Beneath the historic foundation of the constitutional fabric this country is built upon lays the universal idea of right and wrong, which to many seems cut and dry. However, when a prison sentence is delivered, the individual circumstances of every criminal and the crime committed need to be examined and taken into account.
Opposite to this school of thought are the ideas of the Republicans. In the weeks before the election, Virginia Sen. George Allen and Attorney General Jerry Kilgore celebrated the anniversary of the abolition of parole, so that criminals convicted now serve more time then they did before.
On its surface it appears to be a good idea. The Attorney General’s Web site itself notes that those who have previous serious criminal convictions and are again convicted serve an average of 46 years. Those with no previous criminal record are serving an average of 32 years.
Dig past the initial stigma of being on the side of convicted criminals, and one finds a seriously dysfunctional corrections system created by Allen and Kilgore here in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Pondering this point, one can easily come to the conclusion that additional social reasons exist that make criminals repeat offenders.
Of course, Kilgore would like to wrap up the benefits of abolishing parole in a cute little box with a bow on top, as his Web site reads, “Since violent criminals are being kept incarcerated for longer periods of time, they are no longer free to commit their crimes again and again. As a result, crime has fallen significantly.”
If only life were so simple. We deal with this problem here at VCU everyday as we navigate our way through homeless people who sometimes curse at us. These people are not criminals, as they are mentally disabled and need help to correct that.
Many of those incarcerated for repeated violations of serious crimes are lacking in intelligence because of learning disabilities, some are addicted to and dependent on alcohol or drugs, have no job training or skills, and while they have been incarcerated many times, never been exposed to a rehabilitation program.
Not taking responsibility and adjusting the corrections system for it sets a societal trap, catching many young people in urban neighborhoods, a large portion of which are African-American males who also coincidentally make up the highest number of those currently incarcerated.
The other option would be to curb the problem before it begins by putting unprecedented amounts of money into inner-city schools. Many of these youth are already displaying telltale signs of drug and alcohol abuse, lack of social skills, and minimal education, but nothing is being done to fix these problems.
People are real. On paper, inmates may just be a number, but every one of them that has been incarcerated sufers from some underlying sickness that needs to be addressed. I have looked long and hard, and I just do not see the societal value of keeping someone locked up for 30 years.
I believe a more constructive thing to do would be intensive mandatory rehabilitation programs, strict regiments of counseling and apprenticeship. Only after exhaustive failures of these reprogramming methods would I deem someone enough of a social failure to be locked away for 30 years in the same condition.
Currently, those in jail come out just as they were in when they went in. If they lacked formal education and job training when they went in, they still do. If they had drug addictions before they went in they still do (unless they seek help, which many won’t).
Why do Republicans feel so strongly on incarceration? Clearly, facts show that it is not the best way to achieve the goal of having a safe, equal and balanced society where all races exist together and there is not a disproportionate number of any one race incarcerated.
The only answer can be is that Republicans such as Allen and Kilgore want to rely on barbaric revenge methods such as the eye-for-a-eye philosophy they so frequently perpetrate, which really erodes the core of conservative Republican logic.
Allen and Kilgore often portray themselves as God-fearing, Christian conservatives as much of their logic is grounded in the Bible. Kilgore is one of the main proponents of getting organized religious prayer in schools, as he filed the legal brief that sought to allow VMI students the right to say grace before dinner.
Where, though, is this Christianity when confronted with the Christian belief of forgiveness? If Allen and Kilgore so heartedly believe in the Bible, they should find ways to give people the help they need, forgive them and consistently stand behind the words of the Bible, not just when it is convenient for them.
Virginia’s foremost minister, Jerry Falwell, even posts on his Web site that “all sins committed before we are saved are forgiven the very minute we come to Jesus with repentance in our hearts.”
While I don’t claim to subscribe to the Christian way, it would be nice if those who claimed to be Christians actually practiced what they preached.