So,  TV is Our Treatment for Criminal Behavior?

  Some day, I should visit our jails, to see if the prisoner sits around and watches TV all day. Well, maybe calling them and asking would do.
   At any rate, before the age of television, the prisoner didn't have such an influence. I can't help but wonder if he was the better for it. I wonder if with the invention of the TV, a harmful influence was unleashed upon the prisoner.
   Well, I do confess, I am one of those who considers the violence and the sexuality and the values portrayed on television to be a negative influence on anyone. But, if they are, I ask, why do we feed the prisoner on little else. If a man is the sum of the things he consumes, in terms of what he feeds his mind, why would we let the TV be the chief influence our inmates have?
   I will confess, I do not know how many prisons let TV be the chief way the convict passes his time, but I do wonder how many allow it to be so. And, yes, I really do shake my head at how wrongheaded we are to go about correcting the criminal this way. Our idea for making things better is to have them sit idly, doing little but watching television all the day long? We really have progressed a long way in treating criminal behavior. If this is what our criminal justice system has come to, I really don't think we are giving much thought to what treatments are best to counter criminal behavior.

 

Let the Convicts Serve Their Victims

   Our judicial system might could take a tip from what is taught in church. I know some recoil when anything churchy is brought into politics. But, if that is you, listen, and judge the suggestion on its merits, not on where it came from.
   A few weeks ago, while debating a Facebook friend who pointed out the U.S.'s high incarceration rate, some scriptures and church doctrine on repentance came to mind. The steps of repentance include recognizing our sins, feeling sorry we did what we did, providing restitution, forsaking the sins, and confessing them. I zeroed in on restitution, at first, but quickly realized how the others steps could also be involved if we changed up our system so that, when possible, instead of sending people to prison, we asked them to serve their victims. 
   Serving the victim, then. Let the judge look at the case, and decide if it is the better option, better than prison, or maybe something that could be done even while in prison.
   Not thinking he was LDS, I didn't share any scriptures, or church doctrine with my Facebook friend, I just told him serving the victim might be an option, instead of prison.
   Now, when a person serves someone, they are turned to thinking about them. Could we not teach the convicts some of the good qualities about their victims, helping them develop an empathy for them. Serving the victim can help the prisoner achieve the steps of repentance. Serving the victim can help create a sorrow for the crime. If you know a little bit about the victim, and are taught what is good about that person, you are more likely to recognize that what you have done is wrong, you are more likely to  feel a sorrow for what you have done, and you are more likely to say, "I never want to do this thing again." 
   If those steps of repentance really are principles of overcoming sin, why would we not want to use them in our judicial system? If they are true principles, let's use them. They are just as practical in one situation as they are in another. Me thinks it a wonderful thing that this might help, might make for a better judicial system.

Love the Prisoner, or Face Him Again  

   If you would change a person, you must love him first.
   What is that phase? I don't care how much you know until I know how much you care? And, what is it that all those studies on loving and hugging children show? That they grow up to be better adapted? Well, the need for love doesn't stop just because you are no longer a child. And, there is no part of society we should want to change more than those who are in prison. 
   So, where is the love?
   When our prisons are created -- when the functions of the prison officers are assigned and the programs are all set in place -- how often is the element of love even considered? Confinement is the concern. As long as we have confinement, we have a prison. To the large degree, it is punishment we seek for the criminal to have. Love should be important, though, if we decide punishment is not enough, if we decide we also want the criminal to be rehabilitated. Still, while it is true we often do seek rehabilitation, I do not see love as being an integral element we mindfully infuse into our correctional system.
   It should be. A correctional facility should not be master planned that does not address how the prisoner will receive love. In Utah, we are fortunate to have volunteers go to the state prison, and we are fortunate that the prison is located so close to our large population, so it is easily accessible to the volunteers and encourages them to come.
   Studies have indicated recidivism is reduced when the prisoner is loved. 
  Love the prisoner, then, or face him again.
  (Note: I originally posted this Oct. 26. With my postings again being on prisoners, I am re-posting it, with slight changes.) 

Constitution Protects the Accused More than Anyone

   Pick it, if you can: Which segment of our society is most protected by the Bill of Rights?
   Blacks? Gays and lesbians? Women? Religions? Gun owners? Well, which will it be?
   Try, criminals. If the answer isn't criminals, then it is the broader group: those accused of crimes.
   Tell me, if this is not right. To begin with, doesn't the Fourth Amendment protect those who would be prosecuted, "against unreasonable searches and seizures"? 
   And, in the Fifth Amendment, we have not just one, but at least four protections. It says, "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury." More, it say, "nor shall any person be subject for the same offence be twice put in jeopardy." More, yet, it says, "Nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to witness against himself." And, finally, it says, "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..
   So, the double-jeopardy clause, the right to "plead the Fifth," and due process are all found in the Fifth Amendment.
   Keep reading the Bill of Rights, and watch as protections for those accused of crimes come one amendment after another. The Sixth promises that, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial." And, it suggests the accused shall be told what crime he has committed, cannot be convicted unless there are witnesses against him, and has the opportunity to bring witnesses to his defense. And, it says he must be provided with a lawyer.
   The Seventh Amendment promises the right to a trial by a jury in lawsuits.
   The Eighth Amendment says excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed. Oh, and it has that famous protection of not allowing cruel and unusual punishment.
   Did you catch all that? Amendments Four through Eight are pretty much devoted to protecting those accused of crime, and, in some cases, convicted of crimes. Count the above protections. There's no less than 14 of them. Impressive, to me.
   I'm thinking, there's no segment of our society that the Founding Fathers protected as much in the Bill of Rights. 

.

Punishment for Undocumented Americans Should Equal the Crime

Some would send the undocumented immigrants back where they came, telling them to get in line behind those who are coming legally.

Go back to Mexico. Wait for five years.

I turn to the Bill of Rights, to the 13th Amendment, where it says excessive fines shall not be imposed. Haven't we always supposed the punishment should not exceed the crime?

If I watched a movie without a ticket, would the theater ban me for five years? If I rode TRAX without a ticket, would I be forbidden to use the train for five years? And, the requirement to return to their home country can be more harsh to some immigrants. For some, the cartels are waiting for them, the immigrant having been enticed or coerced into a difficult-to-pay agreement to help them cross the border.

Stop and consider their offense. The immigrant is in the U.S. without proper paperwork. This is an offense, and a punishment is justified, but it should be just. If we send them back, I say let them return to the U.S. as quick as possible. 

We Imprison More of Our Own than any Nation in History

We Americans are in such a troublesome position, incarcerating more people by far than other nation. As of 2009, the U.S. held 743 in prison per 100,000 people. Second on the list? Russia, 577 per 100,000. Third? Canada, with but a fragment of what the U.S. has, Canada having 117 per 100,000.

I've heard it said we incarcerate more of our own people than any nation in all of human history.

Being embarrassed seems appropriate. More people imprisoned in the Land of the Free than in any other land? Say it ain't so!

Fleeing America Because of Persecution

You've heard of people being persecuted, and, to escape it, fleeing to America.

Dread the day they should flee America, because of persecution, right? Of course, that would never happen, would it?

Alas, it has. Watch this CNN report, about how a family from Mexico ended up turning back around after many years, and returning to Mexico, because of the hatred they felt in Arizona, and the fear put in their hearts because of harsh immigration laws passed there.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/26/world/americas/mexico-leaving-us