Other

The paradox of law enforcement

by Robert Randle
07/15/16
Free to Share
Author requests article critique

  Message Writer
  Hire Writer

Tweet

In Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (Tenth Ed.), the word paradox is defined as a (noun) c: an argument that apparently derives self-contradictory conclusions from acceptable premises. So, with that understanding I think this a good place to begin with, because the results derived from combatting crime proves this very point. There are those get tough on crime proponents in society who advocate hiring more police officers but there aren’t any statistical data or studies that I am aware of which prove that this approach results in lower crime rates. This may sound convincing on the surface of it, and there might even be a correlation to substantiate lower incidents or reports of crime, but that is not the same as causation. The only thing hiring more police officers do is that it means there are more of them to dispatch to a criminal incident or threat, which is reactive; not proactive.

The way to deter or prevent crime is to address the conditions or environmental factors that provide the fertile ground from which these behaviors sprout. The favorite talking points of politicians of “get tough on crime” or policy makers in the legislative, as well as administrative branches of state and local government do not fully understand, or choose to ignore the problem in favor of other considerations. For instance, instead of hiring a police officer and paying an annual salary of $50,000 why not take that same money and put it to better use in the community for job training, technical education, mental health services, and other needed programs? The new ‘paradigm’ should not be more police or boots on the ground, but rather, more books and other educational materials to help someone pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. Let’s help create a society that moves away from the approach derived from the Old Europe of medieval times to one of positivity and self-actualization.  As it pertains to the old ways, when the guillotine was introduced in Europe crime rates actually went up, not down; as one might would have expected.

Enforcement is not prevention nor is it a viable strategy and it is counterproductive as it is presently implemented, Crime will only be deterred and reduced, though not totally eliminated, when the conditions and socio-cultural factors that inhibit lawful behavior are significantly minimized and alternatives and incentives are provided that reward self-empowerment toward achieving positive outcomes which benefit the person and society as a whole.  More importantly, it is time to take the profit motive from prosecuting criminal behavior that benefits the courts and the prison industrial complex; of which the latter earns billions of dollars annually in operational revenues and serves the financial interests of vendors and suppliers who provides services to them.

Robert Randle
776 Commerce St Apt #701
Tacoma, WA 98402
July 15, 2016
[email protected]