Right on Crime is Wrong

In 2010 several conservatives formed a group called Right on Crime.  It includes conservative luminaries such as Newt Gingrich and William Bennett.  A major tenet of their purpose is the belief that our current criminal justice system needs reform because of our over reliance on incarceration.  They propose more "cost effective" methods of various alternatives to incarceration.  This, they say,  is in keeping with conservative principles of limited government and fiscal responsibility. 

With current federal and state budgets stretched beyond capacity this sounds like a reasonable proposal.  Liberals have been denouncing our criminal justice system for the same reasons stating that as a nation we're too punitive in our response to crime.  Now it seems that many conservatives have been co-opted and herded aboard the anti-incarceration bandwagon.


The proposition of improving our criminal justice system primarily through prison reform is wrong for a number of reasons.  Most important of these is the fact that the premise for reform is faulty.  Our criminal justice system DOES NOT rely too much on incarceration.


According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) at the end of 2009 our country had 7,225,800 individuals under correctional supervision.  Of this number 2,284,913 were in prison or jail while 5,023,275 were on community supervision (also called community corrections).  This means that about 70% of our correctional population is on some type of "alternative" sentence rather that in prison or jail.  Probation alone with 4,203,967 individuals under supervision makes up the major portion of the community corrections population.  One could say that in this country incarceration is an alternative sentence.If the goal of  Right on Crime and other likeminded organizations is to shift the number of people in prison into alternative community supervision programs; Mission accomplished!   Fixing our criminal justice system will require more than merely reshuffling bodies or altering sentencing.


Probation is the most crowded and potentially dangerous segment of corrections.  Probation officers struggle with caseloads of 200 and more.  Many cases are banked meaning they receive little to no supervision.  Unsupervised probation coasts practically nothing but is of little value in terms of public safety.  Providing the needed services and enhanced supervision to these cases will increase, not decrease, costs.  


A major problem with our current system is its focus on individual criminal behavior rather than on crime. It is constantly struggling with what to do to or for offenders after they commit a crime. The system is never asked to confront crime. It is tasked with processing cases. This is what must change. Instead of a criminal justice system focused on things to do to or for criminals, we should have a true public safety model of justice that’s focused on crime prevention and reduction as well as creating and maintaining safer communities.


We’re told that prisons hold a large number of non-violent offenders. This raises several questions. Should we only incarcerate violent offenders? What about car thieves, burglars, drug dealers, swindlers and others? Should we never incarcerate these types of criminals? What exactly is a non-violent offender? Is it someone who has never committed a violent crime? Is it someone convicted of a non-violent crime but with a history of violence? Is it someone who committed a violent crime but was convicted of a non-violent crime because of plea bargaining? The point is that sentencing statistics provide only a snapshot of the person’s current offense.

The current system also relies on a flawed success measure-recidivism. This also raises several questions. If a person hasn’t returned to prison, is it because they’ve reformed or is it because they haven’t gotten caught? Perhaps an individual was rearrested in another jurisdiction but as long as he/she doesn’t return to the institution of release it’s counted as a success. Reliance on recidivism creates unintended consequences. Probation and parole officers are often instructed not to revoke supervision unless (until) a person commits a “serious” offense. Many major offenses can be prevented by revoking individuals at the first sign of trouble-usually after a “minor” infraction. To do so would be considered a failure in today’s system. Does this make any sense? Offenders can avoid rearrest and conviction while continuing to wreak havoc in the community.

A system focused on community safety would strive to reduce victimization rather than recidivism. It would consider victim’s rights and crime prevention as crucial to success. It would consider incarceration as neither good nor bad, in and of itself, but as merely one component in its efforts to confront crime.

The reason the system needs to change is not that it’s too harsh or too lenient. The purpose of change should not be to become meaner and harsher or kinder and gentler on what’s done to or for offenders. We currently have a criminal justice system focused on the needs of the individual criminal regarding punishment, rehabilitation, etc. What we don’t have is a justice system that represents the interests of communities and crime victims. We don’t have a system that confronts crime rather than responds to individual criminal acts and criminal behavior. That is why the system must change.  If increasing the cost of the system enhances its value to the taxpayers so much the better.

Not Even FOX News Covered this

This is from an e-mail sent to me by a friend.
Ed B.

NATIONAL NEWS MEDIA SOMEHOW "MISSED" THIS GATHERING.


On Sunday, June 6th, a multi-ethnic, multi-racial coalition of Americans opposed to Islamic violence and intolerance rallied at the site of the World Trade Center in New York City .

9/11 families were joined by immigrants from India, Russia, Egypt, Israel, Africa, Iran and Europe to show opposition to the construction of a mega-mosque at Ground Zero. Others flew in from overseas to speak or just to share their particular ethnic communities’ experiences at the hands of Muslims.

These are parents and spouses of firefighters killed on 9/11. The rally took place just a minute’s walk from Ladder 10 Firehouse, where their loved ones were stationed for duty that terrible day. Ladder 10 lost seven firefighters.



Crowd estimates ranged from 5,000 (NYPD) to 10,000. The crowd overflowed the police barrier enclosures that ran the full length of two city blocks. This photo shows the enclosure in front of the stage at the intersection of Liberty and Church Streets. The second enclosure ran the length of the next block and can be seen on the other side of the traffic lights.



Thousands of additional participants filled the treed area of Zuccotti Park .

Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller are the founders of STOP ISLAMIZATION OF AMERICA, which sponsored the rally. Ms. Geller is a citizen journalist and blogger who runs the human rights web site Atlas Shrugs. Mr. Spencer is the author of several books on Islam and head of the influential web site Jihad watch. Pamela Geller:

“Ground Zero is a war memorial, Ground Zero is a burial ground. We are asking for sensitivity…It is unconscionable to build a shrine to the very ideology that inspired the jihadist attacks at Ground Zero, right there. We are asking the imam Rauf and Daisy Khan to be sensitive. For mutual respect and mutual understanding that is demanded of us every day.

There’s a hair-trigger sensitivity in the Muslim world, you can’t run the cartoons, you can’t say Mohammed, this is offensive. This is an offensive mosque. To build a shrine, an Islamic flag of conquest on the sacred ground the cherished site, of a conquered land. This is historic, this is Islamic history. It’s what they do. The St. Sofia in Turkey , the al-Quds, at the holiest Jewish site in Israel . Not here. This is where we take a stand. We must take a stand. We must say no.”

I do not believe that the landmarks commission controlled by Mayor Bloomberg, is going to stop this mosque. It’s not going to happen. Here’s Omar Muhamedi, on his human rights council, a CAIR lawyer, who sued the airlines and the Jane and John Does that saw something and said something on those airplanes, if you remember. That’s who’s on his human rights commission. It ain’t gonna happen with Bloomberg. We have to make it happen. You have to get involved.” (Pamela Geller)

Police enclosure on left, with crowd flowing out of park on right. The new Tower 7 and World Trade Center site are in the background. The green tent, center, is located immediately behind the stage.

Port Authority and NYPD officers kept watch over the rally and were well aware of the need for heightened security at this event. One of their own Port Authority officers, WTC Sergeant Alan T. De Vona was on duty at the World Trade Center on 9/11, 2001, and was one of the first to help victims of the terrorist attack. He spoke these words to the SIOA rally:

“It’s almost nine years. I’m hoping that America is watching. I’m hoping that America is remembering. Because, make no mistake. September 11 was an act of war. And thank the military that has lost almost 5,000 troops from that day, defending us. I don’t know what to say to jar America ’s memory. I want America to remember.

Port Authority Police and FDNY firefighters are seen here gathered beneath this banner.

The issues at stake will certainly affect the heart of American freedom, democracy, cultural values and tolerance. America is a tolerant country that allows for the free worship of all its citizens. But our tolerance has limits. Do we have to tolerate intolerant Islamic ideology and Muslims who preach intolerant Islam?”

Hindu human rights activists Narain Kataria, Prasad Yalamanchi and unidentified friend came from Mississippi and Chicago with banners and flyers highlighting the radical statements of imam Rauf and his jihadist roots.

Stephen Dyer and Gary Jules journalism students at York College, with Pamela Geller. Not one major network sent a satellite truck or camera crew to this event. Without bloggers this newsworthy event would have remained unknown to the public and history.

Pamela Geller is greeted by Hindu human rights activists Prasad Yalamanchi and Narain Kataria.

Bhupinder Singh Bhurji, Pamela Geller, and Robert Spencer. Singh Bhurji is the president of the  NAMDHARI SIKH FOUNDATION. The foundation is a member of the Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam (HRCARI). HRCARI is a coalition of Hindus, Sikhs, Christians from Sudan, Egypt and Iraq, moderate Muslims and Jews — who are victims and targets of radical Islam around the globe. He said, at another rally:

“Radical Islamists are killing people in India , trying to dominate that nation. And here too they come with violence against “infidels.” We are “infidels united,” standing together, brown, black and white, against this epoch’s fascist movement. Radical Islam wants to dominate entire world. They want everyone to surrender. Islam radical or otherwise. They want to put the Islamic flag on White House.”

Because of Islamic terrorism, America and the world have seen massive new security measures become a way of life. Anyone openly critical of Islam, or terrorist ideology, must surround themselves with security, or live in hiding. Those courageous enough to confront Islamism are criticized by the cowards and appeasers of the left who seek safety by supporting the enemy. Moderate Muslims were silent when Theo van Gogh was brutally murdered in Amsterdam , just as moderate Muslims in the United States are generally reluctant to speak out against violent Islam. Moderate Muslims also face great danger in speaking out.

Geller and Spencer will press on despite the danger. They hope to inspire Americans to stand up and say enough of political correctness and work to stem the galloping islamization of America and Europe

Pajamas Media » China’s Military Threatens America: ‘We Will Hurt You’

Pajamas Media » China’s Military Threatens America: ‘We Will Hurt You’ We can take a hint--I hope.

American Thinker: A Mom Asks: Should We Care What's Wrong with Obama?

American Thinker: A Mom Asks: Should We Care What's Wrong with Obama? This is one thing I've been wondering about too.

The coming depression?

Depression 2010? Robert Samuelson again sounds a warning. The bill for the Greek welfare state has now been paid in IOU's. Other EU countries will soon follow. How long before the U.S. follows in the EU wake?

The Welfare State's Death Spiral

In The Welfare State's Death Spiral, Robert Samuelson gives interesting insights into what the economic crisis in Greece portends for other countries including our own.

Miss me yet?

A lot has been said recently about sign posts of George W Bush appearing in various places asking "Miss me yet?".   Below is a thoughtful piece that was published June 21, 2008 in of all places the TELEGRAPH of London.

Now that Joe Biden is giving Obama credit for success in Iraq, it's time for some introspection.

History will say that we misunderestimated George W Bush.