"Each of us has a piece of the puzzle."--Lillian Smith
 |
| European American Author, Lillian Smith, wrote "Strange Fruit", which was banned in Boston. "...Smith maintained that the book's title referred to the damaged, twisted people (both black and white) who are the products or results of our racist culture." |
You are also a piece of the puzzle. You have your own set of life experiences, which shaped your values and ordered your priorities. It can be tempting for each of us to believe that our own values and priorities should set the standard for everyone else. But as any major league football coach will tell you, melding individual strengths into an integrated whole is what moves us forward.
No matter what television or radio stations you tune in to, no matter what newspapers or magazines you read, no matter what is in your beverage glass and who is sitting around your table, societal problems are discussed. No matter what your highest priorities are, there is something you can do to alleviate societal problems.
"It's all about the pocketbook."
We, the tax payers, are paying for prisons to incarcerate human beings for very long periods of time. In the US, we lock up a much higher percentage of our population than almost all other countries. According to the fabulous Wikipedia volunteers, these are the numbers, per 100,000 population, in a few selected countries:
Seychelles 868
United States 707
South Africa 294
Singapore 233
Mexico 211
Saudi Arabia 162
Canada 118
Ethiopia 111
Switzerland 87
Germany 78
Tanzania 73
Glancing through the full list, Seychelles (pronounced "say-shells") was the only country in the same ball park. I'll be honest: I've never heard of Seychelles, a set of islands well off the coast of South Africa, but I don't think I want to go there. Do you think Seychelles is an exceptionally safe place because so many people are locked up? Or do they have so many people locked up because people are so much more dangerous in Seychelles than in other countries? Can you tell from looking at these numbers where you would be the most safe?
If it makes sense that US taxpayers need to pay to lock up 707 people per 100,000 people, there must be some truth in these kinds of statements: We are more than nine times safer residing in the US than in Germany; or people are more than nine times more dangerous in the US than they are in Germany. We are more than four times safer residing in the US than in Saudi Arabia; or people are more than four times more dangerous in the US than they are in Saudi Arabia. Looking over the list, can we make sense of the numbers this way? Are we much safer? Or are our people much more dangerous? Or is it some other factor at work?
How much do tax payers pay for incarceration, and what do we get for it? Incarcerated people pay no taxes. Taxpayers pay 100% of the support of incarcerated persons.
If it's all about the pocketbook, we can save taxpayers a bundle by decreasing our incarceration rates. If this is your puzzle piece, go ahead and bring it to the table.
"It's all about safety."
What causes people to hurt other people? Psychologists will generally tell you that people who hurt others have been hurt themselves, oftentimes as children. We pass it on.
Who keeps children from getting hurt out in the world? Clearly they don't always do it, but primarily, that's a parent's job. Generally speaking, a kid's best bet is with their parents. While no parent is perfect, the instinct to keep our children safe is very powerful.
When we lock up parents for long periods of time for non-violent crimes, we set our society up for violent crime down the road. We are making our society less safe because we prevent parents from doing their primary job, which is to keep their kids safe.
Courtesy of the ACLU, here is just one example of a harsh sentence for a non-violent crime:
Patrick Matthews was arrested while riding in the truck of a friend who pawned stolen tools and a welding machine, which he was convicted of stealing. Patrick is now 25. Since he was sentenced to die in prison three years ago, he has completed his GED, and participates in Narcotics Anonymous and Alcoholics Anonymous. "I never in the world would've thought that could happen," he says. "Made one mistake and was treated like a murderer." Patrick had no violent criminal history and had never served a single day in a Department of Corrections facility. He desperately misses his two young children, Blayton and Hayley, who are eight and six years old. One of the judges who reviewed Patrick's appeal said he did not "believe that the ends of justice are met by a mandatory sentence for this 22-year-old," but that legislation mandated sending Patrick away for the rest of his life because of unarmed burglary convictions when he was 17.How much safer do you feel with Patrick Matthew in prison for the rest of his life? What are the chances that his children will be safer and better cared for with him in prison? He will never be at a Back-to-School night. He will never be the applauding daddy at the school talent show. He will never pay for a single soccer season. He will never protect his children from being hurt by anyone, ever. How will his children fare? Is our society better off?
If it's all about safety, we can let non-violent parents raise their own children, giving those kids a better shot at a non-violent, law-abiding future. If this is your puzzle piece, go ahead and bring it to the table.
"It's all about fairness."
Why did I use an example of a European American felon for "It's all about safety"? Because it is so darned easy to give this guy the benefit of the doubt. As I discussed in my "Scientists at Work" post, we automatically and unconsciously associate African Americans with crime. That's why people are more likely to perceive African Americans as a threat and to dial 911 to report "suspicious activity" by African Americans.. That's why police officers are more likely to stop, question, and arrest African Americans, That's why DAs are more likely to prosecute African Americans. That's why jurors are more likely to find African Americans guilty of crimes. That's why judges are more likely to extend harsher sentences to African Americans. And that's why African American children are more likely to be perceived as a threat in school and disciplined more frequently and more harshly. And that's not fair.
If it's all about fairness, we can find ways to compensate for the automatic injustices of our human brains. We can find ways to measure the injustice. We can consciously observe the injustic. We can reverse the injustice. We can insist that people in positions of authority, whether teachers, principals, police officers, judges, jurors, or corporate managers, are measured for bias and coached in managing their unconcious biases. If this is your puzzle piece, go ahead and bring it to the table.
So, what's it all about for you?
What's your puzzle piece all about? Go ahead and bring it to the table.
No comments:
Post a Comment