Analysis of How to Fix Law Enforcement and Improve Societal Crime

Whether you believe that #blacklivesmatter or #bluelivesmatter, some challenges still need to be addressed that I thought it would be beneficial to share and get a conversation started on.

As a systems thinker, I had to ask myself what are the challenges we need to address in society without participating in political theater and wonder why neither side of the argument has ever managed How do we address the blatant bias against police officers in a court of law? If I am a law enforcement officer who believes the courts won't do anything, would that increase my incentive to watch a criminal receive street justice without intervening?

Many people on the right will ask how did we become soft on crime and why? They may even stretch their thinking to ask more offensive questions to the other side of the argument such as What absurdity is next: Free Puppet-show tickets to convicted child predactors, with a pinky promise for good behavior?

Both sides of the political spectrum are getting comiically silly with promoting their worldviews. In a conversation with a family member who is a minority and in law enforcement, they shared this perspective with me:

I had years of subpoenas requesting my testimony in criminal court for people I arrested. I testified before countless judges, some of whom I knew to be former defense lawyers. I often did my homework and researched the assigned judges. Some were objective and followed the guidelines and codes, while others seemed to be hearing criminal cases from the wrong side of the bench, like criminal defense attorneys armed with a gavel…criminal defense attorneys who took to the bench after swearing impartiality in justice applications.

I have written about orgthongal topics in the past such as Using Actuarial Sciences to strengthen criminal justice reform but have ignored asking a more important societal question of how can We the People ensure that Judges exercise world class Leadership principles and adhere to serving society for fear of penalty?

Florida law requires judges to use a sentencing scoresheet to determine the parameters for imposing a felony sentence. The scoresheet calculates sentencing points based on offense severity (1 to 10), characteristics of the offense (injuries, firearms), and the offender's criminal history. This line of thinking is not required in most states.

Balancing the tough approach to crime versus punishment in courts is a complex and multifaceted challenge that requires consideration of various factors, including legal principles, societal values, and practical considerations. Here are some key elements to consider when striving for this balance:

Rule of Law and Due Process: The legal system should always uphold the rule of law and due process. This means that all individuals are entitled to a fair and impartial trial regardless of the crime they are accused of. The courts must ensure that the accused's rights are respected, including legal representation, the right to remain silent, and a fair and speedy trial.

Proportional Punishment: The punishment should be proportionate to the crime's severity. The principle of proportionality suggests that the punishment should fit the crime and not be excessive. Sentencing guidelines, established by law or legal precedent, can help ensure that penalties are not unduly harsh.

Rehabilitation: Courts should aim to rehabilitate offenders whenever possible. This approach recognizes that many individuals commit crimes due to various social, economic, or psychological issues. Rehabilitation programs, such as counseling, education, and job training, can help offenders reintegrate into society as law-abiding citizens.

Deterrence: Punishments should serve as a deterrent to potential criminals. The uncompromising approach to crime may involve harsh penalties of severe offenses to dissuade others from engaging in criminal behavior. However, research has shown that the deterrence effect of severe punishments is not always clear-cut and may not be as effective as other approaches, such as swift and sure sanctions.

Restorative Justice: Some argue for a healthier approach, where the focus is on repairing the harm caused by the crime, involving victims in the process, and holding offenders accountable for their actions in a way that fosters empathy and understanding. Shifting the burden away from helping lawyers and the government make more money from crime (via fees and fines) feels like something that deserves more attention.

Criminal Justice Reform: Efforts to balance the strict approach to crime with punishment often involve criminal justice reform. This can include changes in sentencing guidelines, alternatives to incarceration (e.g., probation or community service), and addressing issues like over-policing and racial disparities in the criminal justice system. I have proposed several ideas in a past article entitled addressing the shortage of law enforcement hiring.

Prevention and Early Intervention: A balanced approach should also address the root causes of crime and aim to prevent criminal behavior in the first place. Investing in education, social services, and mental health support can help reduce the likelihood of individuals becoming involved in illegal activity.

Community Involvement: Engaging the community in the criminal justice process, such as through community policing or community courts, can help strike a balance between toughness and rehabilitation, as well as improve trust in the legal system.

Data-Driven Decision Making: Using data to assess the effectiveness of various approaches can help courts make informed decisions about balancing toughness and punishment. Evidence-based practices can guide the development of policies and interventions that reduce crime and recidivism.

Public Opinion and Political Will: Public opinion and political considerations can also influence the balance between toughness and punishment. Elected officials may advocate for specific policies based on their constituents' preferences, which may shift over time.

Balancing toughness and punishment in the courts is an ongoing and evolving process that requires careful consideration of these principles and ongoing dialogue among legal experts, policymakers, law enforcement, and the community to ensure that the justice system is fair, effective, and aligned with the values of the society it serves.

In many parts of the United States, law enforcement has lost immunity, yet they are only one peg in a larger broken ecosystem. Should judges also lose immunity and continue the conversation?

#bluelivesmatter #culture #organizations #leadership #coaching #changeleadership #alignment #thinblueline #Georgefloyd #lawtwitter #maga #congress #BlackHistoryMonth #HappyBlackHistoryMonth #BlackHistoryMonth2023 #socialjustice #CelebratingBlackHistoryMonth #constitution #BlackHistoryMonth✊ #CrossCulturalBridges #BreakDownStereotypes #Inclusion #Diversity #Equality # #Awareness #Education #Advocacy #Change #Unite #HumanRights