Just A Question
I’m always ambivalent when read opinions on the “prison industrial complex.” On the one hand, given the grossly disproportionate numbers of Black folks in jail, it looks like something has to be wrong at one or more points in the system. How can such a small percentage of the population have such a large presence in prison? There must be some malfeasance afoot. On the other hand, when I think about Black folks in jail, I know that in the majority of the instances, their victims are Black, as well. Now, the second idea and the first idea are not mutually exclusive, so it’s not a matter of either/or, it’s both. Yeah, we’re disproportionately represented on the prison roles AND the majority of the people who are hurt by our criminal activities are us. But then, that makes the question a lot harder to deal with, because which takes precedence? Should we be primarily concerned with the incarceration rate or the crime (read: victimization of our families) rate?
For me, it’s the latter. While I am concerned about the fact that so many Black folks wind up in jail, I make no bones about the fact that I’m far more concerned about the Black folks who were the victims of whatever they did to go to jail in the first place. And yeah, I know that sometimes innocent people get arrested, tried, sentenced, and actually do some time. Even believing as I do, that innocent imprisonment is not an uncommon occurrence, that still represents a small, small minority of the cases - Far smaller than the number of our mothers and grandmothers who are virtually imprisoned because of the reckless abandon which knuckleheads are running the streets and making them feel unsafe. I mean to break it down, if it comes to Cuzzo, my cousin the thug, or Granny, I’m takin’ Granny every time.
Only thing is, from our Black intelligencia, there seems to be more concern for Cuzzo than Granny. And again, I’m not really arguing whether Cuzzo would get prison time faster than Chaz for committing the same crime. Statistically, he would. That’s a separate issue. That, I think, is an extremely important question, and one that deserves some deliberate, focused, attention. However, that doesn’t mitigate the fact that of the Black cats who actually commit crimes, their victims are primarily Black. I, for one, don’t wanna lose sight of that fact.
But while I’m thinking about it:
Here’s the Daryl Hunt Project for Freedom and Justice
March 25th, 2008 at 9:15 am
Pardon my parsing, but there may be difference between “concern for” and “care about.” Hm. That’s quite the tiny hair I cleave, huh. Well, it’s just to say that while I can see myself caring more about the welfare of a victim than the victimizer, at the end of the day, I can still see that the perp was indeed caught and justice was indeed served.
It’s something to hang your hat on (assuming it’s all a legit/correct prosecution, natch).
But caring for the victim is the easy part. And even if we get the crime rates down to below the rates of other ethnic groups (aside: why is it that White don’t count as an ethnicity?), we can’t ever expect a victimless society. Not that they deserve any less attention because of that fact, but it does bear noting that victims will always exist in society.
The harder question to answer is what to do about getting those rates down. There are no easy solutions in the short run and that’s why that side of the equation is far more vexing to me.
March 25th, 2008 at 9:32 am
i think that if i had a preference in which went down first, i’d rather see the crime rate drop. true enough, there’ll never be a victimless society, but to the extent that the argument about the incarceration rate is based solely on census-type data, i’d rather have Cuzzo someplace away from Granny.
March 25th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
I think two things are going on. The first is that the US actually has a higher standard of public behavior than other countries and I think that our police/judiciary is simply more efficient.
I think the American system solves more crimes than other countries and that we have more crimes than other countries. The existence of a large prison industry is the consequence. In other countries, it’s easier to get away with murder. Criminal gangs are more a part of the way of business than we are. We’ve got the computers, we’ve got the infrastructure.
We have over-engineered our society, but that over-engineering makes it more attractive to immigrants. There are signs everywhere. Our society is pro-forma, idiot-proofed and connect the dots. We are, after all, a society of laws.
March 25th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
For the black portion of this, I cannot ignore the extent to which I see the exodus from New Orleans as part of a somewhat painful transition to the mainstream. That blackfolks have been astounded by the absence of crime in their newly adopted neighborhoods is a striking fact.
I view ‘black on black crime’ as a co-dependent fact. On the one hand, black crooks know they can get away with criminal behavior because it is socially tolerated. On the other hand police can refuse to provide equal protection under the law, which is their original sin. It’s circular.
March 25th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
i definitely think that criminality exists, in large part, because we allow it. i wonder what a zero-tolerance effort on the part of the community would look like, though. i know people - fairly respected in their community, even - who had already stated that if the police knew where one of their family members was, they weren’t gonna tell. but i guess zero-tolerance has to start at home. if home ain’t, then the community can’t be, either.
March 25th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
I’ve moved beyond the ‘Black-on-Black crime’ meme because it tends to distract folks’ attentions from the facts of crime knowing no color or ethnicity, and the real controllable variables that give root to illicit activity. The question as stated is a bit of a false dilemma; I’m just as concerned for the victims as I am reducing crime. But as Follymacher wrote, victims already have the support of the state for seeking justice. It just doesn’t work as effectively for Blacks as it does Whites, or for the underclass as it does the wealthy.
March 25th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
i think victims have the support of the state, to an extent. so to give a personal story, my uncle was murdered right after i was born, but nobody was ever brought to justice behind it. in that instance (and in the modern-day instances of places that have abysmal rates of solving cases), the ability of the state to support the victims is hampered by the reluctance of the people in the community to bring them to justice.
now granted, this reluctance is often brought about or exacerbated (i can’t quite tell which) by misconduct by police and mistrust on the part of the citizens. but whether it’s a cause or a result, the net effect is still felt by the law-abiding citizens, who then get no relief from any quarter; the state can’t (won’t?) do its job, and the academics are explaining why the criminal isn’t completely responsible for what happened.
March 25th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
I often concentrate on putting the PIC out of business by focusing on not committing the crime.
Concerning the deadly embrace, if cops and the courts keep the criminals off the streets, those hunkering down in fear to step up.
March 26th, 2008 at 10:40 am
“… the ability of the state to support the victims is hampered by the reluctance of the people in the community to bring them to justice.”
Not really. The state has more resources than any individual, corporation, or lobby. This is especially true for criminals and criminal enterprises. However, citizens all too frequently fail to hold up their end of the bargain, i.e.; not reporting crimes, avoiding jury duty, not cooperating with investigations, etc.. I don’t think these folks represent the norm, though.
I can understand anyone grasping for context here. Are we supposed to get hot about how many Black males are institutionalized when so many are bringing the heat on themselves? Well, yes and no. There are A LOT of folks in prison or in jail serving penalty for (essentially) vice, or ‘victimless’ crimes, esp. controlled substance convictions. It’s a sound bet the population of incarcerated persons in the U.S. would drop by 25-40% overnight if more recreational drugs were, at least, de-criminalized.
It’s also academic that if the Black underclass didn’t get high, traffic illegal substances, or permitted so many liquor stores and gun shops in their communities, there’d be a lot less crime for police to counter. I can’t help but think this argument is nothing more than a bougeois rationalization for shirking one’s civic responsibility, just as people who fail to cooperate with police investigations, and so forth. Only this group is much, much larger in number and their irresponsibility much more damaging.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
see, i’m all for the decriminalization of certain “drugs.” yes, cheeba-cheeba could come up from the harlem underground. (to those who have ears to hear, let them hear.) ultimately, i think i’m more concerned about crimes with victims. but that also extends to so-called white collar crimes, which victimize far more people on a more prolonged basis.
but as far as the ‘i-ain’t-cooperatin’-with-the-law’ crowd goes, i certainly wouldn’t suggest that it’s a majority, but it’s a significant proportion. my guess is that the proportion is highest where the crime rate itself is highest (duh), which creates something of a vacuum for the people who are in those communities.