spree, yet liberals are more apt to focus on the weapon of choice rather than the root of the problem: drugs. I can't wait to see Webb's / political panel's ideas for reform.
Hey, if one type of people are more respresented in white-collar crimes, can we argue for mitigation for these disaffected "victims"? We need some parity here.
And since when has being an author and "thoughtful" person either qualified someone for policy or shielded them from criticism??? It seems the RT wishes us to set our expectations high for endorsing Webb's plans before the policy recommendations are even in, but that would be getting way ahead of ourselves.
Comment by Jim — January 5, 2009 @ 12:18 pm
I think that heightens the reasoning for not incarcerating simple drug users, but sending them to treatment and rehab centers instead so they get help and can kick the addiction before they progress to other crimes. However, if a user has committed other crimes, they ought to be imprisoned and get rehab while in a prison setting. But the overall goal should be not only to reduce the number of prisoners in ways that don't adversely impact public safety. Treating users whose only crime has been possessing and using the drug so they can get clean and move back to society, rather than sending them to prison where they will likely come out still addicted and likely to commit further crimes, sounds like the way to go.
Comment by Other John — January 5, 2009 @ 12:54 pm
I don't really see the harm in at least exploring freeing up crowded jails by taking out the simple offendors with nothing more than a possession charge or something similar.
Comment by HCS — January 5, 2009 @ 4:10 pm
You'd have to evaluate the costs. If the recidivism rate is high, then a rehab program may not be effective. Also, how do you get around the fact that higher incarceration rates as well as longer sentences increase public safety more than any other policy? One third of the drop in US crime in the 1990s was due to greater imprisonment. Nothing else approaches this effectiveness.
Have you noticed that the countries with the lowest incarceration rates have the highest crime rates / are the least safe? Example, US crime rate dropped over 20% in the 1990s while it rose 11% in EU countries. Africa and Asia have the most dangerous countries and also the lowest incarceration rates.
Also, reduced or lenient sentencing has been responsible for increased crime, particularly for drug related crime.
I find the evidence below persuasive:
http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/LevittUnderstandingWhyCrime2004.pdf
Comment by Jim — January 5, 2009 @ 4:26 pm
And when they wind up in court with that second possession charge we'll just send them right on back out and skip the jail to begin with.
Comment by Jack — January 5, 2009 @ 4:29 pm
Let's just scrap our current system and adopt much tougher Islamic Shariah law for criminal court cases. Most crimes would then be immediately punishable by death. Others by lashings or other corporal punishment means. Theft...lose a hand. Want to guess at how fast the crime rates would drop in this country then? Oh, but the ACLU would have a field day.
Comment by Other John — January 5, 2009 @ 4:50 pm
I realize offenders need to be punished...that's why I said "exploring".
Comment by HCS — January 5, 2009 @ 4:59 pm
I have no problem with rehab in lieu of incarceration for simple possession with first time offenders. However, I do fear that several here are buying into some faulty premises.
Apparently there is some widespread misconception that the jails are packed with first time offenders and people convicted of simple possession. That is simply not the case. Very few people convicted of simple possession actually serve time. That includes felony possession charges. There are already diversion programs in the law that provides for treatment for first time offenders.
Second, rehab might be a good option for some, but again there seems to be a misconception that most drug users are hopeless addicts who try repeatedly to stop but can't. You know the stuff of TV movies. In reality that is simply not the case. The reason most drug users don't stop is not that they are too addicted to quit, it's that they like being high and they don't want to quit. And unfortunately, you can mandate all the rehab and treatment in the world and if the individual doesn't want to change their behavior, it's not going to work.
Comment by C Ramsey — January 5, 2009 @ 8:56 pm
Can we "explore" in your neighborhood first?
Comment by Jim — January 5, 2009 @ 9:44 pm
C Ramsey - I see what you're saying. As you say, rehab won't work for some of these offender because they just don't want to quit. I say the same for jail, I think a weekend in the slammer won't deter that person from going home and smokin some green (or whatever they do). So, yes Jim come explore in my neighborhood other options, to be honest I don't know what the best other option is, but like I said, I don't see the harm in exploring other options.
Comment by HCS — January 6, 2009 @ 8:57 am